People across this country and around the world are having horrible adverse effects or dying after taking this injection called an mRNA “vaccine.” It is not a vaccine at all, it is a bioweapon meant to cause any number of problems and death in order to satisfy the agendas of those few that claim to be the ruling class.
The elderly have been the hardest hit so far, because they are the first to be targeted with this weapon, and they already have in many cases, co-morbidities and compromised immune systems. The perpetrators of this “vaccine” policy fully understand this, and are attempting to claim that this injection has nothing to do with the very high percentage dying very quickly after taking the shot. This is the easiest group to target, because the state can manipulate the narrative much more effectively due to the age and weakened health condition of this targeted group. In addition, they are a captured control group that can be used for experimental purposes, and in the process, also be made much more vulnerable due to this captured state and close contact situation. This is by design. The evil Andrew Cuomo was able to take advantage of this tactic when he forced most all the people in nursing homes in New York to remain locked up together, even moving very many sick patients into these homes. That was simply a type of premeditated murder.
Mass injection at nursing homes is causing high percentages of deaths in a very short amount of time. The injection itself seems to be causing fatal sicknesses in these patients, causing stark changes in their health immediately, all leading to death.
These mRNA shots are not vaccines, but delivery systems meant to harm, control, and kill. No one knows the long-term and gene-altering effects of these poisons, so beginning with the elderly for this experiment was planned all along, and for obvious reasons. When the old and infirmed die, little attention is paid by this now indifferent and frightened population. Months or years from now when the long term effects begin to cause death in the younger and healthier crowd, it will all be blamed on some new or mutated virus strain, when in fact, it is likely that the fatal effects will have been due to vaccination of this bioweapon.
By using false PCR testing at high cycle rates, the old will be said to have Covid, when no such thing has ever been purified, isolated, or identified, and therefore does not exist. After testing positive, the deadly “vaccine” is given, and when the inevitable death occurs, it will be blamed on Covid. The narrative (propaganda) will then be that they had Covid so could not have died from the injection. How convenient for the state. They kill these poor people, and then use the deaths to further their agendas of fear in order to control all. These are evil psychopaths without any conscience or soul.
The highest percentage of deaths to date have been in nursing homes, but these deaths due to the state and its criminal partners in the pharmaceutical industry are being caused in most part by this toxic mRNA concoction that is more akin to a bioweapon than a vaccine.
Brian Shilhavy, editor at Health Impact News, has written about and described this situation thoroughly in his article titled:
There is much research and information in this article, and what should be taken from all that is going on is to avoid this deadly bioweapon called a “vaccine” at all costs!
A LANDMARK legal decision declared that regional containment policies – including lockdowns, social distancing, prohibitions on gatherings by family or friends are UNCONSTITUTIONAL. The judge called the lockdowns a “catastrophically wrong political decision with dramatic consequences for almost all areas of people’s lives.”
The judge ruled that the government violated the “inviolably guaranteed human dignity” under basic German law. This momentous, affirmative, liberating decision was handed down by a court of law in Weimar, Germany; the city whose name was adopted by the first German republic: 1919—1933, until it was overturned by the Nazi regime. Hundreds of thousands of German people have demonstrated throughout the summer and fall of 2020, some protesters compared their struggle to anti-Nazi resistance; which led Germany’s Foreign Minister Heiko Maas to bristle.
Forensic analysis of official data convinced the court that the epidemic situation that was used to justify the lockdown laws does not exist. The judge ruled that the government lacked sufficient legal grounds to impose the restrictions since there was no “epidemic situation of national importance.” He declared that the measures were an attack on the “foundations of our society.”
Dr. Reiner Fuellisch
Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, the lawyer who initiated the first German and American complaints and procedures stated:
“We consider this judgment to be extraordinary and of fundamental importance. It is transferable to all violations of Covid19 measures. It is also transferable to the current Renewed Containment and all applicable coronavirus regulations. Because the “numbers of cases” are decreasing, as are patients in intensive care units! The judge confirms this with an excellent demonstration.”
The battle over government dictatorial overreach and the assault on the rights and dignity of citizens in a democracy will be won in the courts of law.
The decision has been described by German media as “politically explosive”!
Below Dr. Nicole Delépine, MD, provides an in-depth analysis of the body of evidence that supports this momentous decision. She notes that one factor that helped Germany resist the epidemic better than other countries – such as France – is probably due to the early treatment of patients with hydroxychloroquine, antibiotics, vitamins, etc. She concludes that This crisis is purely political with a health pretext.
* Dr. Delépine is a member of the Distinguished Advisory Board of the Alliance for Human Research Protection.
Nicole Delepine, MD
After PCR tests, the principle of confinement condemned by justice. Published on 1/26/2021 3:50 PM
German court declares regional lockdown UNCONSTITUTIONAL, politically major decision
Author (s): Nicole Delépine for FranceSoir
Tribune: German court declares regional containment UNCONSTITUTIONAL, politically major decision [1]
Will Weimar again be the site of legal revolutions as at the time when the constitution ending the empire was drawn up after the First World War? [2] In any case, the judgment declaring confinement unconstitutional caused a stir in Germany and gave rise to several articles. Let us hope that it will also awaken French consciences, giving them the courage to take legal action against these liberticidal and unjustified measures inspired by the WHO which guides our governments [3] and promises them financial aid via the IMF like the President of Belarus has clearly stated [4] .
The Weimar judgment considered major
The social distancing rules imposed by the Thuringian government are deemed incompatible with the country’s Constitution. Thanks to forensic analysis of official data, the judgment affirms that the epidemic situation used to justify the law does not exist. The lawyer Reiner Fuellmich who initiated the first German and American complaints and procedures comments as follows [5] : “ We consider this judgment to be extraordinary and of fundamental importance. It is transferable to all violations of Covid19 measures. It is also transferable to the current Renewed Containment and all applicable coronavirus regulations. Because the “numbers of cases” are decreasing, as are patients in intensive care units! The judge confirms this with an excellent demonstration . ”
Story
On the occasion of a judgment of a man having according to the accusation “violated” (here is a very big word), the strict confinement imposed by the government of the central state of Thuringia last spring, the legality of the measures imposed in Germany to curb an epidemic of questionable severity is back in the headlines. This is all the more interesting given that some countries, including ours talk about containment while the epidemic is stagnating or decreasing, that there are effective early treatments and that the overwhelming majority of hospitals are not full, contrary to what our authorities announce here and there.
Facts
This gentleman had celebrated a birthday with his seven [6] friends. On 24.04.2020, the person concerned was in the evening with at least seven other people in the backyard of the house X-Straße 1 in W. to celebrate the birthday of one of the participants. The eight participants in total were distributed among seven different households. However, a stay in public space is only authorized alone, in the circle of members of his own household and, moreover, at most with another non-domestic person ”according to local regulations.
The Weimar judge condemned a restriction limiting private gatherings to members of the same household and to a person outside of the same household, a rule which the accused had not respected. The judge said that the regional government itself had violated the “inviolably guaranteed human dignity” guaranteed by Article 1 of the German Basic Law by imposing such restrictions.
The accused was acquitted and relieved of the need to pay a fine of 200 euros ($ 243).
No sufficient reason for confinement
According to the court, the government did not have sufficient grounds to impose these restrictions since there was no “epidemic situation of national importance” at the time and the health system was not at risk of failure. collapse, the Robert Koch Institute having reported that the multiplication coefficient of Covid-19 had then fallen below 1.
At no time is there any real danger that the health service will be overwhelmed by a “wave” of patients with COVID-19. According to the register established on March 17, 2020, an average of at least 40% of intensive care beds in Germany were permanently available. In Thuringia, 378 beds were registered occupied on April 3, 36 of which were in covid-19 patients. During this time, there were 417 vacant beds. On April 16, two days before the publication of the regulation, 501 beds were recorded occupied, 56 covid-19, and 528 beds were vacant … Thuringia recorded its highest number of covid-19 patients notified in the spring at 63 (April 28). Thus, at no time has the number of patients with COVID-19 reached a level that could have justified fears of an overflow of the health system.
This estimate of the real dangers of COVID-19 in spring 2020 is confirmed by an assessment of data from 421 clinics belonging to the Qualitätsmedizin Initiative, which found that the number of cases of acute respiratory infections (severe ARI) hospitalized in Germany in first half of 2020 was 187,174 – lower than the figure for the first half of 2019 (221,841 cases), even though that figure included cases of ARI caused by covid. The same analysis showed that the number of cases in intensive care was lower in the first half of 2020 than in 2019 …
The judge also said that the regional government did not have the right to introduce such far-reaching measures since it was for the legislator to do so (parliament and not district courts).
The Weimar court said the spring containment of Thuringia was a “catastrophically flawed policy decision, with dramatic consequences for almost every area of people’s lives . ” [7]
Health situation and confinement: disproportionate decision
The confinement imposed in Thuringia represents “the most complete and deepest restrictions on fundamental rights in the history of the Federal Republic, ” the court said, calling these measures a ” disproportionate ” attack against the ” foundations of our society. ”
Consequences of a regional ordinance
The decision is not legally binding outside of Weimar, although each German court can render a judgment on the constitutionality of orders issued by any authority other than the Bundestag, federal parliament or regional parliament. Unless a law has been passed, each court can contradict the regulations if they appear unjustified
Impact of the Weimar judgment among some officials and local media
Like the other countries submitted to the WHO’s international health council, containment measures are regularly re-imposed, and clearly unrelated to the virulence of the epidemic, which varies depending on the region, but faithfully following Ferguson’s scheme, which had been planned in March 2020 (report 9) the succession of six confinements, in order to be able to move on to the major reset planned by the economic and world forum in Davos (read Klaus Schwab’s brief available on the internet of the same name ). This crisis is purely political with a health pretext.
Germany is once again applying strict containment quite similar to that imposed by the federal government in November and which has been extended and reinforced several times since then [8] . Chancellor Angela Merkel’s cabinet extended the restrictions until mid-February.
Neil Ferguson Dire Prediction
Appeal of the region against the judgment of the Weimar court
The Thuringian Regional Public Prosecutor’s Office lodged a complaint against the court decision, requesting that it be reconsidered and possibly overturned, with the case being handed over to another judge. The judgment must be “revised to develop the law and ensure a unified jurisdiction” regarding the containment and its violation, a spokesperson for the prosecutor’s office, Hannes Gruenseisen, told local media.
Containment is going badly in Germany, especially since the country has resisted the epidemic much better than France, probably due to the early and discreet treatment of patients with hydroxychloroquine, antibiotics and vitamins, etc., from the start, isolation patients, and consequently suffers [9] a lower mortality rate (622 / million at 26/1, according to the WHO. France on the contrary has prohibited early treatment and practiced so-called blind confinement because mixing patients and healthy leading to an explosion of direct (1113 / M) and indirect mortality due to lack of care and other complications of confinement.
Comparison of Mortality — France vs Germany
Germany has seen protests against this measure on several occasions in various cities during the fall and winter of 2020. At one point, protesters even compared their struggle to anti-Nazi resistance, which did not go over well with Germany’s Foreign Minister Heiko Maas.
Rationale for quashing the charge
The person concerned had to be acquitted for legal reasons because the articles on which the accusation was based are unconstitutional and therefore canceled. [10]
The court itself decided on the constitutionality of the norms, since the obligation of submission according to the consistent case law of the Federal Constitutional Court applies only to official federal and state laws, but not to district statutory orders.
The judge concluded that there were no “unacceptable gaps in protection” that could have justified resorting to general regulations. These measures “violate the inviolable guaranteed human dignity” in article 1, paragraph 1 of the Federal Constitution. “
“Devastating accusation against the federal government .
It is striking how coldly Judge Weimar concluded this months-long discussion: the blanket contact ban is a harsh civil rights intervention. It is part of the fundamental freedoms of the individual in a free society to determine for himself with whom (on presumption of consent) and under what circumstances he or she will come into contact.
The free encounter between people for all conceivable ends is also a fundamental basis for society.
The state’s obligation in this case is categorically to refrain from any intervention that deliberately regulates and limits that measure. Questions of how many people a citizen can invite to their home or how many people a citizen can meet in a public place to walk, play sports, run errands or sit on a park bench have absolutely no legitimate interest for the state.
By imposing a blanket ban on contact,the state – albeit with good intentions – attacks the foundations of society by imposing physical distance between citizens (“social distancing”).
No one, even in January 2020, could have imagined, in Germany, to be prevented by the state under penalty of a fine from inviting their parents to their home without banning other members of their family from the house, while that they were there. No one could have imagined that it would be forbidden to sit with three friends on a park bench. Never before in Germany had the state had the idea of imposing such measures to counter an epidemic.
Even the 2013 risk analysis “Pandemic caused by the SARS-like virus” (Bundestag publication 17/12051), which described a scenario of 7.5 million deaths in 3 years, does not consider a general ban on contacts (or ban on leaving home or general suspension of public life). Besides the quarantine and isolation of infected people, the only anti-epidemic measures he speaks of are the closure of schools, the cancellation of mass events and the question of hygiene recommendations (BT 17/12051, p . 61f).
“Although it appears that a shift in values has taken place over the months of the Covid crisis, with the consequence that many people find procedures once considered absolutely exceptional more or less ‘normal’ – which, of course, also changes the outlook on the Constitution – there is no doubt that by imposing a blanket contact ban, the democratic parliament has broken what was previously considered an obvious taboo.
“It should also be noted – as an aspect worthy of special attention – that the state, by imposing its general ban on contact in order to protect itself against infection, treats every citizen as a potential health threat. of third parties. If every citizen is seen as a threat from which others must be protected, that citizen is also deprived of the possibility of deciding what risks to take – which is a fundamental freedom.
A citizen’s choice to visit a cafe or bar at night and run the risk of respiratory infection in the name of social interaction and fun in life, or to exercise caution because he has a weakened immune system and therefore prefers to stay at home, is suppressed under the provisions of a general contact ban. “
The report then details the judge’s examination of the collateral damage caused by the confinement.
– Declines in profits, losses suffered by companies, traders and independent professionals as direct consequences of the restrictions imposed on their freedoms. Losses for suppliers of directly affected companies; losses resulting from disruption of supply chains leading to production stoppages; losses resulting from travel restrictions.
-Wage losses due to reduced hours or unemployment
– Bankruptcies and destruction of livelihoods and consequent costs of bankruptcies and destruction of livelihoods ”.
For Berlin, the Senate administration reported a 23% increase in child abuse for the first half of 2020 [12] .
According to a representative survey (Steinert / Ebert), during the spring confinement period, around 3 percent of women in Germany were victims of physical violence at home, 3.6 percent were raped by their partner, and in 6 , 5 percent of all children’s homes were severely punished.
The number of statistically recorded suicides in Germany is not yet available for 2020, but the Senate administration in Berlin has reported a potentially significant increase in the number of suicides.
During the spring containment, more than 908,000 operations were canceled in Germany, not only so-called non-emergency operations, such as implantation of knee and hip joint prostheses, knee arthroscopy, cataract surgeries, etc., but also 52,000 cancer operations. [13]
According to a meta-analysis published (British Medical Journal) in November [14] this delay already increases the risk of death by 6 to 13% depending on the type of cancer, an eight week delay for breast cancer of 13%, a twelve-week deferral of 26 percent. Without being able to quantify in more detail, there is no doubt that the cancellation of the operations also resulted in deaths in Germany.
A study conducted by the Clinique du Haut-Rhin Waldshut-Tiengen [15] examined excess mortality in the district of Waldshut (170,000 inhabitants) in April 2020. On average, 165 people died there between 2016 and 2019 in April, compared to 227. in 2020, an excess mortality of 37%. Of the 62 additional deaths, only 34 could be associated with covid19, 28, or 45% of excess mortality are due to other causes of death . The study authors attribute these cases to reduced use of emergency medical facilities. Twice as many people have been found dead in their homes than the comparative average. These figures indicate that deaths are due to underutilization or delay in the use of health care.
Short, medium and long term damages were pointed out by the court
(1) Loss of schooling, teaching and impairment of psychosocial development of children due to failure or restrictions of school education or closure of other educational institutions
(2) Loss of cultural suggestions or experiences due to the closure of theaters, concert halls or opera houses and many other cultural institutions
(3) Loss of possibilities for artistic development by prohibitions which prohibit common music in orchestras or choirs.
(4) loss of community experiences / personal social cohabitation by banning meetings in associations, demonstrations, gatherings, closing bars, etc.
(5) Reduction of social development opportunities for children by closing kindergartens
(6) Isolation of children in accommodation without contact with other children by closing schools, kindergartens and play areas
The judgment report emphasizes that school is not only a place for the transmission of knowledge, but a place of social learning. School closures virtually suppress social learning and hinder the integration of children and young people.
Teaching by parents is difficult, particularly in certain disadvantaged areas. The social divide is therefore reinforced. The learning of German among children of migrant families is also seriously disrupted. “Knowledge of German? Catastrophic for a third of the pupils [16] .
Economic consequences of containment According to the Weimar judgment, we note
“(1) Aid provided by the Federal State and the Länder to economic agents
(2) Tax losses due to the limitation of economic activity due to confinement
(3) Partial unemployment benefits and unemployment benefits that had to be paid following confinement
(4) Social assistance for people dependent on social assistance
The “coronavirus shield”, a legislative package adopted on March 27, 2020, in Germany alone represented 1.173 billion euros (353.3 billion euros in aid, 819.7 billion euros in guarantees). The latest federal budgets were 356.4 billion euros (2019) and 346.6 billion euros (2018). Even if the guarantees provided are not per se “lost”, the overall charges are expected to reach the aggregate level of several federal budgets.
Health and economic damage in southern countries secondary to confinements in rich western countries
The collateral damage already occurred or to be expected is enormous. The reasons are the interruption of tuberculosis control programs, childhood disease immunization programs, interruptions in food supply due to collapsed supply chains, etc.
The UN predicts the famine of more than 10,000 children per month during the first year of the pandemic (more than 10,000 children die of hunger each month due to covid19 [17]
In Africa alone, according to Federal Development Minister Müller,400,000 additional victims are expected from malaria and HIV and half a million deaths from tuberculosis as a result of confinement (more victims by confinement than by virus: In Africa, crises have been dramatically worsened, according to an article by John Ioannidis [18] 1.4 million more deaths from tuberculosis are even expected over the next five years .
In the long term, containment-related excess mortality will likely be significantly larger than the death toll from COVID 19.
Since the containment policy in Thuringia is part of a general policy of almost all western industrialized countries, this damage is the indirect consequence also attributable to the pro rata and is therefore in principle linked to the examination of proportionality .
For this reason alone, the standards to be assessed here do not meet the requirement of proportionality. Added to this are the direct and indirect restrictions on freedom, gigantic financial damage, immense damage to health and spiritual damage.
The word ” disproportionate ” is too colorless to indicate the dimensions of what happened. The containment policy implemented by the Land government in the spring (and today again), of which the general ban on contact was (and remains) essential, is a catastrophic political error, with dramatic consequences for almost all sectors of human life, for society, for the State and for the countries of the South of the whole world ”.
Constitutionality of standards
In the case of legal ordinances which have not been adopted by the Bundestag or a regional parliament, each court is authorized to decide for itself their constitutionality. The articles cited [19] by the prosecution are not constitutional, because they are not based on a law passed in parliament.
They are unconstitutional for formal reasons, as provisions which deeply infringe on fundamental rights are not covered by the legal enabling basis in the Infection Protection Act.
The legislator must himself take all the essential decisions in fundamental normative fields, in particular in the field of the exercise of fundamental rights – insofar as this state regulation is accessible – and must not delegate them to the executive. regional.
The more essential legal regulations or other executive acts interfere with fundamental rights, the more specific the provisions of the implementing law must be.
Attack on human dignity
Thus with regard to isolation and prohibition of contact with people outside the family, a general prohibition of contact poses – at least – the question of the violation of the guarantee of human dignity.
Here the prohibition poses a problem because it constitutes a serious attack on the general freedom of action and also on the freedom of assembly, association, religion, profession and art, not only because it is addressed to all citizens, regardless of whether or not they are suspected of disease or contamination.
By prohibiting all citizens from meeting with more than one person outside the household, by prohibiting it not only in the public space, but also in freedoms in the family nucleus, the general prohibition of contact inevitably leads to other restrictions on fundamental rights.
Federal law provides that if persons suspected of disease, contamination of a communicable disease have been identified, the restriction can only be taken “to the extent necessary to prevent the spread of the disease”, the latter not being nothing more than an explicit reference to the principle of proportionality already in force.
These are only absolute minimum conditions. The law can only carry individual measures, such as the closure of (individual) seaside resorts and not a general ban on contact.
To the extent that a general contact ban can be constitutionally compliant, at least precise regulation of the organizational conditions should be required in order to concretize precisely the necessary dangerous situation, but concrete provisions would also be necessary from the point of view legal consequences.
The principle of the rule of law is the imperative of precision in legislation. Laws cannot simply impose general regulations, which would give the authorities the license to act on whims, which would amount to an arbitrary rule.
According to the Federal Infection Protection Act (API), “competent authorities” must impose “the required security measures”. Normally, this means that spreaders or those suspected of spreading infection may be placed isolated or contaminated areas closed.
The more a legal act of the executive intervenes in fundamental rights, the more the regulations of the enabling law must be PRECISE.
Intervention-intensive measures which, in themselves, require a specific regime, can only be authorized in the context of “unforeseen developments” using general clauses, this condition is not fulfilled as it stands.
Responsible local containment in proportion to the consequences in industrialized countries, linked to the proportionality test .
“There is no doubt that the number of deaths attributable to the measures of the containment policy exceeds by several times the number of deaths avoided by it. For this reason alone, the standards to be assessed here do not meet the requirement of proportionality. Added to this are the direct and indirect restrictions on freedom, gigantic financial damage, immense damage to health and spiritual damage”.
The word “disproportionate” is too colorless to indicate the dimensions of what happened.
[2] Nom donné au régime de l’Allemagne après la Première Guerre mondiale (1919-1933).
Née de l’effondrement du régime impérial, la première république allemande, proclamée par le social-démocrate Scheidemann à Berlin, le 9 novembre 1918, ne prend forme qu’après l’écrasement de la révolution spartakiste (novembre 1918-janvier 1919). Elle tire son nom de la ville où se réunit en février 1919 une Assemblée nationale dominée par les sociaux-démocrates et les modérés, dont les travaux aboutissent à la promulgation (août 1919) d’une Constitution qui fait de l’Allemagne un État fédéral, le Reich, composé de 17 États (Länder) autonomes, eux-mêmes représentés au Reichsrat.
Encyclopédie Larousse en ligne – République de Weimar
[4] 950 Millions d’euros lui furent promis s’il confinait son pays. Il a dit non et raconté que d’autres pays avaient refusé mais soupçonnait que les plus obéissants avaient cédé au mirage de l’argent facile.
[6] pas une rave partie à 2000 qui au passage n’a d’ailleurs pas entrainé aucune vague de malades du Covid, ni même de poussée de contaminations, ni le moindre cluster
[9] Nous n’en avons eu confirmation que très tardivement
[10] Le tribunal a décidé lui-même de la constitutionnalité des normes, car l’obligation de soumission selon l’article 100 Abs.1 GG selon la jurisprudence constante de la Cour constitutionnelle fédérale (BVerfG, arrêts du 20 mars 1952, 1 BvL 12/51, 1 BvL 15/51, 1 BvL 16/51, 1 BvL 24/51, 1 BvL 28/51) s’applique uniquement aux lois officielles fédérales et des États, mais pas aux ordonnances statutaires.
The numbers reflect the latest data available as of Jan. 22 from the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System website. Of the 329 reported deaths, 285 were from the U.S., and 44 were from other countries. The average age of those who died was 76.5.
As of Jan. 22, 329 deaths — a subset of 9,845 total adverse events — had been reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) following COVID-19 vaccinations. VAERS is the primary mechanism for reporting adverse vaccine reactions in the U.S. Reports submitted to VAERS require further investigation before confirmation can be made that an adverse event was linked to a vaccine.
The reports, filed on the VAERS website between Dec. 14, 2020 and Jan. 22, describe outcomes ranging from “foaming at the mouth” to “massive heart attacks” to “did not recover.”
According to the Washington Post, as of Jan. 29, 22 million people in the U.S. had received one or both doses of a COVID vaccine. So far, only the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines have been granted Emergency Use Authorization in the U.S. by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). By the FDA’s own definition, the vaccines are still considered experimental until fully licensed.
Even with the updated injury numbers released today, the CDC said Thursday that safety data shows “everything is going well.” According to USA TODAY:
“Early safety data from the first month of COVID-19 vaccination finds the shots are as safe as the studies suggested they’d be.
“Everyone who experienced an allergic response has been treated successfully, and no other serious problems have turned up among the first 22 million people vaccinated, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.”
According to the VAERS data, of the 329 reported deaths, 285 were from the U.S., and 44 were from other countries. The average age of those who died was 76.5.
States reporting the most deaths were: California (22), Florida (16), Ohio (18), New York (15) and KY (13). Most of the reports were from, or filed on behalf of people who had received only the first dose. About half of the people reporting had the Pfizer vaccine, the other half Moderna.
The Moderna vaccine lot numbers associated with the highest number of deaths were: 025L20A (13 deaths), 037K20A (11 deaths) and 011J2A (10 deaths). For Pfizer, the lot numbers were: EK5730 (10 deaths), EJ1685 (11 deaths), EL0140 (15 deaths), EK 9231 (12 deaths) and EL1284 (11 deaths).
Several deaths and multiple severe allergic reactions are under investigation in the U.S. and Europe.
Last week, California health officials temporarily paused a large batch of Moderna vaccines due to a high number of allergic reactions, but reversed that decision a few days later.
On Jan. 3, Miami obstetrician Dr. Gregory Michael died after he suffered a hemorrhagic stroke. Michael died about two weeks after receiving Pfizer-BioNtech’s COVID vaccine. Although he became ill just three days after he got the shot, Pfizer said it didn’t think there was any direct connection to the vaccine. The New York Times quoted Dr. Jerry Spivak, a blood disorder expert at Johns Hopkins University, saying “I think it’s a medical certainty that the vaccine was related.”
Officials in Orange County, California, are investigating the death of a 60-year-old healthcare worker who died Jan. 9, four days after receiving his second injection of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID vaccine. Tim Zook, an x-ray technologist at South Coast Global Medical Center in Santa Ana, was hospitalized on Jan. 5, several hours after being vaccinated. Zook’s wife, Rochelle Zook, told the Orange County Register that her husband’s health rapidly deteriorated over the next few days. She said she didn’t blame any pharmaceutical company and that people should still “take the vaccine — but the officials need to do more research. We need to know the cause.”
Data about deaths following receipt of the experimental Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine are also emerging from Israel, Norway, Portugal, Sweden and Switzerland. Norway launched an investigation into the vaccines after the Norwegian Medicines Agency received reports of 33 suspected adverse drug reactions with fatal outcomes following administration of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. Pharma and federal agencies attributed the majority of these cases to “coincidence.”
“Coincidence is turning out to be quite lethal to COVID vaccine recipients,” said Children’s Health Defense (CHD) Chairman Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. “If the clinical trials are good predictors, the rate of coincidence is likely to increase dramatically after the second shot.”
While the VAERS database numbers are sobering, according to a U.S. Department of Health and Human Services study, the actual number of adverse events is likely significantly higher. VAERS is a passive surveillance system that relies on the willingness of individuals and professionals to submit reports voluntarily.
In December, CHD and Kennedy wrote to former FDA director, Dr. David Kessler, co-chair of the COVID-19 Advisory Board and President Biden’s version of Operation Warp Speed. Kennedy told Kessler that VAERS has been an abject failure, with fewer than 1% of adverse events ever reported.
A critic familiar with VAERS’ shortcomings bluntly condemned VAERS in The BMJ as “nothing more than window dressing, and a part of U.S. authorities’ systematic effort to reassure/deceive us about vaccine safety.”
CHD is calling for complete transparency. The children’s health organization is asking Kessler and the federal government to release all of the data from the clinical trials and suspend COVID-19 vaccine use in any group not adequately represented in the clinical trials, including the elderly, frail and anyone with comorbidities.
CHD is also asking for full transparency in post-marketing data that reports all health outcomes, including new diagnoses of autoimmune disorders, adverse events and deaths from COVID vaccines.
We all know the problem: in the coming dystopia of social credit scores and central bank digital currencies, our ability to buy and sell will be at the mercy of the criminals in government. . . . Unless we have an alternative means of transaction, that is. Join James for this exploration of survival currencies that already exist and how these ideas can be adapted to meet your communities’ needs.
[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, Lbry/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.]
The German virologist Pf. Dr. Christian Drosten is the face of the corona crisis we are going through. In March 2020, the weekly magazine Stern even published an article entitled “The corona virus has made Prof. Christian Drosten the most sought-after man in the Republic” and made him a star. For it was Christian Drosten who, in January 2020, developed the PCR test for corona, which has become the standard method for detecting the Covid-19 coronavirus worldwide. As Director of the Berlin Charité Institute, he is a very influential advisor to the German Federal Government, and has participated as an expert at numerous government press conferences. His evaluation has thus had a decisive influence on important political decisions such as the compulsory wearing of masks, the interruption of regular education or the closure of all cafés, bars and restaurants. He has received numerous awards, including the Bundestverdienstkreuz (Cross of Merit) in 2005 and the first-class Bundestverdienstkreuz in 2020.
This programme will open a 4-part dossier that shows a completely different face of Christian Drosten and sheds light on little-known but far-reaching circumstances. The Drosten dossier, part 1: Christian Drosten and his false predictions
Due to his many high distinctions, one would expect his various estimates and forecasts to come true. Here are two examples of his forecasts, which are always worrying compared to the actual evolution: Forecast 1: 2003 / SARS
“If the epidemic cannot be postponed in the near future, it is possible that there will always be new cases of SARS. If lung diseases of this kind were to break out regularly in some countries, this could have serious effects on their economies. An effective vaccine can be expected in one or two years at the earliest.”
Actual developments: According to the WHO, since the beginning of the so-called SARS epidemic in 2003 there were only 8,096 cases of SARS worldwide with 774 deaths. Germany had a total of nine cases of SARS and not a single death. Forecast 2: 2009, swine flu
“It is a widespread viral infection with side effects far more severe than anyone could imagine from the most dangerous vaccine.”
Although there are no reliable indications on the number of people who are ill, Drosten urged people to get vaccinated against swine flu.
Actual development: The prophesied epidemic never happened. In spite of this, Western governments bought vaccines for several hundred million euros, which the vast majority of the population refused, despite Drosten’s insistent recommendations. What’s more, the vaccines caused far more serious damage than swine flu itself. Conclusion: Drosten’s frightening predictions, which always aimed to impose the “standard vaccine solution”, turned out to be fatal errors of assessment, resulting in enormous economic damage. How is it possible that Drosten, with his multiple horror predictions, continues to appear credible as THE government’s advisor? The Drosten dossier, part 2: Christian Drosten and his doctorate
As the coronavirus crisis has made Prof. Dr. Christian Drosten probably the best known scientist in Germany, his doctoral thesis has been requested many times. Strange contradictions then came to light: 1st contradiction:
Dr. Drosten claims to have written his thesis in 2003 at the Goethe University in Frankfurt. Surprisingly, the Frankfurt University Library was initially unable to provide a single copy of his thesis. 2nd contradiction:
At the request of Dr. Markus Kühbacher, a scientist specialising in scientific fraud, the university’s press officer stated that the copies had been damaged by water damage. According to Kühbacher, the press officer later had to confess that he had given him false information about Drosten’s work. Nor did the German National Library have a single copy of the thesis until 2020, which is normally compulsory for every promotion. 3rd contradiction:
It is also very strange that the catalogue of the German National Library – which is obliged to list all theses – does not contain any entries concerning Christian Drosten for the years 2000-2003. 4th contradiction: On 15 October 2020, the Goethe University in Frankfurt am Main published a statement of clarification regarding the “false statements concerning the admission procedure of Prof. Dr. Christian Drosten”. The statement shows that Dr. Drosten has been entitled to use the title of Doctor of Medicine since 4 September 2003. This is very surprising, as a WHO document mentions him as early as April 2003 – i.e. 5 months earlier – with the title of Doctor. This and many other contradictions led Dr. Reiner Füllmich to refer to Drosten as “Captain von Köpenick” (a German swindler of the late 19th and early 20th century) in the context of the extra-parliamentary commission on coronavirus. Kühbacher filed a complaint with the Stuttgart District Court on 2 December 2020 about the “compulsory copies of Mr. Drosten’s thesis and their allegedly excessively wet storage”. This court case has brought to light further surprising contradictions. The situation could, however, become even more unpleasant for Drosten, as lawyer Dr. Füllmich has already addressed a first claim for damages to Drosten on behalf of one of his clients who has suffered damage as a result of the measures taken against the coronavirus. A class action is being prepared in the USA. Finally, the issue at stake is not Christian Drosten’s doctorate, but his credibility. Why has he persisted for months in remaining silent and not clarifying these serious allegations? His behaviour certainly does not enhance his credibility! The Drosten dossier, part 3: Christian Drosten and his PCR test for the coronavirus
The PCR test for coronavirus developed in haste by Drosten in January 2020 for the detection of coronavirus is “the test of the year”! The results of this test are used by governments around the world to legitimise the most massive restrictions of fundamental rights against their citizens!
As early as 2014, Drosten said about this PCR test method: “The method is so sensitive that it can detect even a single molecule of the virus genome. If such a pathogen has, for example, spent one day on the nasal mucosa of a nurse, without her getting sick or noticing anything, she suddenly becomes a case of MERS. Where previously there were reports of people who were sick to death, the statistics now contain mildly ill people and people who are in fact perfectly healthy. This is how the explosion in the number of cases in Saudi Arabia could be explained. In addition, the media on the spot have inflated the matter incredibly. “Doesn’t Drosten’s statement accurately reflect the current status of the coronavirus? “The statistics suddenly have people in perfect health, which distort them! “The number of cases is exploding! “The media have inflated this incredibly! “Did Drosten choose this PCR method in a calculated way to trigger a “test pandemic”? Ongoing scientific research by 22 top scientists reinforces this suspicion, as it denies the scientific basis for Drosten’s study, which served as the basis for the WHO’s implementation of the test. Initial court decisions confirm the unscientific basis of Drosten’s study and his coronavirus test! With his non-scientific study and his unsuitable PCR test based on it, one man played a decisive role in the whole coronavirus scenario: Christian Drosten! Not only him, but also the test he developed, turns out to be not very credible under closer examination! The Drosten dossier, part 4: Christian Drosten and his many links
Neutrality and objectivity are decisive indicators for the credibility of scientists!
1. Is neutrality and objectivity on the part of Drosten possible – in view of his links with Olfert Landt?
Olfert Landt is one of the regular co-authors of the Drosten studies – also of the study of the coronavirus in question. In addition, he is the owner of the Berlin-based biotech company TIB Molbiol Syntheselabor GmbH, which manufactures tests for the coronavirus. Drosten and Landt seem to have discovered a successful business model: in the event of a pandemic and the emergence of the most diverse viruses, they jointly develop the corresponding PCR test. This was already the case in 2002/2003 for SARS, in 2011 for EHEC, in 2012 for MERS, in 2016 for zika virus, in 2017 for yellow fever. The same pattern is still in place, which they have now also used for coronavirus. Landt admitted this to the Berliner Zeitung newspaper: “The testing, design and development came from the Charité. We simply implemented it immediately in the form of a kit. And if we don’t have the virus, which originally only existed in Wuhan, we can make a synthetic gene to simulate the genome of the virus. That’s what we did very quickly. “From the start of the coronavirus crisis, the Landt biotech company was making test kits for 1,500,000 tests a week and by February had tripled its turnover. In the meantime, these tests must have brought it huge profits. It is doubtful whether Landt received all the profits and left only the glory to Drosten. Irrespective of the question of the personal benefits that Drosten might have derived from it, the question arises: how is it possible that developments are made with public money and then private companies profit from them to such an extent?
1. Is neutrality and objectivity on the part of Drosten possible – in view of his links with the pharmaceutical industry?
Drosten has been awarded among others:
– the “Förderpreis für Klinische Infektiologie” (Prize for Clinical Infectiology) awarded by Aventis Deutschland Pharma GmbH with a prize of 5,000 euros,
– the “Diagnostics Award of the European Society for Clinical Virology” from the pharmaceutical company Abbott Laboratories, endowed with €2,500 and linked to other privileges of interest to the recipient, and
– through the Charité de Berlin, an institute of which Drosten is currently the director, in December 2019 and March 2020, a sum of approximately US$ 335,000 from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. This foundation is by no means disinterested, but it is known for its proximity to the vaccine industry. Have these awards and grants created conflicts of interest for Drosten that have led him in the past to always advocate for vaccines as a solution? The current coronavirus crisis seems to confirm this suspicion, as Drosten does not even shrink from a violation of the code of ethics of the medical order by recommending certain vaccine manufacturers. Shouldn’t Drosten’s statements and studies be completely revised from the point of view of objectivity? Who would believe a scientist who propagates the fact that smoking is safe and at the same time receives awards and subsidies from the tobacco industry? CONCLUSION:
Fatal erroneous predictions, numerous unclarified contradictions about his doctoral thesis, a hastily developed “PCR corona test” with fundamental scientific flaws and an unsuspected swamp of financial entanglements take away all credibility from Christian Drosten! If the key person at the centre of the entire coronavirus crisis proves to be uncredible after closer examination, this raises serious questions:
1. Should we not finally, because of these non-scientific foundations, analyse all the events linked to the coronavirus, with the inescapable economic and financial collapse that threatens entire peoples, to find those who are pulling the strings and profiting from this situation in the shadows?
2. Could the aim not be a staging for a power grab and even, under the pretext of fighting the pandemic, lead to the setting up of digital surveillance of entire peoples?
3. Why don’t the mass media, which has the task of providing critical media coverage, reveal the “Drosten dossier”, but keep it under wraps?
Dear spectators, do you also think that these facts should be known to everyone? Then help us to make the “Drosten dossier” public as soon as possible. Only a movement of the people themselves can break the silence of the monopolised media, which all sound the same, and lead to a public discussion! You can contribute to this by making these hidden links public! To do so, share this video! Inform as many of your acquaintances as possible by email, via WhatsApp, Twitter, Vimeo or put the video on Facebook. Here is the link to this show: https://www.kla.tv/17877. Sources/Links :
It is no coincidence that a resurgence of attacks by Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS) on civilians and the Syrian Army have been reported in Iraq and Syria as Joe Biden’s “build back better” government takes power in Washington.
Just days before Biden’s inauguration, there were conflictingreports of US military build-up in oil-rich northeast Syria. Whatever happened in the run-up to the change of power in Washington, it is a fact that this area was already occupied and plundered by US Coalition forces and their Kurdish separatist proxies. Some reports indicated the arrival of convoys of trucks carrying weapons, military hardware, and equipment into the region. Back in September, the “US Central Command (Centcom) deployed Sentinel radar, increased the frequency of US fighter patrols over US forces and deployed Bradley Fighting Vehicles to augment US forces,” according to spokesman Captain Bill Urban.
US convoy of 40 trucks and armoured vehicles illegally enters Syria to reinforce their presence in the North East and continue stealing our oil.So tell me how’s that pushing Biden left going? You planning on paying of this back? “Lesser of two evils” lol. You must be proud. pic.twitter.com/NoG0RZTQPS
The ISIS revival should come as no surprise to analysts of the Syrian conflict. In December 2018, Donald Trump made the unexpected announcement that he would withdraw US troops from Syria. One month later, ISIS carried out a suicide attack on Manbij, in northeast Aleppo, killing four American operatives and wounding three. This enabled the war hawks in Trump’s administration to impede plans for an exit from Syria.
Syria in Joe Biden’s crosshairs
The Biden administration is a throwback to the Obama/Clinton era of globalism. Those who celebrated Biden’s victory over Trump have heralded a new era of “war on terror” that will be waged against all those who challenge establishment narratives. The American “left” has effectively sanctioned a new wave of neoconservative military and multi-spectrum dominance campaigns that will be devastating for Syria and the region unless it is halted before it gets started.
Honored to witness history today. May God bless @JoeBiden and @KamalaHarris as they take on the work of healing our nation. May we all fulfill our duty as citizens to help our country and our fellow Americans through the challenges ahead. pic.twitter.com/dooSLnFePe
Joe Biden is no stranger to unlawful US military intervention. He had been strongly in favour of war against Iraq in 2002, based on the “weapons of mass destruction” canard. Biden sold the war as a “march to peace and security”. It clearly did not signify peace and security to the millions of Iraqis starved, mutilated, murdered and disenfranchised by Bush’s campaign of “shock and awe”that followed. Biden’s role was pivotal to Bush’s securing Senate support for going to war.
It was Biden who let slip, in 2014, that the Gulf States, Turkey and Jordan were arming and funding terrorist organisations invading, occupying and destroying Syria, but he omitted the fact that this would have, no doubt, been sanctioned by the US. Biden was vice president to Obama when the CIA’s Timber Sycamore programme began to funnel weapons and billions of dollars of aid to Al-Qaeda and ISIS-linked“moderates” in Syria.
The recent spate of ISIS operations are fortuitously timed, to put it diplomatically, if one’s aim is to facilitate increased aggression against Syria and a doubling-down of US military presence in neighbouring Iraq. We should not forget that the US has been allegedly implicated in support for the terrorist group, and ISIS operations should always be viewed in lock-step with US predator foreign policy in the region.
It has been claimed that the US has long been transporting ISIS fighters across the border into Iraq, where they are being refreshed and equipped before percolating back into Syria as a “super-ISIS” in a bid to sustain the perpetual destabilisation of Syria.
We know that Biden has the full support of aligned mockingbird media in the West and the control of the most influential social media platforms, Twitter and Facebook, to garner public support for his militarist policies. Trump was the economic sledgehammer, tasked to reduce Syria to a failed state economically, deprived of resources, driven into food insecurity by attacks on agriculture and food supply infrastructure. Biden is the war machine the neoconservatives have been patiently waiting for.
Biden’s pick of war-hawks
Biden has picked William Burns as CIA director. In Burns’s book ‘The Back Channel: A Memoir of American Diplomacy and the Case for its Renewal’, he advocates the use of soft power and the hitching of statecraft to the wagon of covert paramilitary operations and intelligence-gathering. Burns is described as a career diplomat who believes diplomacy and espionage are two sides of the same coin. Burns is an old-school American diplomat with close ties to Hillary Clinton.
Burns endorsed US intervention in Libya, he regrets not overthrowing President Assad and not sanctioning direct US military intervention on a greater scale. In a 2019 interview at the Truman Centre conference on US global leadership, he claimed a “maximalist” approach towards Syria would have been more effective and that it was a mistake not to enforce Obama’s “red line” over the alleged use of “chemical weapons”. It was an opportunity missed, according to Burns, when the US did not capitalise on “Assad losing altitude” and territory in 2012. He argued that military support should have been increased to the “moderates” at that point.
Despite his previous reticence over intervention in Iraq, Burns is not an intelligence head who will argue diplomacy over militarism – he has an axe to grind against the Syrian government. Global peace and security is dependent entirely on US supremacy. This is a CIA director who will uphold Biden’s promise that “America is back and ready to lead the world”. The reality is that Hillary Clinton is back and she will pick up where Obama left off before the Trump interlude, with potentially devastating consequences for Syria.
Samantha Power, the former US Representative at the UN during the Obama administration, has been appointed as head of the CIA outreach agency the US Agency for International Development (USAID). A budget of over $ 27 billion makes USAID one of the most powerful ‘aid’ agencies in the world today. It “accounts for more than half of all US foreign assistance”.
Power was one of the most vehemently anti-Syria government voices during Obama’s presidency. She was a UN ambassador who propelled the Syria ‘chemical weapon’ narratives into the media stratosphere with emotionally charged accusations supported by testimony from UK/US intelligence-linked White Helmet operatives and armed-group-linked medics with clear connections to the externally well-managed ‘opposition’ complex.
Ambassador Samantha Power is a world-renowned voice of conscience and moral clarity—challenging and rallying the international community to stand up for the dignity and humanity of all people. As USAID Administrator, she’ll be a powerful force for principled American engagement. pic.twitter.com/jwseGEsb8c
Biden has also given Power a seat on the National Security Council, which positions her close to National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan and in close proximity to CIA Director Burns. This forms a deadly alliance in favour of direct aggression against Syria and the toppling of a Syrian government already under pressure from Trump’s economic policies and a Covid outbreak that has closed borders and effectively blockaded the country, with international ‘aid’ pouring in exclusively the terrorist-held enclave of Idlib.
Whitehouse and ‘think tank’ double-speak translated
A recent National Security Directive on US global leadership in connection with the Covid-19 crisis was a clear opportunity for Washington to review the savage sanctions imposed on Syria by previous administrations. Peter Ford, the UK ambassador to Syria between 2003 and 2006, had this to say about the directive:
“With Samantha Power heading USAID … I fear it will be a battle to break down the inevitable resistance to doing anything that would help ‘government-controlled areas’. In the end, all that may result, and indeed all that may be intended, is an easing of sanctions as experienced by the areas not controlled by the government.
“NGOs from the Anglosphere complain that sanctions hamper aid relief intended for the jihadi-controlled areas and the Kurdish fiefdom. Here is the new administration signalling it has heard them.”
A report titled ‘The United States needs a new Syria policy’ has the appearance of a rewritten road map of Syria, but appearances can be deceptive. It is actually nothing more than a tactical attempt to whitewash the savagery of economic sanctions. Ford describes the offer as a “poisoned chalice” that would be “tantamount to a surrender, if met”. Cunningly presented in the form of a hammer blow in a velvet glove, it calls for intrusive monitoring mechanisms, the release of ‘political prisoners’ and unhindered countrywide “humanitarian” access that could be exploited as a revival of the Timber Sycamore operation to arm, equip and fund the remaining armed groups inside Syria. More worryingly, the report argues for greater decentralisation in Syria, which may be translated as a revival of the partitioning plans, in part drawn up by Jeffrey Feltman, the US ambassador to Beirut from 2004 to 2008 and an arch-opponent of the Assad government, who is intent on renewing and intensifying US operations in Syria.
Escalation in Syria: terrorist cells, isolated attacks and swarming
Under the Biden administration, we are likely to see an increase in US coalition military presence, particularly in northeast Syria.
A public-policy paper by the Rand Corporation titled ‘Swarming and the future of conflict’ describes potential tactics to be deployed by the Biden administration, using its multiple proxies to carry out isolated attacks on essential infrastructure, Syrian military and civilian targets so as to maintain instability and increase the pressure on the Syrian government.
One thing is clear, Biden is not going to repair the devastation caused by a 10-year ‘regime-change’ war – he is going to exploit the poverty, misery and suffering of the Syrian people to attempt full spectrum dominance in the region for the US and Israel. This has the potential to bring the US into direct confrontation with Russia, Iran and Hezbollah in Syria. We should prepare for a turbulent future in the region under Joe Biden. Democrat or Republican, the road map is the same. The only difference lies in the methods used to bring a recalcitrant nation to heel.
Since the beginning of this false pandemic, I’ve been offering compelling evidence that no one has proved SARS-CoV-2 exists.
Then people ask, “So why are all these people dying?”
I have explained that, many times, and in this article I’ll explain it again.
First of all, the whole notion that COVID-19 is one health condition is a lie. COVID IS NOT ONE THING.
This is both the hardest and simplest point to accept and understand.
Don’t reject the existence of the virus and then say, “So what is THE cause of people dying?” There is no ONE CAUSE. There is no one illness. There is no “it.”
By far, the biggest sources of illness we are dealing with are lung conditions: various kinds of pneumonia; flu and flu-like disease; TB; other unnamed lung/respiratory problems.
THESE ARE BEING RELABELED “COVID.” It’s a repackaging scheme. People are dying for those traditional reasons, and their deaths are being called “COVID.”
Thus, the old is artificially made new. It’s still old.
In this wide-ranging group of people who have traditional lung conditions, by far the largest component is the elderly and frail.
They are dying in nursing homes, in hospitals, in their houses and apartments. In addition to their lung problems, they have been suffering from a whole host of other conditions, for a long time, and they’ve been treated with toxic drugs.
They’re terrified that they might receive a diagnosis of “COVID,” and then they are given that diagnosis. THEN they’re isolated, cut off from friends and family. They give up and die.
This is forced premature death.
Some of these elderly and frail people are heavily sedated and put on breathing ventilators—which is a killing treatment. In a large New York study, it was discovered that patients over the age of 64, who were put on ventilators, died 97.2 % of the time. Staggering.
Some of these elderly and frail patients are now dying from reactions to the COVID vaccine—and of course, their deaths are listed as “COVID.”
Why else are people dying? In many cases, it’s a simple matter of bookkeeping. They die in hospitals for a variety of reasons, and staff write “COVID death” on their files. In the US, states receive federal money based on these statistics.
Let’s say that, in certain places around the world, there are clusters of deaths (being called COVID) that can’t be explained in the ways I’ve just described.
In those situations, you would have to examine EACH situation closely. For example, just prior to an outbreak in Northern Italy, was there a vaccination campaign? What was in the vaccine? A new breed of toxic substances?
You have to consider each cluster independently.
Getting the picture?
None of the “COVID deaths” anywhere in the world requires the existence of a new virus.
For instance, in Wuhan, where the whole business began, the first “COVID” cases of pneumonia occurred in a city whose air is HEAVILY polluted. In China, every year, roughly 300,000 people die from pneumonia. That means millions of cases. None of those deaths need to be explained by invoking a new virus.
Now, add to all this the fact that the PCR test for the virus is irreparably flawed and useless (for a variety of reasons I’ve explained in other articles). The test spits out false-positives like a fire hose. Thus, the high case numbers. If the authorities have to go to such extremes to paint a picture of a spreading viral epidemic…
There is no evidence that an actual germ is traveling around the world felling people. The “evidence” is invented.
The “pandemic” is invented.
The fraud is promoted.
During these fake epidemics (there have been many), someone will say: “But my neighbor’s son, who was very healthy, died suddenly. It must be the virus.”
No. People who appear to be healthy do die. Not just today, but going back in history as far as you want to go. No one has an explanation. They might have an explanation if they looked very closely, but they don’t look closely.
Favoring the “virus explanation” is a bias, a knee-jerk reaction, a response to propaganda.
If you think there must be other major reasons to explain “why all these people are dying,” keep in mind that “lung conditions” is a category that expands all over the globe. For instance, there are about one BILLION cases of flu-like illness EVERY YEAR on planet Earth.
Repackaging/relabeling just a small percentage of those cases alone would account for all official COVID death numbers.
What’s new about COVID is the STORY. That’s what’s being sold: a STORY about a virus.
Dr. Tom Cowan w/ Dr. Andrew Kaufman: We Have No Scientific Proof That Viruses Cause Disease — A Response to Dr. Judy Mikovits
This content features a discussion of the (lack of) scientific evidence for the proof of viruses alleged to cause disease in the context of a recently aired debate between Judy Mikovots, Ph.D. and Andrew Kaufman, M.D.
[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.]
The original discussion between Dr. Kaufman and Dr. Judy Mikovits may be seen here:
The Gizars have been out in force this week combing through the internet, and that’s certainly true with today’s offering spotted and shared by M.S. (with a big thank you). And this one is a whopper doozie, being nothing less than an article from The Journal of Scientific Exploration by Dr. Mark Carlotto, which correlates the location of certain ancient and megalithic sites to poles that have since shifted.
If that seems highly significant, it is, the much more so because of the man who authored the article, Dr. Carlotto. Many Gizars will already be familiar with that name, but many may not recognize it, so a brief review of Dr. Carlotto is in order. Dr Carlotto was involved early on – ca. the 1980s – in pioneering computer analysis of digitized photographs, and actually authored the algorithms of some of the computer analysis programs for photographs both for the American military and for its space program. As such, Dr. Mark Carlotto was brought into the analysis of the Viking photographs of the “Face on Mars” and the surrounding area of Cydonia on Mars by Richard C. Hoagland back during the days of his earliest analysis of those anomalies. Carlotto thus formed a part of Hoagland’s “Mars Mission” team back in the late 1970s and early 1980s, along with a host of other scientists, anthropologists, artists, and so on, before Hoagland’s “Mars Mission” morphed into his current website, enterprisemission.com. Carlotto went on to offer his own theories on the Martian anomalies, authoring a book and several articles on the topic, and concluding on the basis of astronomical alignments that whatever disaster as befell Mars and the Cydonia region may have occurred ca. 650,ooo years ago.
So when Dr. Carlotto offers a theory with combines “pole shifts” with alignments of ancient megalithic sites on Earth, I sit up and take notice:
This article is, as one can gain from a cursory reading, full of detailed technical and mathematical argument, but the abstract of the article sums up the argument:
Abstract—In a previous study of more than two hundred ancient sites, the alignments of almost half of the sites could not be explained. These sites are distributed throughout the world and include the majority of Mesoamerican pyramids and temples that are misaligned with respect to true north, megalithic structures at several sites in Peru’s Sacred Valley, some pyramids in Lower Egypt, and numerous temples in Upper Egypt. A new model is proposed to account for the alignment of certain unexplained sites based on an application of Charles Hapgood’s hypothesis that global patterns of climate change over the past 100,000 years could be the result of displacements of the Earth’s crust and corresponding shifts of the geographic poles. It is shown that more than 80% of the unexplained sites reference four locations within 30° of the North Pole that are correlated with Hapgood’s hypothesized pole locations. The alignments of these sites are consistent with the hypothesis that if they were built in alignment with one of these former poles they would be mis-aligned to north as they are now as the result of subsequent geographic pole shifts.
Now there is an implication here for my own work, one which contra-indicates some assumptions that are implied in my Great Pyramid weapon hypothesis. Consider the following table from Carlotto’s article. On page 216 of the article, Dr. Carlotto notes that several Egyptian sites, including the major pyramids of the Giza Compound, are exactly aligned to the cardinal compass points as currently exist, and not to a previous cardinal north pole. In other words, they were constructed after the previously hypothesized crustal displacement as advocated by Charles Hapgood, which took place ca. 100,000 years ago. While it is certainly true that I did not couple the Pyramid weapon hypothesis to any particular date, I have strongly implied that (1) it was built long before the beginnings of the Egyptian era, and (2) that is may be far older than anyone really knows, and (3) it, or something like it, may have been involved in “the cosmic war” which may have occurred some 3.2 million years ago (see my The Cosmic War: Modern Physics, Interplanetary Warfare, and Ancient Texts). It should also be noted that Carlotto’s hypothesis does not contraindicate Christopher Dunn’s hypothesis that the Great Pyramid was a machine, for Mr. Dunn did not attempt to place his hypothesis within any broader model of any major historical or chronological revision.
What is also intriguing about Carlotto’s table is that it is clear that the basis for the alignments of some sites is different. Some sites – like many of the Egyptian sites – appear to be aligned to the currently existing cardinal compass points. Others are aligned to stellar positions, lunar standstills, and so on. Some, as Carlotto also observes, seem to have no currently recognized basis of alignment.
Interestingly enough, one of the alternative researchers into the subject of megalithic alignments that Carlotto does not mention is Carl Munck, whose work I reviewed in my book Grid of the Gods.
What appears to emerge from all of this is that Dr. Carlotto, at the minimum, has considerably increased the mystery surrounding these ancient sites. Clearly, like Munck, he is implying that the orientation of these sites was not accidental, but served some sort of scientific purpose, and that implies a science to create the alignments that are there. It also implies the possibility that all these projects may have been massively coordinated not only over a wide area of the Earth but over a considerable time as well.
At this juncture, it appears that we’re all “back to the drawing board,” and in that spirit, I offer a bit of (very) high octane speculation. And that speculation is prefaced by my own personal skepticism of many years about Charles Hapgood’s crustal displacement hypothesis. I have never bought into it, for it implies a radically different geophysics than that of the standard model. On Hapgood’s view, the Earth’s crust “floats” on everything else, and under the right circumstances, might “slip” like the rind of an orange slipping over the rest of the orange. It’s a model attractive to some catastrophists, as a sudden “slippage” of that nature would cause all manner of havoc and destruction, from floods to earthquakes to volcanism, and massive topographic changes. In my “weapon hypothesis”, I argued that whatever weapon as might have been used in that great “cosmic war” was a weapon that weaponized the fabric of space-time itself, and as such, could perhaps be used precisely to cause that sort of massive geophysical disturbance.
But for the moment, I remain skeptical of Hapgood’s idea.
Or to put it country simple, we’re still “missing something.”
“The COVID-19 pandemic has proven an opportunity of convenience for totalitarian elements who have put individual rights and freedoms globally under siege,” said CHD chairman Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. in his letter to 100,000 lawyers.
The report explores the legal rights to informed consent, bodily integrity, the right to refuse unwanted medical interventions, religious expression and autonomy. All of these rights will be “dramatically constricted” if employers, states and/or the federal government impose vaccine mandates.
Dear Colleague,
The COVID-19 pandemic has proven an opportunity of convenience for totalitarian elements who have put individual rights and freedoms globally under siege. A medical cartel composed of pharmaceutical industry, government regulators, financial houses, and telecom and internet billionaires are systematically obliterating freedom of speech and assembly, religious worship, property rights, jury trial, due process, and — ultimately — America’s exemplary democracy.
As a fellow lawyer who has practiced in our country’s courts for more than 40 years, I am alarmed by the growing power of global corporations to overwhelm our justice system, obliterate our constitutional liberty, and destroy public health. Throughout my career as a litigator, law professor, public advocate and author, I have worked to hold corporate giants and government institutions accountable. My life’s work has provided me with a unique perspective on our individual rights to clean air, clean water, unobstructed access to the commons, and our rights to make our own decisions about our bodies.
As chairman and chief legal counsel for Children’s Health Defense (CHD), I have now dedicated myself to protecting children’s health by ending harmful environmental exposures to children, ending the exploding chronic disease epidemic that has debilitated over half of American kids born after 1989, and to holding those responsible accountable.
A 2006 Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) study found that 54% of America’s children today have chronic health conditions — allergies, ADHD, autism, eczema, asthma, obesity, autoimmune conditions and more. When I was growing up, most of these conditions were rare or unknown. When I was a boy, I received three vaccines. Today, children receive 72 mandated doses of 16 vaccines, prior to age 18. A mountain of peer-reviewed studies points to vaccines as the primary culprit in this public health calamity. That isn’t stopping our health authorities from mandating more hugely subsidized, shoddily tested, zero-liability vaccines for children. Our vaccine safety program falls dangerously short of what our children deserve.
The COVID-19 pandemic has allowed captive corporate regulators to hold the population hostage to justify the transfer of $45 billion of taxpayer money to pharmaceutical companies to finance a gold rush of new vaccines.
Protecting individual rights in the era of COVID-19 is essential
I urge you to read this short legal dossier, “Protecting Individual Rights in the Era of COVID-19”, with an open mind and to draw your own conclusion about the legal and ethical implications of one-size-fits-all vaccine mandates for zero-liability, heavily subsidized mandatory vaccines.
Current vaccine mandates now require most school children to receive between 50-75 shots just to attend school. A vaccine-injured child, or adult, cannot sue the healthcare provider or the vaccine producer — but rather must go to a rigged national injury compensation program to sue the very government that ordered vaccine compliance in the first place. After studying this subject for years, I am more horrified than ever by the system’s pervasive corruption.
Given existing federal legislation and judicial precedents, it is all but impossible to hold vaccine manufacturers or healthcare providers accountable for vaccine injury in the courts. Vaccine injuries are not rare — HHS’s own studies show that the agency claims that injuries only occur with “1 in a million” vaccines is a mendacious canard. The true injury rate is actually 1 in every 39 vaccines, according to the Federal Agency for Health Research Quality.
Problems with vaccine safety aren’t isolated just to children
Federal and State officials are considering mandates for the new COVID-19 vaccine. The New York State Bar Association, an organization for which I have great respect, has given its imprimatur to a COVID-19 vaccine mandate for all New Yorkers if “experts” deem that necessary. But those experts are mainly regulators from captured public health agencies with pervasive and corrupt financial entanglements with pharmaceutical manufacturers.
The pharma-controlled media’s advice that we “trust the experts” is anti-democratic and anti-science. You and I know that “experts” can differ on scientific questions and that their opinions can vary in accordance with and demands of politics, power, and financial self-interest. In every lawsuit, leading, highly credentialed experts from opposite sides routinely offer diametrically antithetical positions based on the same set of facts. The trouble is that today, in the political arena, dissenting voices that question government policies and corporate proclamations are silenced by censorship and vilification.
In this special report, our CHD Team explores the legal rights to informed consent, bodily integrity, the right to refuse unwanted medical interventions, religious expression and autonomy. All of these rights will be dramatically constricted if employers, states and/or the federal government impose vaccine mandates.
Welcome to New World Next Week – the video series from Corbett Report and Media Monarchy that covers some of the most important developments in open source intelligence news. This week:
Visit NewWorldNextWeek.com to get previous episodes in various formats to download, burn and share. And as always, stay up-to-date by subscribing to the feeds from Corbett Report (https://corbettreport.com/support) and Media Monarchy (https://mediamonarchy.com/join).
Those in the US who want to support their work can send cash, check or money order (payable to James Evan Pilato) to:
Media Monarchy
c/o James Evan Pilato
P.O. Box 22486
Santa Fe, NM 87502-2486
[Satire] Dictator Newsom Ends California Lockdown!?! What You Need To Know
California dictator Gavin Newsom in California lockdowns!
What do you need to know about the great governor’s decision to end the lockdowns? Obviously it’s 100% in the peoples best interest and nothing to do with his political game. You can trust us on that.
“Physicians following their Hippocratic Oath must resolutely stand up for the well-being of their patients.”
Gerlinde Laeverenz-Foti, M.D., is a holistic physician and has been dealing with the issue around vaccination for many years. She turns to her colleagues on this occasion, stating that if physicians in particular are not attentive in this crisis, they will become complicit in a policy that makes a mockery of all human values and scientific standards.
Here is what she has to say:
“I urge all physicians in this country and indeed around the world, without exception, to think outside the box of what we have been taught in medical school and beyond our further education.
Use your common sense, question and explore connections with a desire to know the truth. Trust in your gut feeling, something that every good doctor should be capable of. Do not be satisfied with what is written in your textbooks, but go one step further – on behalf of the human being, on behalf of your patients.
Being a doctor means being independent of any system, of opinions, of politics, of guidelines and directives, even of every (man-made) law. The only guideline that counts is to be found within yourself and your patient.
I would be very surprised if even one doctor could and would sign that vaccinations cannot pose a threat to a person’s health or life.
Why are vaccinations so trivialized and complications often neither recognized, let alone noted in the patient’s file?
And to those physicians who consider vaccinations to be useful – how many of you have studied them in depth, have delved deeper into immunology, studied the scientific and well-researched literature and listened to the testimonials of parents and patients?
To all of those who have seen or experienced as much suffering through vaccinations as I have, affecting children and their families, and to all of those who do not dismiss it from the outset with the sentence “this cannot come from the vaccine”. All of those that can no longer help but ask the questions and take a critical look at allopathic medicine.
Do not be complicit in this so-called “health policy” that neither respects the dignity and true development of man, let alone his soul and his being. Do not sell yourselves and the people entrusted to your care for fear of being defamed or because you believe that your professional existence will be threatened. This is an illusion anyway, because no one can take your vocation away from you except yourself. Rather work on rehabilitating the patients’ trust in the medical profession, which many people have now lost, and rightly so. Put your patients back in the centre of attention, listen to them with interest and a healthy curiosity. Take their concerns, doubts and fears seriously and take steps to educate yourselves independently. Especially in the context of vaccines and the current mask obligation!
Let us work together to ensure that we retain our sovereignty and independence. It is not up to politicians or a school principal to decide what is medically justifiable and how to assess a health risk to the individual! We as physicians should remain the decision makers here. Likewise, the patient entrusted to us must remain protected, and should not be made to discuss their personal health issues with a manager of a supermarket or their employer! This is degrading and shameful at the same time. This is a novel and absolutely unjustifiable disregard of human dignity, which we simply cannot accept!
And what about our children? We must protect them instead of handing them over to state measures! Right now, political fears and moves are being played out on the backs of our children – we physicians must not allow this under any circumstances, let alone accept it silently!
We must rise up, it is high time!
Dear colleagues, if you haven’t already done so, I urge you to come back to the ground of facts, to the real basis of medicine. Remember your Hippocratic Oath, the oath that you once took, and by which you committed yourselves to the well-being of the patient! Remember the reason for which you – hopefully – once became a doctor. Remember what is essential in life and what is really important in medicine. It is about the individual. And thus it is about the health of our society.
Remember what is essential when it comes to your medical responsibility.
You do have a great responsibility. Please be very serious about it. And, if you cannot do so because of fear or other reasons, then you should give up your license to practice medicine.”
“There is no crueler tyranny than that which is perpetuated under the shield of law and in the name of justice.” ~ Baron de Montesquieu
A very horrendous bill was introduced recently in Congress called the “Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2021.” The irony of this bill title is that it is not about preventing terrorism; it is about legalizing terrorism by the state against the citizenry. It would be more appropriately titled the U.S. Government Terrorism Authorization Act of 2021.
The motivating factor for this atrocity was said to be the recent purposely staged and intentionally allowed false-flag coup at the Capitol on January 6th. The entire situation was planned in advance to assure that Biden would be the ‘selected’ president, while the members of Congress could pretend to be fearful for their lives. The police led both legitimate and criminal protesters inside the Capitol building, allowed them to remain there, all while doing nothing but brutally murdering one innocent woman. The cowardly Congress was shuttled into safe places to hide until enough pictures and video could be taken, and enough facial recognition could be gathered so that the desired Trump supporters could be gathered up and jailed while others would walk free. This was the plot and now the scene is set. The feigned ‘indignant’ Congress got everything they wanted out of this directed production.
This non-threatening Hollywood-like creation ended peacefully of course, but was made out to be another 9/11. This minor event has been called a terrifying attack, a domestic terrorism attack, a hate crime, devastating, an experience of terror by white nationalists, and heinous violent crimes; all said to have been prosecuted by homegrown domestic terrorists made up of white supremacists, and other racially and ethnically motivated violent extremists. In other words, white people!
Co-sponsor for this tyrannical bill, Democratic Representative Brad Schneider, said this in a press release on January 20:
“Following the terrifying attack on the Capitol this month, which left five dead and many injured, the entire nation has been seized by the potential threat of more terrorist attacks in Washington and around the country. Unlike after 9/11, the threat that reared its ugly head on January 6th is from domestic terror groups and extremists, often racially-motivated violent individuals. America must be vigilant to combat those radicalized to violence, and the Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act gives our government the tools to identify, monitor and thwart their illegal activities. Combatting the threat of domestic terrorism and white supremacy is not a Democratic or Republican issue, not left versus right or urban versus rural. Domestic Terrorism is an American issue, a serious threat the we can and must address together,” said Rep. Brad Schneider (IL-10).”
“I am proud to be an original cosponsor of this bill, which we need now more than ever. In the wake of the domestic terrorist attack on our Capitol two weeks ago, it is painfully clear that the current approach to addressing the real and persistent threat posed by white nationalism and similar ideologies is not working. We must not allow hate crimes and domestic terrorism to continue unchecked. I look forward to working with my colleagues to advance this important and timely bill as quickly as possible,” said Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler (NY-10).”
In this ridiculous press release, he used the word white, white nationalism, and white supremacist at least ten times. Democrat Vincente González from Texas said “the Domestic Terror Prevention Act is more important than ever as we work to root out and rid America of this cancer.” The cancer he is alluding to is concerning white people that either are not Democrat, are against Biden, or against this government.
This bill will be used to set up a witch-hunt for mainly white people in America, mostly white males. Half the country will be considered guilty. It will be used to destroy businesses, steal property, incarcerate those that oppose the state narrative, separate families, to censor speech at every turn, and even murder. Ex-CIA head, John Brennan, came up with a list that included as he put it, “an unholy alliance of religious extremists, authoritarians, fascists, bigots, racists, nativists, even libertarians.” In this planned legislation, whiteness is vilified, as the bogeymen are white supremacists, white nationalists, and supposedly those that that are guilty of ‘hate’ crimes, hate crimes being anything thought ‘offensive’ by idiot leftists, progressives, and globalists. None of this is qualified of course, and this pending bill is just as vague in its description of the targeted class. All these people and more should be silenced, “reprogrammed,” and eliminated according to those supporting this act that is nothing less than a plan to prosecute false sedition.
The list of supporters endorsing this tyrannical piece of legislation is telling to say the least. They include:
Anti-Defamation League, Arab American Institute, Bend the Arc: Jewish Action, Center for the Study of Hate & Extremism, Human Rights Campaign, Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, Muslim Advocates, NAACP, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., Sikh Coalition, Southern Poverty Law Center Action Fund, and Unidos.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Department of Justice (DOJ), and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) will gain massive additional powers, and funding, in order to monitor (surveil), investigate (spy), and prosecute (terrorize, murder, and jail) so-called cases of generally undefined “domestic terrorism.”
This legislation is a travesty, and can only lead to extreme totalitarian political policing of all that believe in freedom and that stand against the state.
Yes, #TheGreatReopening is happening as we speak. No, it will not be televised (or even YouTubed). Find out the details as James highlights the resistance movements that are rising up around the world on this week’s edition of #SolutionsWatch.
Just when you think you’ve heard the last strange thing about Antarctica, and that all is “back to normal” (whatever “normal” is down there), another strange thing pops up that literally screams for attention. This one – we’ll call it the “Mount Erebus Something” – was spotted by S.D., and the article is almost a parody of what we’ve seen so often before in this strange field of alternative research:
Now, you can look at the pictures accompanying the article, and clearly see that whatever has risen above the ice, it’s clearly a “something.” As the article itself states, it looks like some sort of gigantic “skid” mark made by something crashing:
However, the Science Channel revealed in its ‘What on Earth?’ series how one image – appearing to show something had crash-landed – left experts scratching their heads.
Aviation journalist Joe Pappalardo said: “To me, it looks like something landed there extremely quickly and skated to a halt.
“Maybe something had crashed.
Except…uhm….er….ahh…. there doesn’t appear to be any kind of debris from whatever it may have been that “crashed.” So we can scratch the crash idea(for now). We’re still left with a “something”.
Here, as usual, we assume for the sake of our daily high octane speculation that Never A Straight Answer (NASA), has released photos which it has not doctored, and that it is not having a little joke at our expense. NASA is, after all, part of the Lying Circus of the American federal goobernment (think magic bullet here, folks).
Now, at this juncture, if you’re one of those who have been following the “strange stuff” that we humans keep bumping into – from the Blair Cuspids on the Moon, to the Face (and/or) Pyramids on Mars, to the bizarre resemblance of the Saturnian moon Iapetus to George Lucas’ “Death Star” (complete with Iapetus’ three parallel ridges running around its equator), or the famous STS 48 space shuttle video showing some “somethings” flying around up there, and apparently being shot at from “something” on the planet’s surface, and then doing sharp turns-on-a-dime and zipping off into space – this is usually the point that they trot out “the scientist” to give everyone a reassuring pat on the head and a lollipop of an explanation that it can all be explained purely naturally. Think of J. Allen Hynek’s “Swamp gas” for UFOs, or NASA’s “trick of light and shadow” for the Face on Mars (an explanation which, incidentally, you might recall, had a very short shelf life when they found another picture of the “Face”, from a different sun angle). Or think of NASA’s “ice crystals” from a “porta-potty” dump for the “somethings” flying around and being shot at in STS 48. So…
Cue “the Scientist”:
Sure enough, right on cue, we get the scientific explanation:
“NASA scientist Dr Kelly Brunt travels to the remote feature.
“She finds a seven-mile-long wall of jagged ice protruding from the frozen seas of McMurdo Sound.
“It is a rare type of glacier feature created by millions of tonnes of ice flowing from the base of Mount Erebus into the frozen seas.”
Heavy sigh of relief! It’s nothing bit a glacial feature!
“But madam Scientist, why haven’t we see them before?”
“Well, Billy, because it’s a rare type.”
So rare, in fact, you might only encounter it in Antarctica, near a mountain that was the scene of a tragic aircraft crash. Here’s your lollipop, run along and play now.
Except, it can’t have been the crash, because what looks like a “furrow” is really a ridge(unless of course it was a crash of a “something” which burrowed beneath the ground or ice and raised the ridge…who knows), a ridge which appears to end rather abruptly, and appears to have more or less evenly spaced “somethings” along the furrow-that’s-really-a-ridge. True enough, it may indeed be a “rare glacial feature”. Really rare.
But part of me isn’t buying, because the bottom line is, it still looks like a “something” to me. And maybe, along with all the other “somethings” alleged to be down there (sans the ridiculous “quattuoropus” story of course), we might be looking at yet another reason such a strange list of people from Herman Goering to John Kerry and Buzz Aldrin and King Juan Carlos (among many others) are interested in the place. And maybe we’re looking at a “something” that’s another reason the explanations for the interest of such people in Antarctica – from “Germany needs whale oil and fishing grounds” to “Mr. Secretary wanted to observe climate change up close and personal” – seem so off.
Yet another wake up call against tyranny from eastern Europe. This time it’s from a small country in the north east on the Baltic Sea that has long lived under the influence of Germany, Russia, Belarus and Poland. As in many other countries, citizens of Latvia have warned against a political disease. In December, their freedom movement organized the biggest rally after the war to protest against the Covid measures calling on the support of other nations. Leaders of the movement are condemning the lockdown policies taken on the basis of meaningless PCR-tests. In his recent public declaration Mr. Janis Plavins, one of the leading voices of the Latvian freedom movement supported his claims by quoting the decisions issued by the supreme courts in Austria, Portugal and Bosnia who all concluded that lockdown measures violate their constitution.
Citizens deplore the refusal of government officials and experts to take part in any debate on the issue in spite of repeated demands supported by several peaceful rallies and car caravans. According to Mr. Plavins, “In Latvia whistleblowers and freedom supporters are being prosecuted in unlawful and harsh ways with extremely high fines, defamation, attacks on their personal businesses and the closing of their bank accounts”. A famous activist and a nurse were even arrested and jailed after a single interview where they expressed their views on the government’s measures.
Latvians know the taste of totalitarian regimes and the feeling of anger against their government is rising.
Senta Depuydt the President of Children’s Health Defense Europe met with leading activists shortly before their major protest and addressed a message to support Latvians in their efforts to protect democracy and health.
The wife of Tim Zook, a 60-year-old x-ray technician who became seriously ill hours after getting his second Pfizer vaccine and died four days later, says “we need to know the cause.”
Officials in Orange County, California, are investigating the death of a 60-year-old healthcare worker who died four days after receiving his second injection of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID vaccine.
Tim Zook, an x-ray technologist at South Coast Global Medical Center in Santa Ana, was hospitalized on Jan. 5, several hours after being vaccinated. Zook’s wife, Rochelle Zook, told the Orange County Register that her husband’s health rapidly deteriorated over the next few days. He died Jan. 9.
Rochelle Zook said her husband believed in vaccines, and that she didn’t blame “any pharmaceutical company” for his death. She also said:
“But when someone gets symptoms 2 1/2 hours after a vaccine, that’s a reaction. What else could have happened? We would like the public to know what happened to Tim, so he didn’t die in vain. Severe reactions are rare. In reality, COVID is a much more deadly force than reactions from the potential vaccine itself.
“The message is, be safe, take the vaccine — but the officials need to do more research. We need to know the cause. The vaccines need to be as safe as possible. Every life matters.”
Tim Zook was “quite healthy” his wife said, though he took medication for high blood pressure and was slightly overweight. “He had never been hospitalized. He’d get a cold and be over it two days later. The flu, and be over it three days later.”
According to news reports, Zook told his wife he wasn’t afraid to get the vaccine. He even photographed himself on Jan. 5 before he became ill, with a Band-Aid on his arm and holding a picture of his vaccination card.
“We closely monitor all such events and collect relevant information to share with global regulatory authorities. Based on ongoing safety reviews performed by Pfizer, BioNTech and health authorities, (the vaccine) retains a positive benefit-risk profile for the prevention of COVID-19 infections. Serious adverse events, including deaths that are unrelated to the vaccine, are unfortunately likely to occur at a similar rate as they would in the general population.”
Zook’s death is the latest in a string of reports about deaths and/or allergic reactions to both Pfizer’s and Moderna’s vaccines.
As The Defender reported earlier this week, multiple state and federal officials are investigating the Jan. 21 death of a Placer County, California, man several hours after receiving a COVID vaccine. According to news reports, the man had tested positive for COVID in December. The cause of death and specific vaccine he received have not been released.
Last week, The Defender reported on the death of baseball legend Hank Aaron, 18 days after he received the first dose of the Moderna vaccine. Aaron’s death was initially reported as undisclosed, but according to USA Today, Aaron died of a massive stroke.
Earlier this month, a Johns Hopkins scientist told the New York Times it was a “medical certainty” that Pfizer’s vaccine caused the Jan. 3 death of a 56-year-old Florida doctor. Dr. Gregory Michael, whose wife described him as “perfectly healthy,” died of idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP), a rare autoimmune disease, about two weeks after getting the first Pfizer vaccine. Florida health officials are investigating his death.
More than 40 deaths following vaccinations among elderly people in Norway and Germany prompted China health officials last week to call for a pause on the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, especially among the frail elderly.
As of Jan. 15, 181 deaths have been reported to the U.S.government’s Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) as possibly being related to COVID vaccines. A 2010 study by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services concluded that “fewer than 1% of vaccine injuries” are reported to VAERS and experts say the government’s reporting system is “broken.”
Oddly, for the second day in a row, data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s VAERS WONDER System is “temporarily down.” Though you can’t see any of the data on adverse events that have been reported, you can still submit a report on any reactions to vaccines.
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell w/ Dark Journalist: Election Aftermath, ‘Deep Events’ & the Deep State | Resemblance of the 2021 Domestic Terror Bill to the 1933 Enabling Act in Nazi Germany
[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, Lbry/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.]
Truth Comes to Light editor’s brief synopsis of the video:
This conversation covers a wide range of topics with Dr. Joseph P. Farrell and Daniel Liszt connecting dots as they go. Here are a few of the ideas they explore. This is Part 1 or a two-part interview. When the second part becomes available, we will share it at this site.
The virtual inauguration & Biden as a complete puppet to Mr. Globaloney (global controllers)
Resemblance of the 2021 Domestic Terror Bill to the 1933 Enabling Act in Nazi Germany
‘Deep events’ & the deep state
Nuclear football within the U.S.
Geopolitical fallout
International finance
Pushback from within the states & calls for succession
‘The Plan’ narrative & the manipulation of its many spokespersons in the alternative media
Data-mining & mapping of connections between Trump supporters
The persistent attacks on Trump supporters & the idea of “concentration camps” to rehabilitate them
“But…but, you see, we take a piece of RNA, and we inject it into the person, and the RNA forces the cells to manufacture a protein that’s very similar to a protein in SARS-CoV-2…and then the immune system swings into gear and produces antibodies to THAT protein, and THEN the person has achieved immunity from the virus…”
Sorry, no dice.
As I’ve been demonstrating for months now, there is no proof that SARS-CoV-2 exists [1] [2]. Therefore, “the piece of RNA” that’s injected can’t be assumed to be related to “the virus.”
Therefore, the protein which the cells produce in the body is merely CLAIMED to be similar to a protein in the unproven “SARS-CoV-2.”
There is no KNOWLEDGE here.
That piece of RNA which is injected into the body—why should we assume it has anything to do with a virus called SARS-CoV-2, when no one has an isolated specimen of this “SARS-CoV-2?”
We shouldn’t assume.
Therefore, everything that happens, inside the body, after the injection, is up for grabs. What is the immune system reacting to?
Why bother, in the first place, to make a vaccine against a virus when you don’t have the virus?
There are several ways to attack this absurdity, and they all come down to the same bottom line: no provable virus, forget the vaccine.
I keep coming up with analogies to explain the insanity of the COVID virologists—
“Three trains collided last night outside Chicago. Investigators who turned up at the scene this morning failed to find a shred of wreckage. But they insist the collision occurred, resulting in a vast explosion. The public is warned to stay away from the cordoned-off zone.”
That fanciful illustrations is LESS extreme than: “We’ve just released a vaccine for a virus that we never discovered.”
As I’ve explained in other articles and interviews, “discovering” the genetic sequence, the structure of the purported SARS-CoV-2, involves all sorts of conjecture [3] [4]. Researchers aren’t looking through some sort of cosmic microscope at rows of genes lined up like cars in a supermarket parking lot.
Researchers assume—on the basis of zero evidence—that certain older reference genetic sequences in libraries are contained in “the new virus.” They use a computer program to scavenge those sequences and build out the ASSUMED structure of “the new virus” and automatically smooth out any wrinkles or gaps.
This would be on the order of fabricating a hologram of a gun that the police will claim is the actual gun used in the commission of a crime.
“Yes, Your Honor, this image you see floating in mid-air IS the weapon Mr. Jones used when he held up the bank last month. It is not a ‘representation,’ as the defense counsel would have you believe. We’re talking about cutting-edge science. We have experts who will testify under oath…”
Judge: “In other words, sir, you’re telling this court that, if the bank teller had some sort of ‘anti-hologram’ program on his computer, he could have prevented the crime with a few clicks of his mouse. Very interesting. Let me ask you, which drugs are you on?”
Prosecutor: “None, Your Honor. Actually, such anti-hologram programs exist. In the area of COVID virology, they’re called vaccines, and they protect people against SARS-CoV-2…”
Above the entrances to virology institutes, they should inscribe: ALICE IN WONDERLAND.
James (he gives his last name in the video) is a CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant), and he recorded this video as a whistleblower because he could not keep silent any longer.
James reports that in 2020 very few residents in the nursing home where he works got sick with COVID, and none of them died during the entire year of 2020.
However, shortly after administering the Pfizer experimental mRNA injections, 14 died within two weeks, and he reports that many others are near death.
The video is long (47 minutes), and it is clear that James is suffering from emotional stress, and he admits that he has nothing to gain from going public, and that he will probably lose his job for doing so.
But he makes it very clear that these were patients he knew and cared for (he is also a “lay pastor”), and that after being injected with the mRNA shot, residents who used to walk on their own can no longer walk. Residents who used to carry on an intelligent conversation with him could no longer talk.
And now they are dying. “They’re dropping like flies.”
His superiors are explaining the deaths as being caused by a COVID19 “super-spreader.”
However, the residents who refused to take the injections, are not sick, according to James.
James makes it very clear that as a Christian, he cannot live with his conscience anymore, and that he can no longer remain silent.
He is not anti-vaccine, but just sharing what he knows is true, regarding the people he has cared for in his profession for over 10 years now.
This is a very clear pattern now. Inject the elderly with the mRNA injections, then blame their illnesses and deaths on the COVID virus.
The only reason Big Pharma and their sponsored corporate media are getting away with this, is because more healthcare workers like James are not coming forward to speak up for the helpless.
Even many in the Alternative Media are guilty for not covering this genocide against our seniors, as James states, because people are more concerned with Donald Trump and Joe Biden political news, while people’s grandmother, grandfather, and others are being killed by these injections.
James calls upon other CNAs, nurses, and family members to go public and tell the world what is going on with these experimental mRNA COVID injections.
How many more lives need to be lost before we say something?
If you know what is happening, but are not speaking out, then you are part of the problem.
And shame on you in the Alternative Media who are more concerned about which tyrant should be president than you are about covering the greatest crime of genocide this country has ever seen.
Rescue those being led away to death; hold back those staggering toward slaughter.
If you say, “But we knew nothing about this,” does not he who weighs the heart perceive it? Does not he who guards your life know it? Will he not repay each person according to what he has done? (Proverbs 24:11-12)
[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, Lbry/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.]
The CDC, after removing the claim that “Vaccines do not cause autism” from its autism-vaccine webpage nearly six months ago, has just put back that claim in direct response to ICAN’s publicity about its removal! The science is clearly not there to support this claim. The CDC knows it. After capitulating to the removal of this claim for lack of science, in the end, the science did not matter.
This puts the nail in the coffin for any claim by the CDC that it follows the science. ICAN will be taking the CDC back to court to seek the removal of this unsupported claim.
This claim was first added to the CDC website in 2015. After relentless attacks pointing out that the science does not exist to support this claim, it was removed on August 27, 2020 without a whisper.
The removal followed ICAN’s lawsuit in which the CDC was forced to provide a list of the studies that the agency alleged support this claim. That list included twenty studies, not a single one of which involved any of the vaccines currently given to babies in the United States during the first six months of life.
Having been forced to face the fact that it cannot scientifically support its claim that vaccines do not cause autism, some individual or some group at the CDC did the right thing and removed this claim from the agency’s autism-vaccine webpage. That was six months ago.
A few days ago, ICAN broke the story of its removal, causing a public relations nightmare for the CDC. In response, the CDC, wasted no time putting its public image ahead of science by putting its unsupported claim that “vaccines do not cause autism” back on its website.
As long as the CDC makes this unsupported claim, the desperately needed research regarding vaccines and autism (and other neurological disorders) will never receive the serious funding it warrants. It may be only a few words on a webpage but those words have massive implications for the funding of vaccine-autism science.
The CDC does not appear to have any serious concern that its most recent data shows that 1 in 36 children born this year in the United States will develop autism. This is a true epidemic. Instead of listening to the 40% to 70% of parents with an autistic child that continue to blame vaccines for their child’s autism, typically pointing to vaccines given during the first six months of life, the CDC and public health authorities insult and demean these families by continuing to claim, without adequate support, that vaccines do not cause autism.
The CDC should stop waging this false media campaign against these parents and, instead, fund independent scientists to do the needed science! But it is plain this will never happen because it is not what drives the CDC. It would rather avoid the issue in order to protect its holy vaccine program and its public image. Shame on the CDC.
ICAN plans to take the CDC back to court to demand it remove the claim “vaccines do not cause autism” from its website. It will certainly be interesting to see how the CDC explains its whipsaw changes in position regarding vaccines and autism. Stay tuned.
We are moving fast down that slippery slope to an authoritarian society in which the only opinions, ideas and speech expressed are the ones permitted by the government and its corporate cohorts.
In the wake of the Jan. 6 riots at the Capitol, “domestic terrorism” has become the new poster child for expanding the government’s powers at the expense of civil liberties.
Of course, “domestic terrorist” is just the latest bull’s eye phrase, to be used interchangeably with “anti-government,” “extremist” and “terrorist,” to describe anyone who might fall somewhere on a very broad spectrum of viewpoints that could be considered “dangerous.”
Watch and see: we are all about to become enemies of the state.
If this is a test of Joe Biden’s worthiness to head up the American police state, he seems ready.
As part of his inaugural address, President Biden pledged to confront and defeat “a rise of political extremism, white supremacy, domestic terrorism.” Biden has also asked the Director of National Intelligence to work with the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security in carrying out a “comprehensive threat assessment” of domestic terrorism. And then to keep the parallels going, there is the proposed Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2021, introduced after the Jan. 6 riots, which aims to equip the government with “the tools to identify, monitor and thwart” those who could become radicalized to violence.
Don’t blink or you’ll miss the sleight of hand.
This is the tricky part of the Deep State’s con game that keeps you focused on the shell game in front of you while your wallet is being picked clean by ruffians in your midst.
It follows the same pattern as every other convenient “crisis” used by the government as an excuse to expand its powers at the citizenry’s expense and at the expense of our freedoms.
As investigative journalist Glenn Greenwald warns:
“The last two weeks have ushered in a wave of new domestic police powers and rhetoric in the name of fighting ‘terrorism’ that are carbon copies of many of the worst excesses of the first War on Terror that began nearly twenty years ago. This New War on Terror—one that is domestic in name from the start and carries the explicit purpose of fighting ‘extremists’ and ‘domestic terrorists’ among American citizens on U.S. soil—presents the whole slew of historically familiar dangers when governments, exploiting media-generated fear and dangers, arm themselves with the power to control information, debate, opinion, activism and protests.”
Greenwald is referring to the USA Patriot Act, passed almost 20 years ago, which paved the way for the eradication of every vital safeguard against government overreach, corruption and abuse.
Free speech, the right to protest, the right to challenge government wrongdoing, due process, a presumption of innocence, the right to self-defense, accountability and transparency in government, privacy, press, sovereignty, assembly, bodily integrity, representative government: all of these and more have become casualties in the government’s war on the American people, a war that has grown more pronounced since Sept. 11, 2001.
Some members of Congress get it.
In a letter opposing expansion of national security powers, a handful congressional representatives urged their colleagues not to repeat the mistakes of the past:
“While many may find comfort in increased national security powers in the wake of this attack, we must emphasize that we have been here before and we have seen where that road leads. Our history is littered with examples of initiatives sold as being necessary to fight extremism that quickly devolve into tools used for the mass violation of the human and civil rights of the American people… To expand the government’s national security powers once again at the expense of the human and civil rights of the American people would only serve to further undermine our democracy, not protect it.”
Cue the Emergency State, the government’s Machiavellian version of crisis management that justifies all manner of government tyranny in the so-called name of national security.
So you see, the issue is not whether Donald Trump or Roger Stone or MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell deserve to be banned from Twitter, even if they’re believed to be spouting misinformation, hateful ideas, or fomenting discontent.
This unilateral power to muzzle free speech represents a far greater danger than any so-called right- or left-wing extremist might pose.
The ramifications are so far-reaching as to render almost every American an extremist in word, deed, thought or by association.
Yet where many go wrong is in assuming that you have to be doing something illegal or challenging the government’s authority in order to be flagged as a suspicious character, labeled an enemy of the state and locked up like a dangerous criminal.
Eventually, all you will really need to do is use certain trigger words, surf the internet, communicate using a cell phone, drive a car, stay at a hotel, purchase materials at a hardware store, take flying or boating lessons, appear suspicious, question government authority, or generally live in the United States.
The groundwork has already been laid.
The trap is set.
All that is needed is the right bait.
With the help of automated eyes and ears, a growing arsenal of high-tech software, hardware and techniques, government propaganda urging Americans to turn into spies and snitches, as well as social media and behavior sensing software, government agents have been busily spinning a sticky spider-web of threat assessments, behavioral sensing warnings, flagged “words,” and “suspicious” activity reports aimed at snaring potential enemies of the state.
It’s the American police state’s take on the dystopian terrors foreshadowed by George Orwell, Aldous Huxley and Phillip K. Dick all rolled up into one oppressive pre-crime and pre-thought crime package.
What’s more, the technocrats who run the surveillance state don’t even have to break a sweat while monitoring what you say, what you read, what you write, where you go, how much you spend, whom you support, and with whom you communicate. Computers by way of AI (artificial intelligence) now do the tedious work of trolling social media, the internet, text messages and phone calls for potentially anti-government remarks, all of which is carefully recorded, documented, and stored to be used against you someday at a time and place of the government’s choosing.
In other words, the burden of proof is reversed: you are guilty before you are given any chance to prove you are innocent.
Dig beneath the surface of this kind of surveillance/police state, however, and you will find that the real purpose of pre-crime is not safety but control.
Red flag gun laws merely push us that much closer towards a suspect society where everyone is potentially guilty of some crime or another and must be preemptively rendered harmless.
This is the same government that has a growing list—shared with fusion centers and law enforcement agencies—of ideologies, behaviors, affiliations and other characteristics that could flag someone as suspicious and result in their being labeled potential enemies of the state.
For instance, if you believe in and exercise your rights under the Constitution (namely, your right to speak freely, worship freely, associate with like-minded individuals who share your political views, criticize the government, own a weapon, demand a warrant before being questioned or searched, or any other activity viewed as potentially anti-government, racist, bigoted, anarchic or sovereign), you could be at the top of the government’s terrorism watch list.
In other words, if you dare to subscribe to any views that are contrary to the government’s, you may well be suspected of being a domestic terrorist and treated accordingly.
Again, where many Americans go wrong is in naively assuming that you have to be doing something illegal or harmful in order to be flagged and targeted for some form of intervention or detention.
In fact, U.S. police agencies have been working to identify and manage potential extremist “threats,” violent or otherwise, before they can become actual threats for some time now.
In much the same way that the USA Patriot Act was used as a front to advance the surveillance state, allowing the government to establish a far-reaching domestic spying program that turned every American citizen into a criminal suspect, the government’s anti-extremism program renders otherwise lawful, nonviolent activities as potentially extremist.
Be warned: once you get on such a government watch list—whether it’s a terrorist watch list, a mental health watch list, a dissident watch list, or a red flag gun watch list—there’s no clear-cut way to get off, whether or not you should actually be on there.
You will be tracked wherever you go.
You will be flagged as a potential threat and dealt with accordingly.
This is pre-crime on an ideological scale and it’s been a long time coming.
The government has been building its pre-crime, surveillance network in concert with fusion centers (of which there are 78 nationwide, with partners in the corporate sector and globally), data collection agencies, behavioral scientists, corporations, social media, and community organizers and by relying on cutting-edge technology for surveillance, facial recognition, predictive policing, biometrics, and behavioral epigenetics (in which life experiences alter one’s genetic makeup).
If you’re not scared yet, you should be.
Connect the dots.
Start with the powers amassed by the government under the USA Patriot Act, note the government’s ever-broadening definition of what it considers to be an “extremist,” then add in the government’s detention powers under NDAA, the National Security Agency’s far-reaching surveillance networks, and fusion centers that collect and share surveillance data between local, state and federal police agencies.
To that, add tens of thousands of armed, surveillance drones and balloons that are beginning to blanket American skies, facial recognition technology that will identify and track you wherever you go and whatever you do. And then to complete the picture, toss in the real-time crime centers being deployed in cities across the country, which will be attempting to “predict” crimes and identify so-called criminals before they happen based on widespread surveillance, complex mathematical algorithms and prognostication programs.
Hopefully you’re starting to understand how easy we’ve made it for the government to identify, label, target, defuse and detain anyone it views as a potential threat for a variety of reasons that run the gamut from mental illness to having a military background to challenging its authority to just being on the government’s list of persona non grata.
There’s always a price to pay for standing up to the powers-that-be.
Facing sluggish demand, especially among healthcare workers, for Pfizer’s and Moderna’s experimental COVID vaccines, employers float a variety of incentives that some say border on coercion.
However, the 14 million adults vaccinated thus far fall significantly short of Operation Warp Speed’s goal of administering 20 million shots by the end of 2020. Officials are offering two primary reasons for the “sluggish” vaccine rollout: logistical (supply-side) problems and the demand-side hurdle of vaccine refusal.
Scott Gottlieb, the former FDA commissioner who passed through the revolving door to join Pfizer’s board of directors in 2019, predicts that demand for the shots will become “soft” after just a third of the U.S. population has accepted the jab.
The fact is, despite the omnipresent messaging in favor of the experimental vaccines, many Americans’ interest in COVID-19 vaccination is tepid at best. This is particularly the case among the healthcare and nursing home workers being asked to take the risk of rolling up their sleeves first. Many are refusing the shots, taking pains to explain that they are not “anti-vaxxers” but object to being “guinea pigs.”
From Los Angeles to Ohio to Maine, up to 60% of vaccine-eligible frontline health workers are declining the as-yet-unlicensed mRNA vaccines. Health systems — “intent on getting doses to as many people as possible, as quickly as possible” — report that in some locations, the vaccine is “‘literally sitting in freezers’ because healthcare workers [do] not want to take it.”
The situation is similar in the nation’s nursing homes, where “workers have been more reluctant than residents to be vaccinated.” According to a group that represents for-profit nursing homes, half of long-term care staff are unwilling to get the COVID shots. And over time, nursing home employees who witness elderly residents dying within hours or days of getting their injections may become even more reluctant to play vaccine roulette.
Discussing the issue of mandates, a Yale executive declared in early December that it is possible to “accomplish [vaccination] without forcing people,” citing as evidence an occasion when he received a piece of cake in exchange for getting a flu shot. Acknowledging that acceptance of experimental COVID-19 vaccines might require “more than a sheet cake,” he nonetheless suggested that “small financial incentives” might be adequate to the task.
Apparently, America’s private sector has reached similar conclusions. A growing number of companies (including, but not limited to, the healthcare sector) are offering “wary staff members” financial and non-financial incentives aimed at shifting employees’ decisional balance in favor of COVID vaccination.
The carrot
What do these incentives look like?
In Nazareth, Pennsylvania, the Gracedale Nursing Home is offering employees who take the jab a one-time payment of $750, “using money received through the federal CARES Act for the pay-out.”
The county officials who approved the payments admit, “there may be some reticence on the part of some staff to be inoculated with the COVID-19 vaccination due in part to the rapidity of its development.”
In Texas, the 26,000-employee Houston Methodist hospital system is offering a $500 “hope bonus” to workers who accept the COVID vaccine. But the hospital expects to “eventually” make the injection mandatory for employees.
Other facilities are offering more modest compensation. For example, a Wisconsin nursing home is providing a $150 bonus for staff who complete both doses, amounting to about eight hours’ pay for most workers. Atlanta’s A.G. Rhodes, a long-term care company, is offering raffle prizes — TV sets, paid time off and paycheck bonuses worth up to $500 — to staff who get vaccinated.
Nursing homes in Maine are exploring strategies “such as bonuses or time off to get vaccinated,” but also view non-monetary tactics such as peer pressure as fruitful.
Eager to jump on the feel-good bandwagon and “promote the importance of vaccination,” the National Football League has offered free Super Bowl tickets and “game day experiences” to 7,500 health care workers — as long as they have received both doses of COVID vaccine.
In commerce, the global grocery chain Aldi plans to give hourly workers two hours of paid time off per dose of vaccine (a total of four hours), “ensuring that all hourly workers who wish to receive the vaccine are able to do so without concern about losing pay or taking time away from work.”
Trader Joe’s, owned by heirs of Aldi’s founders, is making the same offer, as is Dollar General, which will give employees “a one-time payment equivalent to four hours of pay after receiving a completed vaccination.”
Instacart, the online grocery platform, has announced a $25 COVID-19 “vaccine support stipend” for in-store team members and the company’s “shoppers” (individuals who get paid to shop and deliver groceries) “as they take time away from Instacart to get vaccinated.”
Think tanks and ethicists chime in
Discussions about financial incentives for vaccination have also been circulating at high-profile think tanks, and some of the proposals make Instacart’s $25 stipend pale in comparison.
For example, former presidential hopefuls John Delaney and Andrew Yang endorse the idea of paying $1500 to any American who provides proof of vaccination. Meanwhile, Brookings Institution fellow Robert Litan is advocating for a $1,000 (tax-free) payment — although the latter cleverly proposes delaying most (80%) of the payment to vaccinated individuals until the nation achieves its desired level of vaccine coverage (a moving target that front men like Dr. Peter Hotez and Dr. Anthony Fauci have been steadily “inching … upward”).
On Jan. 6, medical experts from Cornell and the University of Pennsylvania aired an opinion piece in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), criticizing “payment-for-vaccination proposals” as being “morally suspect,” but not for the reasons one might think. The two authors’ principal objection — based on the historical, Nuremberg-Code-denying and ethically dubious assumption that “people have a moral duty to be vaccinated” — is that payment would “rob the act [of being vaccinated] of moral significance.” At most, the two say that they could accept reimbursing the vaccinated for expenses, “analogous to the modest payment offered to citizens summoned for jury duty.”
While not their top objection, the two authors do acknowledge “genuine” ethical concerns “about the influence of such an incentive on decision-making” and the risk that incentives could appear to be “trading on financial insecurity.” They state:
“Offering payment as an incentive for COVID-19 vaccination may be seen as unfairly taking advantage of those U.S. residents who have lost jobs, experienced food and housing insecurity, or slipped into poverty during the pandemic.”
Bioethicist Julian Savulescu of the UK’s Oxford Centre for Practical Ethics has a solution for this concern, described at length in Britain’s Journal of Medical Ethics in November. In his treatise, Savulescu benignly proposes a “payment in kind” model rather than cash, arguing that “greater freedom to travel, opportunity to work or socialise,” and “the freedom to not wear a mask in public places … and not to socially distance” would represent “attractive benefits” for the vaccinated.
The stick
As Savulescu sees it, overt vaccine mandates come with hassles, expenses and attacks on liberty that rile the public. In the near term, therefore, and also because the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are still investigational, most officials promoting COVID-19 vaccination deny the prospect of a government mandate.
Instead, they seem only too happy to let the private sector set the tone for vaccine coercion — with monetary incentives representing the first, less threatening step.
Several developments in December suggest that the situation will get worse. First, right after the FDA granted the Pfizer vaccine its emergency use authorization, a Dec. 15 poll conducted by Yale highlighted “a surprising amount of openness to the idea of mandates for vaccines” among current and recent CEOs of major U.S. companies, including Walmart, Goldman Sachs, eBay, American Airlines, MetLife,and Pizza Hut. Although most were not yet ready to make employment contingent upon COVID vaccination, almost three-fourths (72%) of the CEOs endorsed the idea of mandates sometime “down the road.”
Right on cue, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued, on Dec. 16, pandemic guidance stating that employers “generally can mandate” that employees receive a COVID-19 vaccine if FDA-authorized or approved, subject to protections for employees who seek medical or religious exemptions.
Art Caplan, a pharmaceutical-industry-friendly celebrity bioethicist at New York University once accused by Salon of being as willing to dispense sound bites as “sound moral thinking,” recently bragged about his former role as instigator of “the whole idea of mandating flu vaccination for healthcare workers” upon pain of losing their jobs.
In response to health workers’ pushback against mandatory workplace flu shots, Caplan unsympathetically wrote in 2009, “Enough already with the whining, moaning, demonstrating and protesting by healthcare workers. Doctors, nurses, respiratory therapists, nurses’ aides and anyone else who has regular contact with patients ought to be required to get a flu shot or find another line of work.”
Caplan’s recent comments make it clear that he, and others, are gearing up to make the same case for COVID-19 vaccines. While he concedes the difficulty of mandating “something that’s out on an experimental use authorization,” he states that “once vaccines get licensed, we will see mandates [for healthcare workers and nursing home staff] within the next week.”
Caplan also predicts the adoption of similar measures from other types of employers, who “will be insisting on mandates or telling you to stay home.”
Caught off guard
Public health officials appear to have been caught off guard by the extent of COVID-19 vaccine refusal among healthcare workers, and they surely must be concerned that workers’ reported loss of faith “in big pharma and even the CDC [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention]” may make employees impervious to the relatively modest amounts being dangled as financial incentives.
Weighing the risks and benefits (an activity in which all healthcare workers — all people — should be allowed to engage), a pregnant nurse who declined the mRNA injection told the Los Angeles Times that she was “choosing the risk of COVID,” observed over many months of caring for COVID patients, over “the risk of the unknown of the vaccine.”
Dr. Peter Hotez — who initially expressed caution about coronavirus vaccines but now has become one of the injections’ most reliable cheerleaders — has inadvertently identified the real problem: the obsession with vaccines as sole solution. As Hotez recently admitted: “[W]e put all our eggs in the biotechnology basket. We’re now relying exclusively on vaccines to control this.”
An even more significant problem is the doublethink message that is now equating vaccination with “freedom.”
The brewing troubles among American states has cranked up another notch again, according to this story spotted and shared by B. And not surprisingly, Texas is at the center of it.
But first, a little contextual review.
For some time, if you’ve been watching the American states, there has been a quiet, but growing, “pushback” against federal government overreach. Some American states, for example, have passed “constitutional money” resolutions, recognizing bullion and bullion coins as legal tender. Texas went much further just a couple of years ago, and created its own state bullion depository. More recently, a legislator in South Carolina prepared a bill that that state would recognize all bullion coins as legal tender. Utah followed Texas, and created its own version of a bullion depository and went further, even starting a private bullion backed currency which it promptly started to market… in Hong Kong. Missouri, even more recently, is considering a kind of “preemptive federal nullification” law, forbidding any state official or law enforcement officer from enforcing any federal law in violation of the U.S. constitution, a measure primarily designed to protect 2nd amendment rights, but I strongly also suspect designed to protect first amendment rights. Then, of course, we’ve seen the story of Texas Governor Abbot trying to woo the NASDAQ exchange’s data centers from New York and New Jersey to Texas, along with “other exchanges.”
In that context, consider this article shared by B., a letter from the attorney general of Texas to the Department of Homeland Security, or as we like to call it here, the Reichsicherheithaupamt, in response to recent moves by the new federal administration:
Yesterday you ordered a blanket halt on nearly all deportations of illegal aliens. This complete abdication of the Department of Homeland Security’s (“DHS”) obligation to enforce federal immigration law is unlawful and will seriously and irreparably harm the State of Texas and its citizens.
Specifically, your memorandum directed DHS to impose “an immediate pause on removals of any noncitizen with a final order of removal [subject to limited exceptions] for 100 days to go into effect as soon as practical and no later than January 22, 2021.”1 Should such a directive be legal or left unchallenged, DHS could attempt to renew that directive indefinitely or issue a similar directive for an even longer period of time. That would allow the Biden Administration to grant blanket amnesty to the vast majority of the illegal aliens in this country with the stroke of a pen and without congressional approval.
Border states like Texas pay a particularly high price when the federal government fails to faithfully execute our country’s immigration laws. Your attempted halt on almost all deportations would increase the cost to Texas caused by illegal immigration. DHS itself has previously acknowledged that such a “pause on . . . removals” will cause “concrete injuries to Texas.” See Agreement between Department of Homeland Security and the State of Texas (“Agreement”) § 2.
As a result of that particularized interest in the effective operation of our immigration system, Texas has agreed to cooperate with the federal government in its execution of immigration enforcement. See Agreement. Your attempt to halt deportations violates our Agreement in multiple ways.
…
This letter serves as notice that Texas believes DHS has violated the Agreement; it is not a comprehensive list of the many legal defects in your memorandum. See Agreement § 8. Texas would like to resolve this dispute, but you must immediately rescind the January 20 Memorandum. DHS’s failure to provide Texas with pre- implementation notice of the memorandum—combined with its quick implementation of the memorandum—makes waiting impracticable. We require an immediate response or we will seek relief to enjoin your order, as contemplated by the Agreement. Agreement § 6.
Best regards,
Ken Paxton
Attorney General of Texas
And there you have it. The response, I suspect, from fedgov.inc and its “courts” will be to ignore the whole thing. Texas, you’ll recall, file suit concerning abnormalities in the last election, which suit was promptly dismissed by the Supreme Tribunal (one hesitates to call it a court any more), on the grounds that the State of Texas had no standing before the tribunal, a move which I predicted it would make. The other response, I suspect, will come in the form of other states joining in the pushback against more overreach. These too, I suspect, regardless of the form they take, will be ignored or shoved aside.
One thing that won’t be shoved aside is the continued corporate exodus from states such as New York or California, an exodus which has already benefitted Texas and Florida.
So what’s the bottom line? The pattern is clear: overreach from fedgov.inc, state push back, a federal system no longer even pretending to represent the best interests of the states, or their peoples… you get the idea. And the bottom line is that the United States are in deep trouble (and yes, the return to pre-Lincoln usage is deliberate).
Almost immediately after his inauguration, President Joe Biden began creating new government dictates via executive orders. Many of these executive orders concern coronavirus, fulfilling Biden’s promise to make ramping up a coronavirus-inspired attack on liberty a focus of his first 100 days.
One of Biden’s executive orders imposes mask and social distancing mandates on anyone in a federal building or on federal land. The mandates also apply to federal employees when they are “on-duty” anywhere. Members of the military are included in the definition of federal employees. Will citizens of Afghanistan, Iraq, and other countries where US troops are or will be “spreading democracy” be happy to learn the troops shooting up their towns are wearing masks and practicing social distancing?
Another one of Biden’s executive orders forces passengers on airplanes, trains, and other public transportation to wear masks.
Biden’s mask mandates contradict his pledge to follow the science. Studies have not established that masks are effective at preventing the spread of coronavirus. Regularly wearing a mask, though, can cause health problems.
Biden’s mask mandates are also an unconstitutional power grab. Some say these mandates are an exercise of the federal government’s constitutional authority to regulate interstate commerce. However, the Constitution gives Congress, not the president, the power to regulate interstate commerce. The president does not have the authority to issue executive orders regulating interstate commerce absent authorization by a valid law passed by Congress. The Founders gave Congress sole law-making authority, and they would be horrified by the modern practice of presidents creating law with a “stroke of a pen.”
Just as important, the Commerce Clause was not intended to give the federal government vast regulatory power. Far from giving the US government powers such as the power to require people to wear masks, the Commerce Clause was simply intended to ensure Congress could protect free trade among the states.
Biden also signed an executive order supporting using the Defense Production Act to increase the supply of vaccines, testing supplies, and other items deemed essential to respond to coronavirus. The Defense Production Act is a Cold War relic that gives the president what can fairly be called dictatorial authority to order private businesses to alter their production plans, and violate existing contracts with private customers, in order to produce goods for the government.
Mask and social distancing mandates, government control of private industry, and some of Biden’s other executive actions, such as one creating a new “Public Health Jobs Corps” with responsibilities including performing “contact tracing” on American citizens, are the type of actions one would expect from a fascist government, not a constitutional republic.
Joe Biden, who is heralded by many of his supporters as saving democracy from fascist Trump, could not even wait one day before beginning to implement fascistic measures that are completely unnecessary to protect public health. Biden will no doubt use other manufactured crises, including “climate change” and “domestic terrorism,” to expand government power and further restrict our liberty. Under Biden, fascism will not just carry an American flag. It will also wear a mask.
cover image credit naturalnews.com
SARS-CoV-2 Has Not Been Proven to Exist: The Shocking Research of Christine Massey
You can view the work of Christine Massey at her site, fluoridefreepeel.ca (also, twitter: [1]). She deserves the thanks of every thinking person.
Quoting Massey [2]: “I (CM), along with some anonymous helpers, have submitted Freedom of Information requests to various Canadian institutions seeking records that describe the isolation of ‘SARS-COV-2’ (the alleged ‘COVID-19 virus’) from an unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient.
“My requests were intentionally worded to weed out the fraudulent, illogical and unscientific claims of having ‘isolated SARS-COV-2’, of which there are many…”
“My requests were not limited to records of isolation performed by the respective institution, and not limited to records authored by the respective institution, rather they were open to records of isolation performed by anyone, anywhere on the planet.”
“Colleagues in numerous other countries have obtained responses to the same and similar information requests from dozens of additional institutions.”
“As of January 22, 2021 46 institutions and offices have responded to said requests. Every institution has failed to provide, or cite, even 1 record describing the actual isolation of any ‘SARS-COV-2’ from a patient sample by anyone, anywhere on the planet, ever.”
Here is a typical response to a Massey request, from the Ontario Ministry of Health. The response arrived aft
er four months: “This is to inform you that no responsive records were located. A reasonable search of the ministry was conducted, and no responsive records were found. Dr. David C. Williams, Chief Medical Officer of Health, is responsible for this decision.”
NO records indicating SARS-CoV-2 has been isolated. “Isolated” means “separated from other material.” It means “we actually found the virus and could identify it.”
ACTUAL ISOLATION MEANS THE VIRUS EXISTS. INABILITY TO ISOLATE IT MEANS THERE IS NO PROOF THE VIRUS EXISTS.
When, as Massey indicates, 46 separate agencies say the same thing—“no records of isolation available”—we are past wondering what is going on. We’re firmly in the territory of FRAUD.
As I’ve stated many times [3] [4], virologists are twisting and torturing the meaning of the word “isolated.” They claim they have the virus in a soup in a dish in the lab. “In a soup” is the very opposite of “isolated.”
The soup contains animal and human cells, toxic chemicals and toxic drugs, and other genetic material. Some of the cells are dying. The researchers preposterously state the dying must be the result of the virus attacking these cells.
However, the chemicals and drugs could be doing the killing. And the human and animal cells are being starved of nutrients—which fact alone is enough to cause them to die.
Therefore, there is no evidence that the purported (and un-isolated) virus is in the soup in the dish in the lab.
This “proof of isolation” is on the level of claiming the sun is the moon, Alaska is a small town on Saturn, and a rabbit is a spaceship.
It’s no accident that Christine Massey’s relentless investigation has turned up zero records of actual isolation.
People have wanted to take over the world for centuries. You could probably trace the idea of a world government back to the Garden of Eden if you had the time and the energy.
But in practical terms I think the evil plan for a global reset, a new normal, can really be traced back to 1909 when it was first suggested that it is far easier to control people if you have a good long war going on. This was long before Orwell, of course.
We can then jump to 1932 when people at Columbia University had the idea of introducing energy as a new currency. They came up with the word `technocracy’ and the idea that the world would be a much better place if it were run by scientists. The technocrats wanted to abolish private property and change education so that it merely prepared students for the work that had been selected for them by people who knew better.
This nonsense gave Aldous Huxley the idea for his novel Brave New World.
And then we jump to 1961 when a bunch of Kennedy Administration insiders, most of them Bilderbergers, unearthed the old idea of using war to keep the people under control. After much thought, however, they created a twist on that idea. They thought it would be a damned good wheeze to create massive, worldwide pollution and then blame the citizens of the world for the mess – and make them clear it up.
If you’re beginning to get the idea you know where this is going you’re right – you do.
The next things that happened were the formation of the Club of Rome in 1968 and the formation of the World Economic Forum in 1971. The Club of Rome was formed by a mixture of United Nations administrators and rich businessmen. The World Economic Forum, the band of unelected and sanctimonious networkers who hold that silly beano in Davos every year, wasn’t called that then.
In 1976 there was another move towards what we now know as Agenda 21. The United Nations decided to take control of the world’s land and to control the world’s population. The plan, created by a bunch of unelected, interfering bozos, was to put the rights of the community over the rights of the individual. This used to be called communism but they dreamt up the name communitarianism which is as much fun to spell as it is to say.
Things moved quickly after that.
In 1980, they invented the idea of sustainable development – two words that ought to strike terror into the hearts of anyone who cares about people, the world, integrity, respect and the environment.
And in 1983 they set up a commission to prepare us all for a new world order.
For the best part of a decade, they were all still fumbling around like teenage boys at a dance and then in 1991 the Club of Rome, which you will remember if you’ve been paying attention, decided that they needed to find a really whizzo way to motivate and distract the masses. They dug around and with a total lack of imagination came up with global warming.
Now, global warming had been toyed with as a threat since the 19th century but every time anyone had suggested that the planet was getting hotter it quickly became apparent that the idea was a load of rubbish because it wasn’t.
The Club of Rome put a twist on this old bit of nonsense. They said it was all our fault because we had caused the global warming which wasn’t there any more than it had been in Queen Victoria’s Day.
And then in 1992, the United Nations held a conference in Brazil and Agenda 21 was born. This was the start of real, red-blooded communitarianism and the beginning of the end of individualism. Before you could say Tony Blair or Bill Clinton or even Al Gore and a DVD which would get three out of ten for accuracy, the world was set to change.
Loads of big hitters came in at this point. Prince Charles, son of Queen Elizabeth and famous mostly for having large ears and talking to plants, was one of those who saw this a quick way to become terribly important and a world class hypocrite. Charles spent much of the following decades flying around the world in private aeroplanes telling people that they mustn’t fly around the world in aeroplanes.
It was clear that there was a ton of money to be made out of carbon trading – a completely nonsensical piece of chicanery which changed absolutely nothing except the size of the bank balances of the people running the carbon trading scam.
They planned to dumb down education, close all small companies, empty rural areas, force people to live in tower blocks in smart cities and shut down farms. Food could be grown in laboratories which would, in due course, end up being owned by people like Bill Gates.
It was also agreed that it was necessary to force the simple-minded citizens to learn how to take orders and to become compliant slaves. And so recycling was invented. It didn’t matter that all the freshly washed yoghurt cartons ended up being transported to countries thousands of miles away to be burnt or buried. The recycling wasn’t the point. This was all about compliance.
In America, the events of 9/11 enabled the US to create some wonderfully oppressive new laws. The threat of weapons of mass destruction enabled politicians to take away whatever privacy and freedom we had left. Bits and pieces of terrorism allowed other countries to bring in their own bossy-boots laws. And diseases were used as threats too. AIDS and all those funny influenzas were such a threat that we all had to change our lives and accept orders from those who had decided they were our betters.
Regionalisation was brought in as a first step towards globalisation and lovely, well-built old 19th century houses were all knocked down because they didn’t fit into 21st century building regulations. Big, well-built old houses were replaced with crappy, apartment buildings and tacky little houses made out of cardboard which did satisfy the flimsy building regulations.
Cars were targeted as being bad for the environment and we were all told that we had to stop using fossil fuels and start living on sunshine and wind. Since neither of these provides enough electricity to give everyone a lit light bulb, governments started chopping down trees, cutting them up into bits, calling the result biomass and burning it. Anyone objecting to what was clearly the beginnings of a huge scam, was dismissed as a conspiracy theorist and publicly shamed and demonised. Rural living was made damned near impossible by letting roads go to ruin, by ruining water supplies, by making sure that broadband was as slow as a snail and by introducing wild animals into country areas.
The banks decided that they would get rid of cash and replace it with a digital system. Billionaires worked out ways to change the temperature, control the weather and force us to eat laboratory made food. Psychologists were hired to brain wash us all. The police were pushed into demonising themselves as well as us. ID cards and microchips were promoted as a `really good thing’ and there was much talk of the need to depopulate the world.
And that took us up to the start of 2020.
But they still needed something else with which to control us all.
They needed something they could use to terrify us and force us to do as we were told.
CHD is calling on anyone who has suffered a vaccine side effect to do three things: file a report on the U.S. government’s VAERS website, report the injury on VaxxTracker.com and also here, on the CHD website.
Children’s Health Defense (CHD) has joined other organizations around the globe in an effort to encourage, and make it easy, for vaccine recipients to report injuries and adverse reactions to any vaccines, including the new COVID vaccines produced by Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca and others.
CHD asks that anyone who suspects they have suffered any kind of adverse side effect, from any vaccine, do all three of the following:
For U.S. residents, first file your report with the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), the official site of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Go to VaxxTracker.com to file a report. This is an outside source vs. government.
Using this page on the CHD website, share the information you reported to VaxxTracker and VAERS, including the reaction you suffered and the vaccine you received.
VaxxTracker users can click on the option to report anonymously.
“With vaccines so much in the spotlight now, we have a tremendous opportunity to draw attention to the issues of vaccine safety and vaccine choice,” said CHD President Lyn Redwood, RN, MSN. “But we need the public’s help. That’s why CHD has joined in this effort to ensure that vaccine injuries are reported, so they can be analyzed and appropriate actions can be taken.”
VaxxTracker gives people a safe place to report symptoms they believe resulted from a vaccine. Users can also view charts and graphs illustrating the types of symptoms being reported, the number of symptoms associated with specific vaccines, and other trends.
CHD and other organizations will closely monitor adverse event reports collected by VaxxTracker to follow trends and report signals to the responsible federal agencies, the vaccine manufacturers and the public, Redwood said.
“The pandemic has resulted in the largest-ever massive global effort to convince, and in some cases coerce and bully people into not only being vaccinated, but to accept without question unlicensed, experimental vaccines, rushed to market and approved for emergency use only,” Redwood said.
“Instead of focusing on prevention and effective therapeutics, mainstream media, aided by slick PR campaigns, continues to report that all COVID vaccines are safe and effective, and that they are the only way to end the pandemic.”
Still, news reports of injuries and deaths are surfacing, in the U.S. and other countries. As The Defender reported last week, as of Jan. 7, 66 deaths had been reported to VAERS as possibly being related to COVID vaccines.
By law, Redwood said, healthcare workers are required to report any adverse events they suspect may be related to a vaccine. “We know that historically, this hasn’t always happened,” she said. Sometimes, the side effect didn’t occur immediately, and neither the patient nor the doctor connected the dots.
With COVID, Redwood said, healthcare workers are even less likely to report side effects, “simply because they are overwhelmed with treating patients who have the virus.”
A 2010 federal study commissioned by HHS and performed by Harvard consultants on behalf of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality found that fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are ever reported to VAERS.
In his Dec. 18 letter to Dr. David Kessler, newly named co-chair of then-President Elect Biden’s COVID-19 Advisory Committee, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., CHD chairman and chief legal counsel, said regulatory officials can’t count on post-marketing surveillance to reveal COVID-19 vaccine injuries because VAERS “is broken.”
“COVID vaccine advocates argue that post-licensing surveillance will remedy the deficiencies in the pre-licensing clinical trial data collection system. As you know, this is not true. The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a voluntary reporting system co-administered by FDA and CDC since 1990, is a well-documented public failure.”
As The Defender reported earlier this week, a new peer-reviewed study focused primarily on the measles-mumps-rubella-varicella (MMRV) vaccine, called vaccine injury reporting systems worldwide “utterly inadequate.”
“VAERS clearly states that it is a ‘passive reporting system,’” Redwood said. “That means HHS isn’t going out of its way to track vaccine injuries — the system is totally dependent on people who are injured to do the reporting. It’s critical, as employers and health officials float the idea of mandating COVID vaccines, that all injuries get reported.”
Visit the VaxxTracker about us page to learn more about the system and how you can use it.
Announcement via Informed Consent Action Network newsletter:
ICAN’s legal team, led by Aaron Siri, has taken legal action to challenge employers/schools that require their employees/students to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Employers and schools that previously required the COVID-19 vaccine have dropped those requirements! This includes an employer that did so on the heels of ICAN’s legal team challenging the mandate in court.
If you or anyone you know is being required by an employer or school to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, ICAN is pleased to offer to support legal action on your behalf to challenge the requirement. In order to obtain this potential assistance, please email us at freedom@icandecide.org and provide a copy of the written notice from your school or employer stating that the COVID-19 vaccine is required.
Without your support, our ability to fight these illegal COVID-19 vaccine requirements would not be happening. Thank you for making our work possible!
Please note that while we hope to help everyone, and hope to have sufficient resources to do so, depending on the volume of individuals that contact us and the amount of support we receive, we cannot guarantee we will have the sources to assist everyone that contacts us.
David Rasnick [1], PhD chemist, with a long history working in the pharmaceutical industry (Abbott, Prototek, Arris), broke away from official science and served as the president of Rethinking AIDS: the group for the scientific reappraisal of the HIV hypothesis. He was a member of the Presidential AIDS Advisory Panel of South Africa.
Here is a recent explosive statement Rasnick made [2] about SARS-CoV-2 and HIV. Digesting it brings about a breakthrough revelation:
“Viruses are unstable, RNA [e.g, SARS-Cov-2] viruses especially. They are so unstable, there is no such thing as an un-mutated RNA virus. They are like snow flakes, no two are identical.”
“HIV is an RNA virus with 9,800 nucleotides. You can download the HIV Sequence Compendium here:” [3]
“In the Preface it says:”
“’The number of [genetic] sequences in the HIV database is still increasing. In total, at the end of 2017, there were 812,586 sequences in the HIV Sequence Database, an increase of 8.5% since the previous year.”
“None of the sequences of the world destroying [sarcasm], computer generated coronavirus with its 30,000 or so nucleotides, are identical.”
“The virus maniacs use computers to compare the menagerie of sequences to come up with ‘A Consensus Sequence’ for HIV, Coronavirus, and all the rest. The consensus sequence exists in two places: in computers and in strings of RNA synthesized in the lab.”
“Even consensus sequences are not stable. Different groups, using a variety of computer algorithms will invariably come up with different ‘consensus sequences’.”
The implications of Rasnick’s statement are enormous.
First of all, forget about the idea that SARS-Cov-2 has one genetic sequence.
And these multiple sequences aren’t assembled by looking through a magic microscope. They’re put together by computer programs which have pre-set algorithms.
In other words, the sequences are built by ASSUMPTIONS (not evidence) embedded in the algorithms.
ANY vaccine developed for SARS-Cov-2 (even if you believe in the theory of how vaccines are supposed to work) would face the task of producing immunity to an ever-mutating virus—not just one mutated strain, but endless numbers of mutations.
You would have an analog to seasonal flu, in which researchers make a guess about what the new version of the virus will look like every year and develop a new vaccine for that guess.
How well is this working out? Public health agencies report that, each and every year, there are a BILLION cases of seasonal flu, worldwide.
Going still deeper, if the genetic sequences of the ever-mutating viruses are not discovered, but concocted via computer programs, how likely is it that a vaccine utilizing that “data” would work?
And at the bottom of the whole pile of guesswork, is, of course, the realization that, if these genetic sequences are concocted—where is the ACTUAL isolated virus? WHERE IS THE PROOF THAT IT EXISTS?
Where is it, when, as I’ve been reporting for months now, researchers twist and torture the meaning of “isolated,” so that it indicates “the virus is somewhere in a soup in a dish in a lab”—definitely UN-isolated.
Such is the “science” of modern virology.
But don’t worry, be happy, the test “for the coronavirus” must be accurate, the case and death numbers must be accurate, and the consequent lockdowns which are destroying national economies and hundreds of millions of lives are necessary…right?
Sure. Why not? Let’s say it’s all, all right. Everybody can go back to sleep and let tyrants demolish Earth civilization.
OR, you can REBEL against the Police State built on a house-of-cards hoax called “science.”
As opposed to “the virus,” liberty and freedom are quite real. People can feel them in their bones, in their minds and souls. Even and especially if they are slaves, they can feel them.
Speaking of whether a virus actually exists, here is an article I’ve reposted several times:
DOES HIV EXIST? AN EXPLOSIVE INTERVIEW
Before we get to Christine Johnson’s interview, a bit of background.
My first book, AIDS INC., was published in 1988. The research I engaged in then formed a foundation for my recent work in exposing the vast fraud called COVID-19.
In 1987-88, my main question eventually became: does HIV cause AIDS? For months, I had blithely assumed the obvious answer was yes. This created havoc in my investigation, because I was facing contradictions I couldn’t solve.
For example, in parts of Africa, people who were chronically ill and dying obviously needed no push from a new virus. All their “AIDS” conditions and symptoms could be explained by their environment: contaminated water supplies; sewage pumped directly into the drinking water; protein-calorie malnutrition; hunger, starvation; medical treatment with immunosuppressive vaccines and drugs; toxic pesticides; fertile farm land stolen by corporations and governments; wars; extreme poverty. The virus cover story actually obscured all these ongoing crimes.
Finally, in the summer of 1987, I found several researchers who were rejecting the notion that HIV caused AIDS. Their reports were persuasive.
I’m shortcutting a great deal of my 1987-8 investigation here, but once HIV was out of the picture for me, many pieces fell into place. I discovered that, in EVERY group supposedly at “high-risk” for AIDS, their conditions and symptoms could be entirely explained by factors that had nothing to do with a new virus.
AIDS was not one condition. It was an umbrella label, used to re-package a number of immunosuppressive conditions and create the illusion of a new and unique and single “pandemic.”
Several years after the publication of AIDS INC., I became aware of a quite different emerging debate going on under the surface of research: DOES HIV EXIST?
Was the purported virus ever truly discovered?
And THAT question led to: what is the correct procedure for discovering a new virus?
The following 1997 interview, conducted by brilliant freelance journalist, Christine Johnson, delves into these questions:
How should researchers prove that a particular virus exists? How should they isolate it? What are the correct steps?
These questions, and their answers, reside at the heart of most disease research—and yet, overwhelmingly, doctors never explore them or even consider them.
Johnson interviews Dr. Eleni Papadopulos, “a biophysicist and leader of a group of HIV/AIDS scientists from Perth in Western Australia. Over the past decade and more she and her colleagues have published many scientific papers questioning the HIV/AIDS hypothesis…”
Here I’m publishing and highlighting excerpts from the interview [4] [5]. Technical issues are discussed. Grasping them is not the easiest exercise you’ve ever done, but I believe the serious reader can comprehend the vital essentials.
CJ: Does HIV cause AIDS?
EP: There is no proof that HIV causes AIDS.
CJ: Why not?
EP: For many reasons, but most importantly, because there is no proof that HIV exists.
… CJ: Didn’t Luc Montagnier and Robert Gallo [purportedly the co-discoverers of HIV] isolate HIV back in the early eighties?
EP: No. In the papers published in Science by those two research groups, there is no proof of the isolation of a retrovirus from AIDS patients. [HIV is said to be a retrovirus.]
CJ: They say they did isolate a virus.
EP: Our interpretation of the data differs. To prove the existence of a virus you need to do three things. First, culture cells and find a particle you think might be a virus. Obviously, at the very least, that particle should look like a virus. Second, you have to devise a method to get that particle on its own so you can take it to pieces and analyze precisely what makes it up. Then you need to prove the particle can make faithful copies of itself. In other words, that it can replicate.
CJ: Can’t you just look down a microscope and say there’s a virus in the cultures?
EP: No, you can’t. Not all particles that look like viruses are viruses.
… CJ: My understanding is that high-speed centrifugation is used to produce samples consisting exclusively of objects having the same density, a so-called “density-purified sample.” Electron microscopy is used to see if these density-purified samples consist of objects which all have the same appearance — in which case the sample is an isolate — and if this appearance matches that of a retrovirus, in terms of size, shape, and so forth. If all this is true, then you are three steps into the procedure for obtaining a retroviral isolate. (1) You have an isolate, and the isolate consists of objects with the same (2) density and (3) appearance of a retrovirus. Then you have to examine this isolate further, to see if the objects in it contain reverse transcriptase [an enzyme] and will replicate when placed in new cultures. Only then can you rightfully declare that you have obtained a retroviral isolate.
EP: Exactly. It was discovered that retroviral particles have a physical property which enables them to be separated from other material in cell cultures. That property is their buoyancy, or density, and this was utilized to purify the particles by a process called density gradient centrifugation.
The technology is complicated, but the concept is extremely simple. You prepare a test tube containing a solution of sucrose, ordinary table sugar, made so the solution is light at the top but gradually becomes heavier, or more dense, towards the bottom. Meanwhile, you grow whatever cells you think may contain your retrovirus. If you’re right, retroviral particles will be released from the cells and pass into the culture fluids. When you think everything is ready, you decant a specimen of culture fluids and gently place a drop on top of the sugar solution. Then you spin the test tube at extremely high speeds. This generates tremendous forces, and particles present in that drop of fluid are forced through the sugar solution until they reach a point where their buoyancy prevents them from penetrating any further. In other words, they drift down the density gradient until they reach a spot where their own density is the same as that region of the sugar solution. When they get there they stop, all together. To use virological jargon, that’s where they band. Retroviruses band at a characteristic point. In sucrose solutions they band at a point where the density is 1.16 gm/ml.
That band can then be selectively extracted and photographed with an electron microscope. The picture is called an electron micrograph, or EM. The electron microscope enables particles the size of retroviruses to be seen, and to be characterized by their appearance.
CJ: So, examination with the electron microscope tells you what fish you’ve caught?
EP: Not only that. It’s the only way to know if you’ve caught a fish. Or anything at all.
CJ: Did Montagnier and Gallo do this?
EP: This is one of the many problems. Montagnier and Gallo did use density gradient banding, but for some unknown reason they did not publish any Ems [photos] of the material at 1.16 gm/ml…this is quite puzzling because in 1973 the Pasteur Institute hosted a meeting attended by scientists, some of whom are now amongst the leading HIV experts. At that meeting the method of retroviral isolation was thoroughly discussed, and photographing the 1.16 band of the density gradient was considered absolutely essential.
CJ: But Montagnier and Gallo did publish photographs of virus particles.
EP: No. Montagnier and Gallo published electron micrographs of culture fluids that had not been centrifuged, or even separated from the culture cells, for that matter. These EMs contained, in addition to many other things, including the culture cells and other things that clearly are not retroviruses, a few particles which Montagnier and Gallo claimed are retroviruses, and which all belonged to the same retroviral species, now called HIV. But photographs of unpurified particles don’t prove that those particles are viruses. The existence of HIV was not established by Montagnier and Gallo — or anyone since — using the method presented at the 1973 meeting.
CJ: And what was that method?
EP: All the steps I have just told you. The only scientific method that exists. Culture cells, find a particle, isolate the particle, take it to pieces, find out what’s inside, and then prove those particles are able to make more of the same with the same constituents when they’re added to a culture of uninfected cells.
CJ: So before AIDS came along there was a well-tried method for proving the existence of a retrovirus, but Montagnier and Gallo did not follow this method?
EP: They used some of the techniques, but they did not undertake every step including proving what particles, if any, are in the 1.16 gm/ml band of the density gradient, the density that defines retroviral particles.
CJ: But what about their pictures?
EP: Montagnier’s and Gallo’s electron micrographs…are of entire cell cultures, or of unpurified fluids from cultures…”
—end of interview excerpt—
If you grasp the essentials of this discussion, you’ll see there is every reason to doubt the existence of HIV, because the methods for proving its existence were not followed.
And so…as I’ve reported these past few months, there is every reason to doubt and reject the existence of the COVID virus, since correct large-scale electron microscope studies have never been done.
I kept the Christine Johnson interview, and other similar information, in mind when, for example, I explored the dud epidemics called SARS and 2009 Swine Flu.
How many viruses have been named as causes of disease, when in fact those viruses have never been isolated or proved to exist?
Of course, conventional-consensus researchers and doctors will scoff at any attempt to raise these issues. For them, “the science is settled.” Meaning: they don’t want to think. They don’t want to stir the waters.
A few years ago, chemist David Rasnick sent a request to the CDC, asking for evidence demonstrating that the Ebola virus had ever been isolated from a human. The answers he received did not begin to approach a level of certainty.
After 30 years working as a reporter in the area of deep medical-research fraud, I’ve seen that false science occurs in levels.
The deeper you go, the stranger it gets. To put it another way: the deeper you go, the worse it gets.
The technology envisioned is straight out of transhumanist Ray Kurzweil’s The Singuilarity:
Microsoft has been granted a patent for technology that would “reanimate” the dead by re-creating them via social media posts, videos and private messages that could even be downloaded into a 3D lifelike model of the deceased.
Not creepy at all.
“The tech giant has raised the possibility of creating an AI-based chatbot that would be built upon the profile of a person, which includes their “images, voice data, social media posts, electronic messages,” among other types of personal information,” reports IGN. “It’s understood that the chatbot would then be able to simulate human conversation through voice commands and/or text chats.”
The patent explains that the chatbot could be a historical figure, a celebrity, a friend or relative or even a copy of “the user creating/training the chat bot
While the technology is, as the article states, “creepy,” there’s something much creepier lurking in the nooks and crannies. Consider simply the “socio-epistemological” effects. If such technology, along with holograms, artificial intelligence, and robotics were to become widespread, the result is that one might never know if the person one sees on the news or hears on the radio, for example, is indeed the real person, and the remarks really representative of the person himself. We have already seen stories on the internet about a recent appearance of Pope Francis at the Vatican “balcony” having been a hologram. Whether or not the story was real or not is not in view here. The fact that the technology exists and that so many people were willing to believe that his appearance might have been a hologram is the point. Consider, for example, the following video:
So in a world of holograms, “re-animated” people on social media, robots, and so on, the individual is left in the state of “Is it real, or is it Memorex?” Reality and truth become subject to technological manipulation.
So here’s my high octane speculation: what will happen in such a world? Two things stand out among many many possibilities. The first is a bifurcation of society. Increasingly, in a situation of socio-epistemological breakdown, a certain segment of humanity (probably a small one) will opt for reality, truth, and normalcy, and this segment will manifest itself by local relationships, trust, and “analogue” technologies (such as books, or owning a stereo and CDs, television and DVDs, and so on). In other words, such technologies as it possesses and relies upon will not easily be subject to external manipulation. To a certain extent, people who know me well know of my disdain for ebooks, or downloading films online to watch. Conversely, I suspect the vast majority of people will prefer the “virtual” reality, so long as it is thrilling, entertaining, and so on. The second thing that I strongly suspect will happen is that the latter group, as it pulls away from the first, will reach an inflection point where it is no longer identifiably human, or “normal”, and by that I mean no longer able to show or feel genuine empathy, compassion, or concern. It may end up being even less human than the “reanimated” personalities that populate its virtual existence. And its ability to know, reason, or deal with reality will be subject to an almost total epistemological collapse. “Body doubles” will so proliferate that ordinary society breaks down utterly.
I don’t know about you, but I’ve already made my decision as to which group I want to be in.
Decades of research has already determined that exposure to Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) and Radio Frequency (RF) Radiation is biologically harmful. Children seem to be particularly vulnerable to it.
Common sources of RF radiation include “Smart” and/or wireless technology: cell phones, cell towers, personal and “Smart” appliances, devices and, wearables (see 1, 2), utility “Smart” meters (electric, gas, and water), WiFi routers, and more.
In regard to 5G technology, there is research that has proven that exposure is NOT SAFE and the majority of scientists worldwide are opposed to deployment. Cities worldwide AND entire countries have taken action to ban, delay, halt, and limit installation AS WELL AS issue moratoriums due to health, safety, environmental and economic risks. Unfortunately, where it hasn’t been banned, the “Race to 5G” continues despite numerous petitions to stop deployment as well as scientific papers that warn against increasing the already dangerously high levels of electromagnetic radiation aka “Electrosmog.”
Additional research was recently published that indicates the same – exposure is harmful and some are more vulnerable than others.
Wireless and Power Frequency EMFs “Impact Oxidative Balance” Says Swiss Expert Group
The Swiss expert group on electromagnetic fields and non-ionising radiation BERENIS just released a major evaluation of the scientific evidence on oxidative stress in their January 2021 newsletter finding that the majority of research studies have found effects which could be more severe for those with preexisting conditions and the more vulnerable young and old.
This issue is central to the landmark US federal case EHT et al. v FCC which contends the FCC has ignored the scientific evidence presented to them showing harm.
The BERENIS review confirms that yes there is scientific evidence showing adverse impacts from non ionizing radiation as the “majority of the animal and more than half of the cell studies provided evidence of increased oxidative stress caused by RF-EMF or ELF-MF.” Despite the methodological issues in the body of research “EMF exposure, even in the low dose range, can lead to changes in oxidative balance.” Furthermore as pre-existing conditions, such as immune deficiencies or diseases (diabetes, neurodegenerative diseases), compromise the body’s defence mechanisms, including antioxidative protection, “it is therefore possible that individuals with these conditions experience more severe health effects.”
“Is there evidence for oxidative stress caused by electromagnetic fields? A summary of relevant observations in experimental animal and cell experiments related to health effects in the last ten years” by Prof Meike Mevissen, University of Bern Dr David Schürmann, University of Basel.
The newsletter is prepared under contract to the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN). The newsletter only presented a short summary. The full report will be published later by the Swiss Federal Office of the Environment.
Excerpts from the conclusions
“Certainly, some studies are burdened with methodological uncertainties and weaknesses or are not very comprehensive in terms of exposure time, dose, number and quantitative analysis of the biomarkers used, to name a few. Taking these methodological weaknesses into account, nonetheless, a tendency becomes apparent, namely that EMF exposure, even in the low dose range, can lead to changes in oxidative balance.
“Conclusions
In summary, the majority of the animal and more than half of the cell studies provided evidence of increased oxidative stress caused by RF-EMF or ELF-MF. This notion is based on observations in a large number of cell types, applying different exposure times and dosages (SAR or field strengths), also in the range of the regulatory limits. Certainly, some studies are burdened with methodological uncertainties and weaknesses or are not very comprehensive in terms of exposure time, dose, number and quantitative analysis of the biomarkers used, to name a few. Taking these methodological weaknesses into account, nonetheless, a tendency becomes apparent, namely that EMF exposure, even in the low dose range, can lead to changes in oxidative balance. Organisms and cells are generally able to react to oxidative stress, and many studies showed adaptation to EMF exposure after a recovery phase. Pre-existing conditions, such as immune deficiencies or diseases (diabetes, neurodegenerative diseases), compromise the body’s defence mechanisms, including antioxidative protection, and it is therefore possible that individuals with these conditions experience more severe health effects. In addition, the studies show that very young and elderly individuals can react less efficiently to oxidative stress induced by EMF, which of course also applies to other stressors that cause oxidative stress. More extensive studies under standardised conditions are necessary, to better understand and confirm these phenomena and observations.”
Summary of assessed studies related to EMF and oxidative stress
“The majority of animal studies investigating oxidative stress and EMF (ELF-MF and RF-EMF) have been published dealing with possible effects on the nervous system and reproduction, with a predominance for studies on increased ROS production and/or antioxidant protection mechanisms in the brain or specific brain regions. Concurrently, neural cells or neuron-like cells were also most frequently used in cell studies. Animal studies on oxidative stress related to a possible impairment of reproduction and development follow in second place, examining the impact of EMF exposure on various aspects and stages (sperm maturation, early stages of pregnancy such as implantation, effects in foetuses directly after birth and after a few weeks upon exposure of the mother). These animal studies were complemented by some cell studies, mainly executed in mouse cell lines of the male reproductive system and with spermatozoa. Not unexpectedly, more cell studies were published overall. In addition to the above mentioned cell types of the nervous and reproductive system, immune cells and isolated cells from the skin and epithelia were employed.”
“There is good evidence for an influence on cellular signalling pathways regulated by ROS. Here, the magnitude of activation as well as the possibility of compensation must be taken into account, when evaluating health impact in case of exhaustion of counter-regulation. Again, the state of differentiation was critical; differentiated cells reacted less sensitively than undifferentiated or early stage differentiated cells. Higher dose exposures displayed more pronounced effects, however, an effect caused by increase in temperature cannot always be ruled out. Nevertheless, there were also observations of increased oxidative stress in exposures conditions with field strengths/SAR values below the regulatory limits. Other methodological factors, such as keeping sham controls in another incubator, also pose a risk of false-positive results. Here, for example, vibrations, EMF of the incubator or their inadequate shielding come into play and it cannot be excluded that these factors have influenced the outcome and conclusion of some studies. The duration of exposure also seems to be relevant; shorter exposure durations of a few hours tended to increase ROS production and reduce antioxidative processes more often than when long exposures were applied.”
“Similar to findings for the central nervous system, there is evidence in the lymphoid system that the effects of EMF (RF-EMF including WiFi) are age-dependent. Very young animals could not compensate for oxidative stress, even after a recovery phase, whereas this was possible in older animals after complete development of the anti-oxidative protection system. The time of analysis of oxidative stress seems to play also a role in cell systems and short-term exposure was more likely to lead to an increase in oxidative stress in immune as well as in leukaemia cells. This increase was mostly temporary and the processes triggered by EMF were in part similar to a normal immune response.”
“Consequences of EMF on reproduction
The influence of EMF on fertility and on the development of foetuses is also an important issue, as developing organisms and cells are particularly sensitive to external stress factors. Effects of EMF on reproduction have been studied in male reproductive organs and in sperm and their precursors. In addition, dams were exposed to EMF to investigate possible impairment in the early and late stages of pregnancy and in the offspring.
The majority of the findings from the animal studies indicate a functional and morphological impairment of spermatozoa by RF-EMF exposure, which is associated with an increase of ROS, reduction of antioxidant capacity and lipid peroxidation. Here as well, a preceding insult or pre-existing condition (i.e. diabetes) was a risk factor that led to increased oxidative stress by exposure that could not be compensated. After exposure of the dams, an age-dependent effect on oxidative stress markers was seen in the offspring, but this was different depending on the organ system and in some cases did not show any evidence for induced oxidative stress. A study on impairments in early stages of pregnancy provided indications for reduced blastocyst implantation.
With regard to their role in fertility, cells of the reproductive system were also examined for effects of EMF. The majority of cell studies published in the last 10 years focused on investigations of RF-EMF effects, so that hardly any data are available on the influence of ELF-MF on oxidative balance. Due to their temperature sensitivity, developmental characteristics and accessibility, mainly male germ cells and cells from the reproductive organ were used in this context. As they are very temperature sensitive, temperature fluctuations must be excluded during exposure, otherwise false-positive findings will influence the evaluation. This was not the case in many cell studies, meaning that such false-positive findings cannot be excluded. All in all, the few cell studies do not provide any reliable evidence for an impairment of sperm cells and their precursors by EMF-induced oxidative stress.”
“Reactive oxygen species (ROS) are involved in many processes of the organism, including cellular signalling pathways; therefore, physiological concentrations of ROS in cells need to be maintained by engaging protective mechanisms (antioxidative enzymes and antioxidants). On the other hand, external and internal factors influence the amount of ROS by altering the activity of the ROS-forming and -degrading enzymes. For instance, the increased energy requirement during physical activity leads to a temporary oxidative stress and many environmental stress factors such as UV light or radioactive irradiation act via ROS formation. An oxidative imbalance has an effect on many important physiological processes and functions, such as inflammation, cell proliferation and differentiation, wound healing, neuronal activity, reproduction and behaviour by altering biochemical processes or even leading to DNA damage or peroxidation of fats. In particular, changes in cell proliferation and differentiation are closely related to carcinogenesis and the growth and development of organisms.”
The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is a U.S. Government funded database that tracks injuries and deaths caused by vaccines.
A 2011 report by Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, Inc. for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) stated that fewer than one percent of all vaccine adverse events are reported to the government:
Although 25% of ambulatory patients experience an adverse drug event, less than 0.3% of all adverse drug events and 1-13% of serious events are reported to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Likewise, fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported. Low reporting rates preclude or slow the identification of “problem” drugs and vaccines that endanger public health. New surveillance methods for drug and vaccine adverse effects are needed. (Source.)
Currently, data from the two experimental mRNA COVID injections that have been voluntarily reported is available for a two week period from the end of December through January 13, 2021.
I was 28 weeks and 5 days pregnant when I received the first dose of the COVID19 vaccine. Two days later (12/25/2020 in the afternoon), I noticed decreased motion of the baby.
The baby was found to not have a heartbeat in the early am on 12/26/2020 and I delivered a 2lb 7oz nonviable female fetus at 29 weeks gestation. (Source.)
As we have previously reported here at Health Impact News, the guidelines for emergency use of the experimental mRNA Pfizer injection in the UK warned pregnant women, and women planning to soon become pregnant, to NOT get the experimental jab.
But the FDA guidelines issued in the U.S. for the same experimental Pfizer injection did not include such warnings. See:
When reading the accompanying notes from these cases that were reported to VAERS, it is clear that many healthcare professionals are reluctant to report these cases, probably fearing repercussions for doing so.
In some cases, family members filed the report because the healthcare facility refused to do.
Some examples:
(VAERS ID # 913733) My grandmother died a few hours after receiving the moderna covid vaccine booster 1. While I don’t expect that the events are related, the treating hospital did not acknowledge this and I wanted to be sure a report was made.
(VAERS ID # 914621) Resident in our long term care facility who received first dose of Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine on 12/22/2020, only documented side effect was mild fatigue after receiving. She passed away on 12/27/2020 of natural causes per report. Has previously been in & out of hospice care, resided in nursing home for 9+ years, elderly with dementia. Due to proximity of vaccination we felt we should report the death, even though it is not believed to be related.
(VAERS ID # 914895) Injection given on 12/28/20 – no adverse events and no issues yesterday; Death today, 12/30/20, approx.. 2am today (unknown if related – Administrator marked as natural causes)
Since so few reports are actually recorded in the VAERS reporting system, what is the true number of people being killed by these lethal injections? For those who are not killed, how many will be crippled or suffer autoimmune diseases for the rest of their lives?
If during pre-COVID times less than 1% of all vaccine injuries and deaths were reported to VAERS, let’s make a conservative estimate and say that because it is widely known that the COVID injections were fast-tracked to market and have not yet been approved by the FDA, that a greater percentage are being reported, like 10% of the adverse reactions, including deaths.
We are looking at a pace of nearly 1000 deaths per week by injection due to non-FDA approved mRNA injections among nearly 40,000 cases a week of injuries due to these injections.
This is a public health crisis that is 100% avoidable and 100% caused by Big Pharma and the U.S. Government!
While Almost ALL Deaths in 2020 Were Recorded as COVID Deaths, Here’s Why NO Deaths in 2021 Will be Recorded as Vaccine Deaths
It is well known now that due to federal funding for COVID in 2020 that nearly all deaths were recorded as “COVID” deaths, even in cases where the death occurred by traffic accident, shooting, heart attack, etc.
Now we are seeing the exact opposite happen with the roll-out of the COVID experimental injections. NONE of them are being recorded as vaccine deaths. Why?
Because the CDC does not provide a category for “vaccine deaths” to be used on death certificates. To learn more about this, see an article we published in 2018 from a Death Certificate Clerk whistleblower who revealed the politics behind listing “cause of death” on death certificates.
Our current system for capturing mortality rates can and does provide a mostly uninvestigated and inaccurate picture of what causes a death. The process for creating and registering causes of death for public records is a complicated, convoluted, politicized, completely open to both ignorance and the manipulations of personal, professional, and governmental interests.
I’m the one creating these statistics and I offer you this: If you take one thing away from this, take away a healthier skepticism about even the most accepted mainstream, nationally reported, CDC or other ‘scientific’ statistics.
What most people don’t know is that doctors are not allowed to attest to anything that is not a strictly NATURAL cause of death. (Full article.)
Criminal Charges for MURDER Need to be Filed IMMEDIATELY – Experimental Injections MUST BE HALTED!!
We are witnessing the mass murder of Americans right before our very eyes, and the genocide of our elderly population!
Complicit with these murders is the Pharma-controlled corporate media that not only fails to publish these statistics derived from a government reporting system, but actually publishes lies and fake news to encourage people to receive lethal injections.
As an investigative journalist, I have consistently presented the evidence that should be used to arrest and charge the criminals behind this atrocity which is nothing less than MASS MURDER, and crimes against humanity.
In the spirit and legal protection of the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights, and the First Amendment which protects Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press to criticize public officials, here is the short list of government officials who need to be arrested immediately and have charges brought against them for intent to commit mass murder by lethal injections, among many other charges such as fraud.
There are literally thousands, if not tens of thousands that should be arrested and charged, but these are the top 3 most responsible and who should be brought to justice immediately.
MURDERERS ROW
Dr. Anthony Fauci – Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)
The evidence against Anthony Fauci for mass murder is overwhelming. Not only does he profit from bringing an experimental mRNA vaccine to market, something he has worked on for decades together with Bill Gates, but he has publicly demonized safer, effective drugs already approved by the FDA, such as hydroxychloroquine, that many doctors have been using successfully to treat COVID patients.
He has used his public office at the NIH to bring great harm and death against the American people, by capitalizing on so-called “health crises” such as COVID, and HIV in the past.
For more of the evidence against Anthony Fauci, see:
Dr. Stephen Hahn – Director of the Food and Drug Administration (Former)
Stephen Hahn was appointed by President Trump to lead the FDA, and his actions prevented doctors across the country in emergency room and hospital settings from using safe, already approved by the FDA, drugs that doctors were saving lives with, such as hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin.
In addition, Hahn allowed fast-track approval of the experimental mRNA COVID injections illegally, because there were already other successful therapeutics in the market to treat COVID.
Hahn also ignored an ADMINISTRATIVE STAY OF ACTION that was filed with the Department of Health and Human Services and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to stop emergency use authorization of the COVID injections, because the trials used the faulty PCR tests to determine the presence of COVID in evaluating the “effectiveness” of these new experimental injections. See:
His failure to act upon this “Stay of Action” makes him criminally liable for all of these deaths resulting from the COVID experimental mRNA injections. For more evidence against Stephen Hahn, see:
I don’t know if Donald Trump is the current or only former President of the United States (depends who you ask), but one thing nobody can disagree about is that President Trump initiated “Operation Warp Speed” which resulted in the theft of America’s wealth and transfer over to Big Pharma, for several TRILLION dollars, to develop experimental mRNA COVID vaccines.
He ordered the military to participate in their distribution, and he pressured the FDA to issue emergency use authorization, threatening to fire the FDA director for not issuing the EUA quicker.
Up until his last day of this first term, he bragged about how these “vaccines” were brought to market in record time, whereas the normal FDA approval process takes 5-10 years.
These experimental COVID mRNA injections would not be in the market today killing people, if it were not for President Trump leading the way to their approval.
Donald J. Trump should be arrested and charged with mass-murder. For more evidence against President Trump, see:
If these three are indicted by a Grand Jury, brought to trial in front of a jury of their “peers”, and then convicted as “guilty,” they should be publicly hanged on a gallows for all to see, and Joe Biden and his administration and health officials should be warned that they are next, unless they stop these injections IMMEDIATELY.
To do this, of course, we will need the restoration or formation of militia groups as provided by the Constitution, and they will probably have to convene Grand Juries to bring charges against corrupt judges first, to remove them from the bench so honest judges can be appointed, or elected, so law and order can be restored to the Court Houses.
Constitutional Sheriffs[21] can also be utilized (many of their deputies serve as bailiffs in the court rooms,) as these crimes have been committed in probably every county in the U.S. where people have been injured or killed by these injections, and most every county is going to have dishonest, corrupt judges who need to be brought to justice and removed from the bench.
Because otherwise there is little hope for any political solution. We the People need to start exercising our Constitutional rights, and take our country back from the Globalist pedophiles who now run the show.
Comment on this article or connect with Brian Shilhavy at Health Impact News
U.S. Never-Ending Wars: Thirty Years Ago, America’s “First War” Against Iraq
Thirty years ago. The so-called “Gulf War” (Iraq War I) was launched against Iraq on January 17, 1991.
Extensive crimes against humanity have been committed.
On January 16, President George H. Walker Bush announced the start of what was called “Operation Desert Storm”, which was portrayed as “a peace-making operation” allegedly “to expel occupying Iraqi forces from Kuwait”.
There for 60 miles every vehicle was strafed or bombed, every windshield is shattered, every tank is burned, every truck is riddled with shell fragments. No survivors are known or likely. The cabs of trucks were bombed so much that they were pushed into the ground, and it’s impossible to see if they contain drivers or not. Windshields were melted away, and huge tanks were reduced to shrapnel.
Those extensive crimes against humanity were the beginning of a long and unending war against the people of Iraq.
Historians often refer to the One hundred years war between England and France which in fact lasted more than One Hundred years. (1337-1453).
They also refer to devastation and destruction underlying The Thirty Years’ War (1618-1648) which led to the Westphalia Peace Treaty in 1648.
A Thirty Years Wars against Iraq was launched on January 17, 1991. It was called “The Gulf War”. It was heralded as a humanitarian intervention. A no fly zone was established. The Northern Republic of Kurdistan gained de facto “autonomy”, it became a US sponsored proxy state.
It was the onslaught of what should be identified by historians as:
The 30 years criminal war of the US against the people of Iraq. (1991- )
Reviewing the history of US aggression against Iraq, we can distinguish three distinct stages:
Iraq Wars I (January 1991), Iraq War II (March 2003) and Iraq War III (August 2014), over several US presidencies, all of which are characterized by extensive crimes against humanity:
Iraq War I: The Gulf War (January 1991 launched under George H. W. Bush), invoking Iraq’s military occupation of Kuwait;
Iraq War II: The War on Iraq (March 2003 under President George W. Bush), invoking Saddam’s “Weapons of Mass Destruction”
Iraq War II: The August 2014 War on the Islamic State (ISIS) under president Obama, consisting of a massive carpet bombing endeavour which was casually described bt the media as an anti-terrorist operation.
These three so-called wars were part of a Thirty Year War which is still ongoing. It is a never-ending war.
The war on Afghanistan did not start in October 2001.
The US declared war on Afghanistan in 1979 under the label of the Soviet-Afghan War, which was was sustained by US support to Al Qaeda’s Mujahideen referred to by President Ronald Reagan as “Freedom Fighters”.
President Reagan Meets leaders of Afghanistan’s Mujahideen at the White House (1980s)
The US has been at war with Afghanistan for over forty years.
Reflecting on Joe Biden. Firm Supporter of Never Ending Wars
In 2003, Joe Biden as Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee firmly endorsed the Bush Administration’s decision to invade Iraq in 2003 on the grounds that Saddam Hussein “had weapons of mass destruction”.
“The American People were deceived into this war”, said Senator Dick Durbin. Do not let yourself be deceived again by Joe Biden.
“Sen. Joe Biden is running a sham hearing. It is clear that Biden and most of the Congressional leadership have pre-ordained a conclusion that seeks to remove Saddam Hussein from power regardless of the facts, and are using these hearings to provide political cover for a massive military attack on Iraq. These hearings have nothing to do with an objective search for the truth, but rather seek to line up like-minded witnesses who will buttress this pre-determined result…. This isn’t American democracy in action, it’s the failure of American democracy.
Without Joe Biden’s endorsement of the WMD narrative, would the Democrats have endorsed the invasion of Iraq?
See the video above.
Obama’s “Operation Resolve” directed against ISIL-ISIS-Daesh (August 2014)
I should mention that during his tenure as Vice President, Joe Biden was firmly supportive of the carpet bombing of Iraq ordered by President Obama starting in August 2014 under a “Fake” anti-terrorist operation against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL-ISIS-Daesh). On August 7, 2014: “President Obama authorises the first air strikes to protect US diplomats and aid Iraqi government forces”.
What shear nonsense. Why is this anti-terrorist operation “Fake”? ISIL-ISIS-Daesh is an al Qaeda affiliate, a creation of US intelligence.
The operation was directed against Iraqi and Syrian civilians. It resulted in extensive destruction of the civilian infrastructure of both countries. ISIS was the pretext which was heralded by the media.
And in September 2014, Obama announced the formation of “an anti-ISIS coalition” with the participation of NATO member states as well as US allies in Middle East (including Israel, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain, etc).
The incursion of the Islamic State (IS) brigades from Syria into Iraq starting in June 2014 was part of a carefully planned military-intelligence operation supported covertly by the US, NATO and Israel.
The counter-terrorism mandate was a fiction.
The Islamic State was protected by the US and its allies. If they had wanted to eliminate the Islamic State brigades, they could have “carpet” bombed their convoys of Toyota pickup trucks when they crossed the desert from Syria into Iraq in June.
Joe Biden wasted no time getting to work on his first 2 days as President.
That work included snubbing the minorities.
Firing US Surgeon General Dr. Jerome Adams, a black man.
Signing a mask mandate for federal employees on federal property which he immediately violated.
Banished US troops to a parking garage.
Broke promises like not banning fracking and not wanting to make covid vaccinations mandatory.
Hiring Tom Vilsack (Mr. Monsanto) as his agriculture secretary.
The list goes on and on, but the one positive thing from all this is that lies are being revealed and lies create truth seekers.
[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, Lbry/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.]
Eagle Scout Sues Merck, Alleges Gardasil HPV Vaccine Destroyed His Life
This is the fifth Gardasil lawsuit Baum Hedlund and CHD Chairman Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. filed against Merck, challenging the company’s dangerous and defective HPV vaccine for causing severe and life-changing injuries.
Before he got the Gardasil vaccine, our client Michael Colbath was a superlative athlete and scholar. A happy, healthy and active boy, he was an enthusiastic member of his school’s academic teams, soccer player, and long-distance runner who loved backpacking and skiing. At five years old, he could backpack five miles with ease. At six, he taught himself to speed read and handed in a book report on a 600-page novel.
Michael was a committed boy scout and member of his middle school’s cross-country team. He pursued his passions for robotics, played in his school band and practiced Tae Kwon Do, earning his second-degree black belt at age 14, just months before he received the Gardasil HPV vaccine.
He raised service dogs for the disabled and earned his certification in first aid with special training in emergency preparedness.
After the vaccine, that all went away.
Years of Merck’s relentless marketing persuaded Kathy Colbath to allow her child to receive Gardasil. Merck falsely claimed that Gardasil was safe and effective, and that it would protect children against certain cancers. Merck’s advertising said that good mothers must vaccinate their teenagers with Gardasil or face tragic consequences.
In the months following his first injection, exhaustion and extreme fatigue forced Michael away from the sports and hobbies that had been centerpieces of his life. He had trouble staying awake during the school day.
After his second Gardasil injection, Michael developed severe foot pain in both feet, so severe that he needed crutches to attend school. He had trouble waking up in the morning and getting out of bed.
As his symptoms worsened, multiple physicians and specialists treated him for migraine headaches; body pains and muscle aches; chronic fatigue; hypersomnolence (sleeping 15-22 hours in a 24-hour period), sleep drunkenness, unrefreshing sleep; excessive sweating, lightheadedness, and tachycardia; tunnel vision on standing; difficulty with concentration and memory; confusion and brain fog; intermittent or episodic paralysis, numbness; and stomach pains.
Only this unusual talent and drive allowed him to earn admission into the University of California San Diego (UCSD), as a data science major. He can only take a class or two at a time.
Michael is currently taking a daily regimen of 10 strong medications. He can only walk about 500 steps per day.
If Mrs. Colbath had known that Gardasil could create these health issues, she never would have allowed him to receive it.
This is the fifth Gardasil lawsuit Baum Hedlund and I have filed against Merck challenging the company’s dangerous and defective HPV vaccine for causing severe and life changing injuries. In addition to Mike’s case filed this week, we have filed cases on behalf of Sahara Walker of Wisconsin, Zach Otto of Colorado and Julia Balasco of Rhode Island. While each case is unique, they share common threads: All of our clients were happy, healthy, bright, active kids with unlimited potential until they received the Gardasil HPV vaccine. We look forward to getting these cases in front of a jury as soon as possible.
No one knows how many people the vaccines are killing – or how many they will kill.
But although I haven’t seen the mainstream media mention most of these deaths, people have already died or been injured after being given the vaccine:
1) A 41-year-old Portuguese mother of two who worked in paediatrics died at a hospital in Porto just two days after being vaccinated against covid-19 Portuguese health worker 41 dies…
7) A 46-year-old healthcare worker dies 24 hours after receiving the covid-19 vaccine but government says death is not related to the jab A 46-year-old healthcare worker…
Those are just some of the possible deaths and injuries that have followed vaccination.
I have no doubt that the authorities will claim that these deaths were coincidental.
And let us remember if a patient dies within 28 days of being tested positive for coronavirus (and the test doesn’t mean that the patient even has the disease since most tests are false positives) then the death will be listed as a covid-19 death and the patient will be said to have died ‘with’ covid-19. So by the same token, it is perfectly reasonable to say that if a patient dies or falls ill within 28 days of being vaccinated then the death or illness was related to the covid-19 vaccine.
Will the mainstream media ever start recording these deaths or illnesses? Or are journalists going to continue to promote the official government line – and to deny, distort or suppress the truth?
How many people have to die before the media wakes up?
NOTE: According to the National Vaccine Information Centre in the US, 13 people had died of the covid-19 vaccine by the 30th December 2020.
3) Pathogenic priming in older adults yet another concern with covid-19 vaccines Pathogenic priming …
4) Top coronavirus official warns that second dose of covid vaccine tends to cause even worse side effects than first dose Second dose of covid vaccine
5) CDC: Anaphylaxis rate with covid vax 10 times greater than for flu shots Anaphylaxis rate…
11) More vaccine adverse event reports More vaccine…
Covid-19 Vaccine – Possible Vaccine Side Effects
The pro-vaxxers like to tell you that vaccines are perfectly safe and perfectly effective. Even when they wouldn’t be considered safe enough to use as oven cleaner, the fanatics enthuse about them. Young people and those who know little about medicine or science, talk about vaccines with reverence because they’ve been indoctrinated into believing the pro-vaccine lies.
And the pro-vaxxers are lying, of course.
Vaccines cause a lot of illness and quite a few deaths and they don’t always do what they’re supposed to do. Governments around the world have paid out many billions of dollars to patients who have been made ill by vaccines – or to the relatives of patients who were killed by a vaccine.
There are, for example, grave doubts about what the covid-19 vaccine actually does. Since the vaccine is a new type of vaccine and is being given before the usual tests and observations have been completed no one knows what will happen to the people who have the stuff injected into an arm.
What side effects will there be? How many will die?
Well, I don’t know and nor does anyone else.
What if a woman is pregnant when she has the vaccine or gets pregnant after being given the vaccine? The vaccine isn’t supposed to be given to pregnant women but not all pregnancies are planned.
Will the vaccine interfere with essential life-saving drugs? Many elderly patients already take a number of prescribed drugs. Will the vaccine interfere with them? No one knows. The covid-19 vaccine is the biggest experiment in history. And, unlike a proper clinical trial, it is largely unregulated. As with all vaccines most of the problems which develop will never be reported or recognised.
It is estimated that in the U.S., only 1 in 100 vaccine side effects is reported.
Since I believe everyone is entitled to know what side effects there could be with a heavily promoted vaccine, I’m going to read you the official list of possible side effects. This is, remember, not my list but a draft list compiled by the FDA – the Food and Drug Administration in the US.
You aren’t necessarily going to get all of those or even any of them if you have the vaccine. But those are the possible side effects that the FDA has listed. They’re all unpleasant, most of them very serious and you can’t get more serious than death.
And if you are mad enough to have the vaccine then you and your doctor should keep a look out for the symptoms of all the diseases on the FDA’s list.
Your government won’t tell you about these dangers – they don’t believe in fully informed consent as far as vaccines are concerned.
Indeed, most governments are now doing everything they can to ensure that all criticisms of vaccines are banned. Depending on where you live it is, or soon will be, illegal even to mention that vaccines might not always work or might make you ill.
Finally, if your government really cared about you they would conduct a very simple, cheap trial.
They would keep a note of all the health problems affecting 20,000 patients who had the vaccine and compare that list with a list of all the health problems affecting 20,000 patients who didn’t have the vaccine in the same period. They make the comparisons every 3, 6 and 12 months.
Of course, they’d have to find some honest doctors to oversee the trial because it would be very easy to fiddle.
But it would give some very interesting results so I doubt if they’ll be doing it.
German Court Declares Regional Lockdown Unconstitutional in ‘Politically Explosive’ Decision
A German district court has declared a strict lockdown imposed by the government of the central state of Thuringia last spring unconstitutional, as it acquitted a person accused of violating it.
A trivial case about a man violating strict German lockdown rules by celebrating a birthday with his friends has ended up in a decision the German media described as “politically explosive.” A district court in the city of Weimar did not just acquit the defendant but also stated that the authorities themselves breached Germany’s basic law.
Thuringia’s spring lockdown was a “catastrophically wrong political decision with dramatic consequences for almost all areas of people’s lives,” the court said, justifying its decision. It particularly condemned a restriction limiting private gatherings to the members of one household and one person outside of it.
It was this regulation that a local man violated by hosting a party attended by his seven friends. Yet, the judge said that the regional government itself violated the “inviolably guaranteed human dignity” secured by Article 1 of the German basic law in the first place by imposing such restrictions.
According to the court, the government lacked sufficient legal grounds to impose the restrictions since there was no “epidemic situation of national importance” at that time and the health system was at no risk of collapsing as the Robert Koch Institute reported that the Covid-19 reproduction number had fallen below 1. The judge also ruled that the regional government had no right to introduce such far-reaching measures at all since it was up to lawmakers to do so.
The lockdown imposed in Thuringia represented “the most comprehensive and far-reaching restrictions on fundamental rights in the history of the Federal Republic,” the court said while calling the measures an attack on the “foundations of our society” that was “disproportionate.”
The decision, however, only has an effect on this specific case, which saw the defendant acquitted and freed from the need to pay a fine of €200 ($243). When it comes to any broader considerations the ruling is not legally binding, although each German court can pass a judgment on the constitutionality of orders issued by any authority other than the Bundestag or a Landtag (a regional parliament).
Still, the decision has sparked quite a stir among some officials and local media outlets as Germany currently has a pretty similar strict lockdown in place which was imposed by the federal government in November and repeatedly extended and tightened ever since.
This week, Chancellor Angela Merkel’s cabinet extended the restriction until mid-February.
Thuringia’s regional public prosecutor’s office already filed a complaint against the court ruling issued on Wednesday demanding it be reviewed and possibly overturned with the case handed over to another judge. The decision needs to be “reviewed to further develop the law and ensure unified jurisdiction” when it comes to lockdown and its violation, a spokesman of the prosecutor’s office, Hannes Gruenseisen, told the local media.
Lockdown has been a contentious topic in Germany as the nation repeatedly saw protests against the measure in various cities throughout autumn and winter 2020. At some point, the protesters even compared their struggle to the anti-Nazi resistance, sparking a scathing rebuke from the German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas.
Numerous healthcare workers in India have been reported to fake taking the COVID-19 vaccine shots due to concerns of side-effects and pressure from the administration to take it.
Healthcare workers across Bengaluru are faking getting the Covid-19 vaccine, officials in Bengaluru admitted.
A senior BBMP health officer told the Times of India they have come across at least 20 instances where workers have not taken the vaccine, although they claimed to have.
This is because many healthcare workers have doubts about the safety and efficacy of the jab and are hesitant to take it.
“One medical officer said he did not trust the vaccine and did not want it, so he instructed the nurse to hold a small ball of cotton to his arm to make it look like he took the jab,” said the source.
Kamala (name changed), a nurse at a PHC in Shivajinagar, said a health worker who was afraid of getting the jab, faked the act by getting her colleague to simulate injecting the vaccine.
“Many are unhappy over being asked to take the vaccine as they do not trust it yet. The two deaths that were reported have added to fears,” Kamala said.
Israeli War Crimes in Syria – The Trump/Biden Strategy
During the early hours of this morning, Israel launched an attack on multiple positions across Syria – targeting Tartous, Hama and Homs countryside and reports of attacks in Damascus countryside. Initial reports indicated that Israeli aggression was prioritising the Scientific Research Facility in Mesyaf, Hama countryside.
Further reports from local sources have informed us that an entire family was murdered by the incoming strikes, two babies were pulled alive from the rubble in Kazuo neighbourhood, Hama.
On the day of Biden’s inauguration, the US/UK war alliance sent a convoy of 40 trucks loaded with weapons and logistical equipment to illegal military bases in Hasaka governorate, north-east Syria, via the Al-Walid crossing on the Syrian border with Iraq. (local military sources)
I have been talking about the Biden administration for some time now in relation to Syria and I have predicted that the aggression against Syria will now be escalated. Since the New Year we have seen an increase in US-backed, trained and equipped terrorist attacks on Syrian Arab Army and civilian convoys including fuel convoys. This is a deliberate strategy to push the Syrian people further into food insecurity and depravation with the coldest winter months now here.
I will update with any new information as I receive it but it is clear that Biden has no intention of withdrawing from Syria or of lifting sanctions. The deluded “left” are celebrating Trump’s departure but with little appreciation of the Hell they have now unleashed upon this country. The old adage “be careful what you wish for” comes to mind, the Syrian people do not thank America for believing in the mirage of democracy and two party politics – I hope, with all my heart, they wake up to the psychopathic, sadistic, predator class that truly rules them before it is too late for all of us but most of all for the Syrian people who have already endured too much.
Anthony Fauci, the director of the United States government’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, told reporters Thursday that he was “knocked out” for about 24 hours after, on Tuesday, taking the second dose of experimental coronavirus vaccine. Fauci has thus joined the large and growing list of people who have suffered serious harm from the injections that he and other government officials have been encouraging Americans to take.
Back on December 22, Fauci said just before publicly having his first shot of the two-shot regimen that he was being injected with the experimental vaccine “as a symbol to the rest of the country that I feel extreme confidence in the safety and the efficacy of this vaccine and I want to encourage everyone who has the opportunity to get vaccinated.”
It turns out Fauci also ended up a symbol of harm that can arise from taking the experimental vaccine.
In a Friday Daily Mail article, Natalie Rahhal provides more information about Fauci’s post-vaccination trouble, as well as the resistance by medical workers and other Americans against pressure to be injected with the experimental vaccine. You can read that article here.
Catherine Austin Fitts: A Look at the State of Our Currencies & Options for Unlocking the Incredible Abundance of the Planet
With the global technocrats taking the world through the “Going Direct” Reset into the abyss of the End of Currency and the ultimate transhuman slave state, things could not be more dire.
But, as Catherine Austin Fitts of Solari.com tells us, there are options on the table for taking things in a completely different direction and unlocking the incredible abundance of the planet.
The choice is our, but for how long? Don’t miss this important, solutions-focused discussion on The State of Our Currencies.
The 86-year-old sports icon received the first of two doses of Moderna’s vaccine on Jan. 5, in an attempt to inspire other Black Americans to step up to the plate and get the vaccine.
CNN reported that Aaron died “peacefully in his sleep,” and that no cause of death was disclosed.
Aaron made headlines earlier this month when he was photographed getting the Moderna vaccine. He told the Associated Press at the time that getting vaccinated “makes me feel wonderful.” He added:
“I don’t have any qualms about it at all, you know. I feel quite proud of myself for doing something like this. … It’s just a small thing that can help zillions of people in this country.”
Aaron was vaccinated at the Morehouse School of Medicine health clinic in Atlanta, in what news reports said was an attempt to inspire other Black Americans to step up to the plate and get the vaccine. The AP reported at the time:
“Rolling up their sleeves to take the first of two doses, these octogenarians, their spouses and several other civil rights leaders who received the shots in a brand-new health clinic at the Morehouse School of Medicine acknowledged the legacy of mistrust that many African Americans have toward medical research, stemming from the infamous Tuskegee experiment in which U.S. health workers left syphilis untreated in Black men without their consent, making them suffer needlessly.”
In December, VOX reported on the launch of a global campaign using influencers and celebrities to help overcome “vaccine hesitancy,” stating that it “will be unprecedented” and many institutions will have a role, including government and public health authorities.
However, health officials continue to encounter pushback, including from healthcare workers.
Adverse events to the COVID vaccine have been reported worldwide. Germany and Norway have reported a combined 43 deaths among elderly people who received the Pfizer vaccine, prompting China health officials to call for the vaccines to be suspended, especially among the elderly.
“Studies show that self-interested pharmaceutical company researchers, physicians, nursing homes and health officials seldom report vaccine injuries. Instead, they dismiss injuries and deaths as ‘unrelated’ to vaccination,” Kennedy said. “Public health advocates worry that the vast majority of injuries and deaths will go unreported to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), the notoriously broken voluntary surveillance system run by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).”
A 2001 HHS study concluded that “fewer than 1% of vaccine injuries” are reported to VAERS.
As The Defender reported last week, California was forced to recall a batch of 330,000 Moderna vaccines after a cascade of reported injuries, though now the company says it’s okay to resume administration of that batch.
The Defender also covered the story of a 56-year-old Florida doctor who died about two weeks after getting his first dose of Pfizer’s vaccine. His death is under investigation by Florida health officials. In addition, multiple severe allergic reactions have been directly linked to the Pfizer vaccine.
The Exploitation of Our Natural Desire to Hope: ‘Operation Trust’ & Operation ‘Trust the Plan’
Earlier today, I posted the David Icke video where he talks about Q-Anon as a psyop. Now I am sharing the video below, created by HighImpactFlix.
As much as I respect all freedom seekers and understand the genuine love and courage of ‘patriots’, it’s important that we pay attention to how these beautiful aspects of our humanity are being manipulated by those who seek to control us.
From the conversations I’ve had with people who followed Q, it seems many began to see for the first time that there are very dark forces controlling us through governments and their militaries. This called them to start researching so that they could understand more. Some read with interest without seeing Qanon as some sort of authority — but simply one more group of people seeking the truth. They did not pin their hopes on timelines or ‘secret intel’. For those people, the Q phenomenon remains a part of their personal wake up call.
However, there were also plenty who counted the words of Qanon leadership to tell them what to do. Many tied this in with their faith in God and felt that those who didn’t follow Q were unenlightened and unpatriotic.
We have all been duped many times within this life experience. As truth seekers, we look for answers and seek information and insights that resonate with what we sense to really be true. How many of us have found ourselves participating in religions, military operations, political campaigns, environmental activist groups, charities, etc. that we later learned were not what they first appeared to be when we joined? How many of us had to heal from the complete disorientation of being raised in abusive families controlled by people we tried to respect and love?
Part of who we are is our beautiful vision of freedom for all, our desire for peace without bloodshed, our longing to participate in a society and within families that we can truly trust. Those who seek to control us, know that about us. They also know we are not stupid, so they must include a high percentage of truth in the propaganda mix or we wouldn’t fall for it.
It is not just about mind control but very much about heart control via emotional manipulation and blackmail. All religions and all governments/militaries use loyalty, belief, trust, self sacrifice and love in their “spells” that ask for our obedience. Many families and tribes do the same thing. Real love never requires blind obedience. Real love respects freedom.
None of us has all the answers. Each of us is one of many partially-blind humans touching the elephant. Together, in our dedication to truth and freedom, we will see the whole elephant that is standing here in our living room. Together we will reimagine and change the script that has been dominating this world for a very, very long time.
[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, Lbry/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.]
Despite being “the most popular president in U.S. history,” Joe Biden isn’t faring too well on YouTube since his inauguration, where every single video posted to the official White House channel this week has massive downvote ratios.
The media heralded Biden after he pulled off the *stunning* achievement of garnering the most votes in presidential history with over 81 million, beating Barack Obama’s previous record of 69.5 million.
However, Biden being the most popular person to win the Oval Office in history doesn’t seem to translate to enthusiasm for his speeches, which are typically watched online by a paltry amount of viewers.
This effect has also been seen on the White House’s official YouTube channel, where since switching over to the Biden administration’s control every single video has received significantly more downvotes than upvotes.
Indeed, the most viewed clip on the channel, a 31 minute video of Biden’s inauguration, has 9,200 thumbs up compared to 43,000 thumbs down.
In addition, a video entitled ‘The Work Begins’ which features as the channel’s main video has more than four times the amount of downvotes than upvotes.
Another video which features new White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki giving her first press conference has just 6,600 thumbs up compared to 31,000 thumbs down.
The downvotes are obviously the work of disgruntled Trump supporters, but given Biden’s popularity, you’d expect his voters to at least be close to equaling them out.
It’s not happening. Not even close.
Biden is supposedly “the most popular president in U.S. history,” but you wouldn’t know it by looking at his YouTube analytics.
If you’ve felt at all like you’re in a spiritual war right now, you’re not alone.
Many of the world’s greatest scholars, philosophers and ascetics understood the world to be multi-dimensional and co-inhabited by non-physical beings both good and evil, always at war with us and each other.
It’s not something that can be rightly explained with language or science. One must cultivate such sensitivity that the existence of spiritual beings can be directly experienced.
___
Rudolf Steiner was an Austrian philosopher, educator, and spiritualist, and over the course of his life he published numerous books and papers on the science of spirituality. He viewed the human body as a spiritual vessel, open to occupation by other entities.
To be conscious of these forces was to have the power to reject their negative influence. To remain unconscious of them was to be a leaf in their wind, and spiritual cultivation was the key to developing conscious awareness of them.
“The spirits of darkness are now among us. We have to be on guard so that we may realize what is happening when we encounter them and gain a real idea of where they are to be found. The most dangerous thing you can do in the immediate future will be to give yourself up unconsciously to the influences which are definitely present.” ~ Rudolf Steiner
If people express the natural human inclination toward spiritual growth, they free themselves from fear and anxiety, and effectively develop a sort of immunity to the influences of negative entities. If not, our vibration attracts hostile spirits and we fall unconsciously unto their influence.
“There are beings in the spiritual realms for whom anxiety and fear emanating from human beings offer welcome food. When humans have no anxiety and fear, then these creatures starve… If fear and anxiety radiates from people and they break out in panic, then these creatures find welcome nutrition and they become more and more powerful. These beings are hostile towards humanity.
Everything that feeds on negative feelings, on anxiety, fear and superstition, despair or doubt, are in reality hostile forces in supersensible worlds, launching cruel attacks on human beings, while they are being fed. Therefore, it is above all necessary to begin with that the person who enters the spiritual world overcomes fear, feelings of helplessness, despair and anxiety. But these are exactly the feelings that belong to contemporary culture and materialism; because it estranges people from the spiritual world, it is especially suited to evoke hopelessness and fear of the unknown in people, thereby calling up the above mentioned hostile forces against them.” ~Rudolf Steiner
With such profound global fear, anxiety, and panic over the present pandemic, many are exposing their own spiritual sicknesses and acquiescing to any recommended behavior or intervention that might alleviate these emotions. Along with this is the push to vaccinate 7 billion healthy people.
Nearly 100 years ago, in a series of 14 essays published under the title, The Fall of the Spirits of Darkness, Steiner issued a warning to future generations about a possible measure of mass control, quite similar to the visions presented by Orwell and Huxley. Steiner foresaw a future when vaccines could steal our spiritual nature.
First, some background:
“In these fourteen lectures, given at the end of 1917 following four years of war in Europe, Steiner speaks on the complex spiritual forces behind the World War I, humanity’s attempts to build theoretically perfect social orders, and the many divisions and disruptions that would continue on Earth into our own time. Humanity in general was asleep to the fact that fallen spirits, cast from the spiritual worlds, had become intensely active on Earth. This manifested mainly in human thinking and perception of the surrounding world. ” [Source]
The fall into such destructive slumber would be marked by an age of materialism and centralization of power, during which the influences of ‘spirits of darkness’ would inspire humans to devise new technologies and new means of oppression. Steiner comments:
“I have told you that the spirits of darkness are going to inspire their human hosts, in whom they will be dwelling, to find a vaccine that will drive all inclination toward spirituality out of people’s souls when they are still very young, and this will happen in a roundabout way through the living body. Today, bodies are vaccinated against one thing and another; in future, children will be vaccinated with a substance which it will certainly be possible to produce, and this will make them immune, so that they do not develop foolish inclinations connected with spiritual life – ‘foolish’ here, or course, in the eyes of materialists. . . .
“. . . a way will finally be found to vaccinate bodies so that these bodies will not allow the inclination toward spiritual ideas to develop and all their lives people will believe only in the physical world they perceive with the senses. Out of impulses which the medical profession gained from presumption – oh, I beg your pardon, from the consumption [tuberculosis] they themselves suffered – people are now vaccinated against consumption, and in the same way they will be vaccinated against any inclination toward spirituality. This is merely to give you a particularly striking example of many things which will come in the near and more distant future in this field – the aim being to bring confusion into the impulses which want to stream down to earth after the victory of the [Michaelic] spirits of light [in 1879].” ~Rudolf Steiner
Steiner was talking only about vaccines here. His comment does not consider the compounded effects on human spirituality of the many myriad influences we have in our world today, all of which work against spiritual connection on their own right.
Again, if you’ve felt at all like you’re in a spiritual war, you’re not alone.
CDC Removes Claim ‘Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism’ From Its Website
ICAN, through its attorneys led by Aaron Siri, has been relentless in its legal demands and actions to compel the CDC to remove its blanket claim that “Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism” from its website. We are excited to report that the CDC has finally capitulated to those demands! It has removed this claim from its website!
The journey began with a letter sent to the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) on October 12, 2017. That letter explained why the CDC cannot scientifically claim that “Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism” on its website. ICAN then ended with the following demand: “Please confirm that HHS shall forthwith remove the claim that ‘Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism’ from the CDC website, or alternatively, please identify the specific studies on which HHS bases its blanket claim that no vaccines cause autism?”
To put HHS and the CDC (an agency within HHS) on their heels, mere days after sending this letter, ICAN also sent a FOIA request on November 1, 2017, demanding:
The CDC quickly called ICAN’s counsel, Aaron Siri, regarding this request. After some negotiations, the CDC formally responded on November 7, 2017, stating that “A search of our records failed to reveal any documents beyond the records hyperlinked in the specific web site” to support the claim that vaccines do not cause autism. The CDC had thus revealed a truth, one that HHS could not run from in its response to ICAN’s letter.
On January 18, 2018, HHS responded to ICAN’s October 12th letter. In that letter, HHS provided a list of studies it said supported the conclusion on its website that “Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism.” All of the studies cited related either to a single vaccine, MMR, or to a single vaccine ingredient, thimerosal. None of these studies support the claim that vaccines given during the first six months of life do not cause autism.
Given that HHS failed to support its claim that “Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism,” ICAN responded by letter dated December 31, 2018 wherein ICAN asserted that “HHS cannot scientifically claim that ‘Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism’” and “must therefore remove this claim from the CDC website until it can produce the studies to support the claim.”
ICAN’s Pincer Maneuver (Jan. 1, 2019 to June 18, 2019)
In order to keep the pressure on to force the CDC to be honest with the public, during the first six months of 2019, ICAN submitted numerous requests for communications among key personnel within the CDC relating to autism. Some of these requests sought emails going back decades. The key players within the CDC with regard to vaccines and autism now knew we were watching, and that we would have their unvarnished, internal emails related to autism.
ICAN Drops the Gauntlet (June 19, 2019 to Dec. 30, 2019)
Now that ICAN had gathered the proof in the form of evidence and admissions it needed to hold the CDC’s feet to the fire, on June 19, 2019, ICAN demanded that the CDC produce copies of the studies it relies upon to claim that all the vaccines given during the first six months of life “Do Not Cause Autism.” These vaccines include DTaP, HepB, Hib, PCV13, and IPV. ICAN also demanded that the CDC produce studies to support that the cumulative exposure to these vaccines during the first six months of life “Do Not Cause Autism.”
ICAN, of course, already had the CDC’s admissions on these points from its prior FOIA request in November 2017, the HHS letter exchange, and the CDC’s internal emails. The CDC had nowhere to hide and no way to dissemble. As expected, it responded to ICAN’s request with the same list of studies involving MMR or thimerosal. Not a single study supported that DTaP, HepB, Hib, PCV13, and IPV do not cause autism.
ICAN Battles the CDC in Court (Dec. 31, 2019 to March 5, 2020)
ICAN then put the pressure directly on the CDC. Instead of walking away after the CDC effectively admitted it did not have the studies ICAN sought, ICAN sued the CDC in federal court. The suit focused on the CDC’s claim that “Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism” on the basis that the CDC had not specifically listed the precise studies that it asserts support that claim. This lawsuit also quoted from the deposition of Dr. Stanley Plotkin, the godfather of vaccinology, who admitted under oath that he was “okay with telling the parent that DTaP/Tdap does not cause autism even though the science isn’t there yet to support that claim.”
After a lot of wrangling between ICAN’s counsel Aaron Siri, and the Department of Justice, which was representing the CDC, the CDC finally capitulated and signed a stipulation that was entered as an order of the court on March 2, 2020 in which the CDC identified 20 studies as the universe of support it relies upon to claim that DTaP, HepB, Hib, PCV13, and IPV do not cause autism. Here is a summary of the vaccines these studies cover:
1 relating to MMR (not a vaccine ICAN asked about);
13 relating to thimerosal (not an ingredient in any vaccine ICAN asked about);
4 relating to both MMR and thimerosal;
1 relating to antigen (not a vaccine) exposure; and
1 relating to MMR, thimerosal, and DTaP.
Incredibly, the one study relating to DTaP on the CDC’s list was a recent review by the Institute of Medicine (IOM), paid for by the CDC, which conducted a comprehensive review looking specifically for studies relating to whether DTaP does or does not cause autism. The IOM concluded that it could not identify a single study to support that DTaP does not cause autism. Instead, the only relevant study the IOM could identify found an association between DTaP and autism.
In other words, the only study the CDC listed that actually looked at any of the vaccines given to babies during the first six months of life concluded that there are no studies to support that DTaP does not cause autism. Yet, the CDC chose that study as one of the few that supports its claim that “Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism”!
This reality is truly incredible because, when it comes to autism, vaccines are the one suspected culprit that the CDC claims to have exhaustively investigated but, yet, the CDC could not provide a single study to support its conclusion that the vaccines given during the first six months of life do not cause autism.
The CDC regularly complains that those raising concerns about vaccine safety are unscientific and misinformed. It is therefore truly stunning that when we asked the CDC for studies to support its claim that “Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism,” the March 2, 2020 stipulation and order made it abundantly clear that it was the CDC’s own claim that “Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism” that was unscientific.
ICAN’s Coup de Grâce (Mar. 6, 2020 to Aug. 26, 2020)
And now for the coup de grâce. ICAN’s demands at the end of 2019 and over which it took the CDC to court in early 2020 were for the studies the CDC “relied upon” to claim that Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism. ICAN now had a court ordered stipulation that specifically listed the twenty studies the CDC “relied upon” to support this claim – none of which supported that the vaccines given during the first six months of life do not cause autism.
To assure that the CDC understood ICAN was never, ever, ever, letting this issue go, on March 6, 2020 (days after concluding the federal lawsuit) ICAN submitted the following FOIA demand to the CDC: “All studies supporting the claim that DTaP does not cause autism” and days later requested “Studies created or retained by CDC to support the claim that DTaP does not cause autism.” The difference between this and ICAN’s prior requests is subtle but powerful. Instead of asking for the studies the CDC “relied upon” to support that DTaP does not cause autism (as it did previously), ICAN was now seeking the studies that in fact support that DTaP does not cause autism.
In response to this request, the CDC could not list its MMR or thimerosal studies – its hands were tied. It understood there was nowhere left to hide its unsupported claim that “Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism.” And it knew that ICAN would again take it to court, and this time the outcome could be even harsher.
The CDC Capitulates
On the heels of the foregoing, and dozens of related demands regarding autism that ICAN continued to press, in the dead of the night, and without any fanfare or announcement, on August 27, 2020, the CDC website removed the claim that “Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism” from its website! The CDC had finally capitulated to the truth!
You may be wondering why we waited until now to announce this amazing news. Well, ICAN and its legal team have been so busy fighting on dozens of vaccine related fronts (mandatory MMR vaccines, flu shot requirements, improper COVID vaccine trials, etc.) that we only realized the CDC’s vaccine-autism claim had been removed when we recently turned back to that front! Like a Mayan temple hidden in plain sight for hundreds of years, ICAN only recently discovered the CDC’s silent capitulation.
The Future
The most recent data from CDC shows that 1 in 36 children born this year in the United States will develop autism. This is a true epidemic. If the CDC had spent the same resources studying vaccines and autism as it did waging a media campaign against parents that claim vaccines caused their child’s autism, the world would be a better place for everyone.
To their credit, parents with autistic children have never backed down. In the face of incessant brow beatings by public health authorities, studies have found between 40% and 70% of parents with an autistic child continue to blame vaccines for their child’s autism, typically pointing to vaccines given during the first six months of life. These parents know what they experienced, what their parental instincts tell them, and no amount of shaming can change that truth.
With the removal of the claim that “Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism,” it is ICAN’s sincere hope that our public health authorities have turned or will soon be turning the corner on this issue. That they will fund independent scientists to conduct the desperately needed studies of autism and the cumulative impact of the vaccines given during the first six months of life.
The cries of parents who know that vaccines caused their child’s autism should no longer be ignored. The science must be done. And ICAN will continue to fight to make sure that that it is done.
Epilogue
The CDC’s website does continue to claim that “Vaccine ingredients do not cause autism” and so ICAN’s fight continues! Our next step will be to force the CDC to admit whether or not they are also making this claim for aluminum adjuvants used in vaccines. And if so, to produce the studies to support this claim. (See ICAN’s white paper on aluminum adjuvants and autism here.)
Of course, whether one or more ingredients, like water used in vaccines, does not cause autism is not really the issue. The question is whether the vaccine, the product itself as formulated, causes autism. And we now know that the CDC finally understands that it can no longer claim that “Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism.”
This victory for truth and science could not have happened without the encouragement ICAN receives from its supporters like you. Thank you for making our work possible!
Class Warfare: Students in Anchorage Will Be Forced to Kneel for Hours, No Recess
Update: Due to road conditions, in-person classes will not begin today in Anchorage.
Some of the youngest students returning to classes today in Anchorage will enter a dystopian classroom world, where they must kneel for hours on end on the floor while masked, and have no recess or art or physical expression.
Pre-K–2, K–6, self-contained special needs programs, and the Whaley School are returning to in-person learning at Anchorage School District classes on Tuesday, Jan. 19.
Parents who viewed the classroom their students will be returning to expressed shock: All desks have been removed. Students will kneel on gardening pads and use chairs as their desks for 5.5 hours.
Rather than lockers, they will have to bring a five-gallon utility bucket to store their lunch, jackets, and supplies in. The parents were told all students will be masked over their nose and mouth.
Another parent has sent in this photo of her child’s classroom in Anchorage.
“We wouldn’t allow terrorists to be treated like this,” said one concerned parent, who asked to be kept anonymous.
The new classroom design represents one solution to keeping children apart so they do not spread the COVID-19 virus.
Some of these young students have never been to school before, so they may not see the situation as abnormal. Anchorage schools have been closed due to the coronavirus since last March.
In at least one Ohio school, the desks are in place, but plastic barriers have been placed around each one, to contain moisture coming from students as they breathe through their masks, as shown from this parent’s photograph:
Grades 3–6 will continue with current Zoom and online classes for now in Anchorage. The District has a goal of bringing them back “as soon as possible after our first tier of students.”
Select middle and high school students who need extra support will also begin in-person, small-group classes for 5.5 hours each day on Jan. 19. All middle and high school students will return to in-person learning at the beginning of the fourth quarter, the District says.
“It may be hard to remember what ‘school in school’ was like. That’s okay! We will transition to a new routine together. We are paving the way for a new approach to learning in-person. The District is prepared with Individual School Safety and Mitigation Plansthat are in line with CDC guidelines and customized by school principals and staff to ensure the mitigation works for each unique schools’ building and culture,” the district said.
Meanwhile, Anchorage Education Association, the union for teachers and staff, has sent highly detailed instructions to all of its members telling them exactly how to document their discontent with returning to in-person learning, so that they may file a successful grievance against the school district.
AEA has already filed its first grievance, demanding that teachers may refuse to carry out orders that they feel threaten health. The letter to teachers points out the dangerous situation that will occur when students remove their masks to eat and drink in the classrooms:
“With many students returning to buildings next Tuesday, many of you will have difficult decisions to make regarding your health and safety. The District’s position is that they have plans in place that mitigate and minimize exposure to COVID-19. AEA is focusing on student and staff safety as we return to face-to-face learning.
“AEA has filed a grievance asserting violations of Article 421B: “A member may refuse to carry out an order that threatens health (excluding normal childhood diseases including but not limited to colds, flu, mumps, measles, chicken pox) or physical safety; or which is a violation of federal or state statutes. If the member refuses, the member shall have the burden of proof.” Page 48 in the AEA Contract.
“This grievance includes any members who refuse to carry out an order that they believe threatens their health or physical safety. The specific safety violations are in these areas:
“Classrooms are being set up that do not have six feet of distance between students.
“Student are being allowed to remove masks and eat in the classroom.
“SEL mask breaks in buildings do not comply with CDC guidelines.
“Classrooms may not meet CDC, OSHA, or other regulatory requirements for proper air circulation and filtration to minimize COVID-19 exposure.”
After the FCC last month found no evidence of harm caused by wireless technology, CHD and other groups sued — and included 11,000 pages of evidence refuting the FCC’s conclusion.
For decades, the public has been told there is no evidence that wireless technology is harmful. Claims of 5G harms have been dismissed as “conspiracy theory.”
A landmark case against the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) contests these statements and asserts that the harms are proven and that an epidemic of sickness exists.
Recently, the leading environmental and health advocacy organizations that filed the case submitted 11,000 pages of evidence in support of their claims. (Links to the evidence are provided below).
The case is being heard by the U.S. Courts of Appeals of the DC Circuit. Oral arguments are scheduled for Jan. 25 at 9:30 a.m. EST. The public can listen to it on YouTube.
In December 2019, the FCC closed an inquiry it initiated in 2013 in which the commission asked the public to submit comments to the inquiry’s docket as to whether or not the FCC should review its 1996 health guidelines for Radio Frequency (RF) radiation emitted by wireless devices and infrastructure.
About 2,000 comments — an exceptionally large number — were filed with the FCC. These comments were filed by scientists and science organizations, such as the BioInitiative and EMF Scientist, by doctors and medical organizations, by cities, such as Boston and Philadelphia, and by hundreds of individuals including parents of children who were injured by this technology. The comments referenced thousands of studies showing clear and profound evidence of harm.
Nevertheless, the FCC order, published on Dec. 4, 2019, concluded there is no evidence that wireless technology causes harm, and no need to review the guidelines. The FCC decision didn’t provide an analysis of the science, disregarded the evidence of sickness and didn’t defend its decision with evidence.
Consequently, two lawsuits were filed against the FCC. One by the Environmental Health Trust (EHT) and Consumers for Safe Cell Phones, and one by the Children’s Health Defense (CHD) and additional petitioners including Prof. David Carpenter who is the co-editor of the BioInitiative Report, the most comprehensive review of the science by 29 leading scientists and public health experts.
CHD’s case was also joined by physicians who see the sickness in their clinics and by parents of children who have become sick with radiation sickness. One petitioner is a mother whose son died from a glioblastoma, the same brain tumor that killed Beau Biden, President Joe Biden’s son.
The petitioners of both the EHT and CHD cases filed joint briefs. They argued that, considering the overwhelming evidence that was submitted to the FCC’s docket, and since the FCC’s order lacked evidence of reasoned decision-making, the FCC violated the Administrative Procedures Act and that the commission’s decision is capricious, arbitrary, abuse of discretion and not evidence-based.
The petitioners also argued that the FCC violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) because the Agency failed to consider the environmental impacts of its decision, and didn’t comply with the 1996 Telecommunications Act (TCA) because it failed to consider the impact of its decision on public health and safety.
The court has ordered that in the oral arguments scheduled for Jan. 25, only one attorney will present the case for all the petitioners. It allocated 10 minutes for oral arguments for the petitioners as well as for the FCC.
EHT and CHD have agreed to have CHD’s attorney, Scott McCullough, former Assistant Texas Attorney General and a seasoned telecom and administrative law attorney, present the petitioners’ joint argument.
The three-judge panel in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that presides over the case includes the Honorable Karen Henderson, Patricia Millett and Robert Wilkins.
EHT is represented by attorney Edward B. Myers, who intervened in the successful case against the FCC with the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and several Native American tribes when the court upheld the relevance of NEPA in FCC proceedings.
The NRDC filed an amicus brief in the case. An amicus brief was also filed by the Building Biology Institute, and by an executive from the telecom industry, Joe Sandri. Sandri’s brief included a statement of Dr. Linda Birenbaum, director of the National Institute of Environmental and Health Services (NIEHS) from 2009-2019, stating that the evidence of carcinogenic effects of wireless technology has been established.
The evidence referenced in the case shows profound harmful effects and widespread sickness from wireless technology. The evidence (called the “Joint Appendix”) was recently filed and includes 11,000 pages of scientific and human evidence, yet, it is only the tip of the iceberg.
In this type of case only evidence that was submitted to the FCC’s docket can be used. There s much evidence that wasn’t submitted.
The Joint Appendix contains 440 documents. The table of contents alone is 54 pages. Because of the sheer volume of evidence, it had to be divided into 27 volumes. The court requires seven sets of the Joint Appendix, and therefore, 189 binders each containing approximately 500 pages were shipped to the court. The printing and shipping costs for the Joint Appendix amounted to more than $15,000.
The Joint Appendix includes references to thousands of peer-reviewed scientific studies showing DNA damage, reproductive harm, neurological effects such as ADHD, and radiation sickness, which seems to be the most widespread manifestation of wireless harms.
The evidence shows effects on the brain, including impaired blood flow and damage to the blood-brain barrier, cognitive and memory problems and effects on sleep, melatonin production and mitochondrial damage. Causal mechanism of harm was also established. Oxidative Stress, a mechanism of harm that can lead to cancer, non-cancer conditions and DNA damage, was found in 203 out of 225 studies.
Unlike industry statements, both the majority of the studies and the weight of the evidence leave no doubt that the harms are proven.
The Joint Appendix also includes reports of leading expert scientists such as the BioInitiative Report; opinions of medical associations such as the California Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics; appeals of leading expert scientists; U.S. government agencies’ reports (U.S. Access Board, NIBS, the Department of Interior, U.S. Navy, the Military, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; government studies including the recent National Toxicology Program (NTP), a $30 million study that found clear evidence of cancer and DNA damage; as well as acknowledgement of harm by U.S. government agencies and scientists contradicting the FCC position.
In December 2020, the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NAS) issued a report determining that the most likely cause of the symptoms suffered by the U.S. diplomats in Cuba and China is Radio-Frequency (wireless) weapons. The NAS was appointed by the Department of State. The report references much of the same evidence filed in the case against the FCC.
The NAS invited Prof. Beatrice Golomb, M.D., Ph.D., to present to the committee. Golomb’s 2018 paper was the first to show that pulsed RF is the most likely explanation for the diplomats’ symptoms. She pointed out the diplomats likely suffer from the same condition experienced by growing segments of the population from wireless technology known as radiation sickness/ microwave sickness/ electrosensitivity. Golomb’s paper was referenced in the case.
Hundreds of testimonials of people who have become sick like the diplomats and statements of doctors were filed to the FCC’s docket. The petitioners argued that the FCC guidelines that deny sickness are being used to deny accommodation for the injured, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Nevertheless, the FCC denied the evidence, the sickness and did not address the accommodation issue. For those who have been injured this case has profound consequences.
“Environmental Health Trust has worked for over a decade to protect the public from radiofrequency radiation, testified to Congress and published critical research on why children are more vulnerable,” said Devra Davis Ph.D., MPH, president and founder of Environmental Health Trust. “The FCC has ignored our extensive submissions to the FCC over the years which clearly document harm. As the legacies of lead, asbestos, and tobacco teach us, this issue deserves the immediate attention of our federal government in order to protect our children’s healthy future.”
“This is a landmark case and it is of the utmost importance to the Children’s Health Defense which works relentlessly to eliminate the epidemic of sickness in children,” said the organization’s chairman, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. “The American public has been poorly served by the FCC. The FCC’s guidelines are decades-old and are based on scientific assumptions that were proven false. Its failure and disregard of public health is evident in the growing and widespread conditions involving brain damage, learning disabilities, and a host of complex neurological syndromes.”
Kennedy added: “The overwhelming experimental and human evidence which the FCC has ignored leaves no doubt that wireless technology is a major contributory factor to this epidemic. The FCC has shown that its chief interest is protecting the telecom industry and maximizing its profits, and its position as put forward in its brief is simply indefensible.”
The oral arguments are the final stage of this case. After the hearing, all that will be left is to wait for the court’s decision, said Dafna Tachover, director of CHD’s Stop 5G and Wireless Harms Project, who has initiated and led the case for CHD. “We have invested significant resources in this case and all of us worked very hard for the past 13 months. We believe that we have a strong case. Now it is up to the court. As William Wilberforce, who fought slavery said, ‘You may choose to look the other way, but you can never say again that you didn’t know.’”
The oral arguments are Jan. 25 9:30 a.m. EST, however according to the schedule, 2 other cases are scheduled for the same time and they will be heard ahead of our case. Hence, most likely, our oral arguments will not start before 10:20 a.m. EST.
January 20, 2021 was a historic day for Americans. It marked the day that Joseph Robinette Biden was sworn in as President, ridding the planet of orange man bad once and for all and restoring hope in the land of the free. All problems will be solved, debts forgiven, pandemics cured and a glorious heaven on Earth will flourish in the wake of the inauguration….or so the mainstream media says, almost verbatim.
In stark contrast to how the media portrayed Donald Trump as a reincarnation of Hitler, Joe Biden — a career politician, segregationist, police state worshipping warmonger — is receiving a warm embrace by our alleged non-partisan mainstream media.
As the newly elected racially diverse gift to the prison industrial complex duo assumes their respective thrones in the nation’s capitol, they can take solace in the fact that the mainstream media will be salivating over them as they take the torch from Trump and continue America’s worst policies.
The new face of the fascist American war machine has shifted from an R-rated orange baby and his sycophant dogmatic underling to a G-rated biracial team of woke warriors, ready to fulfil their roles by dropping hellfire missiles on hospitals and brown children from drones painted with BLM and LGBTQ flags.
To maintain the façade of perceived differences between the two parties, the leftist establishment media is already going to great lengths to paint Biden as America’s savior — quite literally.
MSNBC’s Eddie Glaude took a break this week while blaming Trump supporters for the 400,000 dead from COVID-19 and broke out in tears, literally comparing the new dynamic duo to God, citing Psalm 147:3.
“I’m thinking about all those folks who, just for a moment, the nation shared their grief,” Glaude said though crocodile tears. “Oh, what a first step. What a beautiful step.”
“I’m reminded of the Psalmist, you know, ‘He heals the brokenhearted and binds up their wounds,’” Glaude said of his new messiah.
But that’s not all.
After MSNBC compared Biden to God, CNN did it too, claiming the lights around the reflecting pool for the COVID-19 victim memorial were like “extensions of Joe Biden’s arms embracing America.”
CNN’s scrupulously neutral and objective political director: the lights ‘were like extensions of Joe Biden’s arms embracing America.’ Expect much drooling at the feet power of this kind over the next few days and weeks. The mission: Rebrand America. Again! https://t.co/hLHTWMqycP
Make no mistake, when mainstream media repeats this rubbish propaganda enough times, Boobus Americanus will start to believe it. Most Americans will go back to sleep and continue to unquestioningly support the US government’s worst and most murderous foreign policies.
When the corporate press says “things will be different under a Biden presidency” rest assured that what they really mean is “we will be different under a Biden presidency,” and it has already started.
This was the exact play by the corporate media under Trump’s presidency as well, except the leftist media roasted the president every chance they got instead of worshiping him. Though the two approaches use opposite tactics, the result is the same — distracted Americans argue over irrelevant talking points while they continue to get dumbed down, sent off to wars, poorer, and less free.
The war machine knows no party. But don’t take my word for it, let’s get it right from Joe Biden.
Do you think Biden, who played a key role in starting the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Syria, Somalia, demolishing Libya, and saber rattling with Iran, is going to reign in the military industrial complex? If you do, then perhaps you can answer the question of why he filled his Pentagon transition team with war hawks from the weapons industry?
As InTheseTimes, reports, of the 23 people who comprise the Department of Defense agency review team, eight of them — or just over a third — list their “most recent employment” as organizations, think tanks or companies that either directly receive money from the weapons industry, or are part of this industry.
The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) is listed as the “most recent employment” of three individuals on Biden’s Department of Defense agency review team: Kathleen Hicks (a former defense official under President Obama), Melissa Dalton and Andrew Hunter. CSIS is a hawkish and influential foreign policy think tank that receives funding from General Dynamics Corporation, Raytheon, Northrop Grumman Corporation, Lockheed Martin Corporation and other weapons manufacturers and defense contractors, as well as oil companies.
It’s not just the wars in the Middle East either. Biden will continue America’s foreign policy of overthrowing democratically elected leaders by provoking color revolutions and staging coups. In fact, before Biden was even sworn in he announced that he would complete Trump’s coup in Venezuela.
Domestically, Biden will continue to foster the police state and his inauguration should be evidence enough.
Did anyone take Biden seriously when he preached about freedom and unity from behind several tons of razor wire, 25,000 armed National Guard troops, bullet proof glass, concrete barricades, boarded up businesses and dozens of masked up warmongers? Asking for a nation.
However, if you think uncle Joe is going to toe the progressive line in the war on drugs and stop kidnapping, caging, and killing people over arbitrary substances the state deems illegal, again, you are mistaken. Despite a historical vote in Congress last month, to legalize cannabis federally, Biden has refused to even consider legalization as this is a major tool in the box of those who advocate for the prison industrial complex — just like Trump did before them and just like Biden and Harris both always have.
For people outraged by Trump putting “kids in cages” as part of his crackdown on illegal immigration, Joe Biden is not different. Remember, he was vice president during the Obama administration which aggressively deported more immigrants than Trump and who also put “kids in cages.” In fact, the photos used to first bring attention to kids in cages under Trump, were actually taken during Biden’s tenure as VP.
The reality of the situation is that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are merely new faces to the same empire that spread under Trump. This time, however, instead of using cheesy slogans like making America great again to dupe followers into supporting the military industrial complex, Biden and Harris will use woke virtue signaling and talking points on diversity to dupe their followers into supporting it.
Welcome to New World Next Week – the video series from Corbett Report and Media Monarchy that covers some of the most important developments in open source intelligence news. This week:
In the video below, Dr. David Martin reads this excerpt from the report:
By March 2015, both the virulence of the S1 spike protein and the ACE II receptor was known to present a considerable risk to human health. NIAID, EcoHealth Alliance and numerous researchers lamented the fact that the public was not sufficiently concerned about coronavirus to adequately fund their desired research.
Dr. Peter Daszak of EcoHealth Alliance offered the following assessment:
“Daszak reiterated that, until an infectious disease crisis is very real, present, and at an emergency threshold, it is often largely ignored. To sustain the funding base beyond the crisis, he said, we need to increase public understanding of the need for MCMs such as a pan-influenza or pan-coronavirus vaccine. A key driver is the media, and the economics follow the hype. We need to use that hype to our advantage to get to the real issues. Investors will respond if they see profit at the end of process, Daszak stated.”
[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, Lbry/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.]
