strictly obeying absurd instructions from their governments.

That struck me the most, for I saw them as "absurd" right from the start. Since my hubby often plays the devils advocate with me, he asked: "What makes you competent to say that they are absurd?"

In one hundred years, no one will believe this story, or it will have been turned into a believable fairy tale version, like all of history,

I tend to think the same. I am meanwhile skeptic about the so called "plague" and "flu epidemics" and all that jazz. History is the most unreliable source.

Even the recording of business books, for example, can be misleading. Where certain facts are derived from the flow of goods and trade relations as historically reliable from today's point of view, it is equally possible that future historians will have to believe from the quantity of "vaccines" and account books that we had a terrible plague. They would then have to compare their data with the actual death figures and might then become somewhat suspicious. They must be very precise since between 2020 and 2021 there is a huge difference (we people of today like to throw whole decades from the past together.). But since historians are often not accountants, data might be re-written and re-interpreted in the meantime, it remains the eternal argument about the interpretation of human activity.

I'm a proud and loud broken record.

:D HaHa! I like your sense of self humor.