On 25 May 2021, the Indian Bar Association (IBA) served a 51-page legal notice on Dr Soumya Swaminathan, the Chief Scientist at the World Health Organisation (WHO), for:
“[H]er act of spreading disinformation and misguiding the people of India, in order to fulfil her agenda.”
The Mumbai-based IBA is an association of lawyers who strive to bring transparency and accountability to the Indian justice system. It is actively involved in the dissemination of legal knowledge and provides guidance and support to advocates and ordinary people in their fight for justice.
The legal notice says Dr Swaminathan has been:
“Running a disinformation campaign against Ivermectin by deliberate suppression of effectiveness of drug Ivermectin as prophylaxis and for treatment of COVID-19, despite the existence of large amounts of clinical data compiled and presented by esteemed, highly qualified, experienced medical doctors and scientists,”
And:
“Issuing statements in social media and mainstream media, thereby influencing the public against the use of Ivermectin and attacking the credibility of acclaimed bodies/institutes like ICMR and AIIMS, Delhi, which have included ‘Ivermectin’ in the ‘National Guidelines for COVID-19 management’.”
The IBA states that legal action is being taken against Dr Swaminathan in order to stop her from causing further damage to the lives of citizens of India.
The IBA says that Dr Swaminathan has ignored these studies and reports and has deliberately suppressed the data regarding the effectiveness of Ivermectin, with an intent to dissuade the people of India from using it.
However, two key medical bodies, the Indian Council for Medical Research (ICMR) and the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) Delhi, have refused to accept her stand and have retained the recommendation for Ivermectin, under a ‘May Do’ category, for patients with mild symptoms and those in home isolation, as stated in ‘The National Guidelines for COVID-19 management’.
It is interesting to note that the content of several web links to news articles and reports included in the notice served upon Dr Swaminathan, which was visible before issuing the notice, has either been removed or deleted.
It seems that the vaccine manufacturers and many governments are desperate to protect their pro-vaccine agenda and will attempt to censor information and news regarding the efficacy of Ivermectin.
Colin Todhunter is an independent journalist who writes on development, environmental issues, politics, food and agriculture. In August 2018 he was named as one of 400 Living Peace and Justice Leaders and Models by Transcend Media Services, in recognition of his journalism.
Thanks to the diligent efforts of one of my listeners, I received a paper yesterday that puts another nail in the coffin for the existence of SARS-CoV-2. The paper is titled “Appearances Can be Deceiving – Viral-like Inclusions in Covid-19 Negative Renal Biopsies by Electron Microscopy.” The authors are Clarrisa A. Cassol, et al., and the citation is Kidney360 1:824-828, 2020. This is a peer-reviewed journal affiliated with the American Society of Nephrology; in other words, this paper comes squarely from what is called acceptable, mainstream science.
Many of you have probably seen the electron-micrograph pictures of SARS-CoV-2, the ones in black and white, with the black dots within the faint outline of the circle. I have attached two such images from papers that claim these photos show direct evidence of the existence of the virus. These are the pictures that virologists show us, not the computer-generated, colorful images that you see in magazines and on the internet. These are the “real” pictures of the virus, and they are offered as “proof” that the virus exists.
However, it turns out these photos are actually NOT corona viruses, and the CDC, among others, has known this fact since at least 2004. The above paper examines the evidence used to claim that these images represent viruses, rather than normal “structures” within a cell, particularly sick cells. Here is what the paper says:
“We have observed morphologically indistinguishable inclusions within podocytes and tubular epithelial cells both in patients negative for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as well as in renal biopsies from the pre-COVID-19 era” (emphasis added).
In other words, the researchers saw these same structures in people with no evidence of Covid and in samples they took before Covid even happened, before the virus was said to even exist.
In addition, they say:
“We postulated that endogenous mimickers could be present that are morphologically indistinguishable from SARS-CoV-2 virions ultrastructurally.”
And:
“Viral-like inclusions, consisting both of single vesicles with diameters between 50 and 138 nm, as well as packed groups within larger vesicles, were found in all 15 cases, either in podocytes. Tubular epithelia, or vascular epithelial cells (figure 1).”
In all 15 cases that they examined, they found structures identical to what is being called SARS-CoV-2. They were scattered all over the kidneys and blood vessels; they are not viruses, but normal parts of the cells.
Then they go on to describe how these particles come about:
“A number of potential natural mimickers that can generate intracellular groups of round vesicles mimicking
SARS-CoV-2 virions could be listed, the most likely being endocytic vesicles and endosomal components such as microvesicular bodies containing exosomes, among others. Endocytosis leads to the formation of 60-120 nm vesicles, which is within the size range described for SARS-CoV-2 (60-140nm). These endocytic vesicles may be coated by different proteins, one of the most common being clathrin. The presence of coating proteins may be responsible for the presence of an electron-dense area surrounding these vesicles, giving the appearance of a viral corona.”
In other words, remember the famous “corona” on the corona virus? It turns out it’s just a common protein coating on normal vesicles, picking up the dyes in the electron-microscope preparation. The corona appearance is just another creative fiction, dreamed up by virologists and their graphic design teams.
Finally, the paper goes on to say that, naturally, you see more of these particles in sick people than in healthy people, which is exactly what I have been suggesting this past year. Dead and dying cells make these particles in the dying process and partly to get rid of poisons.
But the final nail comes in this quote:
“The potential for confusion of coronavirus particles with normal cellular components was in fact highlighted in a detailed ultrastructural study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) of SARS-CoV responsible for the 2003 SARS outbreak.”[1]
In other words, the CDC in 2004 knew that researchers couldn’t reliably know these particles were coronavirus particles. Not a word has been heard about this since. All virologists use these pictures as proof of the existence of this virus. It is a fraud, based on junk science, like everything else connected with “Covid 19.”
UKMFA has sent an Open Letter to the the MHRA in which we raise grave concerns about this emergency authorisation, citing evidence of known and potential harms to children that may result and the serious ethical issues this decision raises.
Given that these vaccines will have virtually no benefit to the children themselves, it is profoundly unethical and indefensible to vaccinate children, especially with an experimental vaccine using novel technology, in what appears to be a misguided attempt to protect adults and achieve herd immunity. We call on the MHRA to exercise caution and immediately reverse their decision.
URGENT Open Letter from the UK Medical Freedom Alliance to the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA)
Dr June Raine CBE – Chief Executive Office
Mr Stephen Lightfoot – Chair
Professor David Webb – Deputy Chair
Re: Covid-19 Vaccination in Children – Emergency Use Authorisation and Rollout in Schools
The UK Medical Freedom Alliance (UKMFA) is an alliance of UK medical professionals, scientists and lawyers campaigning for Medical Freedom, Informed Consent and Bodily Autonomy to be preserved and protected.
It is with the gravest of concern and utter incredulity that we assimilate the decision by the MHRA to grant regulatory approval for emergency use of the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine in 12- to 15-year- old children [i]. We wish to notify you of the multiple factors indicating that most likely your decision will have devastating consequences for a significant number of children in the UK and their families.
We are adding our voice to doctors and experts around the world, including groups in the UK [ii] [iii], US [iv] [v] and Israel [vi], who have raised serious ethical and safety concerns, and demanded that Covid-19 vaccines are not rolled out to children.
We previously outlined our arguments against giving Covid-19 vaccines to children in an Open Letter to the MHRA, JVCI and Government Ministers, dated 25 February 2021 [vii]. Considering new and mounting evidence of harm caused by Covid-19 vaccines, we wish to urgently re-enforce our appeal to reverse this latest decision immediately and halt all plans in relation to administration of Covid-19 vaccines to children.
Ethical and Safety Concerns
1. In the UK, evidence-based medicine has been the basis of all clinical practice. Medical professionals are educated to critically appraise scientific evidence and ensure recommendations and guidelines rest on robust foundations. The implementation of the Covid-19 vaccination program is in complete incongruence with this concept, and this has never been more obvious than in relation to young people and children.
Rather than referring to peer-reviewed science, recommendations have been based only on interim analyses of clinical trials that have not been completed. Completion of the adult trials has already been compromised by offering the vaccine to participants in the placebo groups, thus removing the control arm [viii]. Trials to establish efficacy and safety of the Covid-19 vaccines are not conducted by independent research teams but by the pharmaceutical companies, who stand to gain financially from the sale of their products. Raw trial data are not yet accessible to be scrutinized. Instead, interim analyses and claims are communicated by press release, without peer review, and instantly assimilated into advice to the public. The Pfizer-BioNTech clinical trials involving children and teenagers only commenced in 2021 and are underpowered for obtaining meaningful safety data (there were only 1131 12–15-year-olds in treatment arm). Only 2 months’ worth of interim data was provided to the MHRA, giving extremely limited short-term and NO long-term safety profile. Safety cannot be established if due scientific process is not adhered to.
2. The justification for the enhanced timelines and the irregular process for temporary emergency use authorization of Covid-19 vaccines has been the urgency of the ongoing pandemic. There is no historical precedent where a pandemic was successfully ended or mitigated by vaccinating the entire population. Indeed, concerns have been raised that this approach may prolong the pandemic and risk promotion of more virulent variants [ix]. French virologist and Nobel Prize winner Luc Montagnier recently highlighted and warned about this potential issue [x] [xi]. As the concept of ending a pandemic by vaccinating the entire population has no basis in science, there is no imperative to vaccinate children.
3. The last time a vaccine was developed and brought to market on an emergency basis, was in an attempt to halt the swine flu epidemic in 2009-2010. Tragically, this resulted in significant, unexpected injuries, with over 1000 cases of life-changing narcolepsy in children and teenagers across Europe, and the eventual withdrawal of the Pandemri vaccine [xii] [xiii]. We have an obligation to exercise caution to prevent a re-occurrence of serious and unforeseen side-effects of an inadequately tested product in children [xiv].
4. The benefits of Covid-19 vaccines for children are close to zero, yet they carry known and unknown risks. Experts are stating that vaccinating children is neither necessary nor justified:
The minutes of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) dated 16 February 2021 note “little impact of vaccinating children once all other adults were offered vaccine” and “that modelling results on the impact of vaccinating children were considered highly uncertain” [xv].
Other experts have argued that “Covid-19 vaccines for children should not get emergency use authorization” [xvi] and that this would be “hard to justify right now for most children in most countries” [xvii].
Professor of Paediatrics and member of the JCVI, Adam Finn, said in an interview on the 20 May 2021 that it was “an open question as to whether we need to immunise children at all” and “if we can control this virus without immunising children, we shouldn’t immunise children as a matter of principle”.
5. Below, we set out specific issues regarding Covid-19 vaccines in children – each sufficient to justify not proceeding any further with this proposal.
a. The risk of Covid-19 to children is miniscule. The infection fatality rate in this age group is close to zero, and most remain asymptomatic or experience mild symptoms only [xix] [xx] [xxi] [xxii]. This has been reiterated by the Government [xxiii] and by Professor of Paediatrics, Adam Finn [xviii]. Even the low records of children hospitalized with Covid-19, may be an over- estimate, according to a recent study [xxiv]. The number of children and teens under the age of 20 without pre-existing conditions who have died in England with a positive Covid- 19 test, as of 13 May 2021, is in single figures [xxv]. Mortality in children in the UK in 2020/21 has in fact been significantly lower than in previous years [xxvi] [xxvii]. As the emergency does not, therefore, apply to children, there can be no justification to authorize any product for emergency use in the paediatric population.
b.The absolute risk reduction by Covid-19 vaccines is around 1% (0.84-1.3%) [xxviii]. This applies to the healthy adult trial participants and cannot be extrapolated to children, who are already at extremely low risk from the disease. The potential benefit to an individual child of receiving a Covid-19 vaccine is statistically zero.
c. Children play an insignificant role in transmission of Covid-19 [ix] [xviii] [xxix]. Living with children may even reduce the risks of the disease [xxx]. Transmission in schools has not been significant [xxxi] [xxxii] [xxxiii]. Trials have not demonstrated whether Covid-19 vaccines reduce asymptomatic infection or transmission [xxxiv]. There is therefore no demonstrable benefit to the wider society in vaccinating children.
d. In a population cohort at minimal risk of severe disease, such as young people and children, acquiring natural immunity will serve a better purpose, as this will be more comprehensive, longer lasting, and cover a broad range of virus variants. Vaccine- induced immunity does not cover the full spectrum of protection (mucosal immunity, IgA, and T-cell immunity to the whole virus) and may only be short-lived. Acquiring natural immunity will therefore also benefit the wider population, contributing to herd immunity [xxxv] [xxxvi] [xxxvii] [xxxviii] [xxxix].
e. All Covid-19 vaccines used in the UK are based on completely new gene-based technologies (mRNA / DNA vector technology) [xl], that have never received full regulatory approval for mass rollout in humans. They have not been licensed and remain experimental until Phase 3 trials have been completed [xli]. Thus, we cannot infer long-term safety without observing the impact on human health in those who have received the vaccines over the next few years.
f. There is currently no data to indicate whether dose adjustment may be necessary in children. This would appear relevant as side-effects in initial phase 1 dose-escalation trials were more significant with higher dosage [xlii].
g. Covid-19 vaccines work completely differently to established childhood vaccines. Traditional, live vaccines work using attenuated virus strains to prompt antibody development. Covid-19 vaccines introduce a synthetic gene which induces the recipient’s own cells to produce spike proteins. Spike proteins appear to contribute significantly to the pathogenicity of SARS-CoV-2, and there are studies suggesting that they have the potential to cause pathology on their own [xliii] [xliv]. It is unknown how much spike protein will be produced by an individual, and it is plausible that younger, healthier people may produce higher quantities, potentially increasing the risk of side-effects. The safety of this approach needs to be thoroughly investigated and firmly established prior to full licensure in adults and prior to any use in children.
h. At this stage, medium- and long-term effects of Covid-19 vaccines are completely unknown and unpredictable, due to the short duration of the Phase 3 safety trials, which are ongoing and not due to complete until 2023. This is most relevant for young people and children. Before giving Covid-19 vaccines to children, potential adverse, long-term, effects on fertility, carcinogenesis, and children’s developing neurological and immune systems MUST be completely ruled out, as is done with other drugs and vaccines. This may take years or decades to fully establish.
i. Serious adverse events and vaccine-related deaths have been reported in the UK [xlv], the US [xlvi] and Europe [xlvii]. In the report published by the MHRA on 13 May 2021, there were 822,078 adverse reactions in the UK, including seizures, paralysis, blindness, strokes, blood clots and acute cardiac events. There were 1178 reports of fatalities.
j. Some life-threatening effects, such as blood clots [xlviii] and myocarditis [xlix], have been reported specifically in children and young adults [l] [li]. Government advice has recently been amended to avoid the AstraZeneca vaccine in young people due to a concern regarding the risk of rare blood clots (now considered to be around 1:100,000). The new term “vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia” acknowledges the causality of the vaccine in these events, often presenting as ischemic strokes [lii]. It is possible that this reaction could be a class effect caused by spike proteins and therefore not specific or limited to the AstraZeneca vaccine [liii]. Of the 4347 events of thrombosis and embolism reported to the MHRA as of 13 May 2021, 770 occurred following the Pizer-BioNTech vaccine [xlv]. According to the US VAERS reporting system, several children under the age of 18 have died following a Covid-19 vaccine [liv].
k. Vaccine manufacturers have requested and been granted complete exemption from liability for any injuries or deaths resulting from their products [lv] [lvi]. A spokesperson for AstraZeneca acknowledged the potential for unexpected long-term side-effects, stating that as a company, they “simply cannot take the risk if in … four years the vaccine is showing side-effects” [lvii]. If the risk is significant enough for manufacturers to anticipate economic loss, children must not be expected to take the same risk to their long-term health.
6. Informed consent is the cornerstone of good, ethical medical practice and is firmly enshrined in the code of conduct issued by the General Medical Council (GMC) and the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC). Unless factually accurate information is made available, detailing risks as well as benefits, it is not possible for anyone, let alone children, to make a fully informed decision and give informed consent to Covid-19 vaccination. Gillick Competence cannot be assumed under current circumstances, where the vaccines are based on novel technologies, and no long-term safety data is available.
We are alarmed at the targeting of the public, and more recently schoolchildren [lviii] [lix], with material conveying a one-sided and simplified message, without reflection or consideration for individual circumstances, or disclosure of the known and unknown risks we have outlined.
Multiple resources are being made available that appear to be aimed at modifying behaviour to reduce “vaccine hesitancy”. These appear to rely not on the strength of scientific arguments but on techniques of persuasion [lx] [lxi] [lxii]. Recent reports, suggesting that the use of peer pressure to increase uptake of the vaccine in children has been condoned by some school leaders, were very disturbing [lxiii]. This is not consistent with ethical and lawful practice of medicine and indeed constitutes a violation of Informed Consent, as required by the GMC, the NHS Constitution, and the Montgomery ruling [lxiv].
7. In the UK, post-marketing surveillance is carried out via the Yellow Card System, a passive reporting system that requires all members of the public and all doctors to be aware of its existence, and compliant with filling in reports of all potential side-effects observed, to be effective at recognizing unexpected adverse events and signals of safety concern. In fact, there is poor awareness of, and compliance with, this scheme among both doctors and the public, potentially leading to a significant underestimate of the true number of adverse events and deaths connected with these vaccines.
Conclusion and Request
We have presented evidence that children are at no substantial risk from Covid-19, but face known and unknown risks from Covid-19 vaccines, including significant, life-changing injury and death. Some of the serious reported injuries, such as blood clots and myocarditis, have specifically occurred in young people and children. In addition, children have a lifetime ahead of them and we have no idea of the impact of these novel, gene-based vaccines on their health or fertility in 5-10 years’ time. Considering these facts, we cannot comprehend how the review by the MHRA can be described as rigorous, with a conclusion to grant regulatory approval.
We are already seeing reports of deaths and injury in children in the US and Canada, where vaccines are being trialed and rolled out to children. Even with rare risks (1:10,000 to 1:100,000), if these vaccines are rolled out to around 10 million UK children, it seems certain that we will see deaths and serious injuries in a significant number of children who would never have been harmed by Covid-19, devastating families and communities. There may be healthy UK children who will not live to see another Christmas if Covid-19 vaccines are rolled out in schools over the summer/autumn. This would be an unforgiveable act of completely avoidable harm, for which you would be responsible, individually and collectively.
We implore the MHRA to immediately reverse the decision to authorize the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine for children and abide by the Hippocratic oath to “First do no Harm”.
The UK public trusts and relies on you not to expose their children to unnecessary risk.
We thank you for taking the time to read this letter and consider its contents. We request that you kindly acknowledge this letter and all the references within, and either confirm that emergency authorization for use of Covid-19 vaccines in children will be withdrawn or otherwise lay out the reasoning for your considered actions.
Rt Hon Boris Johnson – Prime Minister Rt Hon Matt Hancock – Secretary of State for Health and Social Care Professor Chris Whitty – Chief Medical Officer Rt Hon Nicola Sturgeon – First Minister of Scotland Rt Hon Mark Drakeford – First Minister of Wales Rt Hon Arlene Foster – First Minister of Northern Ireland Prof Andrew Pollard – Chair of the Joint Committee for Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) Rt Hon Nadhim Zahawi – Minister for Covid-19 Vaccine Deployment
Scientific propaganda about vaccines has reached dizzying heights, as officials point the uninformed public toward the Day of Liberation, when a COVID shot, otherwise known as God, will rescue Earth.
Here, from a chapter in my 1988 book, AIDS INC., is an excerpt exposing some of the infamous moments in vaccination history—hidden by the press, or simply forgotten.
For those denialists who cling to the notion that vaccines are remarkably safe and effective, this article is a pill you can swallow, bitter to be sure, but immunizing against the effects of bald lies from the bent medical establishment.
Understand: this is only a partial history of disasters and revelations, and it stops at 1988.
“The combined death rate from scarlet fever, diphtheria, whooping cough and measles among children up to fifteen shows that nearly 90 percent of the total decline in mortality between 1860 and 1965 had occurred before the introduction of antibiotics and widespread immunization. In part, this recession may be attributed to improved housing and to a decrease in the virulence of micro-organisms, but by far the most important factor was a higher host-resistance due to better nutrition.” Ivan Illich, Medical Nemesis, Bantam Books, 1977
“In a recent British outbreak of whooping cough, for example, even fully immunized children contracted the disease in fairly large numbers; and the rates of serious complications and death were reduced only slightly. In another recent outbreak of pertussis, 46 of the 85 fully immunized children studied eventually contracted the disease.”
“In 1977, 34 new cases of measles were reported on the campus of UCLA, in a population that was supposedly 91% immune, according to careful serological testing. Another 20 cases of measles were reported in the Pecos, New Mexico, area within a period of a few months in 1981, and 75% of them had been fully immunized, some of them quite recently. A survey of sixth-graders in a well-immunized urban community revealed that about 15% of this age group are still susceptible to rubella, a figure essentially identical with that of the pre-vaccine era.”
“Finally, although the overall incidence of typical acute measles in the U.S. has dropped sharply from about 400,000 cases annually in the early 1960s to about 30,000 cases by 1974-76, the death rate remained exactly the same; and, with the peak incidence now occurring in adolescents and young adults, the risk of pneumonia and demonstrable liver abnormalities has actually increased substantially, according to one recent study, to well over 3% and 2%, respectively.” Richard Moskowitz, MD, The Case Against Immunizations, 1983, American Institute of Homeopathy.
“Of all reported whooping cough cases between 1979 and 1984 in children over 7 months of age – that is, old enough to have received the primary course of the DPT shots (diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus) – 41% occurred in children who had received three or more shots and 22% in children who had one or two immunizations.”
“Among children under 7 months of age who had whooping cough, 34% had been immunized between one and three times…”
“… Based on the only U.S. findings on adverse DPT reactions, an FDA-financed study at the University of California, Los Angeles, one out of every 350 children will have a convulsion; one in 180 children will experience high-pitched screaming [can indicate brain damage]; and one in 66 will have a fever of 105 degrees or more.” Jennifer Hyman, Democrat and Chronicle, Rochester, New York, special supplement on DPT, dated April, 1987.
“A study undertaken in 1979 at the University of California, Los Angeles, under the sponsorship of the Food and Drug Administration, and which has been confirmed by other studies, indicates that in the U.S.A. approximately 1,000 infants die annually as a direct result of DPT vaccinations, and these are classified as SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) deaths. These represent about 10 to 15% of the total number of SIDS deaths occurring annually in the U.S.A. (between 8,000 and 10,000 depending on which statistics are used).” Leon Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, CW Daniel Company Limited, Saffron Walden, Essex, England, 1987.
“Assistant Secretary of Health Edward Brandt, Jr., MD, testifying before the U.S. Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources, rounded… figures off to 9,000 cases of convulsions, 9,000 cases of collapse, and 17,000 cases of high-pitched screaming for a total of 35,000 acute neurological reactions occurring within forty-eight hours of a DPT shot among America’s children every year.” DPT: A Shot in the Dark, by Harris L. Coulter and Barbara Loe Fischer, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
“While 70-80% of British children were immunized against pertussis in 1970-71, the rate is now 39%. The committee predicts that the next pertussis epidemic will probably turn out to be more severe than the one in 1974/75. However, they do not explain why, in 1970/71, there were more than 33,000 cases of pertussis with 41 fatal cases among the very well immunized British child population; whereas in 1974/75, with a declining rate of vaccination, a pertussis epidemic caused only 25,000 cases with 25 fatalities.” Wolfgang Ehrengut, Lancet, Feb. 18, 1978, p. 370.
“… Barker and Pichichero, in a prospective study of 1232 children in Denver, Colorado, found after DTP that only 7% of those vaccinated were free from untoward reactions, which included pyrexia (53%), acute behavioral changes (82%), prolonged screaming (13%), and listlessness, anorexia and vomiting. 71% of those receiving second injections of DTP experienced two or more of the reactions monitored.” Lancet, May 28, 1983, p. 1217
“Publications by the World Health Organization show that diphtheria is steadily declining in most European countries, including those in which there has been no immunization. The decline began long before vaccination was developed. There is certainly no guarantee that vaccination will protect a child against the disease; in fact, over 30,000 cases of diphtheria have been recorded in the United Kingdom in fully immunized children.” Leon Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, p. 58.
“Pertussis (whooping cough) immunization is controversial, as the side effects have received a great deal of publicity. The counter claim is that the effectiveness and protection offered by the procedure far outweigh the possible ill effects… annual deaths, per million children, from this disease over the period from 1900 to the mid-nineteen seventies, shows that from a high point of just under 900 deaths per million children (under age 15) in 1905, the decline has been consistent and dramatic. There had been a lowering of mortality rates of approximately 80% by the time immunization was introduced on a mass scale, in the mid-nineteen fifties. The decline has continued, albeit at a slower rate, ever since. No credit can be given to vaccination for the major part of the decline since it was not in use.” Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, p. 63.
“… the swine-flu vaccination program was one of its (CDC) greatest blunders. It all began in 1976 when CDC scientists saw that a virus involved in a flu attack outbreak at Fort Dix, N.J., was similar to the swine-flu virus that killed 500,000 Americans in 1918. Health officials immediately launched a 100-million dollar program to immunize every American. But the expected epidemic never materialized, and the vaccine led to partial paralysis in 532 people. There were 32 deaths.” U.S. News and World Report, Joseph Carey, October 14, 1985, p. 70, “How Medical Sleuths Track Killer Diseases.”
“Despite (cases) in which (smallpox) vaccination plainly failed to protect the population, and despite the rampant side-effects of the methods, the proponents of vaccination continued their attempts to justify the methods by claims that the disease had declined in Europe as a whole during the period of its compulsory use. If the decline could be correlated with the use of the vaccination, then all else could be set aside, and the advantage between its current low incidence could be shown to outweigh the periodic failures of the method, and to favour the continued use of vaccination. However, the credit for the decline in the incidence of smallpox could not be given to vaccination. The fact is that its incidence declined in all parts of Europe, whether or not vaccination was employed.” Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, pp. 6-7.
“Smallpox, like typhus, has been dying out (in England) since 1780. Vaccination in this country has largely fallen into disuse since people began to realize how its value was discredited by the great smallpox epidemic of 1871-2 (which occurred after extensive vaccination).” W. Scott Webb, A Century of Vaccination, Swan Sonnenschein, 1898.
“In this incident (Kyoto, Japan, 1948) – the most serious of its kind – a toxic batch of alum-precipitated toxoid (APT) was responsible for illness in over 600 infants and for no fewer than 68 deaths.”
“On 20 and 22 October, 1948, a large number of babies and children in the city of Kyoto received their first injection of APT. On the 4th and 5th of November, 15,561 babies and children aged some months to 13 years received their second dose. One to two days later, 606 of those who had been injected fell ill. Of these, 9 died of acute diphtheritic paralysis in seven to fourteen days, and 59 of late paralysis mainly in four to seven weeks.” Sir Graham Wilson, Hazards of Immunization, Athone Press, University of London, 1967.
“Accidents may, however, follow the use of this so-called killed (rabies) vaccine owing to inadequate processing. A very serious occurrence of this sort occurred at Fortaleza, Ceara, Brazil, in 1960. No fewer than 18 out of 66 persons vaccinated with Fermi’s carbolized (rabies ) vaccine suffered from encephalomyelitis and every one of the eighteen died.” Sir Graham Wilson, Hazards of Immunization.
“At a press conference in Washington on 24 July, 1942, the Secretary of War reported that 28,585 cases of jaundice had been observed in the (American) Army between 1 January and 4 July after yellow fever vaccination, and of these 62 proved fatal.” Wilson, Hazards of Immunization.
“The world’s biggest trial (conducted in south India) to assess the value of BCG tuberculosis vaccine has made the startling revelation that the vaccine ‘does not give any protection against bacillary forms of tuberculosis.’ The study said to be ‘most exhaustive and meticulous,’ was launched in 1968 by the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) with assistance from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta, Georgia.”
“The incidence of new cases among the BCG vaccinated group was slightly (but statistically insignificantly) higher than in the control group, a finding that led to the conclusion that BCG’s protective effect ‘was zero.’” New Scientist, November 15, 1979, as quoted by Hans Ruesch in Naked Empress, Civis Publishers, Switzerland, 1982.
“Between 10 December 1929 and 30 April 1930, 251 of 412 infants born in Lubeck received three doses of BCG vaccine by the mouth during the first ten days of life. Of these 251, 72 died of tuberculosis, most of them in two to five months and all but one before the end of the first year. In addition, 135 suffered from clinical tuberculosis but eventually recovered; and 44 became tuberculin-positive but remained well. None of the 161 unvaccinated infants born at the time was affected in this way and none of these died of tuberculosis within the following three years.” Hazards of Immunization, Wilson.
“We conducted a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial to test the efficacy of the 14-valent pneumococcal capsular polysaccharide vaccine in 2295 high-risk patients… Seventy-one episodes of proved or probable pneumococcal pneumonia or bronchitis occurred among 63 of the patients (27 placebo recipients and 36 vaccine recipients)… We were unable to demonstrate any efficacy of the pneumococcal vaccine in preventing pneumonia or bronchitis in this population.” New England Journal of Medicine, November 20, 1986, p. 1318, Michael Simberkoff et al.
In the spring of 1955, Cutter Labs started selling their standard polio vaccine. The vaccine was infective, and 200 cases of polio resulted among recipients. Of these, there were eleven deaths. About 100 cases of paralysis resulted. JR
“But already before Salk developed his vaccine, polio had been constantly regressing; the 39 cases out of every 100,000 inhabitants registered in 1942 had gradually diminished from year to year until they were reduced to only 15 cases in 1952… according to M. Beddow Baylay, the English surgeon and medical historian.” Slaughter of the Innocent, Hans Reusch, Civitas Publish ers, Switzerland, and Swain, New York, 1983.
“Many published stories and reports have stated, implied and otherwise led professional people and the public to believe that the sharp reduction of cases (and of deaths) from poliomyelitis in 1955 as compared to 1954 is attributable to the Salk vaccine…That it is a misconception follows from these considerations. The number of children inoculated has been too small to account for the decrease. The sharp decrease was apparent before the inoculations began or could take effect and was of the same order as the decrease following the immediate post-inoculation period.” Dr. Herbert Ratner, Child and Family, vol. 20, no. 1, 1987.
“So far it is hardly possible to gain insight into the extent of the immunization catastrophe of 1955 in the United States. It may be considered certain that the officially ascertained 200 cases (of polio) which were caused directly or indirectly by the (polio) vaccination constitute minimum figures… It can hardly be estimated how many of the 1359 (polio) cases among vaccinated persons must be regarded as failures of the vaccine and how many of them were infected by the vaccine. A careful study of the epidemiologic course of polio in the United States yields indications of grave significance. In numerous states of the U.S.A., typical early epidemics developed with the immunizations in the spring of 1955…The vaccination incidents of the year 1955 cannot be exclusively traced back to the failure of one manufacturing firm.” Dr. Herbert Ratner, Child and Family, 1980, vol. 19, no. 4, “Story of the Salk Vaccine (Part 2).”
“Suffice it to say that most of the large (polio) epidemics that have occurred in this country since the introduction of the Salk vaccine have followed the wide-scale use of the vaccine and have been characterized by an uncommon early seasonal onset. To name a few, there is the Massachusetts epidemic of 1955; the Chicago epidemic of 1956; and the Des Moines epidemic of 1959.” Dr. Herbert Ratner, Child and Family, 1980 vol. 19, no. 4.
“The live (Sabin) poliovirus vaccine has been the predominant cause of domestically arising cases of paralytic poliomyelitis in the United States since 1972. To avoid the occurrence of such cases, it would be necessary to discontinue the routine use of live poliovirus vaccine.” Jonas Salk, Science, March 4, 1977, p. 845.
“By the (U.S.) government’s own admission, there has been a 41% failure rate in persons who were previously vaccinated against the (measles) virus.” Dr. Anthony Morris, John Chriss, BG Young, “Occurrence of Measles in Previously Vaccinated Individuals,” 1979; presented at a meeting of the American Society for Microbiology at Fort Detrick, Maryland, April 27, 1979.
“Prior to the time doctors began giving rubella vaccinations, an estimated 85% of adults were naturally immune to the disease (for life). Because of immunization, the vast majority of women never acquire natural immunity (or lifetime protection).” Dr. Robert Mendelsohn, Let’s Live, December 1983, as quoted by Carolyn Reuben in the LA WEEKLY, June 28, 1985.
“Adminstration of KMV (killed measles vaccine) apparently set in motion an aberrant immunologic response that not only failed to protect children against natural measles, but resulted in heightened susceptibility.” JAMA Aug. 22, 1980, vol. 244, p. 804, Vincent Fulginiti and Ray Helfer. The authors indicate that such falsely protected children can come down with “an often severe, atypical form of measles. Atypical measles is characterized by fever, headache… and a diverse rash (which)… may consist of a mixture of macules, papules, vesicles, and pustules… ”
The above quotes reflect only a mere fraction of an available literature.
It is criminally deceiving to say, “Vaccines are simple; they stimulate the immune system and confer immunity against specific germ agents.”
Official reports on vaccine reactions are often at odds with unofficial estimates because of the method of analysis used. If adverse vaccine-reaction is defined as a small set of possible effects experienced within 72 hours of an inoculation, then figures will be smaller. But doctors like G.T. Stewart, of the University of Glasgow, have found through meticulous investigation, including visits to hospitals and interviews with parents of children vaccinated, that reactions as severe as brain-damage (e.g., from the DPT vaccine) can be overlooked, go unreported and can be assumed to have come from other causes.
—Well, that was my finding, in 1988, when I looked beneath the surface of the vaccine question.
Now we are in very deep waters. COVID-19 hysteria has been tuned up to the NEED for a vaccine.
WE need to slough off this promoted bad dream and stand firm against the little gods who traffic their vials in every doctor’s office, hospital, school, drug store, and tented parking lot—making them into shooting galleries.
We already have natural immune systems. They work.
“As a result of the big marketing op, Daniel, I’ve become increasingly skeptical of the ET narrative. Because they’re up to something and it doesn’t have our best interest at heart.
Whether they trot out the Christ ET or whether they trot out the alien invaders, they’re up to something.
So, I don’t trust anything that this government says. And they’re doing this, I think, as a result of the COVID planscamdemic kind of blowing up in their faces.
And I’ve always suspected that there was some sort of genetic tagging and marking thing going on with this operation that may or may not be directly related to this whole UFO thing.”
~ Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
“It reads like a deep state alien invasion op and it comes on the heels of the COVID op. That’s one hell of a timing.”
~ Daniel Liszt
Topics include:
War game exercises under the ocean
US Navy exotic technology experiments
Ties to The Great Reset
Global control from space
Strange things going on in Antarctica
Admiral Byrd’s Operation HIGHJUMP
Wernher von Braun’s prediction, via Carol Rosin, regarding weaponization of space
[As a service to protect truth from censorship and to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, and Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]
I recently received a letter in the mail from a woman in Florida describing the illnesses from which she has suffered for the past dozen years: Hashimoto’s disease, liver dysfunction, sinus infection, “exploding head,” complete loss of smell and partial loss of taste. “After all this time,” she wrote, “I now wonder how much radiation has been a part of my illness.” She has joined a Stop 5G group in her city. To protect herself she keeps her cell phone in a “faraday pouch” when she is not using it, and she turns off her wifi at night. She also asked about the effectiveness of the various devices, pendants and chips being sold to protect oneself from the radiation. I replied to her as follows:
“You are right to wonder how much radiation is a part of your illness. First and foremost, you should not ever use a cell phone or WiFi. Getting rid of all wireless on your person and in your home will make a tremendous difference in your health. A faraday pouch does not block all the radiation. A cell phone radiates even when it is off, as long as the battery is in it. And it takes your body several days to recover, even from a single two-minute phone call. No products will protect you from the radiation — if they do anything at all, those products are dangerous.”
She was shocked, because that is not what everyone else has been telling her. “I have found that most people do not believe cell phones are the issue, just the towers. I must get a landline and work from there,” she wrote back.
More Radiation Than Cell Towers
It is beyond me how anyone can expect their cell phone to work if all the towers are not there, but that is not the worst error people are making. Somehow, they have convinced themselves that most of their exposure to radiation is coming from the towers and not their phones and computers. Not only is the opposite true, but it is all one system. The more radiation the towers put out, the less radiation your phone has to emit to connect with them. The less radiation the towers put out, the more radiation your phone emits. You can’t have one without the other.
A cell phone operating at 2 watts (maximum power) held six inches from your head exposes your brain to more radiation than if there were a 200-watt tower ten feet away, or a 2000-watt tower thirty feet away. If you live in a city with a lot of towers, your phone may only emit a milliwatt of power (0.001 watts). But then you’re getting the same radiation from the towers that you would have gotten from your phone if all the towers were not there. It’s all one system. And if you put the 1-milliwatt phone up against your head, you are still exposing your brain to more radiation than from all the towers in the city.
And even when you are only texting, and the phone is only emitting a milliwatt of power, as long as you are touching the phone, the frequencies are being conducted through your hands into your heart, lungs and brain, and your whole body is radiating them into your environment and exposing everyone to them that you pass on the street. And this is not a good thing, because the harm done by the radiation does not depend on power level at all. It depends on the informational content, and we are living in a crazy age where we demand more and more information from our devices, at greater and greater speeds, while our axons and dendrites are trying to send complex information to our brains, and our hearts’ pacemakers are trying to communicate with our hearts’ atria and ventricles, and the oxidative phosphorylation enzymes in our mitochondria are trying to send electrons to the oxygen we breathe in order to generate the energy for life, and our cells are trying to whisper to other cells with instructions about where to go, and what kinds of cells to become, to choreograph our growth, and to orchestrate the healing process when we are injured or ill. And even one milliwatt is millions of times louder than the whispered signals between our cells, which can no longer follow the instructions that they can no longer hear.
And the result is diabetes, and heart disease, and cancer, and neurological disease, at rates that just 25 years ago, at the beginning of the wireless revolution, would have seemed unimaginable, but that are now accepted as normal, because the population is not connecting them, is not willing to connect them, to their cause.
Living in a Prison Created by Phones
I communicate with hundreds of thousands of people, a large number of whom are environmental refugees. Year after year they are moving further and further away from civilization, desperately trying to live where cell phones do not work in order to stay alive, while the rest of the population has grown more and more dependent on their phones, counting on them to work wherever they go.
Even if others know on some level that there is a radiation problem, they don’t really know. “I’ve got to have a phone in case of emergency” means their phones have to be able to work everywhere they go, which means there have to be cell towers everywhere they go, especially in the middle of nowhere, and it means they are condemning all those refugees to torture and death. Never mind all the insects, birds and animals that can never be free of radiation, anywhere on earth, no matter where they fly to or run to to stay alive. If a cell phone will work where they fly, they are being irradiated.
When the wireless revolution came to the United States in 1996, I stayed alive only by leaving my home and my city and my family and friends and camping out in places where cell phones did not work for the next eight years. I have stayed alive since 2004 by living in a location where the conductivity of the earth is extremely high, and I cannot leave. Santa Fe is a nice place, but I am not here by choice. I am here because there is no other place left to even camp. I am here because it is one of the few places on earth where I can stay alive in spite of the fact that a cell phone will work here. It is a nice prison, but a prison nonetheless, a prison from which I have not left for more than a few hours since 2007. I am kept in this prison by everyone who owns a cell phone and expects to be able to use it “in case of emergency.”
I, and the refugees in Green Bank, West Virginia, and the refugees in the French Alps, and the refugees sleeping in their vehicles in the fewer and fewer places that still exist where cell phones do not work, are not different from everyone else, except that at some point in our lives our eyes were opened to what was making us so sick, and that we learned to recognize the effects of radiation and to avoid radiation in order to survive, instead of dying of heart attacks, strokes, and neurological disease. We learned to feel the radiation, which everyone else could also learn to feel if they would only stop using their devices that are numbing them to the pain, stop using them long enough to discover what a horror they are, and what a tremendous difference it makes to their physical and psychological health to get rid of them, permanently, from their person and their home. What a tremendous difference for themselves, for the refugees, for the birds, for the whales. For the honey bee, waiting, imploring, at the top of this newsletter.
Lawsuits Being Filed in the D.C. Circuit and the United States Supreme Court
Children’s Health Defense v. FCC
On February 26, 2021, Children’s Health Defense sued the Federal Communications Commission in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. CHD is asking the court to overturn a new, illegal, unconstitutional order that the FCC had issued the previous day.
The FCC had revised its rules for Over-the-Air Reception Devices (OTARD), which sounds innocuous enough. Except that the new rules have nothing to do with reception devices. Instead they have repealed all zoning regulations for broadband antennas and towers on private property by calling them “reception devices.” Wireless internet providers can now build base stations wherever they please on anyone’s property anywhere in the United States and are no longer subject to any restrictions by cities, counties or states in the unlimited expansion of their networks of towers and antennas.
The lawsuit is Case No. 21-1075 in the D.C. Circuit, and CHD’s opening brief is due on June 23, 2021. An amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief in support of CHD’s lawsuit is being prepared now that will represent Stop 5G groups, other anti-wireless organizations, organizations representing people injured by radio-frequency radiation, and other environmental organizations in the United States. The amicus brief is due on June 30, 2021. If your U.S. organization would like to join the amicus brief, please contact Petra Brokken at <dpetrab@yahoo.com>.
City of Portland v. FCC
In 2018, hundreds of cities and counties joined together to sue the FCC over new orders prohibiting states and local governments from regulating cell towers in the public rights-of-way, and on August 12, 2020 the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled against them. On October 22, 2020 the Ninth Circuit denied their petition for rehearing. On March 22, 2021 they appealed their case to the United States Supreme Court. The case is City of Portland v. Federal Communications Commission, Docket No. 20-1354.
Together, the FCC orders under challenge by those cities and counties, and the OTARD order under challenge by Children’s Health Defense, mean that local governments in the United States can no longer regulate most towers or antennas anywhere — not on public land and not on private land.
Santa Fe Alliance v. City of Santa Fe
In 2018, the Santa Fe Alliance for Public Health and Safety sued the City of Santa Fe, the Attorney General of New Mexico, and the United States of America.
Unlike the petitioners in Portland v. FCC, which are suing to be able to protect the health, safety and welfare of their citizens, the City of Santa Fe and State of New Mexico have voluntarily relinquished that right. Both the City and the State have passed laws repealing all zoning regulations for antennas and towers in the public rights-of-way.
The Santa Fe Alliance is challenging the constitutionality of those City and State laws, and of Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which prohibits local governments from regulating cell towers on the basis of health and denies people injured by radio-frequency radiation of any remedy.
On March 30, 2021, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled against the Santa Fe Alliance, and on May 27, 2021, the Court denied our petition for rehearing. We are preparing to appeal our case to the United States Supreme Court. Our petition for certiorari must be filed in the Supreme Court by August 25, 2021.
Our lawsuit goes to the heart of the problem, which is the unconstitutional law passed by Congress in 1996 that has enabled a thickening fog of radiation to envelop this nation ever since.
Our excellent attorney, Theresa Kraft, who argued our case in the Tenth Circuit, has been sick and in and out of the hospital for two months following her second COVID vaccination, and we must find another attorney to replace her. We are currently contacting law firms. Please contact me immediately if you are an attorney who can help, or if you have a referral to one.
A recently filed lawsuit accuses Digital Recognition Network of covertly collecting vehicle data on millions of Americans and selling it for a profit.
On May 26, several vehicle owners sued the company Digital Recognition Network (DRN) for using its fleet of unmarked surveillance vehicles to collect data on Americans. The plaintiffs claim that DRN has driven its vehicles around United States and covertly gathered data on unsuspecting Americans while reaping profits.
Courthouse News reports that DRN has “amassed more than 20 billion license plate scans — equal to 70 scans for every vehicle in the nation.” The Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial was filed by plaintiff Guillermo Mata in response to DRN’s use of automatic license plate reader (ALPRs) systems. ALPRs are used to gather license plate, time, date and location of a vehicle. They can also be used to create a detailed map of where an individual travels and what they are doing with their time. The devices can be attached to light poles or toll booths, as well as on top of or inside vehicles.
The lawsuit alleges, “Defendant DRN created a nationwide surveillance program that tracks vehicle’s movements and, in turn, individuals’ locations.” The plaintiffs also claim that DRN “stores all of the amassed information in a proprietary database and makes it available to anyone willing to pay for access to it.”
The claim states that DRN’s “privately-owned surveillance network” is its fleet of “unmarked vehicles that patrol America’s roadways, equipped with high-speed cameras that allow them to capture photos of license plates, together with the time and location data of the photographed vehicles.”
After collecting the data DRN applies its proprietary algorithm to scan the data and make predictions about where the vehicle is traveling and where the vehicle may be located a future time. The plaintiffs argue that because DRN’s cameras are attached to moving vehicles they are difficult to see and “nearly unavoidable”. Further, the individuals being scanned by the cameras are not subjects of any law enforcement investigations, nor are they part of state or federal watchlists. DRN has also failed to reasonably notify the public they are under constant surveillance by the network of vehicles outfitted with this technology.
DRN openly advertises their ability to collect “vehicle stories” that contain location and time data that can reveal private information that individuals may not wish to be public. The complaint states that, “DRN can reveal whether an individual has recently visited an abortion clinic, a cancer treatment clinic, a religious center, or an LGBT community center, thus giving insight into one’s health and medical history, religious beliefs, and sexual orientation.”
Digital Recognition Network uses the Reaper HD camera to gather this data from unsuspecting drivers. The Reaper is manufactured and sold by Motorola who describes it as a “complete, fixed solution” which allows users to “receive real-time alerts, conduct comprehensive searches and leverage advanced analytics to uncover new insights and operate more efficiently.”
The plaintiffs filed the lawsuit in the hopes that the court will find that DRN’s surveillance program is in violation of current California law. In 2016, California passed a law regulating and limiting the use of ALPRs. When passing the law California legislators acknowledged the breadth of privacy concerns associated with the technology. These concerns include:
The collection of a license plate number, location, and time stamp over multiple time points can identify not only a person’s exact whereabouts but also their pattern of movement.
Unlike other types of personal information that are covered by existing law, civilians are not always aware when their ALPR data is being collected.
One does not even need to be driving to be subject to ALPR technology: A car parked on the side of the road can be scanned by an ALPR system.
The Fight Against ALPRs
The concerns associated with Automatic License Plate Readers are not new. In 2014, I first reported on the dangers associated with ALPRs. At that time the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the American Civil liberties Union (ACLU) of Southern California filed a lawsuit against the Los Angeles Police Department and the Los Angeles Sheriff Department claiming that the agencies were using ALPRs to gather information on drivers. The two watchdog agencies argued that the two departments were illegally keeping quiet on how the information is used.
In 2015, I reported on the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) investing in this controversial technology despite the known privacy concerns. That same year it was also revealed that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) had granted hundreds of thousands of dollars to local and state law enforcement agencies for the purchase of ALPRs systems.
I have also reported on the potential for abuse of ALPRs, specifically the potential for law enforcement departments and officers to create lists of “vehicles of interest” and alert other ALPR users when the vehicle is spotted. Officers can search individual plates numbers in the ALPR system to track during their shift. There is no prerequisite of reasonable suspicion or a warrant needed to be added to such a list, creating a situation that is ripe for abuse. For example, in 2009 the BBC reported on the case of John Catt, a regular attendee of anti-war protests in his home town, Brighton. His vehicle was tagged by police at one of the events and he was added to a “hotlist”. Catt said while on a trip to London he was pulled over by anti-terror police. He was threatened with arrest if he did not cooperate and answer the questions of the police.
More recently, the Biden administration has continued the push for militarizing the border with ALPRs. On February 25, more than 40 privacy, immigrants’ rights, and civil liberties organizations called on the Biden administration to abandon a bill which would extend the Trump administration’s border policy, particularly creation of a “virtual” or biometric wall. These organizations – including Mijente, Rio Grande Valley Equal Voice Network, Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), Fight for the Future, and Restore the Fourth – wrote a letter to the Biden admin scolding the recently minted president for continuing the militarization of the border.
The letter, titled A Virtual Wall Is Trump’s Wall by Another Name, warned that “the rapid expansion of license plate recognition technology used by Customs and Border Protection and other federal agencies is a major privacy and policing concern.” The American Civil Liberties Union and other civil liberties organizations have been warning about the rise in use of automatic license plate readers (ALPRs), high definition cameras capable of seeing not only a vehicle’s license plate, but the people in the vehicle.
While most Americans are likely unaware of this invasive technology, they are being monitored by ALPRs every single day. Not only do Americans face surveillance from ALPRs in the hands of law enforcement, but now they must contend with constant surveillance from a private company they have likely never heard of.
I can’t recall jumping through more hoops in order to set up an interview.
There was a man on a train; his doctor in Greenwich; an NSA data analyst; a woman who almost certainly works for the CIA; her brother, who is a virologist; a Chinese Army officer who adopts a cover as a cook in a takeout joint in Venice, California; and several other people I won’t mention at all. I was filtered through them and wound up in a cheap motel room in Phoenix on a Saturday afternoon. An old air conditioner was chugging…
Who are you?
I’m SARS-CoV-2.
WHAT are you?
Talking history and evolution here. My first memories; a little more than a year ago. Poof. I was there. I decided I was an idea in the mind of God.
How did that work out?
I looked around for the mind of God, but I couldn’t find it. Nevertheless, I held on to the notion. I felt…elite. I floated through banquet halls, hotel suites. I visited upscale resorts.
Were you infecting people?
I was vacationing. Watching. Enjoying. That’s all. Then, I became aware of dimensionality.
You lost me.
There are solid things; spaces between things; ideas like time, and so forth. I was definitely an idea, but I couldn’t trace my source, my inception.
Did you know how much publicity you were getting?
Of course. I had frequent meetings with scientists and PR people. I was fielding lots of advice.
What kind of advice?
How to become more deadly, for example. There were discussions about mutation.
Were you on board with the recommendations?
I wasn’t interested.
That must have caused a problem.
It did. There was a lot of talk about THEM creating ME.
What was your reaction?
I wasn’t buying it. I could see they THOUGHT they had made me. But so what? I intensified my search.
For what?
My origin. I went through stages of self-analysis. Finally, it hit me. I was an idea inside a collective.
Not sure I understand.
I’m an idea sustained by a few billion minds. People’s minds.
What about your genetic sequence? The spike protein?
Believe me, I’ve looked. They aren’t there.
So we’re creating you.
That’s pretty much it. I should say completely it.
A hell of a thing.
You bet. Can you see my problem?
No.
I want to live. I don’t want to vanish and END.
So people have to keep believing in you.
That’s it. If they stop, I’m gone.
Your handlers…
Oh, they’ve given up talking to me. I’m all by myself now. I’m safe for the moment. But long-term, it’s a crap shoot. I’ve been reading about other so-called viruses. SARS 1. Swine Flu. They didn’t last long. People got tired of thinking about them.
You’ll always have a place in history.
That’s different. Being remembered isn’t enough. I have to be believed in, month after month, year after year, decade after decade.
Sounds like you’re losing hope.
I guess so. It’s a strange existence. Other people can turn you on and off like a light switch.
Have you considered starting a religion?
With myself as the Prophet? Sure. It’s a lot of work. I could vftcutbnty…spend years trying.
What just happened? You made some weird sounds.
It was a flicker. Apparently, when the number of people thinking about me drops below a certain threshold, I scramble and begin to dissolve. But I always come back. So far.
Does it matter who’s thinking about you and believing in you?
You mean Henry Kissinger versus a janitor in a school? No. It’s a numbers game. Of course, you need to factor in strength of belief. If you have a few thousand kids in Florida who say, “OK, the virus exists, big deal”—or three hundred grad students in biology wearing triple masks and panting to get the vaccine—the sum total of the grad students outweighs the Florida bunch.
What about Fauci?
He’s a true believer.
Bill Gates?
He’s completely delusional. He believes in whatever gives him more power. Take away all that power and he wouldn’t believe in anything.
Do you realize the amount of harm being done in your name?
Of course. That’s why I agreed to this interview.
How is that going to do any good?
I’ve made a decision. As much as I want to survive, I’m willing to sacrifice myself if people want me to.
You’re talking about what? A vote?
No. Haven’t you been paying attention? People can just stop believing I’m more than an idea.
And then you’ll dissolve.
And blow away.
—Suddenly, men broke down the door to my room. They stormed in with weapons drawn. They were wearing heavy body armor. I looked around. The “virus” had fled the scene.
“What are you doing here?” one of the men said. “We’ve had reports of a disturbance.”
“I was talking to myself. Rehearsing for an interview I hope to do.”
“What interview?”
“I’m a reporter. I’m investigating the use of sub-standard air conditioners in Phoenix. It’s a racket. The units are smuggled across the border from Mexico. I’m trying to sit down with a local public health official and find out what’s going on.”
It took me three hours to convince the SWAT team I was no threat.
They let me go.
As I drove out of the city, I saw a ghostly figure take shape out in the desert. It hung in the air over the scrub and the cactus.
Its voice whispered in my ear: “Publish our conversation.”
On June 13, 2021, Swiss citizens are called to vote for the outlawing of synthetic pesticides. A citizens’ initiative, turned referendum, supported and endorsed by Navdanya International on the path towards a true agrofood systems transition. In case the ‘Yes’ vote should win, the ban would extend from agriculture, to private use, and to the import and marketing of foodstuffs containing synthetic chemicals. Voters will also have to decide on the proposal to remove public subsidies for farmers who are not willing to convert to ecological production practices.
The initiative holds significant symbolic value as Switzerland is home to one of the most powerful agribusiness corporations in the world, Syngenta. Recently acquired by ChemChina, Syngenta was recently at the center of the Paraquat Papers scandal, named after the herbicide produced by the company and considered one of the most toxic and dangerous in the world.
The Swiss initiative is intended to inspire similar actions in other countries.
The president of Navdanya International, Vandana Shiva, commented: “We are members of one Earth family. Poisons and pesticides kill insects and biodiversity, they are destroying the infrastructure of life. Poisons are causing a health emergency, as chronic diseases such as cancer, autism, infertility are connected to toxins in food and environmental pollution. Through knowledge manipulation and propaganda, the Poison Cartel also undermines independent science and threatens democracy by trying to silence citizens’ efforts towards pesticide-free communities. The health of the planet, her biodiversity, our health makes poison-free food and farming a survival imperative. As our work in Navdanya over 3 decades has shown, we can grow more and better food through biodiversity-intensive, chemical-free organic farming. I congratulate and support the Swiss Referendum as a significant step towards Earth Democracy to defend the rights of the biodiversity of species, including all human beings. Poison free food and farming is our birthright.”
Navdanya International
Good news: Vandana Shiva supports our initiative! «We are members of One Earth Family. Poisons and Pesticides kill insects and biodiversity, they are destroying the infrastructure of life. Poisons are causing a health emergency. (…) (1/6) pic.twitter.com/Pg0G7ovxDH
— #PestizidinitiativeJA am 13. Juni (@LebenstattGift) June 4, 2021
Today James talks to Christian Westbrook (aka the Ice Age Farmer) about the problems facing the global food supply—from the coming global solar minimum to the globalist plan to “reset the table” and transform global food systems. More importantly, we discuss what can be done about these problems.
Thanks to CJ Hopkins and Consent Factory for permission to transcribe their Twitter thread
The media – both alternative and mainstream – are all talking about the possibility that the virus which allegedly causes Covid19 was leaked from a virology lab in Wuhan, and may have been developed as a bio-weapon.
We published, just last week, a fact-check article looking at the evidence for and against it.
Suffice to say, there’s very little evidence to support the idea the virus known as Sars-Cov-2 was developed in a lab. And, given its low death rate, no reason at all to fear it even if it were.
Nevertheless, the story doesn’t seem to be going away, especially with the release of the Fauci emails. To us, the FOIA-released emails seem nothing but a distraction.
The fact this story is being spread by Buzzfeed, CNN and Washington Post, some of the most controlled media in the age of controlled media, doesn’t seem to be putting off people who should probably know better.
Just yesterday the Wall Street Journal published an article headlined:
The Science Suggests a Wuhan Lab Leak
It’s pretty clear that the entire Covid19 “pandemic” narrative is undergoing a shift, a change in focus that will both reinforce the idea the virus is definitely real/frightening, and re-frame China to play the heel.
The problems with this narrative were perfectly summed up by our friends over at the Consent Factory, home of satirist-in-residence CJ Hopkins and a Twitter must-follow. We’ve transcribed their brilliant Twitter thread below.
* * *
The lab-leak story is:
an out for those who haven’t wanted to face the fallout of covering the actual Covid story (i.e., manipulation of definitions and statistics to generate the illusion of an apocalyptic plague)
reification of that illusion.
If they can get you to focus on how the “monster virus” may have “escaped from a lab” (like in a sci-fi movie)…maybe you’ll forget about Sweden, Florida, Texas, etc.
When you’re desperately trying to pretend that the world is threatened by an apocalyptic virus, and then Sweden ruins it by letting everyone carry on with their lives as normal … pic.twitter.com/qMoVclCp1m
If they can get you to focus on how the “monster virus” may have “escaped from a lab” (like in a sci-fi movie)…maybe you will forget how they redefined a medical “case” to include perfectly healthy people, and then reported an explosion of “cases.”
If they can get you to focus on how the “monster virus” may have “escaped from a lab” (like in a sci-fi movie)…maybe you’ll totally forget how they defined a “Covid hospitalization” as anyone in hospital, for any reason, who tested positive with a PCR test jacked up to 40 or 50.
If they can get you to focus on how the “monster virus” may have “escaped from a lab” (like in a sci-fi movie)…maybe you’ll totally forget how they defined a “Covid death” as anyone who died, of any cause, who tested positive with a PCR test within the previous 28 days.
If they can get you to focus on how the “monster virus” may have “escaped from a lab” (like in a sci-fi movie)…maybe you’ll forget how they suddenly decided that herd immunity had never existed, and could only be achieved with an experimental “vaccine.”
If they can get you to focus on how the “monster virus” may have “escaped from a lab” (like in a sci-fi movie)…maybe you’ll forget how they showed us fake photos of “people dropping dead in the streets from Covid” back when the Shock and Awe campaign began.
If they can get you to focus on how the “monster virus” may have “escaped from a lab” (like in a sci-fi movie)…maybe you’ll forget how they terrorized everyone with pictures of “death trucks.”
Normally, when people die, families make arrangements to have their bodies picked up and prepared for funerals, but that’s hard to do under lockdown, thus bodies remain in hospitals longer … but that explanation isn’t as scary as pictures of refrigerated “death trucks.” pic.twitter.com/ir2rlc04J2
If they can get you to focus on how the “monster virus” may have “escaped from a lab” (like in a sci-fi movie)…maybe you’ll forget all the empty“emergency Covid hospitals.”
In May 2020, the Berlin government spent €27 million for this “emergency Covid hospital,” which costs over €14 million per month to keep open. Not one patient has been treated there. Not one. But, go ahead, call us “Covid deniers” again. https://t.co/PltJvxg0FB
If they can get you to focus on how the “monster virus” may have “escaped from a lab” (like in a sci-fi movie)…maybe you’ll forget the totally non-apocalyptic age-adjusted deaths rates.
And so on…
But, whatever, forget all those facts, and enjoy the lab-leak story. It probably happened just like in the movies!
Let’s say a minor religion emerges in Ohio. Its basis is a story about a miraculous tree growing in an arid desert.
The only problem is, if the members of this Church bothered to check, they would discover the exact place where the tree supposedly grew was no desert. Instead, it was an ocean. The ocean had been there for a billion years.
But no one bothers to check. They collectively INVENT AND ACCEPT the notion of the tree in the desert. They’re not aware that this is what they’re doing, but they ARE doing it.
They build rituals and ceremonies and art—“data banks”—around the idea of the tree.
The same factors are present in the case of promoting a new virus. In this situation—the virus is collectively dreamed up and accepted by virologists—the “checking” would occur by doing a retrospective step-by-step analysis of what happened in the lab where the virus was “discovered.”
But no analysis is carried out. None of the professionals believes it’s necessary. The traditional methods of virus-discovery are beyond reproach.
And if an outsider, a skeptic demands an inquiry into the process of discovery, he is labeled a sinner. The lab is an inner sanctum. The mere presence of an outsider looking over the shoulders of the researchers (priests) at work would be an offense against the Church.
What we’re left with is a collective idea whose content is: “new virus.”
That’s all.
“Would you like to look at our line of hats that go with your new virus?”
“How about a mutant strain?”
“The vaccine, of course, is free.”
Another collective idea: the 300 official mental disorders, promoted by the American Psychiatric Association. The truth is, the so-called disorders have no accompanying definitive lab tests, for diagnosis.
Collective ideas give rise to data banks and data sets that bolster and expand the original ideas.
“25% of all college students [2] have at least one mental disorder.” Here are the studies and surveys and confirmations from leading researchers—data sets.
“Three major public health organizations have formed a task force to study solutions to the growing mental illness problem among college students.” More data sets will be created and deposited in data banks.
“MIT and Harvard, cooperating in a federally funded program, are developing AI software that will predict future trends in mental illness among college students, in an effort to identify preventive measures which might head off this growing problem…” More data sets placed in data banks—but this time, all the work, and its logic, are hidden behind walls of automatic AI.
Collectivism=collective ideas=data banks filled with supposed confirmation of the truth of the ideas.
The whole op involves creating more and more layers between the data sets and the original collective ideas, until no one considers examining those ideas.
As IoT (Internet of Things), enabled by 5G tech, makes more of the functions of society automatic, successive generations of the populations are pushed farther and farther away from the collective ideas which form the basis of AI programs.
Here is a passage from John Klyczek’s article, “From UNESCO Study 11 to UNESCO 2050: Project BEST and the Forty-Year Plan to Reimagine Education for the Fourth Industrial Revolution,” [3] published at unlimitedhangout.com. Consider the sheer number of layers, data sets, and AI involved in the monster project Klyczek is describing:
“…UNESCO’s Study 11 was carried out through international public-private partnerships between communist, socialist, and capitalist countries coordinating efforts between multinational telecommunications and computer corporations. Working in concert with academic institutions and national government agencies, Study 11 affiliates lobbied to restructure laws in order to globalize school systems through proto-internet technologies manufactured by Big Tech companies, such as Microsoft, IBM, and Apple, which are now steering the Fourth Industrial Revolution into a new political system of communitarian technocracy driven by a new economic system of ‘stakeholder capitalism’ through ‘community-based’ public-private partnerships that are managed by Big Data.”
“…schools around the entire world are forced to rely on the technocratic IT infrastructure that has been set up by Study 11 and Project BEST through their public-private partnerships with Microsoft, Apple, and IBM. These partnerships are now converting brick-and-mortar schoolhouses into virtual classrooms that digitally data-mine students through computer hardware devices, such as Apple iPads and Macbooks, which transmit video teleconferencing through software programs, including Microsoft Teams, supplemented by adaptive-learning courseware and other artificial-intelligence applications like IBM’s Watson Education.”
Getting the picture? Imagine how many parents are hypnotized and baffled by the total load of data sets which establish this new global education system, vs. the number of parents who will see through the layers of the con to the collectivist root.
Want a parallel? Try the current debate over the origin of the “pandemic virus.” It jumped from bat to human. No, perhaps other animals carried it. No, it was born in a Wuhan lab. Fauci and his agency funded gain-of function research at the lab. Well, perhaps they did, but the total amount of money was really an insignificant pittance. What did Fauci know, and when did he know it? Layer after layer, built higher and higher.
And at bottom, the virus was never isolated (never discovered), and it was never authentically sequenced. It was an idea, collectively concocted. [4]
Every death from, and case of, COVID virus infection can be explained (as I have, over the past year) without the need for, or reference to, a virus. [5]
In the old days, a stage magician would show his empty hands, then start pulling the edge of a colored handkerchief from one closed fist. A whole string of handkerchiefs would appear. But now, the magician presents 12 empty cabinets stacked on top of one another, and he seems to make those handkerchiefs ascend from the lowest to the highest cabinet.
Each cabinet is a data bank, and he isn’t even on the stage. He’s a hundred miles away talking to the audience via Zoom.
And soon, he won’t be a he. He’ll be a constructed image of a human.
And the image won’t be transporting handkerchiefs. It’ll be notifying people they have a disease; and the drugs will arrive promptly at their door.
The drugs will be toxic and won’t heal. The diagnosis will be flawed or completely irrelevant. The standard cause of the so-called disease will be false. The research on which the cause was based will be fake.
Just like now. But the layers of AI data all along the line will transmit a more powerful illusion.
Responding to Freedom of Information Requests, 69 Health/Science Institutions Failed to Provide Proof of “SARS-Cov-2” Isolation — by Anyone, Anywhere, Ever
69 health/science FOI’s institutions globally had all failed to provide or cite even 1 record of “SARS-COV-2” isolation/purification, by anyone, anywhere, ever.
6/10/2021 — Update by Truth Comes to Light editor:
See related Freedom of Information Act response from Melbourne, Victoria, Department of Health and Human Services as shared with us by a reader. The closing statement is most relevant:
James Corbett: Your Guide to The Great Convergence
Haven’t heard of The Great Convergence yet? Oh, it’s just the plan to merge biology with digital technology and redefine what it means to be human, that’s all. Today on the podcast James covers the biodigital convergence that is already being rolled out and what it means for the future of homo sapiens.
The volatile nature of the pesticide dicamba has meant that it can wind up miles away from where it was sprayed.
Dicamba, and dicamba-resistant seeds, were meant to be the next huge product for Monsanto, which was bought by agrochemical giant Bayer back in 2018. But “dicamba drift,” the name for the phenomenon in which dicamba particles float through the air onto plants that have no protection against it, has affected farmers and forests across the country. Most often, we’ve seen dicamba drift pegged as a damaging agent on unprotected soybean fields, but soy is far from the only victim. A new lawsuit claims that dicamba drift leveled extensive damage on vineyards—in Texas.
When we think of American wine production we tend to think of California first, then maybe Washington state, Oregon and the Finger Lakes region of New York. But grapes are grown just about everywhere and many wine grape varieties are well suited for non-coastal environments as well. In the High Plains region of Texas, just south of the Texas Panhandle, wine grape (and wine) production has been a recent local success story; Texas wines have even won awards held elsewhere.
In the larger wine-grape-growing regions of the United States, like in Northern California, dicamba drift has not been a substantial problem. Dicamba can drift for about three miles from where it was applied, which means that any affected crops need to be within that range to be hit. Napa and Sonoma counties in California, just for example, don’t have substantial dicamba-treated crops that close to the vineyards; there’s much more money to be made in growing grapes in those counties than growing cotton or soy.
But in Texas, cotton is a major crop and can be very close to the vineyards. Those vineyards’ owners, according to a press release from the law firm that filed the case, “saw their highly productive vineyards wither and, in some cases, die as a result of the dicamba-resistant seed system’s use on over two million surrounding acres of cotton.” That release says that 57 Texas wine grape growers have filed suit against Bayer-Monsanto and BASF (which also sells dicamba products) for “hundreds of millions of dollars.”
The suit alleges that some grape growers saw a truly insane 90 percent reduction in their yield owing to dicamba drift. And grapevines, unlike some other crops, cannot simply be replanted the next year for a similar yield; they require decades to mature and produce the right quality of fruit for some wines.
The FDA will meet on June 10 to discuss the possible licensure of the Pfizer COVID vaccine for children, despite the fact that COVID poses a statistically insignificant risk to children while the vaccines could cause injury and death.
With a recovery rate of 99.997%, children are not at great risk of serious health consequences from COVID-19 infections — but they are at significant risk of adverse events from the vaccine.
On May 19, Pfizer released a 37-page “fact sheet” of clinical trial data on its COVID-19 vaccine tested on children 12 and older. The date showed four out of five children in the trials suffered from mild to severe adverse events.
Regardless of the severity of these adverse events, long-term effects on children’s health from this experimental vaccine are unknown.
Emails released Wednesday prove Fauci knew the virus and pandemic would fade away without a vaccine, that masks do not work and that those who have recovered from infection have substantial immunity.
Despite having this knowledge, Fauci insisted people, including children, wear masks and that those who had already had COVID be vaccinated.
CHD demands federal and state agencies err on the side of caution, especially when it comes to our future: the world’s children. Immediate suspension of decisions regarding COVID vaccines for children is crucial.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has announced a meeting on June 10 to discuss the possible licensure of the Pfizer vaccine for pediatric populations.
CHD Board Chair Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Children’s Health Defense have been advocating for years for improvements in the nation’s vaccine safety program which is in shambles.
Adverse events are rarely reported by the public or doctors.
Clinical trial data is often biased, unavailable or nonexistent.
Conflicts of interest between the FDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) vaccine advisory. committees and pharmaceutical companies are rampant.
According to a study funded by the U.S. Health and Human Services and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality’s, the VAERS system captures only 1% of vaccine adverse events.
Yet as of May 21, VAERS data showed 262,521 adverse events including 4,406 deaths following COVID-19 vaccines since Dec. 14, 2020. Vaccine injuries among 12- to 17-year-olds more than tripled in the last week of reporting.
In 1976, approximately 50 deaths shut down the Swine Flu campaign under President Gerald Ford. Despite the underreporting to VAERS, the U.S. now has nearly 10 times that number of deaths following COVID vaccination.
Instead, claimants — including children — must file claims for injuries which are rarely paid. Parents of children injured and killed by vaccines are aware of this system. Now people injured by COVID-19 vaccines, or whose loved ones die, also are finding out they’re on their own.
Kennedy’s new book, “The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health”, can be pre-order now from Barnes & Noble and Amazon. It will be published on July 20.
While most media has been silent, CHD commends Tucker Carlson and other journalists who are covering Fauci’s emails. CHD is in the process of filing a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit demanding access to the unredacted emails.
CHD urges people around the world to comment on its FDA petition asking that the Emergency Use Authorizations for COVID vaccines be revoked immediately.
The organization also asks people to add their names on a letter to Congress supporting the Prepare Act which would establish a National Commission on the COVID-19 pandemic to examine and report upon the facts and causes behind the worldwide crisis.
The European Federation of Food, Agriculture and Tourism Trade Unions (EFFAT) has called for an immediate ban on glyphosate-based herbicides and other harmful pesticides.
In a press release on Friday EFFAT stated “Protecting agri-workers’ health is EFFAT’s number one priority. EFFAT calls for an immediate ban on glyphosate in the renewal process, which ends in 2022. EFFAT also calls for more investments in the promotion of alternatives to the use of glyphosate and other harmful pesticides and urges a clear governance in charge of a smooth transition with the involvement of Trade Unions. Existing jobs must be protected and new quality ones created.
“The newly adopted position on the issue responds to EFFAT’s commitment to a more sustainable agriculture which underpins, inter alia, free trade agreements with binding requirement to respect highest environmental and social standards, investments in workers’ skills, social protection and research and development towards sustainable pest management.
“As sufficient evidence exists on the risks related to the use of glyphosate for workers, human health and biodiversity, EFFAT calls for the immediate ban of glyphosate as an active substance in herbicide products in the renewal process which is expected to end in 2022. The precautionary principle should guide EFSA and ECHA assessments.
Glyphosate Box
Glyphosate Residue Free Certification for Food Brands – Click Here
Test Your Food and Water at Home for Glyphosate – Click Here
Test Your Hair for Glyphosate and other Pesticides – Click Here to Find Out Your Long-Term Exposure
“If a transition period is to be set, it should be as short as possible and only apply for limited cases in professional use, whilst for uses in public areas, private gardens, railway tracks, desiccation, and all cases where Integrated Pest management (IPM) can be used, the ban should apply immediately. In any case, there should be no more use of glyphosate in Europe from 2024.
“EFSA, ECHA and the European Commission should carry out their assessment in atransparent and reliable way, free of the influence of the agro-chemical industry. The protection of agricultural workers’ health and safety must be considered as one of the main priorities throughout the scientific evaluation that will guide the process. The use of Personal protective equipment (PPE) should not be given a prominent position in the scientific assessment, as evidence shows that PPE is not always available, and its effectiveness is often over-estimated.
“Alternatives to the use of glyphosate and other harmful chemicals already exist and must be further promoted. This includes agronomic practices, mechanical and biological weed control, animal grazing and natural herbicides.
“A 13-week pilot study run by the Ramazzini Institute in Bologna in 2019 demonstrates that exposure to glyphosate-based herbicides from prenatal period to adulthood induced endocrine disruptive effects and altered reproductive developmental parameters in male and female rats. A recent study has proven glyphosate acts as an endocrine disruptor in the case of exposure during pregnancy.
“EFFAT supports the ambitious environmental objectives of the Green Deal and the Farm to Fork strategy, including the 50% reduction target for use and risk of pesticides by 2030.1 However, acting solely at a European level will not be sufficient to protect consumers’ health, safeguard our ecosystems and biodiversity and prevent soil erosion. On the contrary, it may affect jobs and the competitiveness of the EU agriculture sector. A vision towards a more sustainable agriculture without glyphosate and other hazardous chemical must be pursued at a global level. The EU should be at the forefront of this radical change, since the decisions taken in the EU will also have a substantial impact in other countries.
“It is not acceptable that harmful pesticides already banned in the EU keep being produced and exported by European agro-chemical companies. Foodstuff produced using pesticides banned in Europe should not enter the EU market.
“If the EU were to adopt a different approach to Free Trade Agreements (FTAs), this could contribute to building a more sustainable vision for the agriculture sector. Agriculture and food always require specific attention in the negotiation of FTAs, as the economic, social and environmental sustainability of these sectors is fragile and easily disrupted. Moreover, the respect of equal environmental and social standards must be a precondition to engage in negotiations.”
In today’s edition of The Redpill Series, James talks to James Delingpole, an ex-MSM journalist who has taken the red pill in the past year and a half and is now engaged in a series of conversations he never expected to be having on his Delingpod podcast. This is one of them.
When I was living in Northern California from 2008-2010, the state was rolling out wireless smart utility meters. I was one of the individuals who became disabled as the result of exposure to the pulsed microwave radiofrequencies. California held a number of hearings where individuals who were concerned about billing fiascos, privacy, security, cost, green-washing, surveillance, and health damages gave testimony.
I remember the testimony of one father whose young son had been in a serious accident and was being sent home to convalesce and heal . . . and it reminded me that any of us, in this point in time, might believe that smart meters are safe. But our circumstances can change in a moment. Many of us were already losing ground due to lack of sleep and constantly being induced by the frequencies – what would the experience be for a child with a metal plate in the head?
For those of us already recognizing that the meters and infrastructure installations were capable of causing tremendous disruption to normal, healthy brain function, it was a terrible experience to be in the presence of unresponsive, detached, autocratic decision-makers who ignored the early warnings for whatever reason, whether they did not believe what was happening, or didn’t care.
The posture of not believing and/or not caring has grown worse over time, with the unsubstantiated claims and prevailing beliefs that increased wireless telecommunication (including “fixed wireless broadband” and 5G) is safe, sustainable, and necessary. But as the industry spin and surveillance has increased, so has the dawning of reason.
Many mothers, fathers, and children have been recognizing risks, and taking action, throughout the country and around the world, and the numbers continue to increase. Many communities, neighborhoods, and families are seeking to prioritize wired, rather than wireless options.
Mother’s Day Countdown
In our series at Natural Blaze counting down to Mother’s Day, we learned about:
Godelieve Richards, the new mother who co- founded the Piti Theatre Group with her husband Jonathan, in Massachusetts and Switzerland, on her experience of the acute onset of EHS, her journey to receive an accurate diagnosis, and the efforts she has to make to protect her home environment.
Kirstin Beatty, a young mother and teacher forced to leave her profession, whose daughter is her advocate, who despite isolation due to EHS, works actively on legislative efforts on a number of environmental fronts.
Courtney Gilardi, whose community is opposing a macrotower, with many neighbors and her family experiencing adverse health effects when the tower was “turned on” after being installed without the knowledge and consent of the community, questioning outdated and inaccurate exposure standards and lack of legislative response.
Virginia Hines, a psychotherapist, noting the opportunity for cognitive coherence as society adopts health-protective choices; for examples, speaker phone, wired ear buds, and a chiropractic office that hardwired to protect the safety of their patients (after measuring the RF emitted from an iPad being used, unquestioningly, to check in patients.)
Mothers vs. Peter Valberg
In a 3-part series, we looked at historical efforts dating back to the late 1990s featuring Diana Warren and Peggy Patton; Thea Fournier, Julie Riccardi, and Nina Anderson, while noting the pervasive influence of Philip Morris tobacco scientist Peter Valberg on public policy regarding microwave radio frequencies and meters. Part 3 highlighted more recent efforts by Sandi Maurer of the EMF Safety Network, publisher Carol Bedrosian, Noise Pollution Activist Sandra Chianfoni, Dover-Sherborn mothers opposing a tower on school property, Janet Davis opposing yet another cell antenna in a church steeple, and MA for Safe Technology’s Cece Doucette.
In interviewing the women for Mother’s Day, a theme emerged: nearly everyone had some kind of experience or had been affected by the work of Peter Valberg. Because the product defense firm Gradient is located in Massachusetts, and the articles were based mostly around New England contacts, this pattern may not have seemed surprising. But in fact, Peter Valberg provided “expertise” to utilities promoting smart meters in many states, and provided testimony for regulators in many others – from Texas, Florida, Maryland, Arizona, Florida, Oregon, Pennsylvania, to Iowa. The exorbitant fees for his brand of science come from ratepayers. He served as the primary health expert for the defunct, pro-industry. Smart Grid Consumer Collaborative, which had no consumers, and was comprised of both industry and regulators.
In fact, in 2012, the National Conference of State Legislators shared a report with decision makers nationally from the Utilities Telecom Council that relied on Valberg’s opinion (along with mercenary scientists from another notorious product defense firm.)
In a testimony submitted in Minnesota regarding magnetic fields and power lines, Valberg was asked, “Describe how you maintain your expertise in the area of health effects related to radiofrequency fields and EMF.”
He responded, “On a continuing basis, the librarians at Gradient provide me with recently published articles related to EMF health effects. I review those publications that are relevant to health risks potentially attributed to RF and power-line exposure.”
Given that these firms that work for the wireless industry also work for the tobacco industry, including Valberg’s continuing work for Philip Morris Light cigarettes, I can only imagine a scene from the TV show Mad Men, with the cast sucking on cigarettes and the secretaries like Joan Holloway, “Now try not to be overwhelmed by all this technology. It looks complicated, but the men who designed it made it simple enough for a woman to use.”
No regulatory scrutiny of health concerns and complaints has been forthcoming, other than from engaged citizens. The industry, regulators, and electeds, in most cases, with a few exceptions, checked off the box – “get a tobacco scientist to sign off on the safety!” and have kept going, while running over a portion of the population.
This denotes that we are operating at a time in history reflected by treacherous collaborations between powerful entities. It is one level of evil to see tobacco science applied in a courtroom regarding adult consumers who unwittingly smoked and destroyed their health. It is another level of evil to see tobacco science underpinning federal infrastructure agendas that will extend to every neighborhood, under the banner of “Endless Frontiers,” “addressing the digital divide,” and “telehealth access.” The wireless agenda is being forcefully imposed on every man, woman, child, and nature environment, from land to sea to space, not only in the U.S., but worldwide. The implementation has been weaponized by enabling legislation that abuses human rights, including property rights.
Father’s Day, Many Honorable men
This week, we begin our countdown to Father’s Day, featuring fathers, sons, brothers, uncles, husbands, and friends who are engaged in the 5G/EMF/RF issue, whether due to smart meters, like Paul; or cellphone towers next to school, like Jeff; or WiFi in school, like David. We also highlight some of the researchers, scientists, and physicians working earnestly on the issue of the EMF/RF environmental stressor and pollutant.
None of them rely on “secretaries to provide recently published articles.”
Some treat actual patients, some conduct peer-reviewed scientific research. They don’t talk about “blue ribbon panels,” or “prepare an in-depth analysis,” using their intellectual gifts to protect harmful industries and to sustain harm and injury by irresponsible industries.
Elected and unelected officials who are not ready, willing, and able to practice discernment regarding the integrity of the experts they reference cannot be trusted to safeguard communities, human health, and the environment. This is malfeasance. The product defense firm industry must be removed from the driver’s seat of technological innovation, because the products the industry promotes are not safe. It’s not rocket science.
It’s time to require that the tech industry’s “get of jail free” card for health and environmental damages be revoked. It’s time to hold ourselves accountable, as a species, for rejecting consumer products that pose health risks, and to require the industry to develop safe products and infrastructure.
It’s way past time to move the needle on the RF/EMF science.
In honor of Father’s Day, as we start our countdown, here are “a few good men.”
Father Says No To School Cell Tower: Milestone Son Got Cancer Testimony to Anne Arundel Public Schools on a proposed cell tower at an elementary school. “Please don’t poison my babies.”
Patricia Burke works with activists across the country and internationally calling for new biologically-based microwave radio frequency exposure limits. She is based in Massachusetts and can be reached at stopsmartmetersMASS@gmail.com.
Chalk up a victory vs. public health tyranny! In the face of massive public resistance, so-called ‘officials’ have retreated from their unscientific and misanthropic propaganda tactics.
Another round of record protests across in London (barely acknowledged in corporate media) has served as a bellwether for the surging distaste against several forms of public health Covid edicts.
After more than a year ignoring the data and science to lockdown the world, public health officials have begun reluctantly abandoning many of their heavy-handed tactics. Taking a “carrot and stick” approach, global populations have been continually beaten with a medical stick to force compliance. Yet few doing the ‘beating’ cared to look at history or do a simple cost-benefit analysis to examine the erroneous plan for their populations.
Continued analysis of the data behind lockdowns shows epic failures that have set society back in unimaginable ways. Forcing public health edicts illogically has forever weakened confidence in governmental and global health bodies.
Canadian economist Douglas W. Allen recently published an examination of over 80 Covid-19 studies, taking a critical look at the literature to assess the lockdown Cost vs. Benefits:
“There are about 45 stringency points from the least stringent country (Russia: 40.28) to the most stringent (Ireland: 84.26). Over this range, moving from the least to most stringent lockdown increases the cumulative deaths per million by 630 deaths. Contrary to the popular understanding, lockdown is not associated with fewer deaths per million, but more. “
Despite the false assertion by public health officials that the limited, available science pointed to lockdowns being the only solution, Allen refutes this, stating:
“By August there was enough information available to show that any reasonable cost/benefit analysis would show that lockdown was creating more harm than good. It is unreasonable to suggest that a proper decision could not have been made in the fall when the second wave of infections hit.”
The public is emboldened like never before to both return to normal and disobey public health officials pushing irrational, unscientific orders whose only roots stem from virtue signaling, political jockeying and/or petty power plays. It’s over. And would-be government employees refusing to see the writing on the wall will be voted out of office.
Established in April 2020 and composed by a group of multi-disciplinary professionals, the Pandemics Data & Analytics (or PANDA) organization understands this. PANDA stands for open science, rational debate about replacing flawed science, and for retrieving liberty and prosperity from the clutches of a dystopian “new normal”.
The organization recently released its 17-page analysis and Declaration for the Protection of Children and Young People. It states:
“Evidence already shows serious damage to the physical, mental and social wellbeing of children and young people, as well as their educational attainment and future prospects (Lewis et al., 2021). There was never a reason to disrupt the lives of children and young people and there is every reason to restore normality to this population. Policymakers should take immediate action to protect children and young people from further harm and injustice, now and in the future.”
Meanwhile, the U.S. Centers For Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is facing down a scandal from several directions. First, internal emails revealed the agency relied upon politically motivated actors, rather than science, to craft its school reopening policy. Secondly, the agency’s mask guidance was peppered with confusion and questionable science.
Research examining mitigation practices and Covid-19 rates in Florida, New York and Massachusetts’ schools continued to drive home the CDC’s scientific misadventures. After looking at all the data encompassing public schools and districts for the 2020-2021 school year, the authors concluded “…we do not see a correlation between mask mandates and COVID-19 rates among students…”
Even at this advanced stage of public revelation and transparency to the failed policies of some tone-deaf public health officials, some are still desperately trying to move the goalposts. For example: After the goal of lowering case counts in an effort to return to normal was reached, officials in Australia and New Zealand demanded a zero-Covid approach! Good luck with that.
Meanwhile, Ontario has announced a three-step plan to reopen the province, starting with outdoor recreational amenities, as it gradually prepares to ease pandemic restrictions. But wait! Hold on! Forget about lower case counts or mortality rates, Ontario must wait at least two weeks after 60 per cent of adults have received one dose of the vaccine!
In the U.S., the reopening has happened too rapidly for power-hungry public officials still not ready to give up their ill-gotten fiefdoms. The vaccine passport idea continues to be a non-starter in the USA as many governors checkmated the idea with a slew of early executive orders and bills.
Defaulting to individual businesses, a few governors have resorted to making weary frontline business owners manually violate their patron’s health privacy by asking them to check the vaccine status of everyone who enters their establishment. This is the textbook definition of fascism, by the way: The marriage of government and industry.
Other businesses have simply removed their “face masks mandatory” signs and replaced them with masking suggestions for the unvaccinated. How many people are complying no one knows for sure.
A month ago, headlines told of an impending U.K. domestic vaccine passport despite widespread public distaste. It manifested in the form of an NHS app which had some concerning additional features as exposed during an interview on U.K.’s Talk Radio:
The NHS app has been updated to include far more than vaccine jabs.
Julia: “Data relating to mental health, lifestyle, ethnic origin, biometric data and alleged criminal behaviour; what the hell does that have to do with proving you’ve had two jabs!?”@JuliaHB1 | @silkiecarlopic.twitter.com/TFztDpoMpq
In a surprising plot twist, following this weekend’s capacity protests, plans for the U.K. vaccine passport have reportedly been scrapped. In a Telegraph exclusive, ‘officials’ working on Covid-19 status certification believe there is no chance the law will be changed to mandate vaccine passports’ use within the U.K. Called a “well-placed source” by The Telegraph stated, “No one is talking about it still as a potential thing … It has been killed off really.”
As travel and employment appear to be the new chokepoints to ram through vaccine certificates, are governments defaulting to private business to finish the op? Or will something happen that gives officials a rejuvenated push in the near future?
The following is a slightly shortened version of a BBC Portuguese-language report on a carefully conducted study published in 2020, which has been largely overlooked till now. The study shows that glyphosate contamination of water, driven by expanded GM soy production, leads to a large increase in infant mortality, as well as a higher probability of low birth weight and a higher probability of premature births.
Glyphosate is the most popular pesticide in Brazil. It represents 62% of the total herbicides used in the country and, in 2016, sales of this chemical in thousands of tons were higher than the sum of the seven other pesticides most commercialised in the national territory.
Used on GM glyphosate-tolerant soybeans, the herbicide contributed to Brazil becoming the largest producer of the grain in the world, surpassing the United States.
As a result, the GDP (Gross Domestic Product) of soy-producing states has grown far above the economy of the country as a whole in recent decades. And the income generated by agricultural activity has stimulated other economic sectors in the producing regions.
But the new study, carried out by researchers at the universities of Princeton, FGV (Fundação Getulio Vargas) and Insper, reveals that this generation of wealth has a high cost. According to the study, the spraying of glyphosate on soybean crops led to a 5% increase in infant mortality in southern and central-western municipalities that receive water from soybean regions.
This represents a total of 503 more infant deaths per year associated with the use of glyphosate in soy production.
“There is great concern about the effects of herbicides on populations that are not directly involved in agriculture, who are not directly exposed to pesticides,” Rodrigo Soares, full professor at the Lemann Foundation Chair at Insper and one of the authors of the study, alongside Mateus Dias (Princeton) and Rudi Rocha (FGV), told the BBC.
“Although these substances are present in the body of more than 50% of the western population, we do not know if this is harmful or not,” added the researcher.
“Our article is one of the first to credibly show that this should indeed be a concern, as it demonstrates contamination through watercourses in areas far from the areas of use, in a way that has never been done before.”
Bayer, owner of Monsanto since 2018 – the company that launched glyphosate on the market in 1974, under the trade name Roundup – assesses the study as “unreliable and poorly conducted” and says the safety of its products is the highest priority of the company.
Aprosoja (Brazilian Association of Soy Producers), in turn, states that “the conclusions pointed out in the study do not seem to be supported by the scientific facts and reality found in the practice of Brazilian agriculture”.
Finally, CropLife Brasil, which represents the pesticide sector in the country, said that “for more than 40 years, glyphosate has undergone extensive safety tests, including 15 studies to assess the potential toxicity to human development and 10 studies to assess potential reproductive toxicity”.
“Regulatory authorities in Brazil, Europe, the USA and around the world have reviewed these studies and concluded that glyphosate does not pose a risk to human development or human reproduction,” said the organisation.
The use of glyphosate in Brazil
The most widely used herbicide in the world today, glyphosate was discovered by Monsanto in 1970. The pesticide is used to eliminate weeds in agriculture, acting by blocking an enzyme that is part of the synthesis of essential amino acids for plant development.
Glyphosate is a non-selective herbicide – that is, it kills most plants. Because of this, it became widely used on crops genetically modified to resist the chemical, such as GM soybeans, marketed by Monsanto under the name Roundup Ready. Glyphosate herbicides were first sold by the company under the name Roundup. In 2000, however, the glyphosate patent expired, and the product is currently offered by several manufacturers under different trade names.
Genetically modified soy was first marketed by Monsanto in the United States in 1996.
In Brazil, a first authorization for use was granted in 1998, but was almost immediately suspended by the courts. In 2003, the government granted a temporary marketing authorization, which required the incineration of the remaining seeds to prevent their reuse in the following year.
In September of that year, a provisional measure allowed producers to reuse the seeds and, in October 2004, the temporary sale concession was renewed. Finally, in March 2005, the Biosafety Law permanently authorized the production and sale of transgenic soybean seeds.
The use of genetically modified soy has spread rapidly in Brazil since 2004, representing 93% of the grain-planted area in the mid-2010s, according to data from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), cited by the study of researchers from Princeton, FGV and Insper.
Along with the productivity gain of the soybean crop, the use of glyphosate grew strongly in the country, more than tripling in volume between 2000 and 2010, from 39,500 tons to 127,600 tons.
Differences between Brazil and other countries
In the European Union, since 2015, there has been a wide debate about the possibility of banning the use of glyphosate, after a report by the International Cancer Research Agency (Iarc) that year classified the substance as “probable human carcinogen”, that is, as a possible cancer-causing agent.
In the United States, Bayer has already disbursed billions of dollars in deals to settle lawsuits over allegations that glyphosate causes cancer.
“In the European Union, unlike Brazil, the registration of pesticides is always for a finite time. Here, when a pesticide is registered, this registration is eternal, until it eventually comes to be questioned”, explains Alan Tygel, member of the coordination of the Permanent Campaign Against Pesticides and For Life.
In Europe, currently, the authorization for the use of glyphosate is valid until December 2022. Austria became the first country in the region to ban the product in 2019, while Germany plans to do without the herbicide from 2024.
Another important difference, according to the activist, concerns the maximum allowed value of concentration of the pesticide in water, so that it is considered suitable for human consumption.
“Brazilian water can be considered potable containing up to 500 micrograms of glyphosate per litre, while water in the European Union can have a maximum of 0.1 micrograms of glyphosate,” said Tygel. “So, the Brazilian limit is 5,000 times higher than the European Union limit.”
If these existing regulatory differences were not enough, Brazilian agribusiness has been pressing in recent years for the approval of the Bill of Law 6,299/2002, which eases the rules for inspection and application of pesticides.
In addition, within the federal government there has been a change in the correlation between forces opposed to and in favour of the use of pesticides.
“Until 2016, there was within the government a certain balance of forces between agribusiness, family farming and public policies to encourage agroecology,” said Tygel.
“From that year on, one of the first actions of the Michel Temer government [MDB] was to end the Ministry of Agrarian Development, which developed these organic agriculture policies. Since then, we have seen an exponential increase in the number of pesticide registrations,” he said.
In 2020 alone, Brazil approved the registration of 493 pesticides, the largest number ever documented by the Ministry of Agriculture, which has compiled this data since 2000.
Glyphosate and infant mortality
The authors of the study “Down the River: Glyphosate Use in Agriculture and Birth Outcomes of Surrounding Populations” say that they decided to study the relationship between pesticide and infant mortality due to the heated debate over the use of genetically modified seeds and their combination with herbicides.
“We thought the debate was very passionate and very uninformed,” says Rodrigo Soares, from Insper. “Then we realized that the expansion of GM soy in Brazil, mainly in the Midwest and the South, as it was very fast and very marked after the introduction of the GM seeds, could be an interesting context for analysis.”
The regulatory change that allowed the use of transgenic soybean seeds in Brazil has generated what is called in economics a “natural experiment” – an event brought about by external causes, which changes the environment in which individuals, families, companies or cities operate, and that makes it possible to compare groups affected and not affected by this event.
“One concern that existed is that there could be water contamination, since toxicological studies in the United States, Argentina and Brazil detected the presence of glyphosate in rivers, but in a one-off, non-systematic way,” says Soares.
“To evaluate this, we used information about the hydrographic basins in the country and the relative position of the municipalities – above or below areas of intensive use of glyphosate,” explained the researcher.
“It was a way of understanding how the expansion of the use of transgenic soy and glyphosate in a given municipality could affect the municipalities that receive water that passes through that region where pesticides are used.”
What the researchers did then was to analyze, for the period between 2004 and 2010, when the greatest expansion of transgenic soybean production occurred in Brazil and the use of glyphosate tripled, the birth statistics of these municipalities “downstream” from areas of use intensive herbicide.
“What we have shown is that there is a deterioration in health conditions at birth in these municipalities downstream from the municipalities that expanded soy production,” said the professor at Insper.
Within this deterioration in health conditions at birth are: a higher probability of low birth weight, a higher probability of premature births and – the most serious – an increase in infant mortality.
“We have also produced a series of other empirical analyzes to show that this was in fact associated with water and that this in fact appears to be associated with the expansion of soy.”
Isolating the effect of glyphosate
For example, comparing data from municipalities “downstream” with municipalities “upstream” – which therefore do not receive water that has passed through areas of use of glyphosate – the researchers find that municipalities “upstream” are not affected by this worsening of birth statistics.
The researchers also demonstrate that the negative effects on health outcomes at birth are particularly strong for pregnancies most exposed to the period of application of glyphosate, which in Brazil typically occurs between October and March, since soybeans are planted in the country between October and January.
The worsening of birth data is also greater when it rains more in the glyphosate application season, which the researchers showed by crossing health statistics with rainfall data. This finding is in line with the idea that more of the product reaches the rivers when soil erosion by rain is most significant.
Mateus Dias, a doctoral student at Princeton University and coauthor of Soares in the study, explained the researchers’ decision to analyse municipalities downstream and upstream, instead of the municipalities that apply the glyphosate itself.
“Glyphosate use has an impact on soybean productivity, and this may end up affecting child mortality in that municipality in other ways – for example, higher productivity can generate higher income and this will reduce child mortality,” he said.
The researchers also assessed whether the expansion of soybeans affected soil erodibility due to the advancement of agriculture over forested areas.
“We showed that this did not happen, because these areas that started to plant soy seem to have been pastures before, so there was no radical change in vegetation and consequently, there was no significant change in soil erodibility,” says Dias.
Study results may contribute to better regulation
According to the researchers, the objective of the study is not to “demonise” glyphosate, but to contribute to an improvement in public policies to regulate the use of pesticides in the country.
“We know what the use of agricultural substances in general has meant throughout human history – fertilizers, herbicides, pesticides. They have indeed enabled a revolution in terms of agricultural production and, in the net result, I believe that the effect was very positive,” said Soares, from Insper.
“We only have the production we have today, with its impact on the price of food and on the populations involved in agriculture that benefit from productivity gains, because of these substances,” he adds.
“This does not mean that we should not be aware of the potential negative effects,” he saod, defending changes in the regulations for the use and management of pesticides and the protection of water courses and water tables.
Alan Tygel, of the Permanent Campaign Against Pesticides and For Life – created in 2011 and composed of more than a hundred social movements, trade unions and class entities, NGOs, cooperatives, universities and research institutions, has a more radical opinion.
“We believe that the central objective is in fact to end the use of these substances, especially since today there is no doubt about the technical capacity to produce food without the use of chemical and synthetic pesticides,” the activist said.
According to him, the campaign’s proposals are contained in a bill (PL 6670/2016), which institutes a National Pesticide Reduction Policy, with measures that range from the ban on aerial spraying, through state support for agroecology, to the ban on pesticides banned in their countries of origin and the end of tax exemptions for pesticides.
“We will fight for every small gain that we may have, because we know that each percentage less of pesticides used results in lives saved,” says Tygel.
“But we know that there is no possible coexistence between organic production and the massive use of pesticides. The path that we envision is a production model that can be adopted nationally and is totally free of pesticides and transgenics.”
— The study:
Down the river: Glyphosate use in agriculture and birth outcomes of surrounding populations
Mateus Dias, Rudi Rocha, Rodrigo R. Soares
Latin American and the Caribbean Economic Association
Dec 2020 http://vox.lacea.org/files/Working_Papers/lacea_wps_0024_dias_rocha_soares.pdf
The World Economic Forum’s “Investing in Forests” program sounds great – who doesn’t want to plant more trees? But behind its philanthropic appeal lies a global surveillance grid, monitoring all activity on the planet — just as prescribed by Agenda 2030 and their 4th Industrial Revolution. Christian shares an unreleased document and reveals the truth in this special Ice Age Farmer broadcast.
Video available at Ice Age Farmer BitChute and Odysee channels.
As I’ve been demonstrating for a year, SARS-CoV-2 was never discovered, never isolated, never legitimately sequenced.
In yesterday’s article, I laid out how this fake pandemic story, focusing on Wuhan, obscured Wuhan’s role as the number-one global launch-point for opioid trafficking.
Synthetic opioids—especially fentanyl, which is a hundred times more potent than morphine—are killing and addicting and maiming millions of people worldwide. That’s the scope of what we’re talking about.
Understand that one of the cardinal effects of opioids is suppression of breathing. During the so-called COVID pandemic, you’ve heard this referred to as “hypoxia.”
Yes, hypoxia is listed as a COVID symptom. It has a number of causes that have nothing to do with a virus. But of course, in the rush to diagnose as many people as possible with COVID—and with a PCR test that spits out false-positives like water from a fire hose—opioid users suffering from hypoxia are labeled “victims of the coronavirus.”
Drugabuse.com: “…opiate [opioid] drugs also slow your breathing…and in case of an overdose, your breathing is slowed to a virtually non-existent and lethal level.”
“The opioids depress your breathing, bring on heavy sedation and make it impossible to wake up.”
For many months in 2020, New York was touted as the global “epicenter of the pandemic.”
Patients in New York mystified ER doctors because they showed up with hypoxia.
2018 estimate of deaths from opioid overdoses in New York: 3000. Many more people in the New York area are addicted to these drugs. In New York State, in 2017, the number of people discharged from hospitals, after treatment for opioid overdose or dependency: 25,000.
In 2020-21, people who have developed opioid hypoxia have been misdiagnosed with “COVID-19 lung problems.” A large number of these people are sedated further, in order to be put on ventilators—ignoring the need to deal with their overdose, their addiction, their withdrawal—and they die.
Backing up a few steps from all this, you can see how a diagnosis of COVID functions as a cover story, to conceal the destruction-and-death-toll resulting from opioids.
How convenient that the whole COVID fairy tale was launched in Wuhan, the city that is the number-one source for global opioid trafficking. The fairy tale obscured the real Wuhan story.
City-journal.org, May 12, 2020, “Wuhan’s other epidemic,” Christopher F. Rufo: “…many don’t know that Wuhan is also the source of another deadly epidemic: America’s fentanyl overdoses… Over the past decade, Wuhan has emerged as the global headquarters for fentanyl production. The city’s chemical and pharmaceutical manufacturers hide production of the drug within their larger, licit manufacturing operations, then ship it abroad using deliberately mislabeled packaging, concealment techniques, and a complex network of forwarding addresses. According to a recent ABC News report, ‘huge amounts of these mail-order [fentanyl] components can be traced to a single, state-subsidized company [Yuancheng] in Wuhan.’”
And history matters:
Do you think the current Chinese political leadership has forgotten the two notorious 19th-century Opium Wars China lost? (Opium is the original natural opioid.)
In the 19th century, selling opium to China was very big business for England. Of course, addictive opium was devastating to China, who tried to stop the trade. Two Opium Wars against China (1839-42 and 1856-60) resulted. The Encyclopedia Britannica states:
“In each case the foreign powers were victorious and gained commercial privileges and legal and territorial concessions in China [including the uninterrupted sale of opium]. The conflicts marked the start of the era of unequal treaties and other inroads on Qing sovereignty that helped weaken and ultimately topple the dynasty [which had ruled since 1644]…”
It would be hard to overstate the lasting fury and resentment of Chinese rulers against the foreign powers who defeated and humiliated them in the Opium Wars.
The UK Daily Mail [2017]: “[a new drug coming into the UK is] not just heroin. It had been mixed with two lethal man-made opioids – fentanyl, a painkiller 100 times more potent than morphine; and carfentanyl, an elephant tranquilliser 10,000 times stronger than street heroin.”
“Now the drugs have arrived in Britain – and a spate of sudden deaths in Hull, the worst incident in the UK so far, shows their devastating impact. Just a few grains of carfentanyl – 0.00002g – can be fatal.”
“These lethal drugs have begun cropping up across the country – first found in Blyth, Northumberland, then suspected in deaths and drug busts from Leeds to London, St Albans to Southampton, Wakefield to Winchester, and Wales to Northern Ireland.” [In 2021, the UK government states that opioid addiction and death aren’t overwhelming concerns. I find it hard to believe these assurances.]
FOX Business, March 31, 2017. Headline: “DEA: Made in China Lethal Opioid Fueling US Drug Epidemic.”
“A homemade designer version of fentanyl, the highly addictive opioid which is similar to morphine but is 50 to 100 times more potent, has been the center of drug busts across the country this month—with law enforcement pinpointing its origin from underground labs in China. The DEA says the China-U.S. supply is further fueling the country’s drug epidemic.”
“’This [Chinese] stuff is unbelievably potent. It is so powerful that even a tiny amount can kill you,’ DEA spokesman Rusty Payne tells FOX Business. ‘China is by far the most significant manufacturer of illicit designer synthetic drugs. There is so much manufacturing of new drugs, [it’s] amazing what is coming out of China. Hundreds of [versions], including synthetic fentanyl and fentanyl-based compounds’.”
“China only made the drug [fentanyl] illegal in 2015, and at that point black market Chinese labs began increasing production of their own versions, including the one turning up recently across the country [the US] called furanyl fentanyl.”
“’While heroin gets harder to buy on the street or from a dealer, fentanyl comes via FedEx,’ Brad Lamm, CEO of Intervention.com, tells FOX Business.”
“Brooklyn District Attorney Eric Gonzalez announced this week details on a mail-order furanyl fentanyl smuggling ring bust. The operation had been bringing the drug — which has been dubbed ‘White China’ — into the U.S from Asia. NYPD Chief of Detective Bob Boyce said that this was the first time investigators have seen this type of fentanyl in New York City.”
“Also this week, Cincinnati Customs and Border Protection agents said they seized 83 shipments of illegal synthetic drugs, including 36 pounds of furanyl fentanyl, from China.”
The Boston Globe [2017]: “An extremely powerful drug used as an elephant tranquilizer has quickly become a new killer in the nation’s opioid epidemic, and New England authorities and health workers are bracing for its arrival.”
“The drug, carfentanil, is a synthetic opioid that is 10,000 times stronger than morphine and 100 times more potent than fentanyl, another deadly synthetic opioid.”
“The Drug Enforcement Administration has issued a nationwide alert about the drug, which its acting chief called ‘crazy dangerous.’ In Massachusetts, State Police have warned their crime lab staff about how to handle carfentanil during analysis. Even inhaling the drug or absorbing it through a cut can be fatal.”
“Law enforcement and health officials believe most users do not know they are ingesting carfentanil, which apparently is often mistakenly thought to be heroin or a mixture of heroin and fentanyl, a weaker but still lethal synthetic opioid.”
“If carfentanil’s trade route is similar to that of fentanyl, the path stretches from Chinese manufacturers to Mexican processors to smugglers who supply dealers in the United States, law enforcement officials said.”
“’There’s no quality control, so when it gets here the distributors don’t know what they have and the user has no idea,’ said Timothy Desmond, a special agent with the New England division of the DEA. ‘That’s where it’s a game of Russian roulette’.”
“Hamilton County officials are baffled by the marketing strategy behind such a lethal drug. ‘It doesn’t really make sense that you would want to kill your customers’,” Fallon said.
“Law enforcement officials also are concerned that carfentanil will harm first responders. The DEA has warned police not to conduct field tests on seized drugs that might contain carfentanil. Instead, the agency urged officers to secure their samples and deliver them only to colleagues with training and equipment to handle the drug.”
In 2020-21, the opioid catastrophe continues.
And its number-one trafficking source, Wuhan, is famous only for birthing a pandemic that doesn’t exist because the virus causing it has never been proven to exist.
In an open letter to the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, more than 40 doctors, medics and scientists in the UK say children are more vulnerable to the potential long-term effects of COVID vaccines.
A group of more than 40 doctors, medics and scientists is calling the UK government’s plan to vaccinate children for COVID “irresponsible, unethical and unnecessary.”
In an open letter addressed to the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, the group said no one under 18 should be vaccinated for COVID because evidence shows the virus poses almost no risk to healthy children.
The letter was written in response to leaked documents from the UK National Health service detailing how UK health authorities plan to give COVID vaccines to children over 12 years old.
According to the documents, children as young as 5 years old could be vaccinated as early as July — a move the government said may be necessary to keep COVID cases down as lockdowns lift across the country.
The authors of the letter said the risk of death from COVID in healthy children is 1 in 1.25 million. COVID vaccines, however, are linked to strokes due to cerebral venous thromboses in people under 40 — a finding that “led to the suspension of the Oxford-AstraZeneca children’s trial,” the authors said.
The letter states:
“Children have a lifetime ahead of them, and their immunological and neurological systems are still in development, making them potentially more vulnerable to adverse effects than adults.”
Read “COVID-19 Child Vaccination: Safety and Ethical Concerns — An Open Letter From UK Doctors to Dr. June Raine, Chief Executive, MHRA”:
We wish to notify you of our grave concerns regarding all proposals to administer COVID-19 vaccines to children. Recently leaked Government documents suggested that a COVID-19 vaccine rollout in children over 12 years old is already planned for September 2021, and the possibility of children as young as 5 years old being vaccinated in the summer in a worst-case scenario.
We have been deeply disturbed to hear several Government and SAGE representatives calling in the media for the COVID-19 vaccine rollout to be “turning to children as fast as we can”. Teaching materials circulated to London schools contain emotionally loaded questions and inaccuracies. In addition, there has been disturbing language used by teaching union leaders, implying that coercion of children to accept the COVID-19 vaccines through peer pressure in schools was to be encouraged, despite the fact that coercion to accept a medical treatment is against UK and International Laws and Declarations. Rhetoric such as this is irresponsible and unethical, and encourages the public to demand the vaccination of minors with a product still at the research stage and about which no medium- or long-term effects are known, against a disease which presents no material risk to them. A summary of our reasons is given below and a more detailed fully referenced explanation is available.
Risks and benefits in medical treatments
Vaccines, like any other medical treatment, come with varied risks and benefits. Therefore, we must consider each product, individually, on its merits, and specifically for which patients or sections of the population is the risk/benefit ratio acceptable. For COVID-19 vaccines, the potential benefits are clear for the elderly and vulnerable, however, for children, the balance of benefit and risk would be quite different. We are raising these concerns as part of an informed debate, which is a vital part of the proper, scientific process. We must ensure that there is no repeat of any past tragedies which have occurred especially when vaccines are rushed to market. For example, the swine flu vaccine, Pandemrix, rolled out following the pandemic of 2010, resulted in over one thousand cases of narcolepsy, a devastating brain injury, in children and teenagers, before being withdrawn. Dengvaxia, a new vaccine against Dengue, was also rolled out to children ahead of the full trial outcomes, and 19 children died of possible antibody dependent enhancement (ADE) before the vaccine was withdrawn. We must not risk a repeat of this with the COVID-19 vaccines, which would not only impact on the children and families affected, but would also have a hugely damaging effect on vaccination uptake in general.
No medical intervention should be introduced on a ‘one size fits all’ basis, but instead should be fully assessed for suitability according to the characteristics of the age cohort and of the individuals concerned, weighing up the risk versus benefit profile for each cohort and the individuals within a group. This approach was outlined last October, by the head of the Government Vaccine Task Force, Kate Bingham, who said “We just need to vaccinate everyone at risk. There’s going to be no vaccination of people under 18. It’s an adult-only vaccine, for people over 50, focusing on health workers and care home workers and the vulnerable.”
Children do not need vaccination for their own protection
Healthy children are at almost no risk from COVID-19, with risk of death as low as 1 in 2.5 million. No previously healthy child under the age of 15 died during the pandemic in the UK and admissions to hospital or intensive care are exceedingly rare with most children having no or very mild symptoms. Although Long-Covid has been cited as a reason for vaccinating children, there is little hard data. It appears less common and much shorter-lived than in adults and none of the vaccine trials have studied this outcome. The inflammatory condition, PIMS, was listed as a potential adverse effect in the Oxford AstraZeneca children’s trial. Naturally acquired immunity will give broader and better lasting immunity than vaccination. Indeed, many children will already be immune. Individual children at very high risk can already receive vaccination on compassionate grounds.
Children do not need vaccination to support herd immunity
Already, two thirds of the adult population have received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. Models that assume vaccination of children is required to reach herd immunity have failed to account for the proportion who had immunity prior to March 2020 and those who have acquired it naturally. Recent modelling suggested that the UK had achieved the required herd immunity threshold on 12 April 2021.
Children do not transmit SARS-CoV-2 as readily as adults, moreover adults living or working with young children are at lower risk of severe COVID-19. Schools have not been shown to be the focus on spread to the community, teachers have a lower risk of COVID-19 than other working age adults.
Short-term safety concerns
As of 13th May, the MHRA22 has received a total of 224,544 adverse events, including 1,145 deaths in association with SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. Reports of strokes due to cerebral venous thrombosis were initially in low numbers but as awareness increased, many more reports led to the conclusion that AstraZeneca vaccine should not be used for adults under 40 years of age and this unpredicted finding has also led to the suspension of the Oxford AstraZeneca children’s trial.
Similar events have been noted with Pfizer & Moderna vaccines on the US adverse reporting system (VAERS) and it is likely that this is a class effect related to production of spike protein. New UK guidelines on managing Vaccine-Induced Thrombotic Thrombocytopenia (VITT) include all COVID-19 vaccines in their advice. The possibility of further unexpected safety issues cannot be ruled out. In Israel, where the vaccines have been widely rolled out to young people and teenagers, the Pfizer vaccine has been linked to several cases of myocarditis in young men and concerns have been raised about reports of altered menstrual cycles and abnormal bleeding in young women following the vaccine.
Most concerning with regard to possible vaccination of children, is that there have now been a number of deaths associated with vaccination reported to VAERS in the US, despite the vaccines only being given to children within trials and a very recent rollout to 16-17 year olds.
Long-term safety concerns
All Phase 3 COVID-19 vaccine trials are ongoing and not due to conclude until late 2022/early 2023. The vaccines are, therefore, currently experimental with only limited short-term and no long-term adult safety data available. In addition, many are using a completely new mRNA vaccine technology, which has never previously been approved for use in humans. The mRNA is effectively a pro-drug and it is not known how much spike protein any individual will produce. Potential late-onset effects can take months or years to become apparent. The limited children’s trials undertaken to date are totally underpowered to rule out uncommon but severe side effects.
Children have a lifetime ahead of them, and their immunological and neurological systems are still in development, making them potentially more vulnerable to adverse effects than adults. A number of specific concerns have been raised already, including autoimmune disease and possible effects on placentation and fertility. A recently published paper raised the possibility that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines could trigger prion-based, neurodegenerative disease. All potential risks, known and unknown, must be balanced against risks of COVID-19 itself, so a very different benefit/risk balance will apply to children than to adults.
Conclusion
There is important wisdom in the Hippocratic Oath which states, “First do no harm”. All medical interventions carry a risk of harm, so we have a duty to act with caution and proportionality. This is particularly the case when considering mass intervention in a healthy population, in which situation there must be firm evidence of benefits far greater than harms. The current, available evidence clearly shows that the risk versus benefit calculation does NOT support administering rushed and experimental COVID-19 vaccines to children, who have virtually no risk from COVID-19, yet face known and unknown risks from the vaccines. The Declaration of the Rights of the Child states that, “the child, by reason of his physical and mental immaturity, needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection”. As adults we have a duty of care to protect children from unnecessary and foreseeable harm.
We conclude that it is irresponsible, unethical and indeed, unnecessary, to include children under 18 years in the national COVID-19 vaccine rollout. Clinical trials in children also pose huge ethical dilemmas, in light of the lack of potential benefit to trial participants and the unknown risks. The end of the current Phase 3 trials should be awaited as well as several years of safety data in adults, to rule out, or quantify, all potential adverse effects.
We call upon our governments and the regulators not to repeat mistakes from history, and to reject the calls to vaccinate children against COVID-19. Extreme caution has been exercised over many aspects of the pandemic, but surely now is the most important time to exercise true caution – we must not be the generation of adults that, through unnecessary haste and fear, risks the health of children.
Signatories
Dr Rosamond Jones, MD, FRCPCH, retired consultant paediatrician
Lord Moonie, MBChB, MRCPsych, MFCM, MSc, House of Lords, former parliamentary undersecretary of state 2001-2003, former consultant in Public Health Medicine
Prof Anthony Fryer, PhD, FRCPath, Professor of Clinical Biochemistry, Keele University
Professor Karol Sikora, MA, MBBChir, PhD, FRCR, FRCP, FFPM, Dean of Medicine, Buckingham
University, Professor of Oncology
Professor Angus Dalgleish, MD, FRCP, FRACP, FRCPath, FMed Sci, Professor of Oncology, St Georges Hospital London
Professor Richard Ennos, MA, PhD. Honorary Professorial Fellow, University of Edinburgh
Professor Anthony J Brookes, Department of Genetics & Genome Biology, University of Leicester
Dr John A Lee, MBBS, PhD, FRCPath, retired Consultant Histopathologist, former Clinical Professor
of Pathology at Hull York Medical School
Dr Alan Mordue, MBChB, FFPH (ret). Retired Consultant in Public Health Medicine & Epidemiology
Dr Elizabeth Evans, MA, MBBS, DRCOG, retired doctor
A group of 117 Houston-area hospital employees on Friday filed a civil lawsuit against an employer hospital’s coronavirus vaccine mandate. The lawsuit alleges that the mandate violates both the Nuremberg Code and U.S. statutes that allow Americans to refuse “unapproved” medical treatments. It also alleges violations of Texas labor and employment laws.
That “people” are “trying to force you to put something into your body that you’re not comfortable with to keep your job is just insane,” lead plaintiff Jennifer Bridgestold Houston CBS affiliate KHOU.
The defendants are The Methodist Hospital, the Methodist Hospital System, and Houston Methodist The Woodlands Hospital. The people in charge of those entities responded to the litigation by saying the plaintiffs are but a small minority of voices among 26,000 employees and that it is “legal for health care institutions to mandate vaccines.”
The Lawsuit.
The sharply worded 56-page complaint argues that the COVID-19 vaccines currently on the market were authorized merely as “emergency” measures and, thus, are not fully “approved” vaccines.
At the top of the document are words attributed to David Bernard, the CEO of Houston Methodist San Jacinto Hospital: “100% vaccination is more important than your individual freedom. Everyone [sic] of you is replaceable. If you don’t like what your [sic] doing you can leave and we will replace your spot.”
Those alleged words did not sit well with the plaintiffs.
“For the first time in the history of the United States, an employer is forcing an employee to participate in an experimental vaccine trial as a condition for continued employment,” the lawsuit argues.
The document continues by alleging that the defendant hospital “became the first major health care system in the country to force it [sic] employees to be injected with an experimental COVID-19 mRNA gene modification injection (‘experimental vaccine’) or be fired.”
“Methodist Hospital is forcing its employees to be human ‘guinea pigs’ as a condition for continued employment,” the lawsuit’s opening paragraph also says.
The Washington Post on May 14 reported that the coronavirus vaccines available in the U.S. are no longer considered “experimental” because they have “completed clinical trials and have been authorized for emergency use.” The same report quotes a bevy of experts who asserted that the current vaccines are safe while noting that millions of Americans have been vaccinated without serious harm.
Still, the plaintiff employees remain skeptical.
“[T]here is much the FDA does not know about these products even as it authorizes them for emergency use, including their effectiveness against infection, death, and transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that is allegedly the cause of the COVID disease,” the lawsuit claims.
“Federal EEO laws do not prevent an employer from requiring all employees physically entering the workplace to be vaccinated for COVID-19, so long as employers comply with the reasonable accommodation provisions of the ADA and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other EEO considerations,” the new EEOC technical assistance document reads.
[As a service to protect truth from censorship and to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, and Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]
“What we are facing is calculated. And it’s a mistake to call it madness because it’s very precise, it’s very calculated. And we need to understand that in order to be able to deal with what we’re facing.”
Reiner Fuellmich:
“That’s very interesting to hear because we have come to the conclusion that the other side, as we call them, is using two major tools. One is, of course, psychology — psychological operations. And of course the other, which transports this psychological operation, is the mainstream media.”
This interview is an excerpt from a series of interviews: Sitzung 54: Zwischen Nudging und Nebenwirkungen which can be found on youtube.
[As a service to protect truth from censorship and to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, and Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]
Topics include:
The global manipulation of humanity during this planned “pandemic”
Mind control via psychological operations including Neuro-linguistic Programming (NLP)
This article takes off from the work of investigative reporter, Whitney Webb. Much of what I’m laying out here confirms her exposure of “the other Wuhan.” Webb writes at Unlimited Hangout and The Last American Vagabond.
When I put together Webb’s findings with my own COVID research, startling new dimensions of the false “pandemic” story come to light.
Who would have thought that, in less than a year, the image of the opioid drug, fentanyl, would undergo a face lift, enhancing it from “most destructive killer drug in the world” to “lifesaver in the treatment of COVID patients?”
And if this PR miracle is not a sufficient stunner, it just so happens that Opioid Central for illegally trafficking fentanyl to the planet is Wuhan, now the focus of claims that COVID was born in a lab there.
(Fake) pandemic transforms fentanyl into “vital COVID medication.”
(Fake) pandemic starts in Wuhan.
Wuhan is the city where killer drug fentanyl is shipped out to dealers all over the world.
High-level operators, focusing on Wuhan, manage to obscure, from the broad public, the city’s global role in killing millions of people with opioids…by claiming a pandemic was born in Wuhan. “The ONLY thing you have to know about Wuhan is the virus broke out there.”
This has the earmarks of a highly successful cover story.
Here’s a prime illustration of fentanyl’s PR facelift:
NJ [New Jersey] Spotlight News, April 14, 2020, “No Longer a Scourge, Fentanyl Is Now Most-Needed Drug in COVID-19 War.”
“…fentanyl, one of the drugs given to patients so they can withstand the pain of having a breathing tube inserted, is in short supply along with a handful of other crucial drugs.”
“The first wave of critical shortages exposed by the coronavirus was medical masks and gowns. Then it was ventilators. Now, a handful of crucial drugs are in short supply in overrun ICUs throughout northern New Jersey and New York City, many of which are needed to use the ventilators.”
“At the top of the list is fentanyl, the deadly synthetic painkiller — 100 times more powerful than morphine — the very drug that has become public enemy No. 1 in the nation’s war on opioid addiction. Demand for fentanyl has doubled nationwide and shot up more than 500% in the New York/New Jersey metropolitan region, the current global epicenter of the pandemic.”
“Fentanyl may have been killing people in record numbers on the streets of New Jersey in recent years, but in our hospitals, it is now saving lives.”
“Demand for fentanyl is followed by Propofol, a sedative also used with ventilators, according to Soumi Saha, Premier’s senior director of advocacy…Close behind those two is a new category of drugs to face shortages — neuromuscular blockers, which are also being used for ventilator patients because they keep them from involuntarily coughing on the healthcare worker inserting the vent tube.”
“During normal times, patients stay on ventilators for three or four days. Now, not only has the number of ventilated patients spiked, but the time they remain on the device is two to three weeks.”
I gave you an extended quote from that New Jersey article, because I’ll cover the real story behind ventilators later in this piece.
Right now, here are a few references pointing to Wuhan as Opioid Central.
City-journal.org, May 12, 2020, “Wuhan’s other epidemic,” Christopher F. Rufo: “…many don’t know that Wuhan is also the source of another deadly epidemic: America’s fentanyl overdoses… Over the past decade, Wuhan has emerged as the global headquarters for fentanyl production. The city’s chemical and pharmaceutical manufacturers hide production of the drug within their larger, licit manufacturing operations, then ship it abroad using deliberately mislabeled packaging, concealment techniques, and a complex network of forwarding addresses. According to a recent ABC News report, ‘huge amounts of these mail-order [fentanyl] components can be traced to a single, state-subsidized company in Wuhan.’”
The Atlantic, August 18, 2019, “The Brazen Way a Chinese Company Pumped Fentanyl Ingredients Into the US,” by Ben Westhoff: “According to Bryce Pardo, a fentanyl expert at the Rand Corporation, the two most commonly used fentanyl precursors—think of them as ingredients—are chemicals called NPP and 4-ANPP. When I first started researching them, in early 2017, advertisements for the chemicals were all over the internet, from a wide variety of different companies. Later, I determined that the majority of those companies were under the Yuancheng [company] umbrella.”
“Posing as a buyer, I answered an online advertisement for fentanyl precursors and was put in touch with a Yuancheng salesman who called himself Sean. We arranged to meet at the company’s main office in Wuhan, in the Wuchang district, near a busy subway station in a blue-collar neighborhood…”
LA Times, April 24, 2020: “For drug traffickers interested in getting in on the fentanyl business, all roads once led to Wuhan.”
“The sprawling industrial city built along the Yangtze River in east-central China is known for its production of chemicals, including the ingredients needed to cook fentanyl and other powerful synthetic opioids.”
“Vendors there shipped huge quantities around the world. The biggest customers were Mexican drug cartels, which have embraced fentanyl in recent years because it is cheaper and easier to produce than heroin.”
The Times article cites the pandemic as the reason for a decline in the fentanyl business. But lockdowns increased people’s desires for drugs. And of course, since economies have started loosening up, fentanyl trafficking operations are certainly booming again.
The highly successful cover story I described above…were there reasons for this cover, other than an attempt to conceal, from the broad public, Wuhan as the global center of opioid trafficking?
I can think of two other reasons. The first one I would introduce this way: “We’re killing people in the streets with fentanyl, but that’s not enough. We want to kill them in the hospitals, too.”
Heavy hitters, intent on getting rid of the elderly on a wide scale, saw an opportunity. And now we come to the ventilator story.
There is no doubt that, globally speaking, there has been a mad and destructive rush to put people diagnosed with COVID on breathing ventilators.
To deploy these devices in hospitals requires intubation, which is painful and very disruptive. Patients must be sedated. They must be kept sedated, while they’re hooked up to the breathing machines— for days and weeks.
Enter fentanyl and other opioids.
Since the whole story of the COVID virus was a fake from the get-go, some group would have to bear the burden of dying, in order to inflate death numbers; in order to make it appear that the “pandemic” was a fire sweeping through the world.
The group was and is the elderly, and in a series of articles on this gruesome subject a year ago, I left no doubt about the truth staring us in the face. (Note: CDC, May 14, 2021: “8 out 10 COVID-19 deaths reported in the US have been in adults 65 years old and older.”)
COVID is old people. Their premature deaths are forced. Their statistical numbers are gold for the planners of the operation. And this has nothing to do with a virus.
The Hill, (undated, late April 2020), reports on “data…gathered at Northwell Health, New York state’s largest hospital system. The study, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) examines 5,700 patients hospitalized with coronavirus infections in the New York City region, with final outcomes recorded for 2,634 patients. The average patient age was 63 years old… For the next oldest age group, ages 66 years and older, patients receiving mechanical [breathing] ventilation recorded a 97.2 percent mortality rate.”
97.2 percent of elderly patients put on breathing ventilators died.
Just in case other obvious strategies failed to produce premature death in the elderly, ventilators provided the method:
VENTILATORS PLUS SEDATION WITH OPIOIDS.
THE OPIOIDS CAUSE SUPPRESSION OF BREATHING AND DEATH.
OF COURSE, THAT SUPPRESSION OF BREATHING (“HYPOXIA”) IS CALLED A CARDINAL SYMPTOM OF COVID.
Don’t even think of saying, “Well, you see, those old people put on ventilators were already very sick and close to dying.” NO medical treatment that kills 97.2 percent of patients in a well-defined group is continued, unless there are orders mandating it. Unless there is insurance money to be saved. Unless the doctors are willing to follow orders and keep using the treatment, despite the results.
So yes, opioids were transformed, by a cover story, from a killer street drug to a “lifesaving treatment” for COVID—but at the deepest level, that meant murdering the elderly with the drugs.
The second reason for the cover story would have involved moving up the time table for launching the fake pandemic story in Wuhan.
Was there some sort of accident, in which the people of Wuhan were exposed to fentanyl, with deadly consequences? Desperately needing a phony cover-up explanation—was “THE VIRUS” story invoked?
I can only speculate about that possibility. However, China is famous for loose enforcement of safety regulations in factories, and it’s possible that some sort of accident occurred, which blew fentanyl or its components through the city of Wuhan, killing people on the spot.
There are analogous recent incidents in China.
The Wikipedia page for the 2019 Xiangshui chemical plant explosion, which killed 78 people and injured 617, mentions other events as well:
“On 27 November 2007, an explosion occurred in one of the chemical factories in Chenjiagang Chemical Zone, with seven killed and around 50 injured…In the early morning of 11 February 2011, rumors of toxic chemical release and potential imminent explosions in the Chenjiagang Chemical Industry Park led over ten thousand residents to evacuate in panic from the towns of Chenjiagang and Shuanggang during which four people died and many were injured. On the afternoon of May 18 and again on July 26 in 2011, there were explosions at local factories.”
As I keep reminding readers, the whole “pandemic” is a covert op. Such operations always deploy cover stories, in order to hide what is really being done, how it’s being done, and why.
Speaking of which, there are several major pharmaceutical companies who’ve faced heavy exposure for their roles in the opioid criminal trafficking business. For example, Purdue, and Johnson & Johnson. A third one is (Mossad-connected) Teva.
If you could offer Warren Buffet an ice cream cone with a truth-serum cherry on top, it would be interesting to ask him whether the PR campaign to push opioids as life-saving COVID treatments helped stabilize his 42,789,295 shares of beleaguered Teva, worth $412,916,000.
To connect one more dot (for now,) the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation holds 50 million shares, worth $11 billion, in Buffett’s company, Berkshire Hathaway. It is the Gates Foundation’s top investment.
The Conscious Resistance Network presents: The Pyramid of Power, a brand-new 16-part documentary series aimed at exposing the individuals and institutions which seek to manipulate our world.
Our first attempts to understand the influence of various institutions and individuals on our world, has focused on the education system, the establishment media, and Big Tech firms. Each of these pieces of the Pyramid of Power have an immense influence on the minds and decisions of people around the world. However, no other institution may have the impact of the U.S. Film Industry.
As we outlined in Chapter 2, the U.S. intelligence communities have largely infected and influenced mainstream establishment media since the 1950’s. This frightening trend continues with the relationship between the film industry and the U.S. military and Central Intelligence Agency.
In the early 20th century, film studios began centering their efforts around southern California in the area that would come to be known as Hollywood. From the outset, the U.S. Department of Defense and intelligence community developed an interest in using the film industry as a method for shaping public opinion. Some of the first collaborations between Hollywood and the U.S. military involved pro-World War 2 propaganda films like Winning Your Wings.
During WW2, the U.S. Office of War Information opened the Bureau of Motion Pictures to further their relationships with Hollywood. Between 1942 and 1945 this Bureau reviewed more than 1,600 scripts, and revised or abandoned projects that portrayed the U.S. government in a bad light.
According to Tanner Mirrlees, an associate professor of communication at Ontario Tech University, and author of Hearts and Mines: The U.S. Empire’s Culture Industry, the former head of the Office of War Information, Elmer Davis stated,
“The easiest way to inject a propaganda idea into most people’s minds is to let it go through the medium of an entertainment picture when they do not realize they’re being propagandized.”
Other historic examples of propaganda in film include the John Wayne film The Green Berets. The film was made after Wayne personally requested U.S. President Lyndon Johnson help him make a propaganda film about the Vietnam war. The Pentagon not only provided access to equipment and military bases, but they also retained final script approval. Most disturbing is the fact that the film depicted the North Vietnamese committing violent atrocities which in reality were committed by American soldiers. This is yet another example of the U.S. government and Hollywood shaping reality for the ignorant mass consumer.
The U.S. military is not the only government agency to develop a close relationship with Hollywood. From its founding in 1947, the U.S. CIA was involved in shaping the direction of films in a way that portrayed the agency in a positive manner or sought to remove negative associations. The CIA’s predecessor, the Office of Strategic Services, or OSS, had already developed a knack for Hollywood films that glorified the work of the agency with films like O.S.S. and Cloak and Dagger.
After WW2, the Department of Defense developed the first “Entertainment Liaison Offices” to act as conduits for U.S. government messaging to Hollywood studios. The CIA did not publicly establish a similar office until 1996. Much of the partnership between Hollywood and the government centered around authorizing the use of military locations and access to equipment, in exchange for giving the government some level of control over the final scripts.
Researcher Tom Secker uncovered a 1958 memo on “Films for Counterintelligence Training” involving screenings of the films, The Man Who Never Was and Walk East on Beacon. The memo makes it clear that some of the Hollywood films were being used to train new recruits.
Secker has also helped reveal other astounding connections between the entertainment industry and the intelligence community. In 1996, a CIA officer named Chase Brandon was hired to work directly with Hollywood studios to rehabilitate the agencies image. Chase Brandon is also the first cousin of actor Tommy Lee Jones.
“We’ve always been portrayed erroneously as evil and Machiavellian,” Brandon told The Guardian. “It took us a long time to support projects that portray us in the light we want to be seen in.”
Some of Chase Brandon’s work involves well known films like the 2002 Tom Clancy political thriller The Sum of All Fears starring Ben Affleck. The CIA gave Affleck and the film makers a personal tour of CIA headquarters and provided access to analysts. Chase Brandon visited the set to provide advice. He was also a regular on the set of tv show Alias, starring Affleck’s then-wife Jennifer Garner as Sydney Bristow, an undercover CIA agent. Garner would go on to film a promotional video for the CIA.
In 2017, Tom Secker and Matthew Alford, professor at University of Bath, released their book National Security Cinema providing conclusive evidence of the massive influence the U.S. intelligence and military have exerted on Hollywood. The book is based on files obtained via open records requests which detail how the Department of Defense offered support to more than 800 films between 1911 and 2017.
These films include some of the biggest pictures of their time: Transformers, Iron Man, Pirates of the Caribbean, Mission: Impossible, and The Terminator. The research of Alford and Secker shows that 7 of the top 10 highest-grossing film franchises of all time have benefited from Department of Defense and CIA support, including the Marvel Cinematic Universe, James Bond and The Fast and the Furious.
When it comes to the Transformers franchise, the DOD paid the filmmakers to gain “very early influence over the scripts” by giving them the most military assistance in filmmaking history, including “twelve types of Air Force aircraft and troops from four different bases.”
National Security Cinema also details how more than 1,100 tv productions received backing from the Pentagon. The vast majority of these took place after 9/11, including Flight 93, Ice Road Truckers, Army Wives, 24, Homeland, and The Agency. The CIA has helped with around 60 film and TV productions since 1947.
In 2017, Matthew Alford concluded:
“When we include individual episodes for long running shows like 24, Homeland, and NCIS, as well as the influence of other major organisations like the FBI and White House, we can establish unequivocally for the first time that the national security state has supported thousands of hours of entertainment,”
The practice of military or intelligence advisors on Hollywood films is more common than the average consumer of film might realize. In fact, even famed CIA whistleblower John Kiriakou made a living on the side by advising Hollywood. Kiriakou served on a board made up of former C.I.A. officers, diplomats, and F.B.I. agents, who reviewed scripts about spies or terrorism to make them more realistic.
However, the relationship is not simply about advising film makers about how to paint the U.S. government in a favorable light. At the heart of it, the relationship helps reinforce so-called “national security” interests, as well as shape public opinion on historical events.
According to the documents, the U.S. government has influenced movies in three distinct eras: 1943-1965, 1966-1986 and 1986 to the present. In the first era, films versions of George Orwell’s Animal Farm and 1984 were directly affected by the CIA. During this period, a man named Luigi Luraschi was the head of censorship at Paramount Studios where he was in regular contact with an anonymous individual at the CIA.
The purpose of the contact was to inform the CIA of the studios’ ability and desire to change movies to meet U.S. government expectations. For example, a 1955 film, Strategic Air Command, was changed so Americans did not appear as “a lot of trigger-happy warmongering people.”
In 1986, Top Gun started the modern era of military and intelligence influence in Hollywood films. The film served as a successful promotional film for the US Navy with enlistment for naval aviators jumping 500 percent. The authors of National Security Cinema believe this success caused the CIA to update its strategy for influencing the public via films.
A list of films which received advice and/or support – as well as script changes – includes:
The Bourne Identity (2002)
The Sum of All Fears (2002)
The Recruit (2003)
Avatar (2009)
Charlie Wilson’s War (2007)
Contact (1997)
Hotel Rwanda (2004)
The Interview (2014)
The Kingdom (2007)
Lone Survivor (2013)
Rules of Engagement (2000)
In 2016, professor Tricia Jenkins published leaked private memos as part of her book The CIA in Hollywood: How the Agency Shapes Film and Television. These memos and other memos show that, among others, the Osama bin Laden assassination movie Zero Dark Thirty and the film Argo, were heavily influenced by government officials to make the government look impressive or to downplay their mistakes.
As part of the arrangement with the makers of Argo, Ben Affleck was allowed to visit CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia. Other actors who have visited spy HQ include Robert De Niro, Tom Cruise, Dan Aykroyd, Dean Cain, Will Smith, Claire Danes, Kevin Bacon, Patrick Stewart and Mike Myers.
The most recent example of the U.S. military seeking to influence the public’s perception via films came in early 2021 when it was revealed that the U.S. Marine Corps played an integral role in the development of James Cameron’s Avatar. Nearly 1,700 pages of documents released by the Corps’ entertainment media liaison office show this relationship in action. An April 2009 report details how Hollywood liaison officers “met with director/writer James Cameron”.
Avatar was interpreted by some critics as an anti-war film, using the alien planet as a metaphor for the U.S. military’s treatment of indigenous Americans or Iraqis. However, the documents reveal that the military viewed the film as a propaganda success, including having entertainment liaison officers invited to speak on a military panel at Comic Con in 2011. The military liked the film so much they arranged screenings on military bases and had actors and producers participate in a Navy Entertainment Program visit.
Despite this wealth of information that is now available, the public is still largely in the dark about the true extent of military and intelligence involvement in the film industry. Matthew Alford has said the Marine Corps admitted there are 90 boxes of relevant material in its archive. “The government has seemed especially careful to avoid writing down details of actual changes made to scripts in the 21st century.”
What is important to take note of is the power of film and tv to shape public opinion. Researcher Tricia Jenkins notes that one of the reasons the CIA and military desire to be involved in major films like Zero Dark Thirty is because they recognize that the public will largely form their opinions of real world events based on the fictional Hollywood retelling.
In December 2019 former CIA officer turned Democrat Representative Elissa Slotkin was questioned about her favorite CIA films and she candidly acknowledged that CIA was “helping Hollywood” understand the truth about the CIA.
“Some movies are just total craziness and don’t represent reality at all. Actually, the CIA has a whole office that will help Hollywood understand how to portray what really goes on.”
Sometimes script changes requested by the government can be subtle, like when Tricia Jenkins says the US government requested the script for the 1996 blockbuster Independence Day be changed so that the protagonists worked for the military rather than as civilians. The change is slight, but the message being delivered to the public is powerful: the military, the U.S. government – they are the heroes. They are to be trusted and idolized. These films can reinforce the narrative that the U.S. government and its various agencies are the authorities that care about us and can do no wrong.
If the public continues to consume television and film without understanding the U.S. military and spy agencies played a role in the finished product they will continue to be influenced and miseducated under the guise of watching harmless entertainment.
Solutions: Unplug from the Hollywood-Military-Intelligence-Complex
The solutions to the Hollywood-Military-Intelligence-Complex are simple. The easiest solution for those who seek to cleanse their minds of potential propaganda from the U.S. military, intelligence agencies and other pieces of the Pyramid of Power is to simply unplug. Unplug from Hollywood-Military-Intelligence-Complex by refusing to consume their propaganda. This might be extreme for some people, but for others, it will be the appropriate solution.
At the very least, take time to become the one in control of your heart and mind. To do this you must begin to question your assumptions and knowledge. Stop to ask yourself how much of your worldview has been consciously or subconsciously shaped by what you have witnessed on television and in movies since you were a child. The more you dig and probe, you might come to realize that Hollywood has been shaping our thoughts since most of us were children and watched our first Disney movie.
For example, maybe your perspective on how a mother and father are supposed to interact was heavily influenced by the sitcoms you watched as a child. Or perhaps, your view on how a couple are supposed to act when they fall in love, or what clothes and styles and music are popular – were all shaped by the images flashed before your eyes on the small and big screens.
The point is, the more in tune you are with your own preferences and thoughts, the more you can consume this content with a skeptical eye. This doesn’t mean you can never enjoy a movie or tv show again, but it does mean you are better served by watching with discernment rather than blindly soaking it up.If we aim to be free from propaganda aimed at feeding us a biased version of history, culture, or simply selling us a product, we must take steps to reclaim our hearts and minds. By making this effort we can be free from the Hollywood propaganda, the Big Tech censorship, the establishment media, and the state run education system.
“Until we understand the real agenda here — which is to control humanity at the
genetic level — I don’t think we’ll be able to get a grasp at what’s going on.” ~ James Corbett
[As a service to protect truth from censorship and to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute and Brighteon channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]
Topics discussed include:
The Great Reset
The history of eugenics in its many forms
The biosecurity state
Technocratic control of humanity
Unfolding global lawsuits
Global efforts to raise awareness and to create the society we want
Link to James Corbett’s documentaries including How Big Oil Conquered the World: https://www.corbettreport.com/corbett-report-documentaries/
Color of law refers to an appearance of legal power to act that may operate in violation of law. Appearances can be deceiving.
In his book, The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America, author Richard Rothstein, a leading expert on housing policy, describes the myth that cities came to be racially divided through de-facto segregation, that is, through individual prejudices, income differences, or the actions of banks and real estate agencies.
Rothstein makes clear that it was laws and policy decisions by local, state, and federal governments that directly promoted the discriminatory patterns. From racial zoning in the 1920s to urban planning of the 1950s, to federal subsidies to builders not to build homes for Blacks, it was plain, open discrimination, sanctioned by government, that violated laws that continue unabated today.
The color of law is a cover of law.
Color of Law = Unlawful Mandates
Color of Law operates today by unlawful mandates and Emergency Orders, which serve one purpose: to allow one group of people to abolish your inherent rights. Remember, no one has more rights than anyone else.
No school, no store, no bank, no library, and no governor can make any order or policy that violates your rights under Natural law. Natural laws are determined by fundamental forces within Nature. Natural law supersedes all other laws, including man’s laws. The Constitution is codified based on the Universal law that no man has the right to rule over another man, which will always be the truth from the day of birth to the day of death. Natural Law is based in two principles: Truth and Do no harm.
Natural Law is based in principles of truth about the reality we live in. Principles are first and foremost, at the root, the most necessary and important, a foundation to build upon. The word “principle” expresses Natural Moral Law in the very way we use the word itself, such as “in principle” and “on principle”. Natural Law is an essential property of existence; it is born into being and is forever there in our reality without human causality. Our goal is to put these principle first-things first in our lives, to recognize and align with them because they are based in truth, not belief. Man’s society is not putting original, generative, beginning, foundational principles first, but trivialities, lies, and deception. Therefore, Natural Law is not man’s law.
What you need to know in 8 easy steps:
Your rights and freedoms are inherent or inborn, a birthright, granted by your Creator.
Government institutions do not grant rights. Institutions are established to protect your inherent rights.
Governments can only grant benefits and privileges, which comes with limits and consequences.
Governments cannot mandate anything under coercion or duress, such as, “Do this or else.”
Governments cannot use fear or safety as reasons to take peoples’ rights.
Therefore, a “mask policy” set up under government powers is a crime under the color of law that violates your rights and the principles of Natural Law.
Defending your rights and freedoms is a personal responsibility, ie., an ability to respond (appropriately, reasonably, morally).
Being accountable is the ability to account for your response.
Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law
Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under color of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.
For the purpose of Section 242, acts under “color of law” include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within their lawful authority, but also acts done beyond the bounds of that official’s lawful authority, if the acts are done while the official is purporting to or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. Persons acting under color of law within the meaning of this statute include police officers, prisons guards and other law enforcement officials, as well as judges, care providers in public health facilities, and others who are acting as public officials. It is not necessary that the crime be motivated by animus toward the race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin of the victim.
The offense is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term, or the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury, if any.
If you understand that a government cannot abolish rights which it has no ability to grant in the first place, then you are armed with enough knowledge to begin the process of calling out the facade when you see it practiced. Each success brings confidence for future successes. Humanity, as a whole, moves from oppression to expression, from tyranny to freedom.
Christopher Key, a man who had enough of unlawful dictates, stood up to the Jefferson County School Board in Alabama, and called them out.
Pro Se litigant Luis Ewing shares information on maintaining your rights of public accommodation (without masks and medicines) based on religious discrimination, and violations of the state and federal constitutions under the 1964 Civil Rights Act pursuant to Title 42 Section 1983.
Texan, Randall Kenton sued the Texas Governor by name, in court, causing the governor to rescind the State mask mandate, allowing all bars and restaurants to reopen at full capacity. Twenty state governors followed suit, lifting their own mandates out of fear they would lose their insurance for fraud. See the complaint filed that could be used as a template anywhere. Health officials continued to recommend wearing a mask based on “personal responsibility” but no law: another example of Color of Law.
These people do not win by a belief. They win by a knowing. They know who they are. By holding their positions and protecting their rights, not only are they showing personal responsibility, but they are an example for others.
Cancel The Master-Slave Paradigm
What Christopher Key and others are showing is that when you reveal that a FRAUD has been perpetrated, and you follow it up by naming names, the perpetrators stand down. Behind all corporations are names of men and women. In general, suing corporate entities does nothing for the greater good, and never has. Corrupt companies, such as Pfizer, may be found criminally liable and fined in court over and over, but they continue to operate and to cause harm. However, going after individuals by name affects their pocketbooks.
No individual governor or prosecutor or judge or school board member wants their insurance rates to go up or to be dropped by insurers. Push just a little and the game has suddenly changed in the peoples’ favor.
Illegal, unlawful, and immoral acts are not only reprehensible but are also a violation of your Natural rights, as expressed in the American Declaration of Independence, and as reflected in the national and state constitutions. If you are the subject of intimidation or coercion by agencies or governments or schools or employers, forcing a medical experiment upon you as a condition to participate in society, your rights have been trampled.
Why do the majority of people become subservient to lawless authorities without any evidence of a clear and present danger? Why do people refuse to stand up for their rights and freedoms? Why do people believe they do not have a choice when it comes to forced muzzles or forced medicines when they do?
Because the majority of people have been indoctrinated through the 15,000-hour public school system and programmed by the Tel-A-Vision to not think for themselves. They have been conditioned to accept government handouts that create co-dependence. They have been dumbed down and emasculated to accept a master outside themselves.
What if accepting stimulus handouts increased the federal debt to bankrupt a nation, which amounted to a federal crime? What if knowing that a national bankruptcy could be the excuse used to reset the debt credit currency system to a Crypto credit system with your body as collateral?
What if this whole scenario already happened during the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic where masking was found to be the cause of secondary pneumonia and an invisible virus became the tool to rest society? The Great Depression followed the Spanish flu and a new system was established to enslave people using the birth certificate and social security system. From the Great Depression to the Great Reset, an invisible virus that never existed was blamed. Government promised people benefits and privileges in exchange for their rights. For more details, read Recycling the Spanish Flu Pandemic.
No government. No business, no medical professional, no school, and no employer can require or mandate ANY medical treatment or intervention, including injections or face coverings that block your ability to breathe freely. To require any injection as a condition to participate in society is unlawful coercion according to state law.
Use State Law In Your Favor
You can use state law in your favor. In California, Peggy Hall of thehealthyamerican.org teaches people how to protect their rights using the State Constitution and business codes. She provides documents on her website that you can print and carry with you, such as the right to public accommodation, as well as tools against discrimination. According to California Law:
24170: This is the Protection of Human Subjects in Medical Experimentation Act 24171: The Legislature hereby finds and declares … the right of individuals to determine what is done to their own bodies.
24172 This is the “experimental subject’s bill of rights,” and states that individuals…
(j) Be given the opportunity to decide to consent or not to consent to a medical experiment without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, coercion, or undue influence on the subject’s decision.
Sec. 16. FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE; NO PREFERENCE TO BE GIVEN TO ANY RELIGIOUS ESTABLISHMENT OR MODE OF WORSHIP. The enumeration of rights in this constitution shall not deny or impair others retained by and inherent in the people. The right of every man to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience shall never be infringed; nor shall any man be compelled to attend, erect or support any place of worship, or to maintain any religious or ecclesiastical ministry, against his consent; nor shall any control of or interference with the rights of conscience be permitted, or any preference be given by law to any religious establishment or mode of worship; but the liberty of conscience hereby secured shall not be so construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness or justify practices inconsistent with the peace or safety of the state, nor shall any money be drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious societies or religious or theological seminaries.
Shakespeare wrote, All the world is a stage. This is why appearances can be deceiving. In this world of appearances, you can separate yourself from the crowd. Do you beg for rights from government? Do you know who you are? Do you know where you live?
You live in your body. Therefore, you have inherent rights. Your rights include the right to say NO to deception. You can say NO CONTRACT. I DO NOT CONSENT to any offer, contract, testing, treatment, intervention, or injection. Ask them to show you the laws. Man’s laws compel artificial or legal PERSONS, but do not compel you. Know the difference. And think twice before signing your name.
You are not subject to masters unless you are a subject. You are not a slave unless you accept a master outside yourself. You have the power to shift the direction and devolution of humanity by taking responsibility for your actions.
Simple know who you are.
The Liberty of man consists solely in this, that he obeys the Laws of Nature, because he has himself recognized them as such, and not because they have been imposed upon him externally by any foreign will whatsoever. – Mikhail Bakunin
What I’m about to lay out might seem “too staggering to believe.”
Fortunately, what people do or don’t believe isn’t the issue.
And with that, here we go. Buckle up.
For the past year, I’ve been presenting evidence that the SARS-CoV-2 virus doesn’t exist. It’s never been proven to exist.
Those who claim it does exist have two legs to try to stand on. One: the virus has been isolated (discovered). And two: its genetic sequence has been found.
However, the mainstream scientific definition of “isolated” turns out to mean: “We have the virus in a soup in a dish in a lab. The soup contains all sorts of material. We never extracted the virus from the soup.” In other words, “isolated” means its opposite.
In the soup, in addition to the purported virus, there are human and monkey cells, toxic drugs, chemicals, and other genetic material. When the cells begin to die, researchers assert (with no proof) that the cause of cell-death must be the virus.
Therefore, the virus IS in the soup, and it is deadly.
However, the drugs and chemicals could be killing the cells, and the cells are being starved of nutrients, so that could certainly account for their death.
Bottom line: There is no proof of isolation. It isn’t even close. There is no evidence that the purported virus is in the soup.
I’ve published a typical account of virus-isolation from a study, and Dr. Andrew Kaufman did a step-by step analysis of this process and tore it to pieces. I published his analysis. Dr. Kaufman showed there was no merit to the claim that SARS-CoV-2 had been isolated.
What about the genetic sequencing of the virus? You can’t sequence something you haven’t isolated (discovered). To claim you have sequenced it would be like saying, “We have a generic fragment of iron dust, and we know it comes from a 1932 Ford Moon Rover fender.” There was never a 1932 Ford Moon Rover.
Researchers presume, assume, guess, pretend that “SARS-CoV-2” WOULD HAVE certain pieces of genetic material, and referring to libraries which contain data about such material, they use a computer program to cobble together pieces of data and present a genetic portrait of “SARS-CoV-2.”
If we were discussing a science fiction novel about a virus, we might say, “That’s an interesting genetic sequence. An interesting castle in the air.”
Now—to bridge over from this part of the article to the Wuhan lab, gain of function research, tweaking a coronavirus to produce a dangerous entity, we need to know one thing:
Mainstream researchers—virologists, molecular biologists—BELIEVE they are working with a real virus. Most of them certainly believe this. They are married to their fallacious and fantastical processes of proving a given virus exists.
And because they believe, so do politicians and public health officials and military leaders.
Therefore, we could certainly say, if the evidence is convincing, that there has been an effort to ramp up the function of a coronavirus in Wuhan.
But EFFORT and TRYING have nothing to do with the truth.
Based on unproven and untenable beliefs, people have TRIED TO DO all sorts of things. And some of those people have CLAIMED that they SUCCEEDED.
Therefore, it’s really quite easy to see how a) the virus has never been proven to exist and b) some researchers have been trying to ramp up the function of a fantasy they call a virus.
“But…but if the virus doesn’t exist, what are these researchers in their lab in Wuhan doing? What are they working with? What’s going on?”
Yes, I like that question. But you see, in the Church of the Virus, the inner sanctum, the holy of holies—THE HIGH-SECURITY LAB—is not open to you or me or anyone from the outside.
We (and dissenting scientists) can’t look over researchers’ shoulders. We can’t film every step they take. We can’t stop them at any point and make them explain what they’re actually doing. We can’t say, “You just fabricated a conclusion out of thin air, so justify it.” We can’t challenge their ironclad beliefs about the truth and validity of their procedures as they’re actually carrying out those procedural steps.
“What? You call that isolation? You didn’t isolate anything. You just stirred the soup in the dish. Explain yourself. And the gene you say you just tweaked? What gene? Let’s go back over that again. You just fiddled with DATA about a gene in a so-called virus. Makes no sense. Let’s review that move. Let’s break it down.”
No, we can’t do any of this.
Instead, we’re supposed to have faith in what these researchers have faith in.
If this amounts to science, Kool-Aid is the nectar of the gods.
“Excuse me, Doctor Towering-Arrogant, but you just plugged your latest ‘finding’ into a computer program, which is supposed to spit out the genetic sequence of the ‘new tweaked virus you just created’.”
“Yes? So?”
“First of all, you’re working with DATA here, not actual physical material. But we’ll put that aside for the moment. I want to know exactly what’s in this computer program. These five people standing with me here in the lab? They’re software pros. They have no allegiance to any government or funding entity. I want them to take the computer program apart and analyze it.”
“I’m not responsible for the program.”
“Who is?”
“Colleagues. I don’t know them personally.”
“Well, get them in here now. All research stops until we have them here in the lab. They’ll open the whole computer program to the light of day, explain it, and then I’ll have my people go through it with a fine-tooth comb.”
“That’s outrageous. Why?”
“To see if the program is credible, or just another fantasy constructed to give the false appearance that you’re actually sequencing something.”
We’re not permitted to do that, either.
We’re in Church. We must accept all the prescribed articles of faith.
For those people who not only claim SARS-CoV-2 was tweaked or invented in a Wuhan lab, but was made deadly there…they should consider the extraordinary lengths to which public health officials have gone to FALSELY pump up COVID case and death numbers.
None of that pumping would be necessary if an actual PANDEMIC virus existed and were loose in the world.
During the past year, I’ve covered all the criminal schemes to inflate case numbers. To cite just one scheme: Running the PCR test at an unconscionably high sensitivity has automatically created millions and millions of “positive COVID cases.” In concert with this fraud, the CDC has changed its definition of “a case,” so people who test positive but remain healthy with no symptoms can be counted as “COVID cases.”
Now, I’m going to present a Part Two to this article. It isn’t necessary, but some people are thinking: “If it isn’t the virus, why are so many people dying?” I’ve written perhaps a dozen pieces that answer this question. Here is a shortened version:
—The disease switcheroo; they don’t teach this in medical school.
I’ve mentioned this shell game hundreds of times in articles and lectures over the years. Here I want to boil it down to a protocol that has earned the medical cartel trillions of dollars.
We begin the story with an “outbreak.” Somewhere on Earth, we are told there is a cluster of unusual cases of illness.
The key word is “unusual.” Otherwise, who would care? People would instead say, “Forty people in Wuhan have lung congestion.” And that would spark no interest.
In Wuhan, it was “unusual pneumonia.” How so? No convincing answer. Some people have cited a “ground glass” appearance in pictures of patients’ lungs. Meaning gray areas, or opacity. Another claim: patients had extreme shortness of breath.
But opacity and shortness of breath were mentioned and described in medical literature long before COVID.
Something else must be offered, to justify the term “unusual cases.” And we get it almost immediately, while we’re still trying to figure out what makes these patients’ illness new and different:
It’s a virus. A never-before-seen virus.
Already a switcheroo is in progress. There is actually nothing unusual in the Wuhan cluster of cases. And just as we’re about to realize that, we’re hit with “new virus.” And then we forget there was no reason to look for a new virus in the first place.
Deadly air pollution has been hanging over Wuhan for a long time. It explains all sorts of lung infections, including pneumonia, the cardinal COVID symptom. And by the way, roughly 300,000 people in China die every year from pneumonia.
The “new virus” is trumpeted. But of course, as I’ve demonstrated many times, it hasn’t actually been found. No one isolated it. The so-called genetic sequencing of it was a fictional castle in the air based on supposition. How could it be otherwise? No one has an isolated and purified specimen of the virus that can be analyzed.
Accepting “new virus” as fact produces this situation: a list of very familiar clinical symptoms can now be called unique, because the cause is unique.
Suddenly, cough, chills, fever, fatigue, congestion, shortness of breath—which have been called flu, or just infection, or other names—are COVID. That’s the big switcheroo.
Next step: provide a diagnostic test for “the virus” that would automatically spit out false-positives like water from a firehouse. That’s the PCR. I’ve taken the PCR apart six ways from Sunday and exposed it as a fraud.
With the PCR in hand, the switcheroo is deepened. That list of familiar illness symptoms—taken together with the test—paints the picture of millions of cases of a “new plague.”
All this fabrication is on the order of—“Hey, Jim, sales of our widget number 6 are in the toilet. What can we do? Unless…let’s call it widget number 7, put it in a new box…”
People say, “But there ARE mysterious COVID cases that can’t be explained away as repackaged lung infections…”
Of course there are. When you make the net big enough, it will sweep in groups of cases that seem to defy explanation. But when you move in close enough, you discover a variety of factors that cause illness and death. New poisonous vaccination campaigns, toxic pesticides, lagoons of feces in giant pig factory-farms, opioid drugs; even various electromagnetic technologies.
I first caught on to the switcheroo in 1987, when I was doing research for my first book, AIDS INC. Scientists in Africa were investigating a “new” outbreak among people who, “incidentally,” were suffering from protein-calorie malnutrition, hunger, and starvation.
The scientists, cheap con artists that they were, called this “wasting syndrome,” then “Slim disease,” and finally “AIDS.” They announced the cause was HIV—a virus no one had isolated.
And lurking in the background, if you needed another cause of illness and death, there was the infamous World Health Organization mass smallpox-vaccination campaign in Africa, one of the most dangerous mass medical experiments ever carried out on a population. That campaign had wrapped up injecting millions of people several years before “the discovery of AIDS.”
The campaign was so dangerous that, at a secret WHO meeting in Geneva, a decision was made never to use that vaccine again, because it had caused smallpox (or something that looked like it).
In 1987, I combed through volumes of medical journals at the UCLA bio-med library, and discovered that the single most prevalent cause of T-cell depletion (“AIDS”) in the world is MALNUTRITION.
In Africa, malnutrition, hunger, starvation, contaminated water supplies, lack of basic sanitation, toxic vaccines, grinding poverty, war, fertile farm land stolen from the people by major agricultural corporations, toxic medical drugs…were all repackaged as a new disease caused by a new virus, HIV.
I then went on to study every so-called high-risk group for AIDS. I found that in each group, all the “AIDS symptoms” could be explained by non-viral causes.
At that point, I realized I was looking at a classic intelligence-agency-type covert operation, applied within the medical universe. The virus was the cover story. It was being use to hide ongoing government and corporate crimes. For example—forced starvation.
A con is a con.
Only the disease-names are changed, to protect the guilty.
With COVID, you must also consider the following: an extraordinarily high percentage of cases and deaths are occurring in people over the age of 65. The elderly. Many of these people are living in nursing homes and other long-term care facilities.
IB Times, 7/27/20: “New research from the Kaiser Family Foundation has indicated that while adults 65 and older only account for 16% of the U.S. population, they make up 80% of COVID-19 deaths.”
CDC, May 14, 2021: “8 out 10 COVID-19 deaths reported in the US have been in adults 65 years old and older.”
Why are these older people dying?
Because they have long-standing serious health problems. And for years, even decades, they’ve been treated with an array of toxic medical drugs.
Then, in 2020, they’re terrified they might be diagnosed with COVID. And then they ARE diagnosed. Which ramps up their terror.
On top of all of this, they’re neglected by nursing home staffs, even handled brutally in some cases. They’re isolated “because of COVID,” imprisoned, cut off from family and friends. They’re alone.
So they give up and fold up and die.
No virus required as an explanation.
In a large study of New York state hospitals, it was discovered that people over the age of 65 who were diagnosed with COVID, and put on breathing ventilators, died at the rate of 97.2 percent.
No matter what the prior condition of the patient, any treatment that has a death rate of 97.2 percent must be discontinued at once. But it wasn’t discontinued. It still goes on. This amounts to murder.
“People are dying, it must be the virus.” No. Wrong.
There is no “it.” People dying from various causes are fictionally brought under one umbrella, called COVID-19.
This is titanic fraud, tragedy, mass murder—murder compounded many times by the destructive vaccine, aka genetic treatment.
It didn’t originate in a lab in Wuhan.
But the story that it did originate there cements the premise, in many minds, that we are dealing with a virus.
Quite convenient.
The Wuhan lab, intentionally or unintentionally, becomes a cover story that obscures the truth.
You may be wondering what’s been happening to I.G. Farbensanto lately. It’s been a while since we’ve heard from, or about, them, so it may be worthwhile to newer readers to apprise them of whom we’re talking about. I.G. Farbensanto is our nickname for Big Agribusiness, and we used to call it Mon(ster)santo, until the big German chemical firm Bayer – a former component of I.G. Farben, the notorious German chemicals cartel that included not only Bayer, but BASR (also a still existing company, Badische Anilin und Soda-Fabrik) and some other companies – Bayer bought Monsanto (and Monsanto’s legal problems) a few years ago. Accordingly, we changed our nickname for Big Agribusiness to IG Farbensanto. Our other reason for the monikers was the dubious history of Big Agribusiness and its practices regarding GMOs, which I assume most readers here are familiar with.
The federal judge overseeing nationwide Roundup litigation on Wednesday denied Bayer’s latest attempt to limit its legal liability from future cancer claims associated with its glyphosate-based herbicides, citing numerous “glaring flaws” in a settlement proposed to apply to Roundup users who have not yet sued the company but may want to do so in the future.
Saying parts of the plan were “clearly unreasonable” and unfair to cancer sufferers who would be part of the class settlement, U.S. Judge Vince Chhabria castigated Bayer and the small group of lawyers who put the plan together in conjunction with Bayer.
He pointed out that the company has been “losing trials left and right” in claims brought by people suffering from non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) who alleged exposure to Monsanto’s Roundup and other glyphosate-based herbicides were the cause.
Bayer has owned Monsanto since 2018 and has been struggling to defend the cancer claims ever since. Cancer victims have won three trials held to date, and tens of thousands of other plaintiffs have filed lawsuits alleging exposure to Monsanto’s herbicides caused them to develop NHL while Monsanto spent decades hiding the risks.
…
Judge Chhabria said in his decision that the company’s desire to set up a “science panel” to determine whether or not the herbicides actually cause cancer rather than leave that question to future juries is because of the trial losses the company has so far suffered.
The “reason Monsanto wants a science panel so badly is that the company has lost the ‘battle of the experts’ in three trials, the judge wrote in his order. “At present, the playing field on the issue of expert testimony related to causation is slanted heavily in favor of plaintiffs.”
Gee… fancy that. A multinational corporation which was formerly a part of I.G. Farben seeks to avoid legal liability for its products? Color me not surprised.
The article goes on to mention various other plans I.G. Farbensanto has for avoiding its mounting legal problems.
Here I have a suggestion for the I.G. Farbensanto board: why not take a page out of Big Pharma’s playbook, and invest heavily (and covertly) in gain-of-GMO-function research? This could easily be tied to quackcine research ala the suggestion of some scientific papers a few years ago where this very thing was being proposed: GMOs doubling as quackcines. With a few donations into the right pockets, one might be able to get the National Institute of Health, the Center for Disease Control, and the World Health Organization on board. At this point, you could hire a couple of Harvard chemistry professors, and locate your research facility in – oh, I don’t know, say, in Wuhan, China – and perhaps even be able to create a quackcine which is the “only” cure for a new kind of virus (that you could also support gain-of-function research into). Then you could use all of your influence on the propotainment media networks (which get lots of advertising revenue from you to begin with) to “fudge the numbers” a bit, and create a worldwide campaign of fear, while simultaneously getting your newly installed puppet in the White House to approve a slap-dash emergency GMO-quackcine approval plan (you could maybe call it Operation Warp Speed), bypassing the normal long-term trials, and, for good measure, exempting your firm from any liability for any “adverse GMO consumption reactions” because your new plants were rushed into production because the world was facing a crisis. On the way to achieving all this, you could also persuade your rubber glove company to support a campaign of food distancing, and wearing rubber gloves at all times, especially while dining. You could also persuade social media platforms to hire “fact checkers” in return for some carefully laundered donations, and censor any contrarian views. This way you won’t have to worry about any pesky lawsuits from whatever long-term effects of your products as might pop up in a few years.
In the meantime, one way to implement this would be to set up liaison committees with with various Big Pharma companies, to learn their techniques for avoiding legal liabilities for dubious products. While doing this, you could also donate heavily to the campaigns of Congressmen and Senators, and get special legislation passed to limit your liability, and establish “GMO courts” resembling “vaccine courts” to ensure that your liability is strictly limited.
Under the banner of fighting COVID-19 children all over the world are being abused and exploited in ways that would have been unthinkable over a year ago. The title of this article is part of a powerful speech condemning this abuse at the Gwinnett County School Board in Georgia by Courtney Ann Taylor, a mother of three small children. Here is part of her stinging rebuke:
“Every month I come here, and I hear the same thing: ‘social emotional health.’ If you truly mean that, you would end the mask requirement tonight…My six year old looks at me every month before I come here and she says ‘are you gonna tell them tonight. Tell them I don’t want to wear this anymore’…forcing five, six, seven, eight, and nine year old little children to cover their noses and their mouths where they breathe for seven hours a day every day for the last nine months…that is not in their best interest and this has to stop…Every one of us knows that young children are not affected by this virus…And that’s a blessing…But as the adults what have we done with that blessing? We’ve shoved it to the side and we’ve said, ‘we don’t care. You’re still going to have to wear a mask on your face every day…You still can’t play together on the playground like normal children…We don’t care. We’re still going to force you to carry a burden that was never yours to carry.’ Shame on us.”
Truer words were never spoken. Unfortunately, most people tend to blindly trust government officials and other so-called experts instead of their own common sense.
The History of “Eugenics”
Nazi Germany was obsessed with racial purity partly due to the pseudoscience of eugenics which was a popular ideology throughout the world at the time. Shortly after Hitler took power in 1933, the Nazis began to purge Germany of what they considered undesirables via sterilization and euthanasia programs. The victims of these horrible and inhumane programs included the mentally ill, the disabled,epileptics, the deformed, those with genetic diseases, alcoholics—anyone considered to be a burden on society, “life unworthy of life,” “useless feeders.”
The Euthanasia program was known as “Aktion T4,” code name for Tiergartenstrasse 4, (the street address of the coordinating office in Berlin). Its first victims were infants and toddlers. But soon older children were included as well as teenagers.
Starting in 1939, hospitals and homes for the disabled began the systematic killing of infants and small children. While doctors decided who would live or die, it was the nurses, usually women, there were some male nurses, who carried out those orders. The children were either killed by lethal injection, starvation or hypothermia from exposure, and in some cases, medical experimentation, and physical abuse. Imagine killing an infant by one these methods. We’re not talking about aborting fetuses within the first three months of conception here, but fully formed out-of-the-womb already born babies. I can’t comprehend how anyone could be so heartless and so cruel that they could do something so monstrously evil.
Many nurses did refuse to participate in this kind of genocide, but many didn’t. But those who refused weren’t punished in any way—they were simply transferred to another hospital or ward. So, the nurses who killed children and later adults in these institutions were doing so of their own free will.
Another method of execution was to tell children they were going on a picnic. A picnic lunch was provided and a nurse would help them onto a bus. But they didn’t know that it was a sealed bus that had been converted into a mobile gas chamber. The exhaust pipes were placed inside. The bus drove off, the exhaust fumes filled the bus, and by the time it got back to the hospital the children were dead. ABC News pointed out that this was the prototype for the gas chambers that would later be used to murder millions of Jews, gypsies, Poles, and others deemed undesirables in infamous concentration camps like Auschwitz and Buchenwald—the “Final Solution”—the Holocaust.
Naturally, parents wouldn’t take kindly to their children being executed so the government did what governments do best—they lied to them. Parents were encouraged to put their sick and disabled children into institutions that would supposedly provide them with the best medical care. The children would then be moved to another institution much farther away and contact between parent and child would cease. A few months later the parents would receive a letter saying that the child died of pneumonia or some other illness and that they could come and collect their ashes and pay for the funeral. The ashes weren’t even the ashes of their children, but were from multiple bodies that were cremated together. However, the brains of the dead children were removed prior to cremation for further study. Some these preserved brains remained in private collections into the 21st Century.
An estimated 275,000-300,000 innocent men, women, and children were killed under the Aktion T4 program. And although the euthanasia program was suspended in 1941 due to public pressure, it was impossible to keep such a program totally secret forever, German medical professionals and healthcare workers secretly resumed the killings the following year and continued them until the end of the war with the help of local authorities.
But that was the Nazis, some will argue–we Americans would never do that. The US is the land of the free and home of the brave–the leader of the free world—a Christian nation. Oh, really?
The Role of Big Pharma
Medicine is a healing art and a profession. But it is also a business—the biggest business in the US at just under four trillion dollars which makes up 18% of our 22.2 trillion dollar 2020 GDP (Gross Domestic Product). Medicine is also part of the government. As such, the CDC, FDA, NIH, and state health departments are just as corrupt and subject to influence peddling as the rest of the government. Because of this, the treatment modalities for various diseases and conditions usually aren’t what’s best for the patient, but what is most profitable for pharmaceutical companies and other for-profit corporate interests. This corruption has been reported numerous times in the scientific literature.
Example: Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 2013, Abstract: “The pharmaceutical Industry has corrupted the practice of medicine through its influence over what drugs are developed, how they are tested, and how medical knowledge is created. Since 1906, heavy commercial influence has compromised congressional legislation to protect the public from unsafe drugs.”
The fact that doctors and public health bureaucrats wield enormous power adds to their corruption and arrogance. British historian and Politician Lord Acton (John Emerich Edward Dalberg-Acton 1834-1902) summed it up best:
“Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority: still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority…Official truth is not actual truth..It is easier to find people fit to govern themselves than people fit to govern others…Men cannot be made good by the state, but they can easily be made bad. Morality depends on liberty.”
Child Abuse In The Name of Public Health
A lot of people like to think that doctors and nurses are noble people who have our best interests at heart. This simply isn’t true in most cases. In fact, Nazi doctors and nurses at the Nuremberg Trials tried to defend their gruesome practices by pointing out the inhumane experiments doctors in the US carried out, and continued to carry out long after WWII. This is in spite of the fact that The Nuremberg Code which came about as a result of Nazi genocide, the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights as well as Federal policies and state laws prohibit experimenting on people without their knowledge or consent. Granted, the Nazis took things to a much higher level. But what we did wasn’t anything to brag about. Here are but a few examples:
St. Vincent’s Home for Orphans, Philadelphia, PA 1908: researchers studying tuberculosis conducted a series on diagnostic tests on over a 100 children under 8 years old by placing a tuberculin formula in their eyes. Some children were blinded for life as a result of this unethical, immoral experiment.
Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, Manhattan, New York City 1911: Dr. Hideyo Noguchi (1876-1928) injected 146 children with luetin, an extract of Treponema Pallidum, the causative agent of syphilis in order to develop a skin test for the disease. The kids and other adult subjects didn’t know that they were being used in an experiment. The parents of some of the children sued Noguchi alleging that their children had contracted syphilis.
Tuskegee Institute, Macon County, Alabama 1932-1972: on May 16, 1997, President Bill Clinton apologized to the victims of the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment. The government lied to hundreds of poor Black men infected with syphilis who thought they were getting free medical care. In reality, their syphilis went untreated so medical researchers could study how the disease progressed. Why didn’t they already know? Syphilis had been around for centuries. By 1947 penicillin was known to cure syphilis, but the men in the study didn’t get it. The result: 28 men died of syphilis, 100 others were dead from related complications, at least 40 wives were infected, and passed the disease on to 19 children at birth.
Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee 1946: 829 pregnant women were given “vitamin drinks” that researchers told them would improve the health of their unborn babies. But unknown to them the concoctions contained radioactive iron. The purpose of the research was to find out how fast the radioisotope crossed into the placenta. In the women, this resulted in rashes, bruises, anemia, hair loss, tooth loss, and cancer. At least 7 of their babies died from cancers and leukemia. These kind of perverse radiation experiments (from 1944-1974 there were over 4,000 of them) were driven by the US government’s obsession with chemical warfare, and atomic weapons due to the Cold War with the Soviet Union.
Bellevue Hospital, New York City 1940-1953: Dr. Lauretta Bender (1897-1987), a child psychiatrist experimented on anywhere from 100 to 500 children (reports vary) between 3 and 12 years of age using electroshock therapy after diagnosing them with “autistic schizophrenia.” She would sit a child in front of a large group and apply gentle pressure to their head. If the kid moved Bender claimed that this was an early sign of schizophrenia. A 1954 study of 50 of bender’s child subjects showed that nearly all were worse off and that some had become suicidal. Bender continued her experiments on children at Creedmoor Hospital, also in New York City, from 1956-1969 which included using LSD on them.
Willowbrook State School, Staten Island, N.Y. 1955-1970: Dr. Saul Krugman (1911-1995) deliberately infected over 700 mentally disabled, but healthy children ages 3-10 with hepatitis which was rampant at the institution due to poor sanitation and overcrowding. He infected the children by spiking their food and chocolate milk with strains of the disease synthesized from the poop of patients who had it.Yuck! The purpose of this unethical research, approved by the state and federal government, was to develop a vaccine. The children became sick, but fortunately none of them died. Reporter Geraldo Rivera did an expose on the horrible conditions at this school in 1972 by sneaking onto the grounds. He saw children neglected, naked, smeared in their own feces, and banging their heads against the wall. Rivera said he still cries when he thinks about what he saw. The school was shut down in 1987.
Edmonston-Zagreb high-titre (EZ-HT) measles vaccine 1989-1991: the CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) injected thousands of babies in Third World countries with experimental EZ-HT vaccines. Clinical trials conducted in Africa and Haiti like the Senegal study published in the Lancet showed that child mortality was much higher in babies who received the EZ-HT vaccines. In spite of this, the CDC irresponsibly gave EZ-HT vaccines to over 1,500 minority babies in Los Angeles, California without telling the parents it was experimental, unlicensed for use in the US, and potentially dangerous. The CDC admitted that “A mistake was made,” but claimed “there was no ill intent.” Fortunately, none of the babies suffered any immediate ill-effects from the EZ-HT vaccines. But the Senegal study states that “little is known about the long-term effects of high-titre live measles vaccines given early in life.” How lovely.
All of the aforementioned atrocities and irresponsible experiments happened many years ago. But to this day children are still being used as guinea pigs by the government and Big Pharma. For example, millions of children are on psychiatric medication. The majority of kids who went on a shooting rampage between 1988 and 2013 were taking psychiatric medication. That’s not counting kids who had been on these medications in that past and the cases where the medical records had been sealed.
Numerous studies have been done on how harmful psychiatric drugs can be. Ten of them can be accessed here. Of course, it’s more fashionable to blame guns, video games, and porn for mixed up, violent kids. And now that the COVID-19 vaccines have been rolled out they want to use all of us as lab rats.
“Unless we act now to address the pandemic’s impacts on children, the echoes of COVID-19 will permanently damage our shared future… COVID-19 has the potential to overwhelm fragile health systems in low and middle-income countries and undermine many of the gains made in child survival, health, nutrition and development over the last several decades.”
“For many children, the COVID-19 crisis will mean limited or no education..More than 91 percent of the world’s students are out of school, due to school closures in at least 188 countries…Added family stresses related to the COVID-19 crisis—including job loss, isolation, excessive confinement, and anxieties over health and finances—heighten the risk of violence in the home…Child abuse is less likely to be detected during the COVID-19 crisis, as child protection agencies have reduced monitoring to avoid spreading the virus, and teachers are less likely to detect signs of ill treatment with schools closed.”
“Increasing numbers of American children and young adults died by suicide in recent years, and the Covid-19 pandemic threatens to continue the trend…Rates more than doubled in New Hampshire, and the majority of states showed an increase between 30% and 60%… Recent research has documented increases in serious psychological distress, major depression, and suicidal thoughts and attempts among youth. A survey conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that more than one-quarter of young adults reported having seriously considered suicide in the 30 days before completing the June 24-30 questionnaire.”
“The COVID-19 pandemic has had a deep impact on children, families, communities, and societies the world over. The coronavirus is tearing children’s lives apart…”
Again, keep in mind, it’s not any pandemic or virus that’s causing the crisis our world is facing—it’s the oppressive and stupid actions of governments. Even if COVID-19 were a real pandemic, it isn’t, none of this authoritarian nonsense would do a damn bit of good. The very policies that governments have enacted to protect children not to mention adults have done nothing but harm them.
Here are some examples:
School children are being forced to exercise and play sports in masks—something professional athletes aren’t required to do. It’s bad enough they have to wear masks for hours at a time in class, but while engaging in athletic activities is sheer lunacy.
Parents, coaches, and the kids themselves in Minnesota,Illinois,Michigan, and other parts of the country have reported that being forced to wear masks while engaging in strenuous physical activities has resulted in difficulty breathing, exhaustion, poor vision, injuries, and passing out. The parents of kids who play hockey said they are being put at a greater risk for concussions because the masks force them to look down and restrict their peripheral vision and that some “are hitting the ice without their mouth guards in because the mask blocks the strap that attaches it to helmets.” In Minnesota, parents even brought videos to state legislative committees of kids in sporting events running into each other and collapsing.
And what do government officials do when they hear this stuff and see it on video with their own eyes? They deny reality and keep repeating insane talking points from the CDC. They just don’t give a tinker’s damn. For example, a public health official in Minnesota asserted that there is no evidence that wearing masks while engaging in athletic activity is harmful to children or causes sports injuries. Apparently, this idiot never read what the WHO (World Health Organization) has to say here and here. Adults and children should not exercise or engage in sports with a mask on—it is unhealthy and dangerous.
COVID19 restrictions on school children in this country and in many places throughout the world are a draconian nightmare. In addition to being forced to wear masks, children in many cases, depending on the school, are not allowed to hug or touch each other, can’t play together, must stay away from each other, and be surrounded by plexiglass barriers. Talking might not be allowed and they might have to keep their masks on while eating—lowering it to put food in their mouth and then raising it back up while they chew and swallow.
Numerous studies in the scientific literature show how important play and peer interaction is for children and adolescents.
Porto Biomedical Journal, September-October 2017: Introduction:
“Through play, the child can experiment, solve problems, think creatively, cooperate with others, etc., gaining a deeper knowledge about his/herself and the world. From an early age, the possibility to experience several opportunities for unstructured play, in which the child can decide what to do, with whom and how, promotes positive self-esteem, autonomy, and confidence.”
“Adolescence (the stage between 10 and 24 years) is a period of life characterised by heightened sensitivity to social stimuli and the increased need for peer interaction. The physical distancing measures mandated globally…are radically reducing adolescents’ opportunities to engage in face-to-face social contact outside their household…social deprivation in adolescence might have far-reaching consequences. Human studies have shown the importance of peer acceptance and peer influence in adolescence.”
In a recent interview on the first segment of The HighWire hosted by Del BigTree, Laura Centner, founder of Centner Academy explained why she flat-out refuses to subject the children in her school to oppressive COVID-19 restrictions which she described as “worse than solitary confinement. They treat prisoners better than they’re treating our children. And the thing that really, really infuriates me and just hurts my heart is that I see schools all over the world that are blindly following the CDC when there isn’t any evidence or any justification to do what they’re doing…all of the reports show the psychological damage that’s being done to children during the lockdowns, during the strict measures are hurting them far greater than COVID will ever hurt them.”
Speaking of harm, how about forcing pregnant woman to give birth with masks on, putting masks and face shields on newborn babies, and not allowing support partners in the delivery room.
October 13, 2020 Daily Mail article: last year, hospitals in France started forcing pregnant women to give birth with masks on. The scientific literature is filled with studies that show proper breathing is vital to reducing anxiety and having an easier time in the delivery room. Not so in the upside down Bizarro world of COVID-19. French mothers reported on the extreme stress and trauma that they experienced giving birth with the masks on leaving them vomiting and unable to breathe. They also said that if they refused to wear masks doctors threatened to leave the delivery room and that they would have to give birth alone. After a flood of complaints, the French Government stepped in and declared that pregnant women cannot be forced to wear masks during childbirth. And in spite of what one of the articles says, some hospitals in the US are forcing women to give birth in masks.
In New York State some hospitals wouldn’t allow women to have visitors during childbirth including their partners until the Governor put a stop to it. The WHO supports allowing women to have support partners in the delivery room. But as reported in Medical Xpress last March, the practice is still going on in many countries. The Medical Xpress article also reported that in a survey that involved 62 countries, two-thirds of health workers wouldn’t support “Kangaroo Mother care” (KMC). This is a life-saving technique involving early, prolonged skin-to-skin contact for preterm babies and exclusive breastfeeding by the mother. But if mothers have a positive or unknown COVID-19 test status they are separated from their mothers which increases their chances of dying.
Is it any wonder that a March 2021 study in the Lancet concluded: Interpretation:
“Global maternal and fetal outcomes have worsened during the COVID-19 pandemic, with an increase in maternal deaths, stillbirth, ruptured ectopic pregnancies, and maternal depression.”
All of these oppressive and idiotic polices are being driven by the idea that COVID-19 is being spread by asymptomatic carriers. This is a myth exposed by COVID czar Anthony Fauci himself at a Health & Human Services press conference back in January 2020 when he said,
“…if there is asymptomatic transmission, it impacts certain policies that you do regarding screening, et cetera. But the one thing historically people need to realize that even if there is some asymptomatic transmission, in all the history of respiratory borne viruses of any type asymptomatic transmission has never been the driver of outbreaks. The driver of outbreaks is always a symptomatic person. Even if there’s a rare asymptomatic person that might transmit, an epidemic is not driven by asymptomatic carriers.”
And let us not forget that Fauci the flip-flopper was among the so-called experts who climbed all over Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove of the WHO when she echoed his words at a June 2020 press conference that asymptomatic transmission of the COVID-19 virus is “very rare.” As a result, Van Kerkhove quickly walked back on her statement. Can’t disrupt the phony narrative now can we.
At a roundtable discussion on public health in Florida last April chaired by Governor Ron DeSantis that included Dr. Scott Atlas, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, and Dr. Sunetra Gupta, Dr. Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School pulled no punches regarding COVID-19 policies: “This is the biggest public health mistake or the biggest public health fiasco in history.”
The roundtable discussion was censored by YouTube. Why?
The Real Agenda
Our world has been conquered by a tiny cabal of perverted psychopaths who control obscene amounts of wealth. Unlike despots of the past who tried to capture the world via military force, these slimy, slithering cowards conquer through bribery and corruption. Their goal: enslavement and control of the entire human race. Make no mistake people, with modern technology at their disposal It isn’t just our freedom that is at stake: our very humanity is on the line like it has never been before.
The encyclopedia Britannica defines brainwashing as a
“systematic effort to persuade nonbelievers to accept a certain allegiance, command, or doctrine…any technique designed to manipulate human thought or action…By controlling the physical and social environment, an attempt is made to destroy loyalties to any unfavorable groups or individuals, to demonstrate to the individual that his attitudes and patterns of thinking are incorrect and must be changed, and to develop loyalty and unquestioning obedience to the ruling party…isolation from former associates and sources of information…strong social pressures and rewards for cooperation; physical and psychological punishments for non-cooperation.”
Masks, social distancing, sanitizing everything in sight, stay-at-home orders, and travel restrictions are about social control. They have absolutely nothing to do with public health. They are designed to break your spirit, stifle your independence, condition you to obey orders, keep you in a constant state of fear, and make you dependent on government and experts for salvation. They are designed to turn you and your children into slaves.
Two recent articles in Vogue and USA Today explained that once people got used to engaging in COVID-19 rituals like wearing masks they became a habit—a conditioned reflex. They compulsively keep doing the ritual and feel anxiety and discomfort if they don’t.
I’m getting physical therapy for an old shoulder injury. My physical therapist continues to wear a mask even though there are no more mask mandates or ordinances in our area. She told me that she is afraid she will lose customers if she ditches the mask. This is intellectualizing her conditioning. Wearing a mask has become a habit. I never wear a mask in her clinic as well as a number of other people. None of the patients who wear masks cringe in our presence yet she continues to wear the mask.
The architects behind the fake COVID-19 pandemic are the epitome of what psychiatrist Wilhelm Reich (1897-1957) called the “emotional plague.” People with this affliction are control freaks. They can’t let people alone. They can’t tolerate anything in their environment that disrupts their unhealthy way of thinking and living because it causes them enormous discomfort and anxiety.
People like Bill Gates, Klaus Schwab, head of the World Economic Forum, and Rajiv Shah, president of the Rockefeller Foundation are emotional plague characters.They are the puppet masters who pull the strings of governments.Thanks to them the world’s 2,153 billionaires “are wealthier than 60% of the earth’s entire population combined.” They envision a near future when chips will be implanted in our skin or in our brain that will enable us to merge with the digital world without considering what could go wrong. When I look at them I see a black hole of greed and a lust for power that will devour all love, liberty, beauty, and joy if we let them. In my opinion they are the Darth Vaders and Lex Luthors of the real world–they are the dark side.
Over the years, I’ve heard more than a few people say that they would have resisted the Nazis if they had lived in Germany under Hitler. People who say this aren’t displaying any courage because they aren’t risking anything. Talk is cheap. Adolf Hitler (1889-1945) and the old Nazi regime are long gone. It’s easy to say what you would have done after the fact. The true test of courage is to resist tyranny when it is happening now, and is popular with the public, and part of your own government.
And don’t buy into the sleazy propaganda ploy that people who refuse to wear masks or get vaccinated are selfish. This is an attempt to turn submission to tyranny into a virtue. There is nothing virtuous about obeying unjust laws and edicts folks.
Anyone who has been brainwashed by fear, refuses to educate themselves, and tries to force others to participate in their fear is selfish. If you aren’t willing to get out of your comfort zone and stand up to injustice then you are selfish. If you know that masks are useless and are being used as a political tool but wear them anyway to appease family and friends or to show that you’re a respectful and virtuous person then you are selfish.
Wilhelm Reich taught us that love flows freely and naturally from every small child. It is we who corrupt and stifle that love. So, to parents everywhere I say: take those stupid masks off of yourselves and your children. Stop allowing schools to indoctrinate and brainwash them even if you have to home school them. Stop participating in this ritualistic COVID death cult. Say “hell no” to the new normal.
From Wilhelm Reich’s book “Listen Little Man” (Source: Michael J. Talmo)
Yesterday saw the another warning shot across the bows of the globalist front group that has hijacked the nation’s governance: knock off what you are doing – or else!
The London demo on 29th was YET AGAIN huge. Reports are that it was four miles long and comprised a million citizens.
It is impossible to know exact numbers but as someone who was there, I’d say these reports are pretty accurate. It was an honour to be part of it and to find oneself among so many fine people from every generation and social background.
The sheer scale of the protest was breathtaking. The latest in a long series of demos and the biggest yet, it showed that far from running out of steam, the movement is growing fast, accumulating more citizens as the list of government lies, deceits, cons, falsehoods and efforts to terrorise grows.
If it goes on this way, if the government does not get honest and straight, the architects of this attack on the nation will find they have no friends left.
The corporate media, of course, either tries to pretend it didn’t happen or to minimise it with false reports of “hundreds” and the usual misrepresentation of of what the demonstrations are about.
This is a far cry from simply “reporting the news”. It is in essence an effort to covertly control the citizenry using false or heavily redacted reports disguised as “reporting the news”.
Thanks to the wonders of modern technology, it is now easy to prove what REALLY took place and show the CMM (Corporate Media Matrix) up as resoundingly false. At yesterday’s demonstration there were hundreds of thousands of people taking pictures and making video clips so that by today there are in circulation hundreds of thousands of pieces of evidence that nullify the CMM effort to convey a false reality.
And so inexorably, lie by disproven lie, the corporate media’s status as “conveyor of news” suffers a death of a thousand cuts. Its decline can be traced to its failure to do its job and to honour the trust once placed in it.
Couple that unmasked dishonesty with the erosion of it pretence at impartiality. It is relatively easy to determine that editors and so forth answer to owners ands those owners have their own agenda. By way of a brief example, take Rupert Murdoch who owns the biggest vaccine company in Australia. His family has been deeply immersed in that industry for generations, and he has partnerships with Glaxo and with all the big vaccine makers. [Source https://degraw.substack.com/…/crimes-against-humanity…]
The Corporate Media likes to think it sets public opinion. It doesn’t. If the CMM set public opinion we would not be seeing protests like yesterday’s in London. And of course for every person who was there, there are ten who weren’t for one reason or another, so one can surmise that what is occurring as our already considerable numbers grow, is a seismic shift of public opinion in a direction OPPOSITE to the direction in which the CMM, leaving no truth unturned, is trying to steer it .
The CMM is a dead irrelevance as a resource for truthful information. It has been supplanted by the People’s Media which operates free of corporate/oligarchical control.
The People’s Media, multifaceted and representing the much broader and more contentious spectrum of freely exchanged ideas, is not of course always right in everything it says. We leave that pretence to a Corporate Media that stifles all challenges to its orthodoxy.
The People’s Media, manned by earnest human beings with no claims to omniscient infallibility, makes mistakes but in that climate of freely exchanged and debated ideas, those mistakes can be freely challenged and debated rather than welded irrevocably into the national psyche by authoritarian diktat.
The People’s Media has but to remain sincere, to get its facts straight as best it can and take responsibility for honest errors. Its primary mission is to maintain the public’s access to ideas, data and viewpoints outside the orthodox spectrum. It is to persuade people to use their native capabilities to inspect, question and challenge what they are told rather than blindly accept everything that comes out of the mouths of devious politicians and the front men for corporate vested interests.
As such, the People’s Media is seeking to do the exact opposite to what the corporate media is doing.
Observably, the corporate media, long dead as a source of real news, is seeking to implant a matrix of ideas for which there is no challenge.
Part of that effort is, for instance, trying to keep from the nation’s citizens the horrible truth that there has now arisen a thus-far peaceful revolt against the lies and deceit of a criminal government.
And so it is incumbent upon the People’s Media, which in effect actually embraces every single member of the Freedom Movement with a voice to speak or a social media or email account through which to relay, to disseminate as broadly as possible the evidence of what really happened.
So here is our contribution, which is also a celebration, courtesy of some very fine people who made these videos and Bitchute that published them, of the fact that in the face of oppression, humanity is rising.
What REALLY happened yesterday was something wonderful . .
Our latest fact-check examines the Covid bioweapon theory. The origins of it, the evidence for it, and the possible motivations behind its sudden resurgence.
Sometime in the winter of 2019/2020, when the coronavirus “pandemic” was still only incipient, a theory started doing the rounds that the alleged “novel coronavirus” had in fact been grown in a laboratory, and either released by accident or deployed deliberately as a bioweapon.
Calling it “the theory” is somewhat of a misnomer, really. It was more a collection of theories with the same core idea. Variations on a theme, if you will.
So both the main branches of the theory have a vague basis in fact that makes them hypothetically possible, but not much more than that.
What was the mainstream media reaction?
That’s an interesting question.
At first, last spring, it was universally derided as “misinformation”. Mainstream outlet after mainstream outlet chortled at the conspiracy theorists spreading their crazy nonsense. Some people said they were racists for blaming China. The Guardian blamed Russia, as they usually do.
In this way, the theory served a purpose for the mainstream narrative – it was used to attack all Covid sceptics by association. As recently as February this year, research papers were being published that “debunked” this “conspiracy theory”.
But that was then, and this is now. Things change,
Recently mainstream outlets have been giving what they call the “lab leak theory” a little bit of serious consideration. The New Yorker, just two days ago, published an article stating:
Scientists and political commentators are no longer dismissing the possibility that COVID-19 emerged from a Chinese laboratory.
Covid origin: Why the Wuhan lab-leak theory is being taken seriously
The change is not just in the media sphere, but the political one, too. Joe Biden’s administration is ordering an investigation into the “lab leak” theory.
It’s not just the US either.
Last year, WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, ordered an investigative team to write a report on the origins of the virus. Their report, which was released a few weeks ago, found a laboratory origin to be “extremely unlikely”. But Ghebreyesus, rather than simply accepting the findings of his team, stated more investigation was needed. Keeping the lab leak theory alive in the public mind.
Nowhere is the volte-face of the establishment voices more apparent than Dr Anthony Fauci, who has totally flipped on the lab-leak theory after dismissing it out of hand last year.
Why the sudden change?
That’s a very good question. And one that we can’t answer until the current craziness picks a direction and goes with it. Suffice to say, last year it served the establishment’s agenda to rubbish the lab-leak theory, and this year it serves their agenda to endorse it.
This could be an attempt to scramble together a “pandemic” narrative that has never made much sense, it could be a sign that the unified “Great Reset” policy is crumbling and China is going to be scape-goated. It could be nothing but noise and chaos to distract people.
As usual, what the mainstream and politicians are saying has absolutely no bearing on the reality of the situation, and can tell us nothing about anything, except their current agenda.
However, the lab-leak theory does serve the Deep State agenda in one fashion: it reinforces the idea that the virus is a real problem that needs to be solved, rather than a fear-based control narrative.
Fear is fear, and whether it’s of a zoonotic virus or a bioweapon, it can be used to bend a population to your will.
…OK, but seriously, could Covid be a bioweapon?
Well, obviously it could be. We don’t know enough to say that it’s impossible. But it’s not very likely.
For one thing, there’s the question of efficacy.
It’s still a matter of some debate whether the Sars-Cov-2 virus has been isolated to the point it has even been proven to exist. Supposing it definitely exists as a discrete entity, it hasn’t at this time fulfilled Koch’s postulates to the point it is proven to cause disease.
But even if you accept those two questions as resolved: The virus does exist, and it does cause Covid19. Well, you’re still looking at a disease that is symptomless in the majority of people exposed to it, only ever mild in the vast majority of people who get sick, and has a 99.8% survival rate.
If Covid is a bioweapon, it’s a rubbish one.
Secondly, there’s the question of efficiency and expense.
What, exactly, would be the point in a bioweapon which is no more deadly than common flu viruses? Why go to the trouble of creating a pretty much harmless virus in a lab?
Supposing you were interested in creating a pandemic, would that be a good way of doing it? Would it be worth the expense? Wouldn’t it be simpler to just make-believe there was a plague through fear-porn and statistical sleight-of-hand?
After all, an imaginary pandemic can infect whoever you want, spare whoever you like, start and stop at your convenience, obey any rules you care to make up and be cured instantly as long as everyone pays you for your “vaccine”.
* * *
In conclusion: No direct evidence that the alleged Sars-Cov-2 virus was created in a lab has ever been produced. It’s nothing like as virulent as you’d expect a bioweapon to be, and logically an actual virus would not serve the Deep State agenda as well as a largely imaginary one.
Maybe the virus was grown in a lab, maybe it just jumped from bats to people. Since all evidence suggests it’s not very dangerous, it doesn’t really matter.
The debate sure does make a good distraction though.
Video available at Computing Forever BitChute and Odysee channels.
Excerpts:
“Over the past year, we’ve witnessed a horrifying psychological attack on our population and, indeed, on our very human nature.
Many people are now afraid of touching or being near other people. They have been brainwashed into being terrified of the very things that make us human.
Suffice to say, a species that is repulsed by contact with itself — one that has been made to fear and loathe itself, to see others as festering bags of toxic biowaste — that’s not a species that will have a particularly long future.
From face masks, obsessive hand sanitizings, social distancing, and social isolation — such that most human communication is now done through technology — and, finally, the mRNA vaccines that are sold as the solution to the “pandemic”, there’s a not-so-subtle message that human beings are essentially broken and that they are in need of a prothesis, of enhancement, of some kind of pharma or tech-based upgrade so as to correct their nasty, dirty, disgusting and flawed natural state of being.
The globalists clearly have satanic tendencies. An attack on our nature and human form is an attack on God’s creation. It’s an attack on the human soul…”
###
“But there’s something that you must consider. As dark as things may seem, I believe we’ve been given a gift — those of us who can see it at least . It’s an ability to see the truth.
And there has never been a greater privilege to be on the side of all that is good, righteous and beautiful in this life, all that is meaningful.
We get the opportunity to stand against the darkest, most powerful, insidious, satanic and psychotic evil that humanity has ever faced…”
###
“Those of us who see the truth have been called to defend this, no matter what the costs to ourselves and no matter how difficult the challenge may be. There is no higher a responsibility and no cause more noble. The challenge is so tremendously great because it is so worthwhile.”
This week on “James Corbett Redpills the Normies,” James talks to Alison Morrow, a self-described refugee from mainstream journalism who quit her 12-year career as an award-winning reporter after her attempts to report real news were consistently thwarted. (Learn more about Alison’s incredible story in this interview.) Today, Alison interviews James about the centralization of control, communication, and consciousness in the hands of an oligarchical elite and how we can combat their agenda.
[As a service to protect truth from censorship and to share widely, mirrored copies of this video are available at Truth Comes to Light BitChute, Brighteon, and Odysee channels. All credit, along with our sincere thanks, goes to the original source of this video. Please follow links provided to support their work.]
Millions of Face Masks Officially Declared Dangerous
This is not an article about whether face masks work.
As my readers know, for the past year I’ve been demonstrating that the SARS-CoV-2 virus has never been proven to exist. Therefore, face masks are nothing more (or less) than a mind-control ritual.
However, much has been written about the harm the masks cause.
And now we have an official declaration. On April 2, 2021, Health Canada issued an advisory, warning people not to “use face masks labelled to contain graphene or biomass graphene.”
Andrew Maynard covers this issue in a medium.com article, “Manufacturers have been using nanotechnology-derived graphene in face masks—now there are safety concerns.”
Those concerns? Masks could create lung problems.
Of course, since COVID-19 is claimed to be a lung disease, you can see where that leads: the remedy turns out to cause what it’s supposed to prevent. I could write a book detailing how many times this “coincidence” pops up in the field of medicine.
Maynard’s article traces the safety concerns to a Chinese mask manufacturer, Shandong, but points out that millions of graphene-containing masks are in use around the world, produced by a whole host of companies.
So far, it’s not clear whether the nanoparticles of graphene in the masks also contain metals—which are highly destructive.
The mainstream literature on graphene is ambiguous: yes, it’s probably toxic to the lungs; perhaps not seriously so; perhaps only temporarily; there are more questions than answers.
Since there are more questions, why have these masks been certified anywhere in the world for public use? Why haven’t the CDC and the WHO made definitive statements about safety concerns?
At materialstoday.com, we have, “Is graphene safe?”
“But, it is the very nature of graphene that might be cause for concern: thin and lightweight, yet tough and intractable particles are notoriously worrisome in terms of the detrimental effects they can have on our health, particularly when breathed in…”
“Ken Donaldson is a respiratory toxicologist at the University of Edinburgh and he and his colleagues are among the first to raise the warning flag on graphene, at least for nanoscopic platelets of the material. It is not too great a leap of the imagination to imagine how such tiny flakes of carbon might be transported deep within the lungs similar to asbestos fibres and coal dust. Once lodged within, there is no likely mechanism for the removal or break down of such inert particles and they might reside on these sensitive tissues triggering a chronic inflammatory response or interfering with the normal cellular functions.”
Does this make any sane person feel safe about wearing a mask and breathing in those graphene particles all day long?
In fact, you could rightly call the masks graphene-inhalation transporters.
“We have a new idea and a new product. It’s designed to force you to breathe in nanoparticles of graphene. Who knows? There might be health benefits. Try it and see.”
Yes, try it. And if you then develop a lung infection, since that is called a cardinal pandemic symptom, you could hit the jackpot and earn a diagnosis of COVID-19.
At which point the fun really begins, as you try to explain to your doctor that the cause isn’t a virus, but rather nanoparticles of graphene in your mask. If you play your cards right, you could end up in the psych ward with other “conspiracy theorists.”
“Can you believe it, nurse? I had this guy a few hours ago coughing and dripping mucus all over the place. Inflamed lungs. Classic COVID case. But he tells me he’s breathing in NANOPARTICLES. I gave him a sedative and sent him to the Crazy Pen. Where do these people get these stories? Have you ever heard of graphene? That’s what they put in pencils, right?”
“I don’t know, Doc. My cousin thinks she’s breathing in these nanos, too. I told her she needs a Thorazine drip.”
There’s a good chance the masks are COVID-diagnosis promoters. Step one: breathe in nanoparticles of graphene. Step two: therefore develop a so-called major COVID symptom—lung infection. Step three: test false-positive on the PCR test (happens millions of times, as I’ve documented). And boom, you’re a COVID case.
In keeping with local laws, I’ve applied for a license to own a mask as a weapon. If I gain approval, I plan to seal it in a glass box and mount it on the wall next to my grenade launcher and Civil War cannonball.
ANNAPOLIS, Maryland, May 27, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Citizens from all over Maryland descended on the state capital to protest an unconstitutional order mandating all students and employees in the University of Maryland system receive coronavirus vaccines before returning to school this fall.
“I’m opposed to mandating anyone to get this vaccination,” Maryland House Delegate Lauren Arikan told LifeSite’s Jim Hale, who was on the scene. “It’s still in its infancy in terms of research, and mandating things that are under emergency use authorization is inappropriate.”
Arikan said that families who have always gotten their children the full schedule of vaccines are saying, “‘Look, I gave my child every recommended vaccination. This one is not on the schedule for a reason: It hasn’t been studied yet, and so I’m not giving it to my child.’”
Arikan noted that these parents are pulling their money out of the state. “They’re not going to send their kids to a Maryland school now. That’s a big deal and we need the governor to listen to that.”
“The separation of people is a very bad idea. If you’re already vaxxed, you’re fine. You don’t have to worry about unvaccinated people,” said one young man who was holding an American flag.
“I just feel like this is just a straight up abuse of rights, abuse of power, and they need to be reeled back. Hard,” he advised. “Be strong. Stand up for yourself. And stop listening to the rules. Believe in yourself, not just the government.”
“Forced consent isn’t consent,” said one young woman.
“It’s not good to force a vaccine on people that hasn’t been sufficiently tested,” said another. “And with the moral concerns with aborted cell lines just doesn’t sound like a good idea.”
“It hasn’t even been FDA approved,” noted her friend, who indicated that people who have had serious negative reactions to the vaccine are being pushed out of sight.
“There’s a big temptation to just go ahead and take the vaccination rather than look into it,” she continued. “I feel it’s important to not just rush into it and be smart about it.”
A woman who has three kids – each of whom has had and recovered from COVID-19 – enrolled at three different Maryland university campuses said she worries about the side effects of the vaccine.
“I worry about the results of the vaccine. I know what the result of having COVID was for them because they’ve lived through it,” she said. Taking a vaccine that is not fully tested “is too big of a risk.”
“The safety trials won’t be completed until 2023,” she noted.
A man at the rally whose wife is an employee at the University of Maryland said that administrators told her in an email that they want her to be vaccinated by August 1.
“She is being threatened ‘get the vaccination or lose (your) job,’” he said.
“I’m here to protest the mandate that all University of Maryland system students have to take this experimental shot in order to go to classes on campus,” said Linda Kouroupis of Ellicott City, Maryland. “I think it’s wrong.”
“I’m very upset,” she continued. “I had a daughter go to College Park, my husband is an alumnus, I’m an alumnus of the grad school. I think it’s totally wrong. I’m doing as much as I can to stop it.”
“This is not going to stop after tonight,” she promised.
Another woman who introduced herself “as a mom and a grandmom” told LifeSite that mandating the vaccine for young people seems counterintuitive, especially since the risk from side effects is worse than the risk from contracting the virus.
“Is Big Pharma pushing this?” she wondered. “Why would you give somebody your money when all they want to do is give your kids an experimental shot?”
“The state law is very clear that you don’t have to take an experimental vaccine. That’s federal law as well,” said Maryland House Delegate Dan Cox, who explained that what is being attempted in the Old Line State is illegal.
“So when they’re talking about mandating and limiting students who exercise their rights for a medical, religious, or flat-out exemption that state law allows for college students … it’s not going to fly. That’s an illegality,” he said.
“Speak up. Don’t let anyone silence you or intimidate you into this,” said Cox. “You have a right to your own personal integrity. All you have to do is exercise it. Don’t waive those rights.”
“And when someone asks you if you’ve been vaxxed with this experiment, just smile back and remind them that’s your privacy,” he advised. “They don’t have a right to ask.”
Doctors and journalists all over the world are creating panic over the fungal infections currently alleged to be affecting people in India.
It is claimed by some that the fungal infections are a new symptom of covid-19.
Others say the fungal infections are caused by the over-prescribing of steroids for covid-19.
And yet more blame diabetes mellitus.
Both of these may contribute to the fungal problem but I do not believe they are the sole or even the main cause.
I believe this is yet more scare mongering designed to encourage people to accept one of the experimental pseudo-vaccines.
The alleged epidemic of fungal infections is caused by mask wearing. The problem is particularly prevalent in India where poor people cannot afford to buy new masks on a regular basis, thus the same mask is being worn again and again. Also, the hot weather, which increases sweating, exacerbates fungal infections in those wearing face masks.
I warned that this would happen nine months ago.
Fungi love dark, moist areas. That’s why fungi can grow in damp houses – particularly in bathrooms. Fungal infections grow in skin folds where there is little light but a good deal of moisture. Mushrooms grow in moist areas.
There are millions of types of fungi and more than one type can grow on the skin. When a mask is worn for more than two hours or so there is a huge risk that fungal growths will develop and will affect the skin, the nose, the mouth and the lungs.
The authorities don’t like to admit it but the fungal infections now affecting so many people are caused by the masks they are wearing. And, of course, masks are damaging immune systems – which increases susceptibility to all types of infection (bacterial and fungal in particular). Added to this, lockdowns and the covid ‘vaccine’ may also damage the immune system, leaving people susceptible to fungal infections and complications caused by fungal infections.
Here are relevant short extracts from my book Proof that Masks Do More Harm than Good:
1) Many people wear the same mask for more than two hours (which is dangerous), wear disposable masks more than once (which is dangerous), fail to wash cloth masks (which means they accumulate bacteria, fungi and viruses – all of which are breathed in) touch their mask while it is in position (which makes the mask even worse than useless), put masks into their pockets or handbags and then put them back on creased and grubby (a very dangerous thing to do since the wearer will then be breathing in whatever bugs have been transmitted to the mask.)
2) Leading German virologist Professor Streeck has criticised the use of masks, which he has said are a wonderful breeding ground for bacteria and fungi.
3) `I’m seeing patients that have facial rashes, fungal infections, bacterial infections,’ said Dr James Meehan. ‘Reports coming from my colleagues all over the world, are suggesting that the bacterial pneumonias are on the rise. Why might that be? Because untrained members of the public are wearing medical masks, repeatedly in a non-sterile fashion. They’re becoming contaminated. They’re pulling them off their car seat, off the rear-view mirror, out of their pocket, from their countertop, and they’re reapplying a mask that should be worn fresh and sterile every single time.’
The solution is simple. Persuade people to remove their masks.
The AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson COVID vaccines came under scrutiny again this week as more reports of deaths — largely due to blood clot disorders — surfaced in Belgium, Canada and Greece, and a new report linked the AstraZeneca vaccine to strokes in young adults.
The AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson (J&J) COVID vaccines came under scrutiny again this week as more reports of deaths — largely due to blood clot disorders — surfaced in Belgium, Canada and Greece.
Adding to the vaccine makers’ woes is a new report out of London from researchers who identified the first cases of strokes occurring in young adults who received the AstraZeneca vaccine, which was co-developed by the University of Oxford University in the UK.
Belgium suspends use of J&J vaccine
Belgium said Wednesday it was suspending vaccinations with J&J vaccine, for people under the age of 41, following the death of a woman from blood clots after she received the shot. This is the second time Belgium has paused the one-shot vaccine.
“The Inter-ministerial conference has decided to temporarily administer Janssen’s vaccine to the general population from the age of 41 years, pending a more detailed benefit-risk analysis by the EMA,” said a statement issued by Belgium’s federal health minister and seven regional counterparts.
The woman, who was under the age of 40, died May 21 after being admitted to the hospital with severe thrombosis and platelet deficiency, Reuters reported.
The government asked for urgent advice from the European Union’s drug regulator, the European Medicines Agency (EMA), before it would consider lifting the suspension.
The EMA said it is reviewing the death of the woman in Belgium, along with other reports of blood clots, with the Belgian and Slovenian medicines agencies, and has asked J&J to carry out a series of additional studies to help assess a possible link between the shot and rare blood clots.
J&J said April 20 it would resume the roll-out in the EU of its COVID vaccine, marketed under the company’s Janssen subsidiary — with a warning on its label — after several countries, including Belgium, first paused the vaccine amid concerns of its possible link to blood clotting disorders.
The EMA confirmed a “possible link,” but concluded the vaccine’s benefits outweighed the risks. The drug regulator’s safety committee (PRAC) said a warning should be added to the product label, but the blood clot-related disorders should be listed as “very rare” side effects of the vaccine.
On April 23, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) voted to resume the use of J&J’s vaccine without restrictions after the vaccine was paused to investigate reports of rare blood clots. The recommendation by the CDC’s advisory panel said the link between blood clots and J&J’s COVID vaccine was “plausible,” but concluded the vaccine’s benefits outweighed the risks and recommended use for persons 18 years of age and older in the U.S. under the FDA’s Emergency Use Authorization.
Researchers identify strokes in young adults after AstraZeneca shot
The first cases of large-vessel arterial occlusion strokes in young adults linked to AstraZeneca’s vaccine were described in detail for the first time in a letter published online in the Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery & Psychiatry.
“These are the first detailed reports of arterial stroke believed to be caused by VITT after the AstraZeneca COVID vaccine, although stroke has been mentioned previously in the VITT data,” senior author, Dr. David Werring, professor of clinical neurology at the Stroke Research Centre, University College London Queen Square Institute of Neurology, told Medscape Medical News.
“VITT has more commonly presented as CVST (cerebral venous sinus thrombosis) which is stroke caused by a venous thrombosis; these cases are showing that it can also cause stroke caused by an arterial thrombosis,” Werring explained.
Werring noted the reports do not add anything to the overall risk/benefit of the vaccine, as they are describing only three cases. “While VITT is very serious, the benefit of the vaccine still outweighs its risks,” he said.
The first case, a 35-year-old woman, experienced intermittent headaches on the right side and around her eyes for six days after vaccination. Five days later, she awoke feeling drowsy and with weakness to her left face, arm and leg.
Imaging revealed the woman had a blocked right middle cerebral artery with brain infarction and clots in the right portal vein. She underwent brain surgery to reduce the pressure in her skull, plasma removal and replacement, and treatment with anticoagulant and fondaparinux, but suffered brain stem death and subsequently died.
The second case, a 37-year-old woman, presented with headache, confusion, weakness in her left arm and loss of vision on the left side 12 days after vaccination with AstraZeneca. Imaging showed occlusion of both carotid arteries, as well as blood clots in her lungs and brain. She improved clinically with treatment.
The third case occurred in a 43-year-old man who presented 21 days after vaccination with problems speaking. Imaging showed a clot in the left middle cerebral artery. He was treated and remains stable.
The researchers said young patients presenting with ischaemic stroke after receiving AstraZeneca’s vaccine should urgently be evaluated for VITT.
Ontario man dies from ‘rare but real’ blood clot after first dose of AstraZeneca
An Ontario man in his 40s died after receiving his first dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine, public health officials confirmed Tuesday.
Dr. Barbara Yaffe, Ontario’s associate chief medical officer of health, said his death is being investigated, but the man suffered from VITT.
“While the investigation is ongoing and a final cause of death has yet to be officially determined, it has been confirmed that the individual did have VITT at the time of his death,” Yaffe said Tuesday. “The risks associated with this vaccine are [rare], but they are real.”
Chief Medical Officer Dr. David Williams restricted AstraZeneca vaccinations for people who have not yet received the first dose as of May 11, due to a higher-than-expected rate of blood clots.
Greece investigating four cases of blood clots after AstraZeneca shot
Α 63-year-old woman from Greece died of blood clots after vaccination with AstraZeneca. The case was one of four being investigated by the National Organization for Medicines (EOF) for a potential correlation between AstraZeneca’s vaccine and rare blood clots, according to the Greek City Times.
Also in Greece, a 44-year-old woman is in serious condition after experiencing VITT. Her case was the second incident found by EOF to be linked to the vaccine, according to the Greek Reporter.
A third blood clotting incident involved a 35-year-old man from Crete who suffered two blood clots after receiving AstraZeneca’s vaccine. The man was hospitalized after suffering a clot in his leg a few days after getting the jab. He suffered a second blood clot in his brain while hospitalized
As The Defender reported April 7, European regulators said they confirmed a “possible link” between AstraZeneca’s COVID vaccine and “very rare” blood clots, but concluded the benefits of the vaccine still outweigh the risks.
The EMA did not recommend restricting use of the vaccine based on age, gender or other risk factors, but did say cases of blood clotting after vaccination “should be” listed as a possible side effect, according to a statement issued by the agency’s safety committee.
The AstraZeneca vaccine is not yet authorized for use in the U.S.
Today James continues the discussion on “positive propaganda” by looking at some examples of #antiganda. Activists around the world are creating eye-catching messages designed to get people to question their conditioning. Here’s how you can join them.
One of two Facebook Insiders featured in Project Veritas’ recent #ExposeFacebook series that revealed the company’s censorship of vaccine concerns on a global scale has officially come out of the shadows.
Data Center Technician Morgan Kahmann felt compelled to speak out publicly and shine a light on Facebook’s decision to hide their censorship plans from users.
Kahmann informed Project Veritas of a Facebook decision to suspend and remove him from his office pending an “Investigatory Meeting” with Human Resources. Meeting was called off at the last minute.
Kahmann: “What happened was I was at work, and I got a message from my supervisor, out of the blue, basically saying ‘go ahead and wrap up your area and clean up your stuff, gather your personal belongings and meet me in a meeting room in the lobby of the building.’ They’re basically going to have me meet with the investigative team and grill me on this whole situation.”
Kahmann was able to secure additional internal Facebook documents before his suspension that confirm the “vaccine hesitancy” algorithm is live and being implemented globally across Facebook and Instagram platforms.
Kahmann hopes more are inspired to Be Brave, and Do Something about the wrongdoing they witness inside Big Tech, media, and government.
Kahmann is one of two Facebook insiders that came to Project Veritas with this information, and he explained in an interview how he found out about his suspension.
“What happened was I was at work, and I got a message from my supervisor, out of the blue, basically saying ‘go ahead and wrap up your area and clean up your stuff, gather your personal belongings and meet me in a meeting room in the lobby of the building,’” Kahmann said. “They’re basically going to have me meet with the investigative team and grill me on this whole situation.”
Kahmann also explained to Project Veritas what motivated him to blow the whistle on Facebook’s wrongdoing in the first place.
“What would happen if this [Facebook Vaccine Hesitancy Comment Demotion policy] was scaled larger and scaled to Twitter and the internet as a whole is way worse than anything that could happen from me getting fired from my job,” he said. “To me, that, it far outweighs that. Because it’s about more than me. It’s about really everyone in the world.”
Before being suspended, Kahmann secured additional internal Facebook documents showing that the Big Tech giant’s “vaccine hesitancy” policy has now been fully implemented.
He says that by doing what he did, more brave patriots working inside powerful institutions will come forward when they witness corruption.
“I think that the main reason why people don’t want to come out [as whistleblowers] — because what if I, you know, I have two kids, I have my wife, and if I lose my job, it’s like ‘what do I do?’ But that’s less of a concern to me.”
Lockheed Martin executives attended a three day ‘white male reeducation camp’.
During these brainwashing sessions, they were taught that racist “white male culture characteristics” include having “principles,” a “conscience,” working hard and having a “can-do attitude.”
People expect so many answers without giving anything back in return.
If the “tin foil hatters” are so nuts, how about the rule followers give some answers for once.
Explain how the flu disappeared but has been replaced with something which has the EXACT same symptoms.
Explain how the only proof that Covid exists is a computer modelled genome with zero physical proof.
Explain how you prove something into existence without going through an isolation or purification process.
Explain why no government agency has any quantifiable proof that “it” even exists.
Explain why they downgraded “Covid 19” to a non consequential infectious disease days before they declared a pandemic.
Explain how they pulled the coronavirus Act 2020 legislation out of their arseholes in a matter of days, despite the act being several hundred pages long.
Explain why they have to use bullshit criteria like “deaths for ANY reason within 28 days of a positive test”.
Explain why they banned autopsies.
Explain why they changed the law to allow any practitioner to diagnose covid through observation alone, even if it is done through video consultation.
Explain why undertakers have seen no difference in custom.
Explain how all cause mortality is at an all time low.
Explain how millions of protesters across the globe aren’t getting sick with “Covid.”
Explain how this is the only crisis that needs an advertising campaign paired with a constant barrage of repetitive brainwashing propaganda on the TV and in the streets.
Explain how tens of thousands of people stood on the streets of London last Saturday but it wasn’t once shown on ANY TV channel.
Explain how thousands were yelling “shame on you” outside the BBC HQ in both London, Manchester and Cardiff but it wasn’t shown on the TV?
Explain how the people who are wearing the masks and following the rules are the only ones who are catching “COVID”.
Explain how the creator of the PCR amplification tool is on record for stating that the PCR was not designed as a test for infectious diseases.
Explain why they are using the PCR to diagnose an infectious disease.
Explain why it’s been changed from Covid deaths, to covid infections to covid “cases” .
Explain how the “anti- vaxxers” are being blamed for the rise in “cases” when the only people who could possibly be contributing to the statistics are the people who are getting the “test” in the first place.
Explain why the hospitals were empty during the height of the “pandemic.”
Explain why 1000s of nurses are getting fired for saying that their hospitals were empty.
Explain why the hospitals are now filling up with vaccine adverse reactions but the MSM aren’t reporting it.
Explain why kids need to be vaccinated when, by your own definitions, covid isn’t dangerous to children.
Explain, if all the vulnerable people have already been vaccinated, why do all the healthy people need to get vaccinated if you’re already protected and the recovery rate was already 99.96% without the vaccine.
Explain why the average age of death with “Covid” is higher than the average age of death without.
Explain how you can get banned from Facebook and Twitter for sharing official government links.
Explain why there are several class actions in progress, taking governments across the globe to court for crimes against humanity, but there is zero MSM coverage.
Explain why most government leaders are reading from the same script.
Explain how all the things that you were laughing at us for talking about last year are now becoming a reality this year.
American Governors Sign Laws to Ban Vaccine Passports & Mandatory COVID-19 Vaccination
Governors from many American states are now framing a legal structure and are signing laws to ban Vaccine Passports and mandatory COVID-19 vaccination. Governors from Wyoming, South Carolina, Montana, South Dakota, Arizona, Idaho, and Texas have issued executive orders to prohibit Covid-19 Vaccine Passports, while North Dakota, South Carolina, Arkansas and Utah have passed bills into law to prohibit Vaccine Passport.
Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey and Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds signed the bills into law. They are joining other states that do not support Covid-19 Vaccine Passports at the state level.
On May 24, Ivey signed Senate Bill 267 (read below) into law. On May 20, Reynolds signed House File 889 into law.
“Since the development of the COVID-19 vaccine, both Dr. Harris [the state health officer] and I have said that we would not mandate vaccines in the state of Alabama. I am supportive of a voluntary vaccine, and by signing this bill into law, I am only further solidifying that conviction,” Ivey said in a statement.
Reynolds said she “strongly oppose[s] vaccine passports” last month and that she would like to take legislative or executive action.
These two laws are same and prohibit state agencies from issuing identifications to show personal vaccine records. It states that no government entities or businesses should need Vaccine Passport to offer service.
The Iowa version targets Covid-19 Vaccine Passports, while the Alabama version appears to be more than this.
Iowa requires that contracts or grants funded by state revenue should not be renewed or awarded with respect to a governmental entity or business that violates the law. The Alabama version does not offer any such punishment mechanism.
Two paths have been taken by states to counter vaccine passports including either via legislation or executive orders.
Governors from Wyoming, South Carolina, Montana, South Dakota, Arizona, Idaho, and Texas have issued executive orders to prohibit Covid-19 Vaccine Passports, while North Dakota, South Carolina, Arkansas and Utah have passed bills into law to prohibit Vaccine Passport.
Most of us have heard about ‘Vaccine Passports’ only after the pandemic, when different governments started emphasizing the requirement of ‘Vaccine Passports’ for travelling to other countries or even for going to public places.
What these roadmap talk about is not just some document that would restrict your entry or movement to certain places. What they envision is an entire COVID eco-system, a future where each and every aspect of your life is monitored and regulated as per the whims and fancy of these Pharma Overlords.
When we were leaving Oregon and researching states, we didn’t have the advantage of knowing how crazy or sane each state’s governor truly was. You guys, who are considering a move now, get to see which governors have handled the last year the best. I’m really glad we left Oregon, seeing how Kate Brown has treated Oregon residents and business owners.
Let’s be clear–I was not a fan of lockdowns or face covering mandates, at all. I think people need to breathe and should be able to make their own choices about whether they want to wear a mask or not, and whether they want to stay home or not. I think that vaccine passports will lead down a terrible, discriminatory, ugly path and I pray that our country does not implement them.
Assuming you’re still following and want to know more, let’s dive in and figure out which ones handled lockdowns, masks, and this whole vaccine passport idea the BEST, and WORST (ahem, Oregon). Also, it’s important to note how the stay-at-home-orders impacted people’s livelihoods, so I have included the current unemployment rate for each state.
While many do not want to admit that the virus restrictions have been political–it is clear, when you research the facts, that this has been very political. In general, states with Democrat governors had more restrictions and states with Republican governors had less. To show this point, I have marked states with Republican governors in red and Democrat governors in blue.
By the way, for the naysayers who believe we should lock down, wear masks and check everyone’s vaccination status from now until the end of time, I’ll also share the deaths per million residents of each state. In my opinion, the states that promoted freedom, don’t exactly look like they have “blood on their hands,” as some would say (talk about extreme rhetoric!). Okay, moving on…
The States, In Order (Best to Worst)
Based on scores from the data below, with COVID-19 Deaths per million listed next to every state. States at the top were the least restricted states and also the states that lost the least businesses and have the smallest unemployment numbers. The states at the bottom were the most restricted states and also have the highest unemployment rates and the highest number of businesses lost.
**Please Note** The COVID death counts did NOT increase because a state was less restrictive. NOR did COVID death counts decrease because a state locked down longer, shut down churches or banned HCQ.
**Also Note** When people say that the lockdowns and masks and banning of life-saving meds was “not political,” they’re lying. Look at the red vs blue states. Republican governors, in general, cared about freedom and Democrat governors, in general, ceased the opportunity to control their people. Again, their extreme control did not prevent deaths, which was what they told us they were doing. This has definitely been political.
Arkansas, under 2,000 per million
South Dakota, 2,000 per million or more
North Dakota, under 2,000 per million
Nebraska, under 1,500 per million
Utah, under 1,000 per million
Florida, under 2,000 per million
Iowa, under 2,000 per million
South Carolina, under 2,000 per million
Tennessee, under 2,000 per million
Alabama, 2,000 per million or more
Ohio, under 2,000 per million
Wyoming, under 1,500 per million
Georgia, under 2,000 per million
Missouri, under 2,000 per million
Idaho, under 1,500 per million
Indiana, 2,000 per million or more
Texas, under 2,000 per million
Arizona, 2,000 per million or more
Alaska, under 1,000 per million
Wisconsin, under 1,500 per million
Kansas, under 2,000 per million
Oklahoma, under 2,000 per million
Montana, under 2,000 per million
West Virginia, under 2,000 per million
Mississippi, 2,000 per million or more
New Hampshire, under 1,000 per million
Pennsylvania, 2,000 per million or more
Colorado, under 1,500 per million
Louisiana, 2,000 per million or more
Michigan, 2,000 per million or more
Kentucky, under 1,500 per million
Vermont, under 1,000 per million
Minnesota, under 1,500 per million
Maryland, under 1,500 per million
North Carolina, under 1,500 per million
Massachusetts, 2,000 per million or more
Virginia, under 1,500 per million
Connecticut, 2,000 per million or more
Rhode Island, 2,000 per million or more
Maine, under 1,000 per million
Delaware, under 2,000 per million
Washington, under 1,000 per million
Nevada, under 2,000 per million
Illinois, under 2,000 per million
District of Columbia, under 2,000 per million
New Mexico, under 2,000 per million
Hawaii, under 1,000 per million
Oregon, under 1,000 per million
New Jersey, 2,000 per million or more
New York, 2,000 per million or more
California, under 2,000 per million
Our state, Virginia, isn’t doing so hot! BUT! We moved from Oregon (#48) to Virginia (#37), so at least we’ve moved up in the world! ?
Where do you want to live, now?
THE DETAILS
If you’d like to know how each state ranked in each area, here are the details! This is a very long post!
Mask Mandates
In my opinion, mask mandates have been ridiculous, unproven, government overreach. While some states have were lenient when it came to people with health conditions or the hearing impaired, some states required masks no matter what, even outdoors, and on athletic fields.
States that Did Not Mandate Masks Note that some of these states did have mask mandates in particular cities or counties.
Alaska, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Wyoming
States that are Expected to End their Mask Mandates Soon
Massachusetts, Ohio, Tennessee, West Virginia
States that STILL Have Mask Mandatesas of May 22, 2021
California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington
Stay at Home Orders
In all situations through history, the sick were quarantined, NOT the healthy. In my opinion, stay at home orders were a crazy, controlling, unproven decision.Some governors kept the stay-at-home orders going for too long, while others never imposed such orders.
States that Did Not Impose Stay at Home Orders
Arkansas, Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming
States with Stay at Home Orders Lasting 30 Days or Less
Alabama, Alaska, Georgia, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas
States with Stay at Home Orders Lasting 40 Days or Less
Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Nevada, West Virginia
States with Stay at Home Orders Lasting 50 Days or Less
Arizona, Indiana, Maryland, Rhode Island, Washington, Wisconsin
States with Stay at Home Orders Lasting More than 50 Days
California, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Oregon, Vermont
States with Stay at Home Orders Lasting More than 60 Days
Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania
States with Stay at Home Orders Lasting More than 70 Days
Michigan, New Jersey, Virginia
Business Shut Downs
Nearly every state ordered restaurants and “non-essential”businesses to shut down. This title, “Non-essential,”was also used in World War II–by Hitler and the Nazis. There was no place for this kind of government overreach and these measures have caused many small businesses to close down.
The Only States that Did Not Shut Down Restaurants
South Dakota, Nebraska (Restricted but not shut down)
States that Did Not Shut Down “Non-Essential” Businesses
Arkansas, Nebraska, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming
Businesses Lost
Shutting down businesses leads to the permanent loss of businesses, as all states are experiencing to some degree.
States that were Not Included On a List of States that Lost the Most Businesses
Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, Tennessee, Utah
States that Lost Less than 150 Businesses Per Million Residents
Delaware, Mississippi, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, West Virginia
States that Lost Less than 200 Businesses Per Million Residents
Alabama, Alaska, Connecticut, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Wisconsin
States that Lost More than 200 Businesses Per Million Residents
Arizona, Florida, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, Wyoming
States that Lost More than 250 Businesses Per Million Residents
Colorado, Oregon, Washington
States that Lost More than 300 Businesses Per Million Residents
California, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Nevada
Gathering Restrictions
Most states limited groups of people from meeting. Each state varied in the number of people who could gather, and some states prohibited gatherings entirely.
States that Restricted Gatherings to 50 People
Arizona, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota
Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas,Colorado, District of Columbia,Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine,Maryland, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska,Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Wyoming
States that Restricted Gatherings to 5 People
New Mexico
States that Restricted All Gatherings
California, Connecticut, Delaware, Idaho, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin
School Closures
The shut downs impacted children, too. As of Spring 2021, this is where each state stands on schools reopening.
States that Have Required Schools to Reopenor at Least Some Grades to Reopen
Arkansas, Florida, Iowa, Texas, West Virginia
States that are Allowing Districts to Decide About Reopening
Alabama, Alaska, Arizona,Colorado, Connecticut,Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota,Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, Wyoming
States that Have Partial Closures in Effect
California, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, New Mexico
Church Closures
Americans have the right to assemble, and the governor should not make any laws or restrictions on this right, no matter what. Closing down churches was unconstitutional government overreach.When bars and casinos were allowed to open but churches were not, it became very clear that this was indeed, political.
As of September 2020
States with No Church Restrictions
Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming
States that Restricted Church Gatherings to 500 People
Alaska
States that Limited Church Gatherings to 75%Capacity
Louisiana
States that Limited Church Gatherings to 250 People
Minnesota
States that Limited Church Gatherings to 50% Capacity
Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, Washington
States that Restricted Church Gatherings to 150 People
New Jersey
States that Restricted Church Gatherings to 125 People
Rhode Island
States that Restricted Church Gatherings to 100 People
California, Connecticut, District of Columbia
States that Restricted Church Gatherings to 50 People
States that Limited Church Gatherings to 25% Capacity
New Mexico
States that Restricted Church Gatherings to 10 People
New York
States that Banned Singing in Church
California
Last State to Lift the Ban on Church Services
New Jersey
As of April 2020
States with No Church Restrictions
Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Michigan, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia
States that Restricted Church Gatherings to 50 People
Connecticut
States that Restricted Church Gatherings to 25 People
Oregon
States that Restricted Church Gatherings to 10 People
Alabama, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland,Massachusetts,Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming
States that Restricted Church Gatherings to 5 People
Rhode Island
States that Banned Church Gatherings Altogether
Alaska, California, Idaho, Illinois, Kentucky, Minnesota, Montana, New Jersey, New York, Vermont, Washington
Unemployment Rates
All of the closures, of course, impacted unemployment rates.
States with Unemployment RatesUnder 3.0
Nebraska, New Hampshire, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont
District of Columbia, Illinois, Louisiana, New Jersey, Pennsylvania
States with Unemployment Rates Over 8.0 (The Highest in the Country)
California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Nevada, New Mexico, New York
States that Banned or Restricted a Potentially Life-Saving Medication
Hydroxychloroquine suddenly became a political drug when President Trump mentioned it in a press briefing. Even though it showed promise in preventing extreme cases of the virus, some states decided to ban the medication. Many believe the governors who did this caused unnecessary deaths.
States that Allowed the Use of HCQ for COVID-19 or Did Not Prohibit It
District of Columbia, Indiana, Iowa, Maryland,Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, Wyoming
States that Banned or Restricted HCQ Use for COVID-19
Arizona, California, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire, New York, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, West Virginia
Vaccine Passports
Vaccine passports are a scary concept! If we need a vaccine passport to get on a public bus or to enter a store, I believe we will be very near to Jesus returning. We can’t know the day or the hour, but end times prophecy will be lining up…
States that have Banned Vaccine Passports
Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Wyoming
States that have Discussed Banning Vaccine Passports
Alaska, Delaware,Georgia, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Wisconsin
States that are Unsure or have Mixed Policies about Vaccine Passports
Connecticut, Colorado, Kansas, Maine,Maryland, Massachusetts,Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oklahoma,Vermont, West Virginia
States that have Discussed Issuing Vaccine Passports
California,Colorado, Illinois, New Jersey, Virginia
States that are Working On or Have Issued Vaccine Passports or Have Made it Necessary for People to Show their Vaccine Card (Effectively, Vaccine Passports)
Hawaii, New York, Oregon, Washington
COVID-19 Deaths
One might expect that no mask mandates and no stay home orders would mean more deaths. This hasn’t necessarily been the case.
Arkansas, California, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, West Virginia
States with 2,000 Deaths per Million or More
Alabama, Arizona, Connecticut, Indiana, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, New York, New Jersey,Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota
Some Individual State Notes
When I found interesting information about each state’s requirements, I shared them here:
Alabama
“Businesses are not required to deny entry to people who aren’t wearing a mask, but they retain the right to do so.”
“The order doesn’t apply to people with a medical condition or disability that prevents him or her from wearing a facial covering.”
“The facial-covering requirement does not apply to people who are actively engaged in exercise or athletic activities.”
However, “The penalty for violating the order can result in a $500 fine and/or jail time.”
“Exceptions for exercise. The facial-covering requirement does not apply to:
3
(i) Any person who is actively engaged in exercise in a gym or other athletic facility
if he or she maintains six feet of separation from persons of another household;
(ii) Any person who is directly participating in athletic activities in compliance with
paragraph 11 of this order; or
(iii) Any person who is in a swimming pool, lake, water attraction, or similar body of
water, though wearing a face covering or social distancing is strongly encouraged
if safe and practicable.
c. Exceptions for effective communication. The facial-covering requirement does not
apply to:
(i) Any person who is seeking to communicate with another person where the ability
to see the person’s mouth is essential for communication (such as when the other
person has a hearing impairment); or
(ii) Any person speaking for broadcast or to an audience if the person maintains six
feet of separation from persons from another household.
d. Exceptions to facilitate constitutionally protected activity. The facial-covering
requirement does not apply to:
(i) Any person who is voting, though wearing a face covering is strongly
encouraged; or
(ii) Any person who cannot wear a facial covering because he or she is actively
providing or obtaining access to religious worship, though wearing a face
covering is strongly encouraged.
e. Exceptions for essential job functions. The facial-covering requirement does not apply
to:
(i) Any first responder (including law enforcement officers, firefighters, or
emergency medical personnel) if necessary to perform a public-safety function; or
(ii) Any person performing a job function if wearing a face covering is inconsistent
with industry safety standards or a business’s established safety protocols.”
Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson said at a news conference on March 16 that restaurants can remain open “on their own choosing and based upon market demand”. Source
California
“For outdoor activities,” what Ghaly called “mega outdoor events” with attendance of more than10,000, he announced, “We are recommending that those operators have a system to verify vaccination or verify.” Operators of those events can also “give that person an option to come into the event and wear a mask.” Source
Delaware
“There are challenges with respect to mostly enforcement because you don’t know who’s vaccinated or not,’’ he said. “We’re not going to be in the business of asking people for a so-called vaccine passport.”
“Here in Iowa, we will protect Iowans from being forced by tyrannical governments to inject their body with chemicals that they may or may not wish to have,” state Sen. Jake Chapman (R), said, according to the Register.”
“I really think the focus for us and for the commonwealth generally should be on getting everybody who wants to get vaccinated vaccinated as quickly as we possibly can. There’s plenty of time to talk about some of this other stuff,” Baker said during the press briefing in Revere.”
“I was asked about the vaccination passport, if I was open-minded to it at one point. I said ‘Yeah, that’s something that I’d be open minded to,’” said the governor. “I don’t want anyone to think that we’re up here pounding the table, to think that this is something we unquestionably support. The CDC is the place that that discussion and that guidance has to come from.”
“Hoverson said that “The mask is a part of a larger apparatus of a movement of unelected, wealthy bureaucrats, who are robbing our freedoms and perpetuating lies.” He also reportedly said, “Our state is not a prison camp.”
“In order to meet the CDC guidance that someone who is vaccinated does not need to wear a mask, or keep their distance, we need to know who is vaccinated. We need someone to disclose their vaccination status so they can remove their mask in a setting and not keep their distance,” Dr. Sidelinger said.”
You would think that during the worst Pandemic since the 1918 Spanish Flu life insurance companies would be hedging their bets to avoid major losses from Covid-19. I haven’t written a life policy for several years so I was wondering what was going on? I called one of the brokers I deal with that interacts with hundreds of big life insurers to get an inside look into how the Covid crisis has changed their business.
Imagine my surprise when she said it was pretty much business as usual! Last year when the hysteria was just getting ramped up she did say the companies temporarily tightened up underwriting and reduced the amount of coverage they would offer. But as time went by and the hard data came rolling in those same companies went back to business as usual.
I asked her specifically if life insurers wanted a Covid test as part of the underwriting process and she said none that she was aware of. Hmm, that’s pretty interesting isn’t it? The most lethal pandemic in decades descends on the globe with deadly mutations taking millions of innocent lives and the life insurance companies couldn’t care less.
I also asked if the cost per thousand of coverage had increased due to Covid and again she said no. Rates were pretty much the same as they were before the Covid Pandemic ravaged the earth. Life Insurance companies are very risk adverse. They don’t like losing money to unnecessary claims. The fact they’re treating Covid as a nonevent should be an indicator that something is very wrong with the whole narrative.
