A Response to Rodney Edwards and the Sunday Independent on, Anti-vaxxer Religious Fundamentalism in Ireland
This last Sunday, 21st November 2021, Rodney Edwards of the Sunday Independent newspaper, wrote an article, "Anti-vaxxers hitch a ride on religious radio shows", which mentions me, Keith Malcomson, and Limerick City Church. The following is a most needful response to this public attack.
Rodney Edwards, describes himself on his Twitter account as a Journalist at the Sunday Independent, "Covering stories across the island for Ireland’s most widely read newspaper." It was in 2020 that he left his position as deputy editor of The Impartial Reporter to take up his new position at the Independent. He also publishes articles in the Belfast Telegraph. His article titled, "Anti-vaxxers hitch a ride on religious radio shows: Broadcaster that gives uncritical platform to anti-vax brigade is partly funded by the State," went to press in the Sunday Independent newspaper on 21.11.21. The thrust of its attack was against several people interviewed on Life FM. One of them was me. I was interviewed twice on the subject of the The Great Reset, The Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR), and current events.
In his scathing article, Mr Edwards makes the gravest of all errors for a journalist. He does not check his facts. Edwards writes:
"Co Down native Keith Malcomson, the pastor of Limerick City Church who has called the Pope the antichrist, has also been platformed on the station." - Rodney Edwards
First of all, this is simply not true. I have not called the Pope the Antichrist! In fact I taught an entire message a few months ago showing from the Bible why I believe the Pope is NOT the Antichrist. I have never believed what he claims. While I disagree with the Papacy, I certainly do not believe in name-calling, false identification, or mud-slinging.
Second of all, what has this got to do with the interviews on Life FM? It seems Mr Edwards put this in for added effect. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the interviews; this subject was not mentioned in them, and has nothing to do with the entire contents of Mr Edwards' own article. One has to ask why he fabricated this and included it in the article! This is either bad journalism or deliberate lying. It is alarming that such tactics are used. It damages the reputation of journalism.
Again Mr Edwards lacks a fact-checking process. He writes:
"[Malcomson] believes there is a 'big agenda' behind Covid and made the outlandish claim that it is being used to bring in the 'fourth industrial revolution.' 'Part of that is altering the human body.' he told Life FM on October 19." - Rodney Edwards
He calls my claim that Covid is being used to bring in the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR), "outlandish." Unlike Mr Edwards I work hard and try my best to base my comments and conclusions upon solid facts. As it happens Klaus Schwab, founder of the World Economic Forum (WEF) who coined the term The Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR), is the one who has said this very thing. His book published in June 2020, COVID-19: The Great Reset, explains this in very clear terms. I have read four of Schwab's books very thoroughly to understand his thinking on the 4IR, and I have listened to countless presentations and interviews with Schwab either talking or being interviewed. Schwab and Prince Charles, as well as others, have made it very clear that the Covid crisis gives them a short window of opportunity to 'press the reset button' and initiate or implement the 4IR practically in society. As I explained in my interview with Life FM, this is not my claim but their claim.
Edwards again makes light of my comment that there is a "big agenda" behind Covid, called the 4IR. As stated repeatedly by Schwab, the 4IR is a massive agenda. In fact Schwab emphasizes this over and over again. He claims that everything in our society is going to change at 'break-neck speed'. He says everything, including the human body, is going to be digitized. The WEF is certainly one of the most vital and powerful institutions in our world and that is why many of our political and commercial leaders have attended its annual convention each year at Davos for at least the past 30 years. The big agenda of the 4IR which was presented officially and publicly at Davos in 2018, and in book form, was further unveiled in June 2020, under the title, 'The Great Reset'. This was supported by the UN and other world institutions. They willingly own the fact that the Covid crisis was actively, deliberately, and openly used as a vital tool to implement this agenda.
While Mr Edwards may consider it "outlandlish" or bizarre to think that I would claim that a vital part of the 4IR is to "alter the human body", Mr Schwab does not. One of the five main sections of his 2018 book is titled, Altering the Human Body, and he deals with this repeatedly in written and spoken form as well as in lectures and discussions at Davos. I agree with Mr Edwards, it does sound outlandish, but this is what these very powerful world leaders are openly planning to do. In this same context he mocked Anna Daly, who he said, "told her listeners earlier this year that “implantable chips” will be embedded in our bodies as part of the “great reset.” If Mr Edwards did appropriate research he would find out that this is fact. Schwab has clearly stated that implantable chips are a vital part of the 4IR. This has also been openly promoted by the British and Canadian governments in May of this year in detailed online documents and the British document was provided by its ministry of defence in colaberation with the German, Swedish and Finnish Defence forces.
In his Sunday Independent article, Edwards does prove one thing: he can mock, yet not once does he even attempt to give proof or evidence that I am wrong. In fact Mr Edwards reveals his utter ignorance on this subject. It is obvious that he has no elementary understanding of what he is mocking. Clearly he has done no research or investigation. This is not journalism! If I am making false or outlandish claims then please prove it.
[Malcomson] claimed alternative views on the vaccine “are not allowed” to be heard, and said voices like his own are “blanked out, sidelined, not tolerated”, with YouTube and Facebook “being tightened up”. “You only hear about the danger of Covid-19 and the absolute necessity of vaccines.” - Rodney Edwards
The fact that Mr Edwards wrote and published this article in the Independent, which he claims is the most widely-read newspaper in Ireland, only proves my point. I almost need not say anything further. As soon as anyone speaks out or allows a different view to be aired, as Life FM did, it gets attacked and shot down with lies, misquotes, and mockery without any authentic interaction, scholarly research or honest debate.
Mr Edwards seems to like using the Anti-Vax title in his articles even if his victims are not such. I am not Anti-Vax and have never been. Of all those who I know who have concerns over this vaccination and the unnatural pressures and propaganda used to enforce it, very very few are against vaccines altogether.
I can only imagine that Mr Edwards is living in a bubble if he does not realize that online platforms have and do target numbers of videos and posts that state anything that challenges or even questions the dominant government line. There was a day when we could have relied upon newspapers and investigative journalists to at least question or investigate what was going on, or at least to challenge what was spoken by politicians, but sadly no longer. Now it is left to folk like me to investigate, to question, to point out, or to speak out upon issues being ignored, obscured or lied about. In this case we have Mr Edwards in the Independent now challenging and mocking the man-on-the-street who has concerns and unanswered questions. It is all back to front. Again, if Mr Edwards did his job correctly on this particular issue then men like me would not even attempt to speak out on these things.
Broadcaster that gives uncritical platform to anti-vax brigade - Rodney Edwards
Mr Edwards seems determined to accuse others of that which he himself is blatantly guilty. Here you have a radio station carrying and allowing divergent opinions in contrast to the daily one-sided reporting we have all listened to and read for over a year and a half, which from the start and now increasingly, refuses to allow any challenge or questioning to the singular government-given narrative. Maybe it is Mr Edwards writing in the Independent that actually is the "uncritical platform"?
My own experience in my two interviews on Life FM contradicts Mr Edwards comments entirely. My host was a remarkable interviewer. I had no warning of questions, she was quick and alert; she challenged things I said; asked for evidence, and even at one point diverged from my personal experience by giving her own which gave another view. She kept me on my toes and I came away from the interview impressed with her ability, skill, sincerity and balance, as well as integrity in broadcasting. Maybe Mr Edwards could learn from her?
By all means disagree and challenge with evidence, but to misrepresent and almost demonize those who are sincere and who differ in opinion is another thing altogether. If Mr Edwards' attempt in this article represents the best of a national handling in allaying fears, concerns, and to answer sincere questions it has failed outright. If one of the most read papers in the country can allow this sort of journalism to go to print, then that only alarms and concerns people like me all the more showing me that we are truly in a very sorry state. This only encourages normal average folk like me to continue to research diligently, check facts carefully, and to speak out loudly and boldly because those who should be doing it, are not.
With more and more religious fundamentalists throughout Ireland rejecting the Covid-19 vaccination, is a dividing line being drawn between faith and science? - Rodney Edwards
Here Edwards tries to draw a line between faith and science insinuating that to have faith is to be against science when actually the opposite is often the truth. But let me speak for myself. Science is acknowledged by the best of professionals as a constantly changing, evolving, and partial study at best and so it must of course be scrutinized, questioned, and handled with extreme care. Those in past decades and centuries who blindly and dogmatically followed science have later been proven wrong. However faith was given once and for all, and for myself it is an unchanging and trustworthy thing that does not need updating. I'm afraid science has fared far worse in history than the faith I hold to, yet we are not allowed to question science.
It is worth noting that the word "Fundamentalist" comes from the word fundamentals referring to foundations, solid facts, good solid beginnings. Yes, I am a fundamentalist but not a blind radical who denies reality. True faith makes you question, think, check, scrutinize, research, to be slow and careful in coming to conclusions, and it makes you slow to speak and careful what you write or put in print.
Edwards insinuates that "more and more religious fundamentalists" throughout Ireland are "rejecting the Covid-19 vaccination." I would beg to differ. Most rejecting the vaccine are not religious fundamentalists and in fact many would claim no faith at all. Those rethinking the issue are those who have previously taken two jabs but are growing tired and disappointed because after faithfully following and trusting government and the medical profession, they find that the promises made in connection with getting the jabs have not been fulfilled; small business are suffering terribly, normal people are under extreme financial pressure, restrictions of freedom continue and in fact more freedoms are being removed or curtailed. Many who blindly followed the so-called science feel duped. They are increasingly questioning this merry-go-round that we are all on; the hypocrisies of those who say one thing and do another are galling, and those who are rethinking the whole issue are concerned where this is going and alarmed about the pressure and demonizing of those who do not blindly, or absolutely comply to the fear-tactics being used by authorities. There was a day when journalism would have addressed these things, but sadly not today.
Conclusion I am still only briefly responding here. I could say much more, and give pages of researched evidence to prove what I say, but I have sufficiently highlighted the serious problem that now dominates our national media which is utterly unable and ineffective to defend the State from danger, or protect and warn people on the street of what is just around the corner. A great many people have lost confidence in national media. While Mr Edwards attacks my attempt to speak out, it only reveals a greater need for normal people to investigate, speak out, and to hold the line immovable when attacked. Truth may not be popular but it is always right and verifiable. Those who deny and ridicule facts must be challenged. Darkness, vagueness, and silence is the substance of deception. We sincerely pray that papers like the Independent and reporters like Mr Edwards will rather become instruments of truth in the days ahead; more thorough in their research and factual in content, and that instead of using printed matter to attack folk like us, they will instead ask hard questions of those in power. As a church we are praying for them, we wish them good, and wish they would do their job better so that we may focus upon our task of men's souls and their eternal well-being rather than speaking out on things neglected by national media.