Aletho News


Students should not be coerced into Covid vaccination

TCW Defending Freedom – February 8, 2022

A COUPLE of weeks ago we published a letter from Queen’s University Medical School in Belfast to its medical students which all but made it a requirement for students to get vaccinated to complete all aspects of their course. Since then we have heard from a number of distressed parents and students at various institutions revealing a much wider problem of coercive vaccination for students. It’s not just prospective doctors, but nurses and physios who are being subjected to this coercive pressure and being told they can’t take or complete their course unless they get jabbed.

This is despite the recent rollback of several Covid restrictions including Covid passes. Universities and students continue to be put under enormous pressure from their higher education bosses to see to it that students are vaccinated and told that is both a public safety and ‘duty’ requirement. See below, for example, how the Welsh Government frame both question and answer in their guidance to students, omitting any mention of the fact that at their age students are at no serious risk from Covid-19 let alone the Omicron variant.

Q: How can I feel safe at university with the Omicron variant?

A: The most effective way to manage personal risk is to take up the offer of vaccination. All those eligible should get two doses of the vaccine and when invited, get their booster as a priority to have increased protection. Taking this responsibility and becoming vaccinated means that as well as protecting ourselves we are considerate of others. This will help us all to get back to doing the things we’ve missed the most. It is never too late to get the vaccine and walk-in centres are open to all, including international students. 

There you have it. The official narrative, the official perspective.

The Department for Education likewise in its most recent ‘Guidance’ is still pressuring higher education providers to encourage student vaccination. It tells them that they should have ‘communications strategies for students and staff, which will include principles such as [encouraging] students to take up the offer of both doses of the coronavirus vaccine, and the booster jab as soon as they are eligible’. 

They inform the universities of the checklist of ‘communications’ they must prepare. This includes making sure that ‘Students are strongly encouraged to get vaccinated and know how to get a Covid-19 vaccine.’ Covid-related ‘behavioural expectations’ for students are clearly set out, including ‘continuing to behave responsibly’. This pressure comes down the line, directed first at the universities and then from the universities (in order, no doubt, to tick their own compliance boxes) to the student body. It is not difficult to see how parents and students come to succumb to it, even against their better judgment, in fear of wasted investment and blighted careers before they start.

Not one of these official publications sets out the balance of risk for students between taking and not taking the jab. Not one explains the vaccine’s limited efficacy against infection or transmission. Appallingly, that the vaccine may not be in students’ short-term or long-term health interests is not even considered.

That is why the Together Declaration’s latest campaign in support of university students to stop this vaccination coercion in order to continue their education is so welcome. What they ask us all to do is to write to the vice chancellors of the main universities. You can copy the text from this letter into an email and then BCC (important that you BCC, not CC) this list of names and send it. If you want to be more personal and diligent you can contact the vice chancellors separately and by name, which you can find here.

If you are on Twitter and any other social media, please tweet this graphic.

‘I contacted all vice chancellors at the main universities today. We hope they will do the right thing and will not be insisting on vaccination as a condition of education.

@UniversitiesUK we hope you will also be pushing institutions to allow freedom of choice’.

Government and universities have no business either to be encouraging students (many of whom will have had and recovered from Covid) to be guinea pigs or to be making vaccination a condition of education. You can tweet that too!

February 7, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Solidarity and Activism | , , | 1 Comment

J&J tried to block publication of story about its secret plan to limit baby powder lawsuit payouts

By Christina Maas | Reclaim The Net | February 6, 2022

Johnson & Johnson has been accused of trying to suppress speech by asking a judge to block the Reuters news agency from publishing a story about the pharmaceutical giant’s legal strategy to counter lawsuits claiming that its Baby Powder is a cause of cancer.

“The First Amendment is not a license to knowingly violate the law,” J&J said in a court filing in New Jersey this week.

The filing was made at the US Bankruptcy Court where the Big Pharma giant is trying to get protections from “bankruptcy” from 38,000 lawsuits alleging the company’s baby powder product was advertised as safe but had long-term cancer risks.

This week, Reuters reported that J&J had a secret plan to shift the liability from the lawsuits to a new subsidiary which would then declare bankruptcy to limit having to pay up over the cancer lawsuits.

J&J attempted to stop Reuters from publishing the story by requesting the judge intervene and issue a restraining order.

See the court filing here.

J&J accused Reuters of obtaining documents that were protected from public disclosure, demanding that Reuters return the documents and not publish any information.

The request asks for an order:

“(1) precluding the Reuters news agency from using or relying upon any documents designated as “Confidential” in this proceeding;

(2) requiring the return of any such documents; and

(3) ordering each attorney who has made an appearance in the above-captioned proceeding to submit to the Court a declaration under penalty of perjury stating whether he or she disclosed any materials designated as “Confidential” in this proceeding to Reuters (the “Motion”).”

Lawyers for Reuters, in a court filing, said that Johnson and Johnson’s request to stop the publication was “among the most extraordinary remedies a litigant can request under the law” and that the request was a “prior restraint of speech on a matter of public interest.”

After Reuters published its story, J&J withdrew their request for an immediate hearing but was “not prepared to agree” that the request about the documents was moot.

February 7, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Full Spectrum Dominance | , | 1 Comment

Pfizer, FDA Lose Bid to Further Delay Release of COVID Vaccine Safety Data

By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender | February 7, 2022

A federal judge Wednesday rejected a bid by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), with the support of Pfizer, to delay the court-ordered release of nearly 400,000 pages of documents pertaining to the approval of Pfizer’s COVID vaccine.

Federal judge Mark Pittman of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, in an order issued Feb. 2, said the FDA must release redacted versions of the documents in question according to the following disclosure schedule:

  • 10,000 pages apiece, due on or before March 1 and April 1, 2022.
  • 80,000 pages apiece, to be produced on or before May 2, June 1 and July 1, 2022.
  • 70,000 pages to be produced on or before Aug. 1, 2022.
  • 55,000 pages per month, on or before the first business day of each month thereafter, until the release of the documents has been completed.

The order grants the FDA the ability to “bank” excess pages as part of this release schedule — meaning that if the agency exceeds its monthly quota in any given month it can apply those extra pages to a subsequent month.

Last week’s ruling is the most recent development in an ongoing court case that began with a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request filed in August 2021 by Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency (PHMPT), a group of doctors and public health professionals.

PHMPT, a group of more than 30 medical and public health professionals and scientists from institutions such as Harvard, Yale, and UCLA, in September 2021 filed a lawsuit against the FDA after the agency denied its original FOIA request.

In that request, PHMPT asked the FDA to release “all data and information for the Pfizer vaccine,” including safety and effectiveness data, adverse reaction reports, and a list of active and inactive ingredients.

The FDA argued it didn’t have enough staff to process the redaction and release of hundreds of thousands of pages of documents, claiming it could process only 500 pages per month.

This would have meant the cache of documents would not be fully released for approximately 75 years.

In his Jan. 6 order, Pittmann rejected the FDA’s claim and instead required the agency to release 12,000 pages of documents by Jan. 31 and an additional 55,000 pages per month thereafter.

Pfizer responded, to the Jan. 6 order by filing a memorandum with the court on Jan. 21, requesting to intervene in the case for the “limited purpose of ensuring that information exempt from disclosure under FOIA is adequately protected as FDA complies with this Court’s order.”

Pfizer claimed to support the disclosure of the documents, but asked to intervene in the case to ensure that information legally exempt from disclosure will not be “disclosed inappropriately.”

As reported by The Defender, this request, if granted, would have also meant further delay for the release of the next tranche of documents, until May 1.

Lawyers for PHMPT, in a brief submitted Jan. 25, asked Pittman to reject Pfizer’s motion, prompting Pittman’s Feb. 2 order.

The first batch of documents produced in Nov. 2021, which totaled a mere 500 pages, revealed there were more than 1,200 vaccine-related deaths within the first 90 days following the release of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID vaccine.

Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D., is an independent journalist and researcher based in Athens, Greece.

© [Article Date] Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.

February 7, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | 1 Comment

More U.S. Murders in the Middle East

By Jacob G. Hornberger | FFF | February 7, 2022

The U.S. national-security establishment and its acolytes in the mainstream press are celebrating the U.S. military’s murder in Syria of Islamic State leader Abu Ibrahim Hashimi Qurayshi. Mind you, they don’t call it murder. They call it a “targeted killing” of a “bad guy” or a “terrorist.” But murder it is because the U.S. military has no legitimate authority to kill anyone in the Middle East (or anywhere else), whether it be people it labels “bad guys,” “terrorists,” “communists,” “opponents,” “rivals,” “adversaries,” or “enemies.”

Let’s take a look at the Bill of Rights, specifically the Fifth Amendment. Yes, I know that the national-security establishment and its supporters in the federal judiciary hold that the Bill of Rights doesn’t apply to the military, the CIA, and the NSA. But a close reading of the amendment reveals that there is no exception carved out for the national-security branch of the government. By its express terms, the restrictions in the Fifth Amendment apply to everyone in the federal government, not just to some people within the federal government.

The Fifth Amendment states in part: “No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law.”

Notice something important about that language: It doesn’t say “No American shall be deprived of life without due process of law.” It says “No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law.” That means it encompasses citizens of other countries.

Notice something else important: It doesn’t say “No person within the United States shall be deprived of life without due process of law.” It says “No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law.”

That’s what the Pentagon just did to Qurayshi. In a raid on a safe house in Syria, the Pentagon just deprived him of life without due process of law.

The Pentagon is pointing out that Qurayshi actually killed himself and his family with a bomb once the raid commenced. That doesn’t mean, of course, that the Pentagon isn’t responsible for killing him. The raid is the proximate cause of Qurayshi’s death as well as the deaths of other people who were with him, including women and children. That is, if the raid had not taken place, Qurayshi and those other people would still be alive.

In fact, the Pentagon is also responsible for the deaths of the women and children that were killed by Qurayshi’s suicide bomb. The Pentagon was well aware of the possibility that he could decide to blow himself up rather than be taken captive and carted away to Gitmo for torture and perpetual incarceration. That awareness did not stop them from conducting the raid anyway. The deaths of those women and children was a risk that the Pentagon felt was worth taking.

What is due process of law? It means notice and a trial. The Bill of Rights expressly prohibits the federal government from killing anyone without first giving him notice of criminal charges and a trial in federal district court. The notice comes in the form of a criminal indictment issued by a federal grand jury. At the trial, federal prosecutors are required to prove to a jury (or a judge) beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty of the offense for which they wish to kill him.

At the risk of belaboring the obvious, the Pentagon did not provide notice and a trial to Qurayshi before they raided that safe house and brought about his death and the deaths of more than a dozen other people. Perhaps the reason for that is that U.S. officials felt that they couldn’t prove that Qurayshi had committed a criminal offense against the United States.

National-security officials and their supporters implicitly claim that their “war on terrorism” trumps the Fifth Amendment. Really? Where does it say that in the Fifth Amendment? I certainly don’t see a “war on terrorism” exception in that amendment.

Indeed, what business do the Pentagon and the CIA have sitting in Syria and killing people? The last time I checked, Congress had not declared war on Syria. Moreover, the Syrian government has never invited the U.S. government to situate its troops and agents within the country. That makes the Pentagon and the CIA illegal interlopers in a foreign land, where they are killing whoever they want with impunity.

We also mustn’t forget that it is the Pentagon and the CIA that are responsible for the rise of ISIS in the first place, owing to their illegal and unconstitutional war of aggression against Iraq.

What is a “war of aggression”? It is a type of war that was declared a war crime at the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal. That was the tribunal that put accused Nazi war criminals on trial. The tribunal, which included U.S. officials, convicted German officials of attacking other nations. That’s what they called waging a “war of aggression.”

That’s what U.S. officials did with Iraq. It is undisputed that Iraq never attacked the United States. When the U.S. government attacked this impoverished third-world country, it was waging a “war on aggression.” Moreover, the fact that the Pentagon and the CIA did not secure the constitutionally required congressional declaration of war before committing this Nuremberg-type crime only makes the situation more egregious.

After U.S. officials installed a puppet regime with their war of aggression on Iraq, ISIS formed with the aim of ousting that U.S.-installed puppet regime. In fact, many of the ISIS members had been officials in the Saddam Hussein regime that was violently ousted from power by the U.S. invasion and occupation of the country. (It’s worth noting that Saddam was a partner and ally of the Pentagon and the CIA during the 1980s, when he was killing Iranians in his own war of aggression against Iran.)

Thus, if the U.S. government had never waged an illegal and unconstitutional war of aggression against Iraq, there never would have been an ISIS, which means that the man they just murdered — Abu Ibrahim Hashimi Qurayshi — would not have been the leader of ISIS, which means that he and his family would not be dead today.

Of course, Qurayshi will quickly be replaced, just like drug lords are quickly replaced after they are killed or captured by drug-war agents. ISIS will retaliate for Qurayshi’s killing, and the “war on terrorism” will continue, just as the drug war continues, which means ever-increasing budgets, power, and influence for the national-security establishment. The “war on terrorism” is a better racket than the “war on drugs” and perhaps even better than the old Cold War racket of the “war on communism.”

February 7, 2022 Posted by | Illegal Occupation, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , | Leave a comment

UAE ‘directly benefiting’ from illegal Israeli settlement enterprise

MEMO | February 7, 2022

The UAE is directly benefitting from Illegal Israeli settlements and is in violation of international law according to recently signed bilateral trade agreements between Abu Dhabi and the occupation state, Hugh Lovatt, Senior Policy Fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, has pointed out in a series of tweets.

Lovatt has worked to advance the concept of EU Differentiation, which includes a variety of measures taken by the European bloc and its member states to exclude settlement-linked entities and activities from bilateral relations with Israel.

The EU has never recognised the legality of Israeli settlements in the occupied territories (including those in East Jerusalem and the Syrian Golan Heights that have been formally annexed by Israel). This means that the EU has an obligation to practically implement its non-recognition policy by fully and effectively implementing its own legislation against Israel’s incorporation of settlement entities and activities into its external relations with the EU.

In 2016, Lovatt worked to have this measure enshrined within UN Security Council Resolution 2334. It passed in a 14–0 vote, with the US notably abstaining. The Resolution states that Israel’s settlement activity constitutes a “flagrant violation” of international law and has “no legal validity”. It demands that Israel stop such activity and fulfil its obligations as an occupying power under the Fourth Geneva Convention.

Lovatt claims that recently released details of bilateral agreements between the UAE and Israel show that that the Gulf State is in violation of Resolution 2334 and the principal of differentiation which all UN member states are expected to abide by.

“Has the UAE respected international law and its obligations to differentiate between Israel and the settlements as per UNSCR 2334?” asked Lovatt in his tweet. “The answer: No.”

Lovatt explained that “to comply with UN Security Council Resolution 2334, every bilateral agreement signed with Israel should contain a ‘differentiation’ clause defining the territorial scope of its application to Israel’s pre-June 1967 borders. This is not the case in this UAE-Israel agreement”. He shared a screen shot of a clause from the bilateral agreement indicating that no such territorial distinction was made.

The definition of territory applied in the agreement includes all the land that is under “Israel’s jurisdiction”, which Lovatt explained include Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian territory.

Notably Japan’s trade agreement with Israel includes a definition of “Israeli territory” which upholds the differentiation principal and, therefore, does not fall foul of Resolution 2334, Lovatt said. The absence of this distinction in the bilateral agreement between Abu Dhabi and Tel Aviv means that the UAE is “directly” befitting from illegal settlements through its normalisation with Israel.

Lovatt admits that the UAE may have a different interpretation of the agreement than he does, in which case “it would be incumbent on the UAE government to clarify the agreement’s territorial applicability as soon as possible,” he added.

February 7, 2022 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Illegal Occupation | , , , | Leave a comment

The Truckers vs The Government; We need to get out ahead of all this

By Jon Rappoport | No More Fake News | February 7, 2022

You can support the truckers at

As of this writing, I’m told the police are making arrests in Ottawa. I assume this means they’re arresting truckers.

The Ottawa city government has declared a state of emergency. It’s now a crime for anyone on the scene to give food, fuel, or aid of any kind to the truckers.

The truckers and people all over Canada want freedom and peace. The government wants peace without freedom.

The government wants vaccine mandates and passports, and the ability to declare lockdowns and other fascist measures at any time.

No debate on “the science,” no need to justify the COVID measures, no legal cases taking up Constitutional limits on government power. Just: OBEY.

So that’s what the government is. That’s who they are. That’s who Trudeau is.

We might feel shock at what the government is doing to the truckers, but we shouldn’t be surprised. No one should have expected the government of “obey us” to just sit back and let this convoy happen and proceed, with so many Canadians supporting it.

No one should be surprised that rebellion against “obey us” governments is breaking out across the world.

Let’s get out ahead of what could happen in the coming days and weeks—-

No one with a conscience should back away if governments and their media front men throw around words like “insurrection” and “incitement” and “terrorism.” THESE ARE CONTROL WORDS.

They’re meant to paralyze people. They’re crude smears. The implication would be, anyone who is “a trucker” or a “supporter” wants to overthrow the entire government—rather than replace the fascists.

“Overthrow” was the official characterization of the January 6 Capitol break-in, in the US. “Well, led by a guy wearing a helmet and horns, a mob was going to take over the Congress.”

I see. Sure. And Trump, wearing a military uniform, having gained control over the PENTAGON, was going to swagger into the Capitol, declare martial law, and run the US with his junta.

Thereafter, The Rebels, commanded by a cigar-smoking fatigues-wearing Tony Fauci, encamped in the Catskills, would valiantly try to win back The Republic and the Constitution.

The truckers want freedom and peace, and their own right to earn a living. The Canadian government wants peace without freedom for everyone, and they’re ready to use force to force the peace.

If serious violence breaks out in Ottawa, the government will be behind it.

Violence shouldn’t make people back away from supporting the truckers.

Perhaps you noticed that the George Floyd protests and riots and the looting and burning and violence in many US cities didn’t make anyone on the political Left back away from supporting the rioters.

Did the government call those supporters insurrectionists or terrorists?

You might hear this from people “who are really in the know”: “You see, the whole convoy was a PLAN to cause violence, and then anyone who’s against the mandates and supports the truckers would be labeled a terrorist…”

Without real evidence, that formulation could be used to reject ANY form of mass protest on ANY issue. You may as well say ALL OF LIFE IS A FALSE FLAG, and therefore, we should do nothing and support nothing.

If serious violence does break out in Ottawa, a typical shaming operation will launch: “You people who supported the truckers—you’re responsible for this. You thought the truckers were honorable. But they were always breaking the law. They were stirred up by a mob mentality, by you who won’t accept the reality of the pandemic and what we all have to do to return to normal life…”

Guilt by association, except it turns out the people we’re associated with—the truckers—did nothing wrong.

Again, if anyone has actual evidence to the contrary, evidence that shows there was a plan to launch a convoy that would dead-end in violence, and cause the world to shake its head and say, “THIS is what the protesters and the anti-vaxxers were about all along, they’re all crazy…”, then present that evidence.

I say this, because in the coming days, we could see and hear more of such talk.

What I see in this convoy is honor, justice, the struggle for freedom.

Remember: The convoy is a hell of a lot more than the truckers.

It’s all the Canadians who are supporting it. So if a trucker is there simply because he wants to make a living, but he can’t cross the border unless he shows a vaccine passport, and he doesn’t want to take the vaccine, and that’s the sum of his protest; fine.

And if some trucker turns out to be bad actor, so what?


Get all these things straight in your mind, because if the presence of many people and trucks in Ottawa endures, you’re going to be WORKED by some experienced PR pros; worked to change your thoughts and opinions and feelings.

That’s their job. That’s how they operate.

Stand firm. Stay strong.

Make your voice heard.

Violence is always a government’s hole card. They play it, and then they say the rebels caused it or made it necessary. They splash the violence on the news, because they know it scares many people, who then retreat.

Don’t retreat.

Violence serves another purpose. People want it to stop, so they look to the current political leadership to stop it. They join forces with the fascists who started or triggered the violence.

Don’t fall for that.

If among all the truckers, there are a few bad actors who are government agents, and they do initiate violence, the news will highlight them to the max. This is pure Orwell 1984 stuff. Put pictures of the faces of “the killers” on the screen, over and over, with anchor voiceover telling the public what to see and think and feel. With the goal of stimulating outrage.

Outrage against everyone who supports the truckers or won’t take the vaccine or is opposed to the mandates.

Don’t buy that op.

Stay strong. Stand firm.

Remember what this is. A fight for freedom.

Here’s something else that could happen. The government suddenly announces a new wave of COVID cases. And the blame is directed at the throngs of unmasked truckers and their supporters out in the streets. Super-spreaders. The news, of course, would play that up. By accusation and indirect suggestion, the public will be told THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THE PUBLIC HEALTH OFFICIALS FEARED.

The unmonitored numbers of irresponsible persons rebelling against common sense are responsible for KILLING ordinary law-abiding citizens.

That’s a straight con. During the past two years, it’s been played many times.

Don’t be fooled. Case numbers can be rigged at the drop of a hat. That’s been going on since the beginning of the “pandemic.”

Stand firm.

The pandemic story was planned with the sole purpose of canceling freedom.

Yours, mine, everybody’s.

Don’t give in.

Don’t allow yourself to be manipulated.

No matter what.

One more suggestion. Play out, in your mind, a worst-case scenario: The convoy WAS planned by bad actors with the intent to discredit actual freedom fighters and people who refuse the vaccine and oppose the COVID mandates and restrictions. Go ahead. Make a mind-movie of that.

Where does that lead you? What’s the bottom line?


Because all the people on the streets and in the trucks ARE for freedom; and if the outcome is planned government-caused violence, that means NOTHING about what we’re fighting for. That discredits NOTHING.

If we stay strong.

If we stand up.

If we make our voices heard.

I could write 10,000 more words about a parallel event to the convoy, but I’ll keep it short. The parallel event was the January 6 rally in Washington after the Presidential election, the rally that had nothing to do with the Capitol break-in. Where hundreds of thousands of people gathered.

There were a number of ideas in the minds of all those people: a stolen election; freedom from lockdowns and other fascist COVID restrictions; opposition to the vaccine; opposition to the self-appointed thought-police of America…

In my opinion, Trump didn’t deserve that massive show of loyalty. Not at all. I’ve explained why in other articles. But the people who were there—they were the important ones. Regardless of who planned the break-in and for what reasons. THEY, the hundreds of thousands, wanted freedom. And still do.

The US government is trying to figure out every possible way to discredit and cancel them. Now.

This is the bigger picture.

Keep your eye on it.

I know. I’m not supposed to bring up the January 6 rally. People who want freedom are supposed to forget that. Hush hush. Because THAT event has been slammed mercilessly and discredited and made into a foul horror show.

But I don’t care. All over the world, the same pattern has been repeating. The people who want to live out in the open and throw off their chains are being painted as criminals. For whatever reasons can be cooked up.

And no, not all protests are the same or are launched for exactly the same reasons. But at the core, the impulse and the foundation are there: WE’RE TAKING IT BACK. FREEDOM.

This isn’t Qanon crap or Trumpism or racism or craziness or any hustle.

This is real.

The big smear, guilt by association, and all the other ops aren’t going to fool us.

If we don’t back down.

If we stand firm.

If we don’t quit.

If we make our voices heard.

No matter what.

Jon Rappoport is the author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALEDEXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX.

February 7, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Deception, Solidarity and Activism | , , , , | 1 Comment

Did the COVID vaccine cause Heather McDonald to collapse on stage?

By Steve Kirsch | February 7, 2022

Here’s the article on Heather McDonald suffering a skull fracture after fainting on stage during her act.

Here are the 6 key facts you should know:

  1. She was vaccinated 3 weeks ago with a booster
  2. She has no history of fainting ever
  3. The doctors could find NOTHING wrong with her after she went to the hospital (note that they never test for COVID vaccine injury)
  4. Her fainting spell was not COVID related. She recently tested negative for COVID.
  5. She performed the night before with no incident.
  6. She didn’t consume any alcohol before or during Saturday’s show
  7. She was making jokes on stage about being “vaxxed, double vaxxed, boosted” right before she collapsed

I believe that the most likely explanation is that the incident was caused by the vaccine. They’ve ruled out every other possible cause.

The vaccine is known to cause sudden loss of function and it is most likely to happen within 60 days after the vaccine. In many cases, people simply die instantly with no warning.

It was ironic that it happened when she was joking about being vaxxed, wasn’t it?

I’m sure none of her doctors will ever consider that the “safe and effective” vaccine caused her collapse.

Chelsea Handler

And within 24 hours, another comedian, triple vaxxed Chelsea Handler collapsed and was hospitalized, forcing her to cancel the rest of her shows. Her show was called “Vaccinated and Horny.”

Ironic isn’t it? You really can’t make this stuff up.

February 7, 2022 Posted by | Timeless or most popular | | Leave a comment

Is the vaccine (or repeated doses) weakening our immune systems?

By Kathy Gyngell | TCW Defending Freedom | February 7, 2022

THOUGH I ask this question as a layman, it hardly seems an unreasonable one. It is this:

What exactly is causing the increased risk of infection following vaccination, evidence of which was reported in the Daily Sceptic last week?

From the most recently published UKHSA Vaccine Surveillance Report data for those who are triple-jabbed and from other NHS data published on the double jabbed, the Daily Sceptic have been able to establish the infection rates by vaccination status as well as the unadjusted vaccine effectiveness for infection for those having two or three doses. The conclusion they reached is that the infection rates continue to be considerably worse in the vaccinated, both double and triple jabbed, which translates into what they describe as ‘highly negative unadjusted vaccine effectiveness estimates’. (My italics)

Their report emphasises that these figures are of rates per 100,000 and therefore already take into account the different sizes of the cohorts, meaning that their finding is not because there are more vaccinated people than unvaccinated in the population, and that factor is taken fully into account. You can read the full analysis here.

It is not just this report – which confirms the daily anecdotal evidence I am in receipt of about people I know to be double or triple vaccinated going down with Covid, especially since the booster was rolled out so determinedly – there also are the reports of surging cases in some of the most vaccinated of countries, most notably Israel. Much as Jacob Rees-Mogg and the Guardian, amongst others, really want to believe that it is unvaccinated who are commandeering all the available ventilators, this is not the case as Will Jones has previously laid bare.

On Saturday Dr Jones reported on the recent dramatic statement of one Professor Yaakov Jerris, the director of a coronavirus ward in an Israeli hospital, who has said that between 70 and 80 per cent of the serious cases in his hospital are fully vaccinated and how the vaccine has ‘no significance regarding severe illness’.

All of which brings me to the question of a phenomenon called Antibody Dependent Enhancement which I first heard of when Mike Yeadon warned about it last April under questioning from James Delingpole.

The term refers to the possibility that the vaccine-induced antibodies in the body somehow augment (rather than mitigate against) the infection when you actually catch it, or if these original antibodies don’t make the infection worse, subsequent booster jabs may well.

Could this be the reason for the spate of covid infection and illness? Could it even be the reason for the shocking surge in post-vaccine illnesses that Neville Hodgkinson reported here last week. 

If so, was this a risk that the gene therapy vaccine researchers and producers were aware of?

All of which makes the battle over the FDA’s release of all documents related to the licensing of Pfizer’s Comirnaty COVID vaccine of all the more moment and importance.  Their desire to keep their files secret for 75 years raises the question of what it is that they do not want us to know.

February 7, 2022 Posted by | Deception, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | | 1 Comment

Battleground Melbourne

TopherField | January 13, 2022

Battleground Melbourne tells the story of the Fall of the World’s Most Liveable City, through the eyes of those who risked everything to save it.

We’ve been called every name you can imagine, the media, politicians, and the ‘I stand with Dan’ crowd have used every baseless slur you can imagine, and probably many you can’t, to try and shame us and shut us down.

And Victoria Police went on an 18 month rampage of repression, unlawful arrests, and widespread intimidation in order to silence us.

So who are we? And given all we were up against, how did we grow from just 70 people in April 2020, to hundreds of thousands in the biggest political events in Australian history in November 2021?

This is our story, told through our eyes. Battleground Melbourne is our reply to the lies, half truths, slurs, and lazy attacks that we have endured for the last 2 years.

This is our story. The story of ordinary people doing extraordinary things and taking extreme risks to stand for what we believe in.

You may not agree with us, you may not even like us, but you can’t claim to know who we are until you’ve watched Battleground Melbourne.

February 7, 2022 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Timeless or most popular, Video | , , , | 3 Comments