Last month, yet another letter had to be sent to the Commissioner of the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) and the New York State Education Department (NYSED) calling out their failure to provide any proof to dispute extremely important and revealing data reflecting that unvaccinated children have far better health outcomes than vaccinated children.
Soon after that letter was sent, a new Acting Commissioner of NYSDOH was appointed and so a letter was also sent to Dr. Mary Bassett, welcoming her to her new role and asking that she provide proof disputing these findings.
As explained to Dr. Bassett through the historical correspondence detailing the issue, on May 21, 2021, the attorneys that regularly represent ICAN sent a demand letter on behalf of a group comprising all the families of unvaccinated children in four contiguous school districts in New York. The demand explained that there is an abundance of evidence to support that unvaccinated children have better health outcomes than vaccinated children and shared the following results for the children in the four school districts:
Although not shocking to ICAN, these results should elicit a reaction from and a response by public health authorities and an education department which mandates vaccines. Instead, NYSED chose to completely ignore these findings and sent an inadequate, half-page response almost a full month later.
On August 11, 2021, a response letter was sent to NYSDOH pointing out the glaring omission from the NYSDOH’s response of even a shred of evidence to support that the growing rate and list of chronic diseases and disabilities affecting children are not caused by vaccination. NYSDOH was therefore warned that, absent receipt of this proof, the attorneys have been directed to commence an action challenging the school immunization requirements for kindergarten through the twelfth grade. Still no proof has been provided by the NYSDOH.
One must continue to wonder whether there is any data that could be submitted to these public health agencies that will change their unwavering belief in and allegiance to vaccines. And aren’t they troubled by the fact that they cannot produce any evidence to support their claims? Let’s see if the new Acting Commissioner provides any better response than her predecessor.
According to President Biden, “a winter of death” awaits anyone who rejects the experimental COVID jab which, by the way, has been consistently shown to do far more harm than good.
A December 16, 2021, White House statement reads: “For the unvaccinated, we are looking at a winter of severe illness and death. For themselves, their family and the hospital they’ll soon overwhelm.” That exact sentence was reiterated the next day by COVID-19 response coordinator Jeff Zients during a virtual press conference.
Backlash Over Biden’s Callousness
As reported by MSN’s Claire Goforth,1 the “prediction” didn’t go over well with the public. “Most people hate it. They feel it’s callous and cruel,” Goforth said, quoting a number of Twitter responses, including one from John D. Davidson:
“If you wanted to make half the country hate the administration and resist its edicts and advice, it would be hard to come up with a better strategy than this.”
A Twitter user by the name Martyr Made noted, “The aggressive Us/Them language in this White House message is insane.”2 Olivia Nuzzi, a Washington, D.C., reporter for New York Magazine tweeted, “Who is this for? Unvaccinated Americans are not going to be persuaded by messaging like this.”3
White House Chief of Staff Ronald Klain defended Biden saying “we have a duty to warn people what they are facing if unvaccinated.”4 But from my perspective, the rub is that they continue to pretend that lies are truth and truth is lies. Everything is upside-down, and many are rejecting this “winter of woe” message for the simple fact that they know the opposite is true.
If we are to go by actual science and data, the warning Biden issued should have gone out to the vaccinated, because everything points to the double and triple jabbed being at increased risk for infection, especially with the Omicron variant.
One reason for this is because the COVID jab reprograms your innate and adaptive immune systems, causing immune depletion.5 Data also show that the more heavily “vaccinated” a population is, the higher the case rate gets.6 And even this fails to account for the massive increase risk of dying from the jab or becoming permanently disabled, as many jabbed millions have already suffered.
Former WHO Adviser Tells Vaccinated to Quarantine Over Winter
Back in August 2021, the U.K. Column interviewed professor Christian Perronne, a French infectious disease expert, long-time vaccine policy chief and former vice president of the World Health Organization’s European Advisory Group, who issued the opposite — and likely far more accurate — warning:7
“Vaccinated people are at risk of the new variants … It’s been proven in different countries, so vaccinated people should be put in quarantine and should be isolated from society. Unvaccinated people are not dangerous; vaccinated people are dangerous to others.
It’s proven in Israel now. I’m in contact with many physicians in Israel. They’re having big problems now; severe cases in hospitals are among vaccinated people. And in the UK also, you had a larger vaccination program and also there are problems.”
Not surprisingly, despite impeccable credentials, Peronne has been censored and shunned for his contrarian views on COVID countermeasures, the COVID gene transfer shots in particular. During his interview, he didn’t mince words, referring to the European COVID-19 policy as “completely stupid.”
Are Prison Camps for the Unjabbed Next?
As predicted, we are rapidly approaching a time when the unvaccinated might be imprisoned for no other reason than their refusal of an experimental gene transfer injection. In early January 2021, a New York bill (A416) was introduced that would give the governor and his or her delegates the power to remove and/or indefinitely detain anyone suspected of being a threat to public health.
Detainees would be kept in a “medical facility or other appropriate facility” — in other words, a medical prison camp — for a maximum of 60 days, although a court could extend the detention in 90-day increments, indefinitely. As reported by Reason :8
“The bill’s language is noticeably vague in defining the parameters around disease type, leaving the government wide latitude in conducting its risk analysis … The legislation was originally introduced during the 2015-16 session in response to the Ebola virus … Though [SARS-CoV-2] is a serious virus, it is also no Ebola, which carries an average case fatality rate of 50%, with some outbreaks reaching as high as 90% …
[T]he vagueness of its approach gives the state a great deal of discretion in locking people up who might have some sort of unnamed illness, as well as people who merely interacted with someone who might have that illness.”
The bill comes up for a vote in the New York Senate and Assembly sometime in the next legislative session, which begins January 5, 2022.9 In addition to indefinite detention for poorly specified reasons, the bill would “require an individual who has been exposed to or infected by a contagious disease to complete an appropriate, prescribed course of treatment, preventive medication or vaccination.”
In other words, this bill legalizes the forced vaccination of anyone who is detained under the mere suspicion of being infected with something or having been in close proximity to someone suspected of being infected. As reported by Rights and Freedoms :10
“There is no explicit reference to what types of contagious diseases qualify a person to be removed from public life, detained in a facility, and forced into medical treatment and vaccination. Anyone can technically be held in isolation until they are deemed non-contagious, which would also raise questions over whether those carrying HIV/AIDS could be released back into society.
The bill has received an overwhelmingly negative response on the NY Senate website.11 Commenters have stated that, ‘this is disturbing and sets up a terrible precedent for future law. The governor can basically detain whoever [he/she] likes on the basis of scanty evidence.
This is un-American. It reminiscent of the Soviet Union locking up political opponents on the basis that they were ‘mentally unstable.’ We CANNOT allow this in our state.’ ‘This is a violation of fundamental human rights. The government should be working for the people, not locking them up without cause.’”
Australia Among the First to Test Medical Imprisonment Model
If you think being tossed into a prison camp without cause or recourse is impossible — after all, this is the United States of America, the land of the free, home of the brave — think again. Australia, another shining star of democracy, has backslidden into totalitarianism at a speed that has everyone’s head spinning.
The Australian government has gone full speed ahead, building a massive COVID quarantine camp, complete with barbed wire fences, guards and video surveillance. Once you’re in, you can’t just waltz out whenever you want to. In the video above, Hayley Hodgson describes what it was like to be detained and transferred to a COVID internment camp, even though she wasn’t sick.
Video surveillance placed her with a friend who had tested positive. They ran her license plate to retrieve her address and showed up at her house, telling her she had to quarantine. Even if you test negative, you still have to spend 14 days in a quarantine camp if you’ve been in close contact with someone who has tested positive. If you refuse, you’re fined $5,000 and forcibly taken there by police anyway.
“You feel like you’re in prison … It’s inhumane what they’re doing,” she says. “You are so small. They just overpower you. You’re literally nothing. It’s like, ‘You do what we say, or … we’ll lock you up for longer.’”
If someone can threaten to extend your stay in this “health hotel,” just what kind of medicine are we dealing with? Clearly, this is a prison model, not a health care model. When have you ever been in a hospital and the nurse tells you, “If you don’t eat your pudding, we’re keeping you here another three months”?
Life in the Biosecurity State
Based on Hodgson’s description of the camp, you don’t get much in terms of medical attention. One shudders to think what would happen to someone who actually had a severe case of COVID in there. Will hazmat suit-equipped police drop you at your room and then you don’t see them again unless you’re caught breaking some rule?
Food is delivered and dropped outside your door once a day. Each room has a 2×2 meter deck where you can go, but if you step outside your room or designated outdoor area without a mask, you’re fined $5,000. She was also told that additional infractions would result in her stay being extended past the 14 days — even though she wasn’t sick and there was no reason to keep her there in the first place.
“You’re literally treated like a prisoner in there,” she says. If you’re triple jabbed and think that means you’ll never see the inside of one of these prisons, think again. It doesn’t matter whether you’ve been double or triple jabbed.
If you’re found to have been in close contact with someone who tests positive, in you go. And there’s no legal process you can turn to for help if you disagree with the decree to quarantine. During her stay, three teenagers — all of whom had tested negative — managed to escape the camp. The manhunt that ensued is further evidence that we’re dealing with a prison model and nothing else.
US Has Hundreds of Ready-Made Prison Camps
While Australia is building its second camp, the U.S. already has 800 FEMA camps ready for action. As reported by AMG News :12
“FEMA is the executive arm of the coming police state and thus will head up all operations … The camps all have railroad facilities as well as roads leading to and from the detention facilities. Many also have an airport nearby.
The majority of the camps can house a population of 20,000 prisoners. Currently, the largest of these facilities is just outside of Fairbanks, Alaska. The Alaskan facility is a massive mental health facility and can hold approximately 2 million people.”
The article goes on to list the many executive orders that can work together to suspend the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, effectively allowing government to seize control over all aspects of life, from food production and transportation to communications and health care functions.
There’s even an executive order that allows the government to mobilize civilians into “work brigades” to carry out whatever functions are deemed necessary, and one that allows the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate entire communities. To find the FEMA camp nearest you, check out the state listings in the AMG News article.13 Most states have three or more.
Interpret the Media Narrative — They Want Civil War
If you’ve been paying attention over the past couple of years, you may have noticed that you can almost always predict what the next phase of the narrative is going to be. They “advertise” or pave the way for the evolving narrative by putting out articles slanted in a given direction.
Based on recent headlines, I suspect “the powers that be” are hoping to incite a civil war. “CIA Advisor: US Is ‘Closer to Civil War’ Than Thought Possible,” the Daily Mail claims.14 “We’re Edging Closer to Civil War,” an opinion columnist at The New York Times declares.15 “US Closer to Civil War Than Most Would Like to Believe, New Book Says,” announces The Guardian.16
According to Dr. Barbara Walter, a political science professor who serves on the Political Instability Task Force, the U.S. meets several criteria that historically have served as indicators that an “open insurgency” may be imminent. In her book, “How Civil Wars Start,” she writes:17
“No one wants to believe that their beloved democracy is in decline, or headed toward war. If you were an analyst in a foreign country looking at events in America — the same way you’d look at events in Ukraine or the Ivory Coast or Venezuela — you would go down a checklist, assessing each of the conditions that make civil war likely. And what you would find is that the United States … has entered very dangerous territory.”
Government Has Designated the Enemy, and It’s Us
The problem here is that while authoritarian politicians keep paying lip service to “democracy,” their own actions are anything but. Just who is undermining democracy? If you believe the news and CIA advisers, it’s the people who want the Constitution to stand and be adhered to that are the enemies of democracy. Never mind the mental gymnastics required to get to that conclusion.
It’s not hard to predict a scenario in which authoritarian leaders, acting on a falsely constructed narrative that a civil war is imminent, might start rounding up “dissidents.” And that’s in addition to the already existing, thinly veiled threat of tossing the unvaccinated into indefinite detention.
I agree with Walter’s assessment that we’re in dangerous territory, but not for the same reasons as she suggests. I would also argue that just about every country is a powder keg ready to blow, and for the same reason — people are being tyrannized by their governments and by unelected health authorities that claim powers they do not legally have.
Take England, for example. Entrepreneur and COVID blogger Steve Kirsch was recently notified that an anti-COVID restrictions campaign member had been detained for 28 days under the Mental Health Act for not wearing a mask to a dentist appointment.18 Normally, it’s quite difficult to get a person sectioned under the Mental Health Act, but not anymore.
Refusing to wear a mask apparently qualifies as an acute mental health disorder warranting a month-long stay in a psych ward.
The man, Charlie Cunningham, is reportedly being held at Littlemore Mental Hospital in Oxford, “where he’s being deprived of sleep under the pretext of being suicidal,” according to the woman who contacted Kirsch. She added, “He’s now going to be detained over Christmas and New Year — [he’s] very upset as he feels he’s been kidnapped and being held against his will …”
While all the articles mentioned earlier that warn of civil war blame the decline in democracy on the Trump administration, the Trump administration can hardly be blamed for the civil rights abuses and power grabs that are occurring today. It’s time to judge each tree by its fruit. That said, knowing that a civil war would serve the totalitarian takeover agenda, it would be wise to make sure our resistance remains a peaceful one.
San Diego, CA — Forgoing any legal democratic processes, multiple school districts in California began mandating the COVID-19 vaccination for children earlier this year. Set to go into effect in January, any child, 16 and older, who did not get the jab, was banned from campus in all San Diego public schools.
This authoritarian move caused a mass of backlash and thousands of children and parents refused to comply. The refusal to get vaccinated set the stage for a showdown that was to unfold on January 24 when the children would be kicked out of school for non compliance.
There will be no showdown, however, as a San Diego judge struck down the mandate this week, accurately pointing out that a school district has no authority to mandate medical procedures for children.
CBS 7 reports that Superior Court Judge John S. Meyer granted a writ of mandate for a lawsuit filed by the group “Let Them Choose,” which sought to keep the school district‘s COVID-19 vaccine mandate from going into effect by arguing it did not comply with state law.
Meyer noted in the ruling that the school district‘s COVID-19 vaccine mandate cannot move forward because it conflicts with state law, which says any decision to mandate vaccines must be made at the state level and must also include a “personal belief exemption” if the mandate is not imposed by the state Legislature.
San Diego Unified’s policy did not contain this exemption.
“SDUSD‘s Roadmap appears to be necessary and rational, and the district’s desire to protect its students from COVID-19 is commendable. Unfortunately, the field of school vaccine mandates has been fully occupied by the State, and the Roadmap directly conflicts with state law,” the judge wrote in a tentative ruling.
Naturally, the school district disagreed and claimed they have the right to dictate what children can and can’t be injected with. For now, however, their objection is meaningless and the children and parents who did not want to take the vaccination, will no longer be forced to do so.
“I am overjoyed. We knew that our legal argument was strong, and we brought this case on behalf of thousands of concerned parents and students and to hear the judge say no student should be coerced into getting this vaccine was just a wonderful thing to hear,” said Sharon McKeeman, founder of the group behind Let Them Choose.
As TFTP reported earlier this month, the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) — which is the second largest school district in the country — made a similar move and mandated shots for all children aged 12 and older.
NBC4 spoke to an attorney who is following these cases, Jennifer Kennedy, who explained that school districts do not have the authority to mandate medical procedures. Just like the San Diego school district did not have the authority to mandate the jabs, the LAUSD did not have it either.
“These grotesque contests and displays of treatment and candy and gifts and favors, raffles and cash prizes inducing the kids to the vaccination…. Here is the problem, kids in California cannot consent to vaccination.”
She added, “The LAUSD does not have the power to add a vaccine to the California school schedule,” she said. “You couldn’t do it if you were a po-dunk school district and you can’t do it if you’re LAUSD, the second largest district in the nation. You don’t have that legal authority.”
Several parents of students filed lawsuits against the LAUSD over the mandate and thousands of children remained unvaccinated in LAUSD. This line in the sand forced the school district to postpone their mandate last week after a whopping 28,000 children refused the jab.
It is only through resistance that the change we seek will come. As history shows us, one cannot comply their way out of tyranny.
After months of providing valuable Covid-19 information that runs counter to the official narrative, Twitter has finally banned Dr. Robert Malone, inventor of mRNA technology.
Malone, who will appear on the Joe Rogan show Thursday according to associate Ed Dowd (one of four contributors to the Malone doctrine), had more than 520,000 followers. He has been an outspoken critic of both mRNA vaccines, as well as the abysmal failures of policymakers worldwide in responding to the pandemic.
He was not warned or provided an opportunity to delete any offending tweets – instead he was “just suspended,” Dowd continued.
Here’s Malone’s last tweet – sharing an article which claims that the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine does ‘more harm than good.’
This is what got him banned. There wasn't even any misinformation – the video verbatim went line through line on the data. This is nothing short of gross censhorship at the behest corporate interests. pic.twitter.com/62c4D4AWAj
There are ways to ensure any trial will give you the results you want. Here are the top six methods used to manipulate covid research results.
1.Carry out the study when cases are falling
A favourite trick that has been used repeatedly throughout the pandemic.
Vaccination is a process that takes time. At the beginning of the study all participants are enrolled as unvaccinated. People move into the vaccinated cohort over time. The result is that the unvaccinated are exposed at periods of higher prevalence and for a longer time. The vaccinated are only exposed from a period later on and further down the curve. The vaccinated will therefore be less likely to catch covid and the vaccine can be made to look like it worked.
The ONS recently deployed this trick to claim a 32 fold lower mortality among the vaccinated. It was extreme data manipulation whereby they included the majority of deaths in winter prior to vaccination instead of starting from spring when a fairer comparison could have been made. The Office for Statistics Regulation has upheld a complaint about the ONS’s manipulation of data in this case.
2. Don’t include meaningful outcome measures like death
The vaccine trials have not demonstrated prevention of death.
Death from covid was too uncommon for the trials to be able to show an effect. Among 44,000 participants in the Pfizer trial, for example, there were a total of
29 deaths before the placebo group were themselves vaccinated. 15 of these were in the vaccinated including one of the three covid deaths. There were only 20 severe covid cases reported in the Pfizer submission to the FDA for Emergency Use Authorisation, including those that did not need hospital care.
Instead of using outcomes which are hard to distort, like death, the outcomes used were based on test results.
3. Only measure outcomes for part of the time after vaccination
Vaccinated people are at increased risk of covid infection in the first two weeks after vaccination. After the first two weeks the susceptible will have acquired natural immunity. By ignoring the first two weeks, a distorted picture of the overall impact of vaccinations can be presented. If all the vaccines are doing is causing the susceptible to have their infections earlier then the whole period from the date of vaccination needs to be included in assessing any benefit.
4. Use modelled data
The most reliable scientific papers ensure that the population being studied is representative of the population as a whole. Sometimes that is hard to achieve and adjustments need to be made afterwards to account for any differences e.g. the sample may be younger than the population as a whole. These adjustments are a reasonable thing to do to correct for small problems in the sample.
However, if the sample is so different to the general population that massive adjustments need to be made then effectively the study is no longer based on real world evidence. Instead it has become yet another prediction based on modelled data.
For example, this CDC study claimed, contrary to all other evidence, that people with a prior infection were 5 times more likely to become infected than those who had been double vaccinated. The actual results from the study showed a 70% higher rate but their adjustments made this into 500%. There were other serious flaws in the study which makes even the 70% claim highly dubious.
5. Ignore a crucial subgroup
If the findings are equivocal in most of the population then modelling might be enough to get the result you want. However, if there is a subgroup which has clearly contrary results then they can be left out entirely. When trying to calculate the impact of vaccination on transmission in winter the most obvious group to study would have been the heavily vaccinated care home residents. PHE omitted this group from their paper with no reason given. The consequence was that the overall household transmission rate was much higher in the real world (see figure 1) than in the study. Using published data on mean national transmission rates each week the expected rates in the study would have been 12.4% in the unvaccinated (who were overrepresented when transmission rates were highest) and 11.7% in the vaccinated cohorts. However, the study reported a rate of only 10.1% in the unvaccinated and only 6% in the vaccinated. The population excluded from the PHE study clearly contributed to the much higher real world transmission rates for both the unvaccinated and the vaccinated.
Figure 1: Real world transmission rates as measured by the proportion of contacts that become infected, the secondary attack rate.
6. Use the wrong dose of the drug
A drug can be discredited in a trial where the protocol is deliberately designed to give a drug at an inappropriate time or dose. For example, the RECOVERY trial was said to show that hydroxychloroquine treatment was not helpful in covid. The trial design used a dose of hydroxychloroquine that was in the toxic range and may well have been responsible for the deaths of participants in the treatment arm of the trial. Hydroxychloroquine doses over 1500mg are associated with cardiovascular and neurological harms that can be potentially fatal. The trial used a dose of 2000mg in the first 18 hours and 400mg every 12 hours thereafter.
Conclusion
Scientists are human and are under pressure to produce results in their papers as that increases the chances of publication which is needed for career progression and securing funding for research. There are numerous ways in which data can be altered to tell a story and many of them have been put to use during the pandemic. Dramatic results have become headline grabbing news but often the truth was far more mundane. If a result sounds too good to be true, don’t believe it.
The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) allegedly backed secret experiments into schizophrenia on 311 Danish children, many adopted or from orphanages, during the early 1960s, according to a newly released documentary.
Danish Radio’s documentary ‘The Search for Myself’ accuses the US spy agency of supporting the experiments at the Municipal Hospital in Cophenhagen. The studies were reportedly investigating the link between schizophrenia and heredity or the environment.
Per Wennick, who claims to have been a participant in the experiments as a child, alleged that he was placed in a chair, with electrodes strapped to him and forced to listen to loud, shrill noises. The aim of the test was supposedly to find out if a child had psychopathic traits.
“It was very uncomfortable. And it’s not just my story, it’s the story of many children,” Wennick said, describing his experience.
I think this is a violation of my rights as a citizen in this society. I find it so strange that some people should know more about me than I myself have been aware of.
The project was co-financed by a US health service, receiving support from the Human Ecology Fund, which is operated on behalf of the CIA, according to Wennick and the National Archives.
While the children were not told what the experiments were for, during or after the research, a dissertation was published in 1977 by Danish psychiatrist Find Schulsinger detailing the study.
The Danish Welfare Museum’s Jacob Knage Rasmussen said that this is the first documented time where children under care were used for research purposes in the country.
“I do not know of similar attempts, neither in Denmark nor in Scandinavia. It is appalling information that contradicts the Nuremberg Code of 1947, which after World War II was to set some ethical restrictions for experiments on humans” Rasmussen stated.
The FDA and CDC have now made crystal clear that their promise of transparency with regard to COVID-19 vaccines was hogwash. As everyone now knows, the FDA has asked a federal judge to give it at least 75 years to produce the pre-authorization/licensure safety data. And we now know with certainty, federal health authorities similarly want to hide the post-authorization/licensure safety data.
The FDA and CDC have admitted their existing safety monitoring program, VAERS, was incapable of determining causation and therefore unreliable. The CDC has therefore deployed a new safety monitoring system for COVID-19 vaccines called v-safe, and now claims that these “vaccines are being administered under the most intensive vaccine safety monitoring effort in U.S. history.”
V-safe is a smartphone app that allows vaccine recipients to “tell CDC about any side effects after getting the COVID-19 vaccine.” The purpose of the app “is to rapidly characterize the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines when given outside a clinical trial setting.” Data submitted to v-safe is “collected, managed, and housed on a secure server by Oracle,” a private computer technology company. Although the CDC has “access to the individualized survey data,” Oracle can only access “aggregate deidentified data for reporting.” Meaning, based on the CDC’s own documentation, the data submitted to v-safe is already available in deidentified form (with no personal health information) and could be immediately released to the public.
ICAN, through its attorneys, therefore asked in threeFOIArequests that the CDC produce the deidentified data from the v-safe program in the same form in which Oracle can currently access it. The agency acknowledged that “v-safe data contains approximately 119 million medical entries” but denied producing that data because the “information in the app is not de-identified.” The CDC had apparently not read its own documentation regarding v-safe. But ICAN’s attorneys had and so they administratively appealed this decision and, at the same time, to leave no doubt what was being requested, submitted another request to the CDC that sought all data deidentified after it was submitted to the v-safe app (in other words, in the form that the agency made known that Oracle has the data). Incredibly, the CDC administratively closed this request stating it was duplicative of the original request.
Meaning, the first request was denied by the CDC because the CDC claimed it requested data that was deidentified when entered into the app, but then the CDC closed the second request (which was identical to the first request except for making clear it was seeking data deidentified at any point – before or after it was entered into the app) by claiming the second request was duplicative of the first request! The CDC is plainly playing games. It clearly does not want the v-safe data released.
The public should have immediate access to all v-safe data in deidentified form. Despite the fact that this deidentified data already exists, that it is already in the hands of a private company, and that the CDC has never objected to its production, the CDC has so far failed to produce it to ICAN or to the American public – the same people being mandated to take this liability-free product. But don’t worry, ICAN will not rest until this data is made public and so today has commenced a lawsuit against the CDC and HHS demanding that a court compel them to release this data.
Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense.”
George Orwell, 1984
The “Covid pandemic” narrative is insane. That is long-established at this point, we don’t really need to go into how or why here. Read our back catalogue.
The rules are meaningless and arbitrary, the messaging contradictory, the very premise nonsensical.
Every day some new insanity is launched out into the world, and while many of us roll our eyes, raise our voices, or just laugh… many more accept it, believe it, allow it to continue.
Whether or not you believe the test means anything, they notionally do. In the reality they try to sell us every day, testing positive means you are carrying a dangerous disease.
So they are requesting people allegedly carrying a “deadly virus” work, rather than letting perfectly healthy unvaccinated people simply have their jobs back.
This is insanity.
But could anything more perfectly illustrate the priorities of those running the game?
We already know it’s not about a virus, it’s not about protecting the health service and it’s not about saving lives. Every day the people running the “pandemic” admit as much by their actions, and even their words.
Rather, it seems to be about enforcing rules that make little to no sense, requiring conformity at the price of reason, drawing arbitrary lines in the sand and demanding people respect them, making people believe “facts” that are provably untrue.
But why? Why is the story of Covid irrational and contradictory? Why are we told on the one hand to be afraid, and on the other that there is nothing to be afraid of?
Why is the “pandemic” so completely insane?
You could argue that it’s simple happenstance. The by-product of a multi-focused evolving narrative, a story being told by a thousand authors all at once, each concerned with covering their own little patch of agenda. A car with multiple drivers fighting over a single steering wheel.
There’s probably some truth to that.
But it’s also true that control, true control, can only be achieved with a lie.
In clinical psychology one of the diagnostic signs of the psychopath is that they tell elaborate lies, compulsively. Many times they will tell a lie even if the truth would be more beneficial.
Nobody knows why they do this, but I have a theory, and it applies to the swarming groups of little rat minds running the sewers of power as much as it does any individual monstrosity.
If you want to control people, you need to lie to them, that’s the only way to guarantee you have power.
If you are standing in the road, and I yell “look out, there’s a car a coming”, and you move just as a car whips past, I will never know if you moved because I said so, or because there actually was a car.
If my interest is in making sure you don’t get hurt, this would not matter to me either way.
But, what if my only true aim is the gratification of watching you do what I say, simply because I said it?
… well, then I need to scream out a warning of a car that does not exist, and watch you dodge an imaginary threat. Or, indeed, tell you there is no car, and watch you get run over.
Only by doing this can I see my words mean more to you than perceivable reality, and only then do I know I’m truly in control.
You can never control people with the truth, because the truth has an existence outside yourself that cannot be altered or directed. It may be the truth itself that controls people, not you.
You can never force people to obey rules that make sense, because they may be obeying reason, not your force.
True power lies in making people afraid of something that does not exist, and making them abandon reason in the name of protecting themselves from the invented threat.
To guarantee you have control, you must make people see things that are not there, make people live in a reality you build around them, and force people to follow arbitrary, contradictory rules that change day by day.
To truly test their loyalty, their hypnosis, you could even tell them there’s nothing to be afraid of anymore, but they need to follow the rules anyway.
Maybe that’s the point. Maybe the story isn’t supposed to be believable. Maybe the rules aren’t meant to make sense, they are meant to be obeyed.
Maybe the more contradictory & illogical the regulations become, the more your compliance is valued.
Maybe if you can force a person to abandon their judgment in favour of your own, you have total control over their reality.
We started with an Orwell quote, so let’s end with one too:
Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing.”
Isn’t that what we’re seeing now? What we’ve been seeing since the beginning?
People being mind broken into being afraid of something they are told isn’t frightening, following rules they are told are not necessary, taking “medicine” they are told does not work.
Maybe forcing people to believe your lies, even as you admit you are lying, is the purest expression of power.
Veteran New Zealand doctor René de Monchy’s career came to an abrupt halt after refusing to be vaccinated. Wanting to remain “vaccine-free,” the physician of over 48 years was fired, banned from his hospital, and not allowed to say goodbye to his patients.
The general practitioner and psychiatrist is shining a spotlight on the Globalist forces using Covid to help them seize control of New Zealand. The brave doctor questioned why doctors and patients receive monetary “vaccine” incentives. Furthermore, Dr. Monchy believes the actual number of people who have died from the vaccines is not reported, and relatives of those killed from the injection are receiving “hush money.”
Critical From The Begining
From their inception, Dr. Monchy was very critical of the “experimental, never-before-used mRNA vaccines.” The Doctor disagreed with the vaccine’s “lack of a control group and long-term outcomes,” reports the Doctors Collective. Even more so, the Doctor is outraged that the injection is being promoted to children and pregnant women,
… what closed the door for me was when the vaccines were also given to children, who are absolutely not at risk with corona infection. In addition, the mRNA vaccines were also promoted for pregnant women, which is completely contrary to any medical and scientific tradition of carefully weighing the pros and cons. The immune system, especially of a child, is a delicate interplay. It is like a symphony orchestra with several sections; the winds, strings, and percussion, all of which must fill in at just the right time. By administering vaccines whose effects are still largely unknown, you are going to disrupt this interplay. We have every reason to be cautious.
“Peverse”Monetary Incentives
Since the arrival of the gene-therapy injections, New Zealand has pushed to have 90% of its population receive two injections. In December, the country successfully reached its milestone. To achieve its 90% “vaccination” goal, Dr. Monchy explained that every citizen who received the injection was bribed with a voucher of 20 NZD (12 euros). At the same time, doctors have been given 359 NZD (216 euros) per vaccine.
Just five weeks ago, New Zealand had a so-called “vaxxathon,” a kind of festive campaign, with the sole purpose of giving as many people as possible a shot. Dr. Monchy reported that one health center made 175,000 NZD (105,000 euros) during that vaxxathon. “There is a perverse incentive for doctors to participate in this kind of campaign,” stated the Doctor.
No Vaccine Exemption
Vaccine exceptions were initially allowed in New Zealand, but were soon withdrawn by the government. The only exception now is if someone has suffered anaphylactic shock or a pulmonary embolism after the injection, explains the doctor. “I have had patients who suffered a stroke or Guillaume Barré after the first injection. But what do you think? No exception was given for a second vaccination.”
Similarly, in Australia, Senator Gerard Rennick condemned his government for forcing citizens to take a second shot if they suffered an adverse event from the first.
Chance Of Fine Or Jail
Those who don’t get pricked are demonized as anti-vaxxers and increasingly socially excluded. Since November 18, an unvaccinated person is no longer allowed to work in health care, education, or air and sea transport. Following the introduction of the Corona Pass on December 3, the unvaccinated are no longer welcome in hospitality, sports, cultural events, and non-essential stores. Those who fail to comply risk a fine of NZD 12,000 (€7210) or six months in prison. We have become a segregated society, explains Dr. Monchy.
Because the Doctor works in healthcare, he was also required to get vaccinated. On the day the deadline passed, the manager called him in her office. She asked if he had been vaccinated. He replied, “no.” Immediately his computer account and swipe card were blocked. He was unable to say goodbye to patients and colleagues. He received a restraining order from the hospital, “like a hooligan receiving a stadium ban,” stated Dr. Monchy.
One of the doctor’s closest colleagues told him that there is no talk about the people forced to leave the hospital. The doctor’s co-workers are afraid of losing their livelihoods. The rumor is that doctor’s medical licenses will be revoked, which has already happened to three colleagues.
The doctor is sporadically working under the radar. He sees patients through teleconsultations. His only hope is to continue doing the work he loves.
Posthumous PCR Positive
At the onset of the corona crisis in early 2020, the doctors were initially shocked by the extreme outlook we were presented with, states Dr.Monchy. However, it soon became apparent that the mortality rate was much lower than predicted; in New Zealand, exactly 46 people have died from Covid-19 from January 2020 to date, according to official statistics. Anyone who dies within 28 days of a positive PCR test is counted as a corona death, regardless of other circumstances. Recently, the police in New Zealand shot and killed a criminal. Posthumously, the PCR test turned out to be positive. As a result, he, too, went down in the books as a corona death explains the Doctor.
Leaders Do Not Care About People’s Health
Standard ways of improving health are not encouraged, such as diet, exercise, and fresh air, but rather suppressed. Moreover, any dissent by doctors is being dealt with harshly, either in the media or through the Medical Councils (professional organizations), states Dr. Monchy. “At some point, it dawned on me: this is not so much about health, but more about politics, money, power, and social manipulation.”
Globalists Have Seized Control Of New Zealand
New Zealand is a testing ground for international organizations wanting to roll out systems worldwide, explains Dr. Monchy. For example, credit cards and PIN payment (EFTPOS) were first introduced in New Zealand. In addition, the country is remote and easy to manage, as the population is generally accommodating.
The Doctor slammed the country’s globalist Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern,
She is intelligent, but also shrewd woman, who has mastered political maneuvering to her fingertips. After the attack in Christchurch, she was able to count on much goodwill among the population. Ardern has a degree in communications which you can see, she knows how to play to the masses. What has also helped her is that the press was completely in her hands, and still is by the way.
Jacinda Ardern is closely connected with World Economic Forum (WEF) and was its selected Young Global Leader. RAIR Foundation USA recently reported on her and the Young Global Leaders school, which was established and managed by Klaus Schwab of the WEF. Arden, like many of the school’s famous for Covid dictator attendees are exploiting the pandemic with the aim of crashing national economies and introducing a global digital currency.
Arden’s Labour party has an absolute majority in parliament. The Doctor explains that this allows Arden’s party to publish laws on Thursday, and her government will quickly and quietly push them through on Monday. The leader operates at a pace that the public is supposed to struggle to keep up with.
The Prime Minister has already said that there will be no end to vaccines. The latest Covid-19 law is far-reaching: the Minister of Health can declare a location an emergency area, after which agencies have the right to enter a home, test the people present, and provide mandatory “treatment.” All court cases brought against this type of measure, up to the Supreme Court, have been lost.
“It would be a mistake to think that this system is unique to New Zealand or that only here will it be so extreme.” I think the system is only being perfected here before it is introduced in other places, explains the Doctor.
Powerful international organizations, such as the WEF are out to bring about an overall social transformation. A new plan is launched almost every week in our area, such as a general smoking ban. So much is unknown, but what the Doctor feels sure about is, “so much power should never be in the hands of a government.”
“It is fascinating but creepy to see how a small group of people around Jacinda Ardern have taken control of this country,” states the Doctor. He questions why a majority of the population goes along with this?
Why do we allow ourselves to be split into “good citizens” and the “anti-vaxxers” or “outcasts”? I have noticed that it is precisely the more intellectual people who fall for it. That includes, unfortunately, many fellow physicians, when you cannot possibly maintain that this regime of vaccines and measures is good for public health. I think the scale of the deception certainly has something to do with it. It is simply too big to grasp. The moment you see through it, you lose much of what you have assumed to be valid up to that point. Intellectuals have more invested in the system; they, therefore, have more to lose. Perhaps our greatest fear is that we will lose our minds. To give up confidence in this corona system is maddening; many people do not yet dare to do so.
Sums Of Hush Money
According to official figures, 117 deaths have been reported as “possibly associated” with the Pfizer vaccine, of which only one case has been assessed as “probable.” The rest are still under investigation, or the deaths were dismissed as “not related to the vaccine.”
These are entirely different figures reaching us through the unofficial route, explains the doctor. We have collected 220 cases via next of kin in which the vaccine is most likely the cause of death. For example, a healthy 50-year-old man or a 15-year-old youth died a day after their shot. He reports that “there are indications that relatives are being offered sums of hush money.”
History Repeating Itself
The doctor grew up in the Netherlands and was conceived around the liberation. His father was active in the underground, helping Allied pilots to escape. But, of course, this was dangerous, so his family lived in a certain tension.
During his childhood, the war was never far away. He grew up playing in the bomb craters in the street. His family regularly discussed the war in their home; it was not taboo. Dr. Monchy’s father described how the occupying forces gradually tightened the thumbscrews: “identification requirements, more and more restrictions, then excluding entire groups.” Exactly as is happening now in New Zealand and elsewhere worldwide, explained the doctor. Unfortunately, it is the known way to take control, as history has repeatedly shown.
Hope For New Zealand
The doctor has not lost hope and praised activist organizations like Voices for Freedom for doing fantastic work in New Zealand. Demonstrations are held in many cities almost every week and attract hundreds or even thousands of people. The Globalists can only suppress human beings for so long stressed the doctor,
You have to remember that our “opponents” see us as interchangeable, as expendable units. For everyone the same vaccine. For all the world the same QR system. There is no place for our sense of self in their human vision. But this clashes with the uniqueness of the human being. You can suppress the sense of self for a while, but not for very long. Once people have rediscovered themselves, they start to see the seriousness of the current situation and the turnaround comes.
In April 2021, doctors, dentists, pharmacists and veterinarians set up an organization, New Zealand Doctors Speaking Out with Science. Their group objected to pharma companies actions and the harsh consequences they faced for voicing their concerns,
Our group formed around an open letter to the New Zealand government that expressed our concerns with the Pfizer Comirnaty Covid-19 injection, as well as the implication from our regulatory bodies that we would be considered incompetent in our duties if we provided fully informed consent about this procedure.
The organization is growing quickly as hundreds of doctors, nurses, and other paramedics have been fired for being vaccine-free – they deliberately do not call them “unvaccinated.” When the first side effects of the gene therapy injections appeared, people noticed that their complaints were brushed aside, as was the personal experience of nurses in hospitals. Their organization tries its best to help these brave individuals.
Seeking Connection
Many colleagues Dr. Monchy speaks to express open doubts about the harsh corona policy in private. They wonder whether the measures still have to do with public health. The doctor is glad that they are expressing their doubts and seeking a connection with other medics. “For myself, I will remain true to my principles. I stand for individual freedom and responsibility, for ‘Respect for Life.’ No one can judge me on that.”
This graph is from the Telegraph 2 days ago, and it shows that hospitalizations and deaths have not paralleled the rise in cases for Omicron, as they did for earlier waves.
The second graph shows hospitalizations [with Covid] over time by age from today’s NY Times. The yellow line is pediatric ages. While I have not posted a “cases” graph, cases have shot up, while hospitalizations and deaths have not shot up proportionately, as happened in the US with prior waves.
I cannot recall a time in American history where the medical boards would go after you for prescribing an approved drug off-label for a condition that is supported by over 60 positive studies and multiple peer-reviewed systematic reviews and meta-analyses which is the highest level of evidence-based medicine. Can you?
Is there a cost-benefit analysis somewhere that I missed showing that ivermectin causes harm?
If the cost-benefit analysis is clearly negative, how could those positive meta-analyses have been published?
Ivermectin was discarded unceremoniously till now, but Japan has demonstrated that the drug can be used as a more effective cure and a permanent substitute for the Coronavirus vaccines produced by big pharmaceutical companies. […]
The Pandemic in Japan was going out of control, yet the Japanese government was smart enough to look beyond vaccines in its COVID-19 containment efforts.
In September, Japan deployed Ivermectin and legalising the use of the anti-parasitic drug has helped people recover from COVID-19 with more durable and long-lasting immunity. Caseloads have come down rapidly without the need for booster vaccination doses. In Tokyo, there were around 6,000 cases in the middle of August, but the number has now dropped down to below one hundred.
Japan is now overcoming the Coronavirus, with the number of COVID tests dropping from 25% in the fag end of August to just 1% mid-October.
Ivermectin use is thus helping Japan permanently beat the COVID-19 Pandemic. If and when vaccine efficacy wanes, Japan will have a choice- using an anti-parasitic medicine as a permanent cure to ensure speedy recovery of infected patients with durable immunity. Japan has thus crushed Big Pharma with a small move- deploying the use of Ivermectin.
Let’s look at death rates in Japan vs. the US. See a difference? On a per capita basis, Japan is beating the US by a factor of 17. As soon as Japan rolled out ivermectin, their death rates dropped rapidly to 0.
I wonder if it could be caused by the ivermectin? What do you think?
Recent disclosures by the Zionist regime show that some 2,069 British nationals were serving in the IDF as of March 2025, according to Freedom of Information (FoI) requests submitted to the occupation forces (1,686 dual British-Israeli, plus 383 multinational). We cannot tell from the figures how many of these were already settler colonists and intend to stay in the colony, and how many will return or have returned to the UK. Presumably, those returning to the UK will number far fewer than 2,000, since many are known to have become permanently residents of the colony.
Additionally, the IDF figures only provide a snapshot, and do not tell us how many have served in the Jewish supremacist military either before or after March 2025. One way into the question of how many genocidaires are living in Britain is to ask how many current British residents were born in the Zionist colony. There is data on that, as we shall see. … continue
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.
Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.
Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
DMCA Contact
This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.
We will respond and take necessary action immediately.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.