Reiner Fuellmich & Dr Mike Yeadon: Be Afraid Of Government… PCR Test, Midazolam Murders In UK And Much More…
Reiner Fuellmich and Dr Mike Yeadon discuss the PCR test – which is being used to simulate the pandemic, and the ‘end of life’ drug Midazolam – three years’ supply was dispensed in the ‘UK’ (asymmetric national devolution) in the early stages of the ‘pandemic’, under the watch of Matt Hancock.
Just what are all these deaths ‘with’ covid really about?
What about death spikes coinciding with jabs?
The roles of Christian Drosten, the WHO, national governments and others are examined in this exceptional interview.
Be afraid of your government. Be afraid of the ‘opposition’ parties – who back the agenda. Be afraid of advisors to your government – like Chris Whitty, England’s Chief Medical Advisor, the ‘UK’ Parliament Chief Scientific Advisor, Patrick Vallance (apparently he’s a ‘Sir’, but not from where we’re standing) – and bodies like SAGE. Be afraid of the World Economic Forum and the United Nations.
Something has gone terribly wrong with the way we are governed over the last three decades or so.
Our governments have now turned to murder.
This is a must-watch for all truth seekers.
Source: Covid True Facts Blog
Rarely can the word evil apply so incontrovertibly to a politician than to the truly obnoxious, murderous, far left Prime Minister of New Zealand Jacinda Ardern who has just passed the most extreme abortion law in the world. It is part of an inhuman pattern of abuse of the people by supranational far left corporatism which, as in the 1930s, is leading to disaster.
Overt murder of children (ie born alive babies) will now be legal. Abortion will be legal up to birth for any reason. The killing of a foetus will be justified for disabilities including a cleft lip or club foot. There will be no legal requirement that pain relief be given to babies being aborted between 20 weeks and birth – an amendment to prevent this was specifically voted down by New Zealand MPs.Continue reading →
TheLocal 18 October 2009
Just a week after it emerged that the German armed forces was getting a different kind of A/H1N1 vaccine to the general population, Der Spiegel magazine reports that the government will also get special treatment.
The general population will be offered the GlaxoSmithKline vaccine, called Pandemrix, which contains a new booster element, or adjuvant, as well as a preservative containing mercury.
Controversy has grown around the rapid licensing of the GSK vaccine – and a similar one being made by Novartis. Critics said not enough testing had been conducted before European licensing authorities rushed an approval.Continue reading →
Source: americans4innovation.blogspot.com; January 20, 2020; https://is.gd/lwB4ab
The Pirbright Institute (UK) has been awarded 11 U.S. Patents, including Coronavirus U.S. Pat. No. 10,130,701
Pirbright Institute is controlled by the Queen’s Golden Share
Pirbright’s controllers track back to British SERCO & Sir Geoffrey E. Pattie, Chairman Marconi and the British Intellectual Property Institute
Outrageously, British SERCO—today runs the U.S. Patent Office (proof below), U.S. FEMA and , websites for U.S.
e.g. “IBM Eclipse Foundation” or “racketeering”
SENIOR EXECUTIVE SERVICE (SES) HIJACKED THE INTERNET
SERCO used its control of the U.S. Patent Office to issue its British bio company a patent on the Coronavirus in record time—that’s pure fraud
Fig. 1—The Queen’s company The Pirbright Institute holds U.S. Patent No. 10,130,701 on CORONAVIRUS. Pirbright tracks back to SERCO, which has the contract with the U.S. Patent Office to award its own patent application! This “inequitable conduct” in patent legal terms is fraud and invalidates the claim while the world fights this British- American Pilgrims Society-inspired emerging pandemic, in our opinion. See THE PIRBRIGHT INSTITUTE, Co. No. 00559784. (Jan. 07, 1956). Certificate of Incorporation and related records. Companies House (UK).Continue reading →
20,525 DEAD 1.9 Million Injured (50% SERIOUS) Reported in European Union’s Database of Adverse Drug Reactions for COVID-19 Shots
The European Union database of suspected drug reaction reports is EudraVigilance, and they are now reporting 20,595 fatalities, and 1,960,607 injuries, following COVID-19 injections.
A Health Impact News subscriber from Europe reminded us that this database maintained at EudraVigilance is only for countries in Europe who are part of the European Union (EU), which comprises 27 countries.Continue reading →
OCLA researcher Dr. Denis Rancourt and several fellow Canadian academics penned an open letter to support those who have decided not to accept the COVID-19 vaccine.
The group emphasizes the voluntary nature of this medical treatment as well as the need for informed consent and individual risk-benefit assessment. They reject the pressure exerted by public health officials, the news and social media, and fellow citizens.
Control over our bodily integrity may well be the ultimate frontier of the fight to protect civil liberties. Read the letter below or as a PDF here.
Open Letter to the Unvaccinated
You are not alone! As of 28 July 2021, 29% of Canadians have not received a COVID-19 vaccine, and an additional 14% have received one shot. In the US and in the European Union, less than half the population is fully vaccinated, and even in Israel, the “world’s lab” according to Pfizer, one third of people remain completely unvaccinated. Politicians and the media have taken a uniform view, scapegoating the unvaccinated for the troubles that have ensued after eighteen months of fearmongering and lockdowns. It’s time to set the record straight.
It is entirely reasonable and legitimate to say ‘no’ to insufficiently tested vaccines for which there is no reliable science. You have a right to assert guardianship of your body and to refuse medical treatments if you see fit. You are right to say ‘no’ to a violation of your dignity, your integrity and your bodily autonomy. It is your body, and you have the right to choose. You are right to fight for your children against their mass vaccination in school.
You are right to question whether free and informed consent is at all possible under present circumstances. Long-term effects are unknown. Transgenerational effects are unknown. Vaccine-induced deregulation of natural immunity is unknown. Potential harm is unknown as the adverse event reporting is delayed, incomplete and inconsistent between jurisdictions.
You are being targeted by mainstream media, government social engineering campaigns, unjust rules and policies, collaborating employers, and the social-media mob. You are being told that you are now the problem and that the world cannot get back to normal unless you get vaccinated. You are being viciously scapegoated by propaganda and pressured by others around you. Remember; there is nothing wrong with you.
You are inaccurately accused of being a factory for new SARS-CoV-2 variants, when in fact, according to leading scientists, your natural immune system generates immunity to multiple components of the virus. This will promote your protection against a vast range of viral variants and abrogates further spread to anyone else.
You are justified in demanding independent peer-reviewed studies, not funded by multinational pharmaceutical companies. All the peer-reviewed studies of short-term safety and short-term efficacy have been funded, organized, coordinated, and supported by these for-profit corporations; and none of the study data have been made public or available to researchers who don’t work for these companies.
You are right to question the preliminary vaccine trial results. The claimed high values of relative efficacy rely on small numbers of tenuously determined “infections.” The studies were also not blind, where people giving the injections admittedly knew or could deduce whether they were injecting the experimental vaccine or the placebo. This is not acceptable scientific methodology for vaccine trials.
You are correct in your calls for a diversity of scientific opinions. Like in nature, we need a polyculture of information and its interpretations. And we don’t have that right now. Choosing not to take the vaccine is holding space for reason, transparency and accountability to emerge. You are right to ask, ‘What comes next when we give away authority over our own bodies?’
Do not be intimidated. You are showing resilience, integrity and grit. You are coming together in your communities, making plans to help one another and standing for scientific accountability and free speech, which are required for society to thrive. We are among many who stand with you.
Angela Durante, PhD
Denis Rancourt, PhD
Claus Rinner, PhD
Laurent Leduc, PhD
Donald Welsh, PhD
John Zwaagstra, PhD
Jan Vrbik, PhD
Valentina Capurri, PhD
Dominic Cummings, scientists and the media successfully demonised anyone who questioned the lockdown.
MARTIN KULLDORFF & JAY BHATTACHARYA for Spiked
2nd August 2021
In his recent book, Spike, Jeremy Farrar – a SAGE member and director of the Wellcome Trust – has provided a helpful hint: the political strategist and the prime minister’s chief adviser, Dominic Cummings, planned a propaganda campaign against the Great Barrington Declaration. Farrar’s exact words are that Cummings ‘wanted to run an aggressive press campaign against those behind the Great Barrington Declaration and others opposed to blanket Covid-19 restrictions’. Cummings and Farrar preferred a blanket lockdown strategy, believing it would avoid a winter Covid wave. We do not know what transpired behind closed doors, but Farrar’s admission raises two interesting questions.
First, who would you expect to prevail in a political battle over which pandemic strategy to implement? Would it be (a) the campaigning mastermind who has won multiple elections and referendums, or (b) three public-health scientists with scant media and political experience? Secondly, whose proposal would better control the pandemic, minimise Covid deaths and avoid other non-Covid health harms? Would it be (a) the campaign led by an individual with little knowledge of epidemiology and public health? Or (b) the one authored by three epidemiologists with extensive experience and knowledge of infectious disease and public health?
As we all now know, Cummings and Farrar got their way in the UK. We Great Barrington Declaration authors failed to sway any politicians, except Florida governor Ron DeSantis. Governments worldwide re-imposed lockdowns in the autumn and winter of 2020. The lockdowns’ failure to control Covid’s spread was catastrophic. And they resulted in devastating collateral harms, especially to children, the working class in rich nations and the very poorest people in the developing world.
Whether directed by Cummings or not, there was certainly an aggressive media campaign against the Great Barrington Declaration. The propaganda campaign included multiple distortions, misinformation, ad hominem attacks and outright slander. Many of these slurs are still making the rounds in mainstream media. Journalists who, by all appearances, had not even read the Declaration, confidently asserted falsehoods about it and us in print, on radio, on TV and online. Here are some of the lies and distortions:
Prominent politicians like Matt Hancock, the media and health officials in the WHO and the UK government rebranded focused protection – policies designed to protect the most vulnerable from Covid infection – as a ‘let-it-rip strategy’ that would ‘let the virus continue unchecked’. The Great Barrington Declaration called for the very opposite of a let-it-rip strategy. Ironically, lockdown is actually a slow-motion let-it-rip strategy – it only delays the spread of Covid, as we have regrettably learned these past 18 months.
Hancock, Anthony Fauci, Jeremy Farrar and prominent journalists also mischaracterised the Great Barrington Declaration as a ‘herd-immunity strategy’, even though any strategy will lead to herd immunity sooner or later. Yes, the Declaration discussed herd immunity. It would be irresponsible to ignore such a basic biological fact. But to characterise the Great Barrington Declaration as a ‘herd-immunity strategy’ is like describing a pilot’s plan to land a plane as a ‘gravity strategy’. The goal of a pilot is to land the plane safely while managing the force of gravity. The goal of any Covid pandemic plan should be to minimise disease mortality and the collateral harms from the plan itself, while managing the build-up of immunity in the population. Shockingly, some politicians, journalists and even scientists denied the very existence of herd immunity. Some even questioned the existence of natural immunity from Covid, which is a bit like denying gravity.
Hancock and various scientists dismissed the notion of focused protection. Some falsely claimed that it was impossible to protect the high-risk elderly specifically. Others claimed that we had not offered any specific proposals for doing so. In truth, we made some suggestions on the one-page Declaration, and we provided a long list of well-tested public-health measures in an accompanying FAQ on the website. We also wrote numerous newspaper articles, in which we elaborated on these ideas. It is understandable that a politician like Matt Hancock, with his limited knowledge of public health, could not come up with ideas for protecting the elderly. But we had hoped that the Great Barrington Declaration would generate vigorous engagement and creative thinking about how we might do this, rather than just a propaganda counterattack.
As well as misrepresenting our ideas, our critics also misrepresent us as people. Some journalists tried to paint us as right-wing libertarians with links to the Koch brothers. These were blatant lies and ad hominem smears reminiscent of the McCarthy era. They are also ironic since one of the Koch-funded foundations provided grant support to pro-lockdown scientist Neil Ferguson and his team at Imperial College. The truth is that the three of us co-authored the Great Barrington Declaration without any prior sponsorship.
The propaganda aim was to distract the public from the fact that, unlike lockdowns, the Great Barrington Declaration was founded on long-standing and basic principles of public health. Unfortunately, the UK carried on with its lockdown strategy, locking down last autumn and winter. As we all now know, the lockdown failed to protect the vulnerable, instead exposing them to the virus and causing many unnecessary deaths. Up to now, the UK has reported nearly 130,000 Covid deaths – almost 90,000 of whom died after we wrote the Declaration calling for a different approach.
To save face, Cummings and others have made the ridiculous, evidence-free claim that if only England had gone into lockdown a tad earlier, many of these deaths could have been avoided. But we know that Wales implemented a ‘circuit-breaker’ (a euphemism for lockdown) in October 2020 – two weeks before England went into total lockdown for November. The result? In the short run, Wales came out of lockdown with more daily Covid cases than when it started and with more cases per capita than in England. In the long run? From the beginning of the epidemic to the day we signed the Great Barrington Declaration, on 4 October 2020, England’s Covid deaths per capita were 29 per cent higher than those in Wales. But from October to the end of July 2021, England’s Covid deaths per capita were only nine per cent higher than Wales’. In other words, there is no prima facie evidence in these numbers that an earlier lockdown saved any lives in Wales.
If we look across the pond at the US, we can compare each state’s response to the pandemic. The age-adjusted per-capita Covid mortality of the US as a whole is 38 per cent higher than that in Florida, which adopted a focused-protection approach. Assuming we could have achieved the same percentage reduction in deaths in the UK, we might have had around 49,000 fewer Covid deaths. The actual number could be larger or smaller, of course. But again, there is no prima facie evidence that lockdowns reduced Covid deaths over the long run.
As well as failing to protect us from Covid, the lockdowns have caused enormous collateral public-health damage. In the UK, this includes missed cancer screening and treatment, delayed surgery, untreated heart disease and diabetes, widespread and devastating mental-health problems, and the disruption of children’s education. We will have to reckon with, live with and die with these consequences for many years to come. In assessing which strategy works best – lockdowns vs focused protection – we should not only count deaths from Covid, but also the substantial deaths and disruption caused by lockdowns.
There is no doubt that a properly implemented focused-protection strategy could have saved thousands of lives in the UK. The likes of Cummings and Farrar naively believed that lockdowns were already protecting higher-risk elderly people. They demonised anyone who said otherwise. And so Boris Johnson’s government ignored the focused-protection measures that we proposed for the elderly. Farrar accuses us of causing unnecessary deaths. This is rather strange. His accusation makes much more sense when applied to those whose advice was actually acted upon: ‘Frankly we think their views and the credence given to them by Johnson were responsible for a number of unnecessary deaths.’
Much of this tragedy stems from Cummings’ political approach to the pandemic. The UK punched way above its weight during the Second World War because of its people’s bravery, ingenuity and persistence in the face of danger. But there was one other key factor. During strategy sessions, Winston Churchill surrounded himself with people of different experiences and views. They debated each other vigorously so that all voices could be heard and assumptions could be thoroughly vetted before important decisions were taken. This is the opposite of what works in an election campaign, where the single-minded focus on winning means dismissing those with opposing views. Open discussion and debate about how to manage the pandemic would have better served the British people. The debate could have involved more prominent infectious-disease epidemiologists and experts on all aspects of public health. It is a great pity that Cummings was unable to switch from the combative approach of his campaigning to the inquisitive and multi-faceted approach that we needed during a national emergency. It is a relief that he is no longer in No10.
Martin Kulldorff is professor of medicine at Harvard University.
Jay Bhattacharya is professor of medicine at Stanford University.
JUL 29, 2021 OPINION
The stage is being set for a mass infertility event and covid will be blamed in place of the experimental jabs.
Millions of unvaccinated people represent an undeniable control group. If the vaccinated group becomes ill or dies from specific conditions and the control group does not have those same conditions, then that is a sign the vaccine or drug is poison.
I don’t think I am the only person that has noticed it – There has been a sudden deluge of covid vaccination propaganda and vaccine passport propaganda in the past month, more so than I think we have seen since the beginning of this year.
I am speaking of the US in particular, but it is important to point out that in the US the establishment is still desperately clamoring for a much higher vaccination rate. In places like Europe, the UK and Australia vaccinations rates are higher and governments have moved on to the vaccine passport phase of their agenda.
Some people may be confused by the obvious lockstep that most nations are moving in as far as covid mandates and restrictions are concerned. How is it possible that almost all the governments on the planet are in agreement on medical totalitarianism? Well, it’s rather easy to understand when you realize the majority of them are linked together through globalist institutions like the World Economic Forum, which has repeatedly called the pandemic a “perfect opportunity” to push through their plans for a “Great Reset”.
The “Great Reset” is a long term ideological usurpation of what’s left of individual freedom and free market economies, and it’s goal is the imposition of a global socialist/communist dictatorship. Globalists wrap these objectives in pretty sounding words and humanitarian sounding aspirations, but at bottom the “Reset” is about an end to liberty as we know it. This is not an exaggeration, this is reality; this is what these people desire above all else. But how to achieve such a goal?
Well, interestingly enough the WEF and the Bill And Melinda Gates Foundation described exactly how they planned to do it during a “simulation” they held in October of 2019 called “Event 201”. During the event, they imagined a massive coronavirus pandemic, spread supposedly from animals to humans, which would facilitate the need for pervasive restrictions on individual liberties, national economies as well as the internet and social media. I’m sure it’s all a coincidence, but the exact same scenario the globalists at the WEF played out during Event 201 happened in the real world only two months later.
In any case, the pandemic itself has been a boon for the globalists. We have not seen a far reaching government power and corporate power grab since the rise of the National Socialists in Europe and the spread of communism in Russia and China almost a century ago. In fact, I would say that what humanity as a whole is facing today is much worse than what those wretched empires ever could have produced.
There is no doubt; globalist institutions and their government “partners” are the greatest beneficiaries of the covid crisis. They stand to gain ultimate social and political power if their agenda to exploit the pandemic succeeds.
That said, there a few hangups in their plan, and this is why I believe we are seeing an aggressive propaganda push in recent weeks. For example, as I outlined with extensive evidence in my article ‘Biden’s Vaccine Strike Force Plan Stinks Of Desperation’, it appears that the vaccination rate, especially in the US, is nowhere near as high as the elites would like.
While the Biden Administration and the CDC claims an overall vaccination rate of 67%, numerous other stats including the Mayo Clinics state map numbers indicate that only four states in the US actually have a vaccination rate over 65% (for one dose or more), and the majority of states have rates around 50% or less. Even large population blue states like California and New York are not above the 65% mark, and frankly, those numbers are going nowhere as vaccinations are dropping off a cliff.
If someone has not submitted by now with zero wait times and ample doses everywhere, then they are unlikely to ever be vaccinated.
Contradictory stats suggest to me that Biden and the CDC are inflating their vaccination numbers to create the illusion that a larger majority of Americans support the jab. And if this is the case, it explains why Biden, Fauci and the mainstream media are force feeding the public with pro-vaccine hype that consistently contradicts the real science. They are not getting the fear and public compliance that they had hoped for.
But why do they want 100% vaccination? Why are they so desperate for every single person in the world to get the mRNA jab?
After all, the average (IFR) death rate of covid is a mere 0.26% of those infected (this is a stat that the media consistently and deliberately refuses to mention to the public). This means that 99.7% of the public is in NO danger from covid whether they are vaccinated or not.
Do the vaccines ensure better odds? Well, according to recent statistics from Massachusetts, not necessarily, as they report over 5100 infections and 80 deaths of fully vaccinated patients. The media keeps telling us that only the unvaccinated are dying, but this is a lie, like so many other lies they have been peddling when it comes to covid. So, what’s the point of taking an experimental vaccine if the death rate of the virus is so low and the jab doesn’t necessarily protect you anyway?
There is no point. The science and the stats do not support it. The vaccines can’t even be credited with the decline in infections and deaths this year; the numbers plunged in January – Only 5% of the population was vaccinated by February. The only explanation for this is that the population hit herd immunity many months ago. Remember when governments said that they needed 70% herd immunity or vaccination to stop the lockdowns and mandates? The goalposts have been moves several times and the government “science” changes monthly. Now they claim herd immunity doesn’t matter and demand 100% vaccination.
We must ask the question again – Why the relentless government push for total vaccine saturation? It’s not saving lives, and the mandates remain regardless, so why?
I can only posit theories based on the evidence at hand, but I think it’s clear to most of us that the vaccines are NOT about public health nor are they about saving lives. They are obviously about something else…
As numerous virology and vaccine experts have warned over the past year, there is a great risk of harmful health side effects when it comes to experimental mRNA technology. Even one of the creators of mRNA vaccines has suggested that there are dangers in rolling out these gene manipulation cocktails without more testing. Of note are concerns about longer term disorders such as autoimmune disorders and infertility.
The mainstream media and the globalists will argue that there is “no evidence” that the mRNA vaccines will cause deadly side effects or infertility. I would argue back that there is NO EVIDENCE that they are safe. Most vaccines are tested over the course of 10-15 years before they are released to the public for use. The covid vaccines were unleashed on the public within months. Honestly, I have no intention of acting as a guinea pig for an untested vaccine.
But what if the elites know exactly what the side effects will be? What if the vaccines are a pivotal part of their “Great Reset?”
The infertility question in particular is drawing the most fire from the establishment, and I would point out a particularly insidious narrative being implanted in the media. Whenever people question the chance of sterility caused by the vaccines, bureaucrats and media talking heads go on the attack, and then say “There’s no evidence that the vaccines cause infertility, but Covid-19 might cause it…” Just watch this recent speech by the governor of Arkansas where he and his medical flunky were almost run from the podium by an angry audience for peddling the same propaganda:https://www.youtube.com/embed/1jMLzMpL_sE?feature=oembed
And there you have it. The stage is being set, in my view, for a mass infertility event, and covid will be blamed in place of the experimental vaccines. This is why the establishment needs a 100% vaccination rate; unvaccinated people would stand as evidence of their crime. Let me explain…
My concern is that Klaus Schwab’s reset agenda is impossible to enforce in a permanent way unless the human population is greatly reduced over a short period of time (a generation or two). Globalists are constantly talking about population control and reduction. Elites like Bill Gates are famous for it. Is it any wonder that they would devise a plan to institute it?
What if, as many experts have suggested, the vaccine side effects create this condition of a diminishing population? What if they are meant to? We will not know for certain for a couple of years at least as autoimmune disorders and infertility take time to become visible in a population. The average timeline for actually diagnosing an autoimmune disorder is 4.5 years. Infertility can take six months to a year to diagnose.
If a large population of millions of people remain unvaccinated after the next couple of years, then they will represent a sizable and undeniable control group. A control group is a group of subjects that act as a pure sample untouched by a drug or vaccine experiment. If the vaccinated group becomes ill or dies from specific conditions and the control group does not have those same conditions, then that is a pretty good sign that your vaccine or drug is poison.
The 50% of Americans and smaller percentages in other nations are a control group for the experimental vaccines. If something goes wrong with the vaccines, then we will be the proof. I suspect this is what the elites are really afraid of.
They have to force us to be vaccinated as well – ALL of us, so that there is no control group and thus no proof os what they have done. They could simply blame mass health disorders on covid itself, or some other false culprit.
If the vaccines are a Trojan horse that causes widespread illness or infertility, and the globalists get caught because a control group exists, then it will mean outright rebellion along with ropes and lampposts for them. Their “Great Reset” will fall apart.
To be sure, this might happen anyway. Vaccine passports are the line in the sand for most people. We are even seeing extensive protests and riots in places like Italy, France, UK and Australia over the draconian passport scheme. The US, though, is where the biggest fight will take place, in my opinion. We have an armed population, millions upon millions of trained combat veterans and civilians, a military with around 70% conservatives and independents and a historical understanding of asymmetric warfare. As we have seen in places like Afghanistan, tanks, jets, missiles and drones are no guarantee if victory against a guerrilla force.
Vaccine passports are not going to happen here. We simply won’t allow it.
The globalists have set in motion an end game – It could be an end game for us, but it also could be an end game for them. They are on a strict timeline. They must get near 100% vaccination rates in the next couple of years or sooner. They must get their vaccine passports in place in the next couple of years or sooner. And, they must instill permanent lockdown conditions in the near term to stifle growing dissent. We are now in a kind of race in which the globalists must implement their agenda as fast as possible while we must hold out and hold them back until the truth becomes obvious to the masses; the truth that the lockdowns, mandates and vaccines were never about safety and were always about control – from social control to population control.