Former British PM Tony Blair is calling for millions to be vaccinated with a single dose in a radical acceleration of the vax programme and also for the roll-out of health passports. But what, exactly, is his medical expertise?
‘Listen to the experts.’ ‘Follow the science.’ Two phrases we’ve heard ad nauseam in 2020.
But who qualifies as an ‘expert’ or ‘scientist’ is highly selective. A whole host of medical and scientific professionals who have argued against lockdowns as an anti-coronavirus strategy have been dismissed as ‘cranks’: we saw that quite clearly in the way the distinguished authors of the Great Barrington Declaration were treated.
By way of contrast, those with no qualifications in ‘the science’ have been elevated as public health gurus, simply because they are pro-lockdown and espouse the ‘official narrative’.
The most obvious example of these double standards is Bill Gates, a rather geekish multi-billionaire American computer software tycoon with a nice line in sweaters who is regarded as the ‘go-to’ man by leading news channels on what we should do next about Covid-19.
Gates’ funding of public health bodies and university departments – and media outlets too – is extraordinary. But that shouldn’t hide the fact that he is not a qualified doctor. Yet criticise Gates’ interventions and you’ll be screamed at by the very same people who say we shouldn’t be listening to experienced medical/scientific professionals who take a very different view. And so it is with Anthony Charles Lynton Blair.
‘The Blair Creature’ – to give him Peter Hitchens’ wonderful nickname – has emerged, on the day before Christmas Eve, to call for as many people as possible in Britain to get a special New Year present. “The aim should be to vaccinate as many people as possible in the coming months,” Blair writes in The Independent.
The target should be to cover a majority of the population by the end of February. “We should consider using all the available doses in January as first doses, that is, not keeping back half for second doses,” he continues. That’s despite the two vaccines in question only being licensed on the basis that people receive two doses.
Let’s remind ourselves of Tony Blair’s qualifications for giving advice on vaccination programmes. Er, he doesn’t have any. He studied law at Oxford where he played in a pop group called Ugly Rumours. He became a barrister, not a doctor or scientist. Then of course he went into politics, bombing various countries.
Yet here he is pontificating as if he’s some kind of world expert on vaccine programmes. But rather than focus on his lack of qualifications in immunology, the same ‘centrist’ crowd (many of whom hurled rather large stones at the genuine experts who did oppose lockdowns), laud the intervention of ‘The Blair Creature’. Tony is speaking, so we all must stop whatever we’re doing and listen.
Really? I’ll only start listening to Blair’s advice when those Iraqi weapons of mass destruction that he assured us could be assembled and launched within 45 minutes turn up. Why on earth should we trust someone who launched an illegal war based on false accusations?
This is not even about the vaccine. It’s about loud ‘this is what needs to be done’ statements on Covid-19 coming from people who have no medical education, while those who do are being sidelined for not toeing the ‘party line’.
It’s not just mass ‘single dose’ vaccinations by the end of February that Blair is keen to see rolled out. He wants health passports too. “Prepare for a form of health passport now,” he says. “I know all the objections, but it will happen. It’s the only way the world will function and for lockdowns to no longer be the sole course of action.”
This is another example of ‘it’s not what is said, but who says it’ in operation. For several months, a number of commentators (myself included) have warned about the roll-out of health passports and how our freedom to travel, attend sports and cultural events, or even go to the shops could be dependent on us possessing one.
But we were dismissed as ‘conspiracy theorists’ or worse, even though the World Economic Forum has been enthusiastically promoting such schemes.
Now Tony Blair, the great idol of those who spend their lives calling others ‘conspiracy theorists’, says that health passports “will happen”. Got that? “Will happen.” Not ‘might happen’, or ‘will happen if governments and the public decide they’re a good thing’, but “will happen”.
There is not meant to be any debate on the matter. The Davos elites have decided. We plebs are merely expected to wait in line for our jabs, and then gratefully receive our health passports without which we won’t be able to do things we took for granted just 12 months ago.
Following ‘doctor’s orders’? Or implementing a dystopian ‘Great Reset’ political agenda with terrible consequences for personal liberty? You decide.
Neil Clark is a journalist, writer, broadcaster and blogger. His award winning blog can be found at http://www.neilclark66.blogspot.com. He tweets on politics and world affairs @NeilClark66
If the Gateses and the Faucis and the representatives of the international medical establishment get their way, life will not return to normal until the entire planet is vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. What many do not yet understand, however, is that the vaccines that are being developed for SARS-Cov-2 are unlike any vaccines that have ever been used on the human population before. And, as radically different as these vaccines appear, they represent only the very beginning of a complete transformation of vaccine technology that is currently taking place in research labs across the planet. This is a study of The Future of Vaccines.
For those with limited bandwidth, CLICK HERE to download a smaller, lower file size version of this episode.
For those interested in audio quality, CLICK HERE for the highest-quality version of this episode (WARNING: very large download).
TRANSCRIPT
Since the dawn of the corona crisis, we have been told over and over that the world has changed forever.
MARIA VAN KERKHOVE: What we’re going to have to figure out, and I think what we’re all going to have to figure out together, is what our new normal looks like. Our new normal includes physical distancing from others. Our new normal includes wearing masks where appropriate. Our new normal includes us knowing where this virus is each and every day, where we live, where we work, where we want to travel.
DUCEY: What we’ve gone through and the challenges that I’m sharing with you really is Arizona’s new normal. And it’s our new normal for the foreseeable future. I really want ask people to get their heads around that.
JUSTIN TRUDEAU: This pandemic has provided an opportunity for a reset. This is our chance to accelerate our pre-pandemic efforts to reimagine economic systems that actually address global challenges like extreme poverty, inequality and climate change.
This “New Normal” with which we are being threatened brings with it great uncertainty. Uncertainty over work. Uncertainty over travel. Uncertainty over what our lives will look like on the other side of this “Great Reset.”
But there is one thing that we can be certain about: If the Gateses and the Faucis and the representatives of the international medical establishment get their way, life will not return to normal until the entire planet is vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2.
GATES: It is fair to say things won’t go back to truly normal until we have a vaccine that we’ve gotten out to basically the entire world.
ZEKE EMANUEL: Realistically, COVID-19 will be here for the next 18 months or more. We will not be able to return to normalcy until we find a vaccine or effective medications.
ANTHONY FAUCI: So, if we get the overwhelming majority of people taking the vaccine, and you have, on the one hand, an effective vaccine, on the other hand, a high degree of uptake of the vaccine, we could start getting things back to relative normal as we get into the second and third quarter of the year, where people can start thinking about doing things that were too dangerous just months ago.
This message has been repeated so frequently and so consistently by public health officials, political “leaders” and media commentators that many have begun to believe it. And now, the public is being prepared for an unprecedented global vaccination campaign. Taking the form of a military operation . . .
GENERAL GUSTAVE PERNA: It is this effort that I can look you in the face and say to you, “E.U.A. [Emergency Use Authorization] comes, 24 hours later vaccines will be distributed out to the American people and be ready for administration.”
. . .the plan is to rush a new generation of experimental vaccines to market and deliver them at “warp speed” before any long term testing has even been attempted. What many do not yet understand, however, is that the vaccines that are being developed for SARS-Cov-2 are unlike any vaccines that have ever been used on the human population before.
And, as radically different as these vaccines appear, they represent only the very beginning of a complete transformation of vaccine technology that is currently taking place in research labs across the planet.
For almost the entirety of 2020, a traumatized public has been told that nothing resembling our pre-corona lives will return until there is a COVID vaccine.
So it is no surprise that the same media sources that have been promoting this talking point would celebrate the hopeful pronouncements of the Big Pharma manufacturers regarding their COVID vaccine candidates.
BECKY QUICK: Welcome back to Squawk Box everybody. We have some breaking news from Pfizer. Meg Tirrell joins us right now. Meg, good morning.
MEG TIRELL: Good morning, Becky. This is the news that we’ve been waiting to hear.
Pfizer and BioNTech reporting the first results from their phase 3 vaccine trial saying that in this interim look the vaccine showed to be more than 90 percent effective.
JAKE WHITTENBERG: Well, we begin with breaking news this morning. The push to find a coronavirus vaccine. This morning, Moderna says its vaccine is more than 94 percent effective.
TIM STENOVEC: Vaccine headlines are rolling in. One of AstraZeneca’s doses stopped an average of 70 percent of patients from falling ill and that even rose to 90 percent with additional regimens now the head of the government’s operation warp speed is saying that quote hopefully vaccinations in the u.s will start in less than three weeks.
But lost amid the hype of this media-led celebration are some sobering facts.
Firstly, these news stories were not generated on the back of publicly accessible data, but literal corporate press releases. This announcement-by-press-release style of corporate self-reporting was immediately exposed as a sham when AstraZeneca was found to have given an “unintentionally” lower dose to one group of trial participants and then touted the results of that smaller dose group without clarifying the confusion.
FRANCINE LACQUA: I’m not really sure what to make of this AstraZeneca-Oxford trial there’s confusion about whether it’s 60 efficacy whether it’s 90 what exactly happened.
ANDREW PEKOSZ: Well it is a little bit unclear, but let’s start with what we think we know. which is some of the patients that were in their phase three clinical trial ended up getting a half-dose of their of the initial inoculation and it turns out that the group that got that half dose followed by a boost had a much higher rate of protection from covid19 disease than the group that got the dosing schedule that the company wanted to give to everybody
Secondly, the “success” of these vaccines is not being measured by their ability to prevent infection with SARS-CoV-2, as many in the general public believe, but merely to lessen the severity of the symptoms associated with COVID-19, like coughs and headaches.
ANJALEE KHEMLANI: Do you anticipate that the first sets of vaccines out the door will be more of a less effective blocker of the virus?
FAUCI: Well that’s the primary—that’s a great question, and that’s the primary endpoint of most of the virus, is to prevent clinical disease. To prevent symptomatic disease, not necessarily to prevent infection.
Thirdly, the studies are touted as involving tens of thousands of people, but in Pfizer’s trial, only 170 of them were reported as being “diagnosed with COVID-19” during the trial. Of those, 162 were in the placebo group and eight were in the vaccine group. From this, it is inferred that the vaccine prevented 154/162 people from developing the disease, or “95%”. But as even the British Medical Journalpoints out, “a relative risk reduction is being reported, not absolute risk reduction, which appears to be less than 1%.”
Fourthly, the trials are still ongoing. Although several countries have now issued “emergency use authorization” allowing these companies to begin distributing these vaccines to the public, the stage III trials of the vaccines are ongoing, with several of the planned “endpoints” for the data not being collected for 24 months after injection. As a result, as even the UK’s own “Information for UK Healthcare Professionals” pamphlet regarding Pfizer’s vaccine points out, “Animal reproductive toxicity studies have not been completed,” meaning that, “It is unknown whether COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 has an impact on fertility.”
Even more chillingly, it is not healthcare professionals who are leading the charge to deliver this vaccine to the world, but the military
MURRAY BREWSTER: He commanded Canada’s NATO mission in Iraq. Now he’s in charge of making sure Canadians get the COVID vaccine.
TRUDEAU: Major General Dany Fortin will be heading up the logistics and operations within the centre.
RICHARD PASCOE: You know, we’re about to turn the corner here into 2021 and I think the American public should be very proud of what the army and the Department of Defense and our partners on the science side have done to bring these vaccines to the market.
BREWSTER: How much more involved the military will get is unclear. Public Health is still developing its plan. Defense Minister Harjit Sajjan acknowledges it is not beyond the realm of possibility in some parts of Canada troops could be running clinics and administering vaccine.
And most importantly, as incredible as this headlong rush to push an experimental vaccine on the majority of the world’s population is, it is even more incredible when it is revealed that Moderna and Pfizer’s vaccines are not, in fact, “vaccines” as anyone in the general public understands them. They are mRNA vaccines, a novel method of vaccination that has never before been approved for human use.
RHIJU DAS: So the concept of an RNA vaccine is: Let’s inject the RNA molecule that encodes for the spike protein.
ANGELA RASMUSSEN: It’s making your cell do the work of creating this viral protein that is going to be recognized by your immune system and trigger the development of these antibodies.
DAS: Our bodies won’t make a full-fledged infectious virus. They’ll just make a little piece and then learn to recognize it and then get ready to destroy the virus if it then later comes and invades us.
[. . .]
DAS: It’s a relatively new, unproven technology. And there’s still no example of an RNA vaccine that’s been deployed worldwide in the way that we need for the coronavirus.
RASMUSSEN: There is the possibility for unforeseen, adverse effects.
AKIKO IWASAKI: So this is all new territory. Whether it would elicit protective immune response against this virus is just unknown right now.
To be sure, the new mRNA vaccines work on an entirely different principle than any other vaccine that has ever been used on the human population. In order to understand that, it is important to understand the history of vaccine technologies.
The concept of “inoculation” has been around for centuries, with one of its earliest instances in China several centuries ago, where dried-out scabs of lightly infected smallpox sufferers were powdered and then blown up the nostrils of healthy people. The procedure aimed to infect the patient with a mild strain of smallpox, thus conferring immunity on them. This practice was brought over to Europe via Turkey and was eventually adopted around the world.
“Vaccination” developed in the late 18th century when Edward Jenner discovered that those who had been exposed to cowpox—a less virulent relative of smallpox—were themselves immune from smallpox. He “vaccinated” a boy with a cowpox vesicle from a milkmaid and then inoculated him with smallpox two months later. The boy did not develop smallpox, and the procedure was hailed as a breakthrough of medical science. The term “vaccination,” derived from the Latin word for cow, eventually came to refer to the general process of introducing immunogens or attenuated infectious agents into the body in order to stimulate the immune system to fight infections.
But this is not how mRNA vaccines function. In contrast to vaccination, which involves introducing an immunogen into the body, mRNA vaccines seek to introduce messenger RNA into the body in order to “trick” that body’s cells into producing immunogens, which then stimulate an immune response.
ELENA GUOBYTE: Two types of genetic vaccines are being investigated for COVID-19: mRNA and DNA. mRNA needs to reach the cytoplasm of host cells, while DNA needs to enter the nucleus. Then this genetic material gets taken up by the cell’s machinery, and the cell expresses the spike protein. These spike proteins are then recognized by the immune system, hopefully stimulating a protective response.
PAUL OFFIT: So the way this is going to work, the mRNA vaccine is—it’s the mRNA that codes for that coronavirus spike protein. You’re inoculated with that small little piece of genetic material. That genetic material then enters your cells and is is translated into a protein—in
this case, the coronavirus spike protein—which is then excreted from the cell. So, in essence, your body makes the spike protein and then your body makes antibodies to the spike protein, all because it’s been instructed to do that. Your cells have been instructed to do that by this little piece of messenger RNA.
NARRATOR: Protein factories in the cytoplasm, called ribosomes, bind to the messenger RNA. The ribosome reads the code in the messenger RNA to produce a chain made up of amino acids. There are 20 different types of amino acid. Transfer RNA molecules carry the amino acids to the ribosome. The messenger RNA is read three bases at a time. As each triplet is read, a transfer RNA delivers the corresponding amino acid. This is added to a growing chain of amino acids. Once the last amino acid has been added, the chain folds into a complex 3D shape to form the protein.
Any and all questions about this rushed, experimental vaccine technology are being labeled by the pharmaceutical manufacturers and the corporate press that runs on their advertising dollars as “anti-vax misinformation” and being actively censored. But despite the straw man argument that opposition to the vaccine comes solely from ignorant members of the public who are worried about being “injected with mircochips,” there are genuine concerns about the long-term safety of these vaccines coming from within the scientific community, and even from whistleblowers from within the ranks of the Big Pharma manufacturers themselves.
On December 1st, the former chair of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe Health Committee, Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, joined Dr. Michael Yeadon, a former Vice-President and Chief Scientific Officer at Pfizer Global R&D, to file a petition calling on the European Medicine Agency to halt the Phase III clinical trials of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine until they are restructured to address critical safety concerns associated with this experimental technology.
DEL BIGTREE: There is a petition now to try and stop the vaccine from being released in Europe and stop the trials in their tracks until some serious errors are fixed. The complaints are the potential dangers, if they are not rectified, of this vaccine. Let me very quickly just read through these before I bring on my next guest.
Here are the four major elements that are being pointed out by Dr. Wodarg and Dr. Yeadon.
The formation of so-called “non-neutralizing antibodies” can lead to an exaggerated immune reaction, especially when the test person is confronted with the real, “wild” virus after vaccination. This so-called antibody-dependent amplification, ADE, has long been known from experiments with corona vaccines in cats, for example. In the course of these studies all cats that initially tolerated the vaccination well died after catching the wild virus.
The mRNA vaccines from BioNTech/Pfizer contain polyethylene glycol (PEG). 70% of people develop antibodies against this substance – this means that many people can develop allergic, potentially fatal reactions to the vaccination.
The vaccinations are expected to produce antibodies against spike proteins of SARS-CoV-2. However, spike proteins also contain syncytin-homologous proteins, which are essential for the formation of the placenta in mammals such as humans. It must be absolutely ruled out that a vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 could trigger an immune reaction against syncytin-1, as otherwise infertility of indefinite duration could result in vaccinated women.
The much too short duration of the study does not allow a realistic estimation of the late effects. As in the narcolepsy cases after the swine flu vaccination, millions of healthy people would be exposed to an unacceptable risk if an emergency approval were to be granted and the possibility of observing the late effects of the vaccination were to follow. Nevertheless, BioNTech/Pfizer apparently submitted an application for emergency approval on December 1, 2020.
We’ve just updated you that that vaccine has been approved for the UK as we speak.
[. . .]
BIGTREE: What is it that people can do what—your fellow scientists and doctors—what do we need to do to make sure we don’t make one of the greatest scientific errors in human history?
WOLFGNG WODARG: Protect yourself and protect all your neighbors and friends so that they don’t get this vaccine. and you have to be—you have to show up, you have to tell the politicians that you will blame them for what they do with this. I think what what’s happening, it’s a great betrayal. We are betrayed. And people who betray normally are punished, and we won’t forget this if they go on doing this with us.
Before the combined weight of the pharmaceutical manufacturers, global health bodies, governments and the corporate media combined to suppress any questions about this unprecedented rush for a globally-distributed, experimental vaccine, there were widespread calls for caution from within the heart of the scientific community.
Even mainstream publications like Scientific American were compelled to note back in June of this year that there are reasons for concern over the way the COVID-19 vaccines are being rushed to market:
Telescoping testing timelines and approvals may expose all of us to unnecessary dangers related to the vaccine. While preclinical trials to evaluate the potential safety and efficacy of vaccine candidates are likely to include tens of thousands of patients, it is still unclear whether that number will be large enough and a trial will last long enough to evaluate safety for a drug that would be administered to so many. The US alone plans to vaccinate hundreds of millions of people with the first successful candidate. One serious adverse event per thousand of a vaccine given to 100 million people means harm to 100,000 otherwise healthy people.
The potential dangers of these vaccines—not just the mRNA vaccines that hijack your body’s cells to begin producing proteins to stimulate an immune response, but vaccines like AstraZeneca’s that uses a chimpanzee adenovirus to express the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein—are numerous. Not only do these vaccines present the potential for the antibody-dependent enhancement phenomenon that makes people more susceptible to the wild virus after having been vaccinated against it—which is a problem common to previous coronavirus vaccine candidates—but their potential impact on fertility has, even by the UK government’s own admission, not been tested at this point and remains “unknown.”
But even more fundamental than these particular safety concerns about these particular vaccines is the way that this fanatical, reckless and unprecedented headlong rush to push (and potentially even mandate) these vaccines on billions of people worldwide—women and children, young and old, healthy and unhealthy alike—is setting the most dangerous public health precedent in the history of humanity, a precedent that threatens to undermine our most cherished health freedoms in the name of a panic-induced “emergency.”
One of these core freedoms is the ability to refuse an experimental medical procedure, a freedom that was acknowledged in the Nuremberg Code of 1947 and enshrined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which states that “no one shall be subjected without his free consent to medical or scientific experimentation.”
Despite the fact that the clinical trials surrounding these experimental vaccines are ongoing and that the FDA itself admits that there is “currently insufficient data to make conclusions about the safety of the vaccine in subpopulations such as children less than 16 years of age, pregnant and lactating individuals, and immunocompromised individuals” and “risk of vaccine-enhanced disease over time, potentially associated with waning immunity, remains unknown,” governments around the world are contemplating making these vaccinations mandatory, or compelling people to take them against their will by restricting their access to public life until they subject themselves to this medical experimentation.
ANCHOR: It’s a controversial idea that could end up being the law: “no jab, no job,” with some businesses considering making the COVID-19 vaccine mandatory for employees.
CHRISTINE ELLIOTT: There may be some restrictions that may be placed on people that don’t have vaccines for travel purposes, to be able to go totheaters and other places. But that will be up to the individual person to decide.
JO LING KENT: So here’s how it works: The app gives you a health pass to show before you go into big stadiums like this to streamline the process to make it safer and faster to get to your seat.
TRACY GRIMSHAW: Alan, when there is a vaccine are you going to require all of your passengers to be vaccinated before they get on a plane?
ALAN JOYCE: Yeah we are looking at changing our terms and conditions to say for international travellers that we will ask people to have a vaccination before they can get on the aircraft.
The threat of forcing or compelling people to become unwilling guinea pigs in an ongoing medical experiment is immoral on its face. But even the prospect of enforcing such mandates would entail the erection of a surveillance and tracking system that further threatens basic rights and liberties. After all, in order to determine who has been vaccinated—and thus who is allowed to board an airplane or access a stadium or enter a store with a vaccine policy—there will need to be a system for identifying and tracking each vaccine recipient.
Whereas in days past, such tracking systems might have worked with identification papers, special badges to identify people’s status or other outwardly identifying marks, in the modern age, such schemes will take the form of digital apps and other technologically advanced methods for tracking, categorizing and identifying billions of people and their movements in real time.
There are already apps like IBM’s Digital Health Pass and CLEAR’s Health Pass that envision a world where our biometric ID will be linked via our smartphones to our health data in order to grant or deny access from public spaces and public events
NARRATOR: Here’s how Jane opens the CLEAR app and verifies her identity with a photo and real-time health insights. CLEAR’s developed touchless technology can take her temperature and confirm Jane is Jane so she can walk in with confidence
NARRATOR: Your COVID-19 status will efficiently display as green, amber or red, dependent on your test results. This allows us to go about our daily activities in a safer way. We can all use health passport ireland in many ways, such as travel, hospitality, education, health care, construction, offices, entertainment, visits and much, much more.
Once the COVID vaccines are widely distributed, it would simply be a question of linking one’s vaccination record to the health pass app to prevent the unvaccinated from accessing any given space.
And while this future—sold through glossy corporate advertising but rejected by the vast majority of the public—may seem like a science-fiction dystopia, such systems are already being used to control the movements of people in China, where access to certain building or the ability to leave one’s own neighbourhood can be restricted to those whose phone-based apps show a “green” immunity status.
Worse, the COVID vaccine presents governments, intelligence agencies and corporations that have a direct interest in suppressing dissent, monitoring dissidents and controlling their populations with the perfect opportunity to make such systems a permanent fixture of daily life. After the immediate “threat” of the declared public health crisis subsides, the public is already being warned that these apps will be transitioned seamlessly into general monitoring of the population.
ANCHOR 1: Well during the summer spike, Palm Beach County launched something called a Combat COVID app. they spent a huge chunk of CARES Act money to do it. The app can alert you if you come into contact with a COVID positive person.
ANCHOR 2: The problem is it only works if there’s widespread use and there isn’t. So was this just a big waste of money?
[. . .]
DANIELLE WAUGH: Palm Beach County officials would not make anybody available for an interview for this story but I did get a written statement from a county spokesperson, who tells me they will still have use for this app even after the pandemic is over. He says they plan on transitioning its functions to be a more general community app.
As chilling as these “immunity passports” opening the door for governments to implement persistent digital tracking of their entire population is, it represents only the most visible privacy invasion that is being enacted on the back of this unprecedented vaccine rollout.
As viewers of the “Who Is Bill Gates?” documentary will know, these smartphone apps and voluntary reporting mechanisms will eventually be replaced by an even more invasive technological means of certifying vaccination. Not the “microchip” strawman that the fact checkers use to attempt to debunk these concerns, but the verifiable existence of a program to develop quantum dot tags to instantly identify who has received a given vaccine.
Late last year, Gates once again turned to Robert Langer and his MIT colleagues to investigate new ways to permanently store and record the vaccination information of each individual. The result of their research was a new vaccine delivery method. They found that by using “dissolvable microneedles that deliver patterns of near-infrared light-emitting microparticles to the skin,” they could create “particle patterns” in the skin of vaccine recipients which are “invisible to the eye but can be imaged using modified smartphones.”
Rice University describes the quantum dot tags left behind by the microneedles as “something like a bar-code tattoo.”
So who was behind this development? As lead researcher Kevin McHugh explains:
“The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation came to us and said, ‘Hey, we have a real problem—knowing who’s vaccinated [. . .] So our idea was to put the record on the person. This way, later on, people can scan over the area to see what vaccines have been administered and give only the ones still needed.”
Experimental vaccine technologies. Rushed testing. Mandates and health apps. And, eventually, quantum dot tags and biometric IDs. The future that is coming into view on the back of this COVID nightmare is truly dystopian.
But as worrying as all of this, the most worrying aspect is the precedent that it sets for a new era of biosecurity. An era in which public health authorities will claim to have the right to force rushed, untested and experimental technologies on the public in the name of public “health.”
At the moment, these new technologies—like mRNA vaccines which reprogram cells to produce antigens or the DNA vaccines that seek to insert foreign genetic material directly into the cells’ nucleus and that even biotech giant Moderna admit “have a risk of permanently changing a person’s DNA”—are still understood by the public as “vaccines.” But they bare as little resemblance to the vaccines that have previously been given to the public as Edward Jenner’s cowpox vaccine bore to the old Chinese art of blowing smallpox scabs up the nose. And the medical technologies that are emerging now will once again utterly transform our understanding of “vaccines.”
One such technology is being actively developed by Profusa, Inc., a company that in 2016 received a $7.5 million grant from DARPA—the research and development agency of the US military—to “develop implantable biosensors that can continuously monitor multiple body chemistries.” Earlier this year, Profusa announced a study that will examine how the company’s technology—including a “wireless reader that adheres to the skin and collects and reports tissue oxygen levels” and a 3mm string of hydrogel, which can be inserted under the skin with a syringe and programmed to send “a fluorescent signal outside of the body when the body begins to fight an infection”—can be used to “develop an early identification system to detect not only disease outbreaks, but biological attacks and pandemics up to three weeks earlier than current methods.” The study is expected to be completed next year.
Hydrogels—networks of crosslinked polymer chains—are increasingly being turned to by proponents of these new technologies as potential delivery devices for drugs, cells, proteins, and bioactive molecules. In 2013, for instance, a team of European researchers announced a novel method for injecting a vaccine-containing hydrogel sphere to a spot beneath the skin, which could be released at a later time by swallowing a “stimulusresponsive biohybrid material.” Touted as a “remote-controlled vaccine delivery system,” the researchers proved their concept by injecting mice with a hydrogel containing human papillomavirus vaccine and later giving them a pill containing fluorescein, which dissolved the hydrogel mesh and released the vaccine. The research on this vaccine delivery method continues, with a Chinese team publishing research just this year on a self-adjuvanted hydrogel which “had both adjuvant potential and the ability to sustained release antigen.”
As viewers of the “Who Is Bill Gates?” documentary will know, the idea of implanting remote-controlled vaccines in large populations has been around since at least 2012, when, according to MIT Technology Review, Bill Gates personally asked MIT researcher Robert Langer to create an implantable birth control device that could be turned on or off remotely. The resulting device—a wireless birth control microchip that, as the National Post noted in 2014, “can be turned on and off with a remote control and that is designed to last up to 16 years”—was developed by Microchips Biotech, now part of Daré Bioscience, and has so far received $17.9 million in grant funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
From biolectronics to nanorobotics to synthetic biology, ever more incredible technologies are being pioneered that, whether or not they are marketed to the public under the catch-all term of “vaccine,” will operate in ways that are fundamentally unlike anything before used on the human population.
University of Ottawa researchers are working on creating “edible vaccines.”
Researchers at Harvard Medical School are developing autonomous DNA nanorobots capable of transporting molecular payloads directly into cells.
A team of scientists at Johns Hopkins University are working on shape-changing microdevices called “theragrippers” that can reside in the GI tract to aid in extended drug delivery.
Nanobots. Shape-changing bioelectronic devices. Remote-controlled vaccines. This is not the stuff of science fiction but of science fact, and the precedent that is being set during the COVID era to rush experimental and unproven medical technologies into use on the back of a declared crisis is the same precedent that could be used to foist these injectable technologies on the public in the future.
And, as Catherine Austin Fitts—former United States Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and founder of Solari, Inc.—explains, these injectables are part of an elaborate system of biological, economic, and political control that is being bankrolled into existence by powerful special interests.
CATHERINE AUSTIN FITTS: So let me go through where I think he’s going. I think where they’re going—and they’re they’re prototyping tons of technology, so I don’t think they have it yet—but where they want to go is they want to download a Microsoft Office system into your body, into your brain, and hook it up to the Jedi cloud contract and the Amazon Cloud contract at the CIA. And if they can get seven people seven billion people hooked up directly to their cloud contracts and use viruses—I mean, it’s very clever—use viruses to keep those updates coming. You know, just keep those updates coming.
So you saw my most recent article, “The Injection Fraud.” I think it’s a fraud to call these vaccines they’re not vaccines, they’re not medicine. But I think it’s the exact same model you used in the computers and the ideas. Just like Bill Gates made it possible for the intelligence agencies to get a backdoor into our—you know, our data—and our computers. They want a backdoor into our mind and it’s very hard if you haven’t if you haven’t looked into the creepy technology, the Charles Lieber kind of technology, it’s hard to fathom but we’re beginning to fathom it.
[. . .]
So what we have are people who have unimaginable liabilities for what they’ve done in the health area and what they’ve done in the financial area. And what they’re trying to do is they’re trying to do two things: one is to load an operating system into our bodies—I call it the injection fraud because they’re calling it a vaccine and under law a vaccine is medicine, this is not medicine, so to me what they’re up to is a fraud. And then the second thing they’re trying to do is implement contract tracing so they they can have—before they get the operating system in everybody they can have complete control. You know, kidnap you, put you in prison with no warrants, break into your house, take your kids.
And I keep saying to people: “Do you notice that it’s the people who flew Epstein Air who all want contract tracing? Why is that?” You know, why would you want the people who did Epstein Air to be able to come into your house and kidnap your kids?
Despite the protestations of those like Bill Gates who have a financial interest in these experimental vaccines, and the Big Pharma corporations that are selling these vaccines, and the governments that are being bribed by the international public health cartel to purchase these vaccines and pressure their public to accept them, and the corporate media who relies on these Big Pharma corporations for their advertising dollars, some facts about these novel coronavirus vaccines are indisputable:
They are the most rushed vaccines ever developed.
The manufacturers have been given total immunity from liability if their experimental vaccines cause injury.
The clinical trials testing the safety of these injections are not finished, meaning that every member of the public who takes one is now a human guinea pig in an ongoing medical experiment with the population of the planet.
The Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines are themselves part of an experimental class of injection that has never before been given to the public;
These vaccines have not been tested for their ability to prevent infection or spread of SARS-CoV-2 and are not intended to do so.
And there is absolutely no long-term data about these vaccines to determine what their effects may be on fertility, the potential for pathogenic priming, or any other serious adverse reaction.
That this represents the most reckless and brazen experiment in the history of the world is undeniable on its face. Never before have billions of people been pressured to submit to a completely experimental, invasive medical procedure on the basis of a disease with a greater than 99% survival rate.
But large-scale, emergency vaccination campaigns have been tried before with sobering lessons about the danger of such a wide-scale experiment that are being deliberately ignored right now.
In the late 1950s and early 1960s, hundreds of millions of people were injected with polio vaccines that, years later, were discovered to have been contaminated with SV40, a cancer-causing virus found in the rhesus monkey kidney cells that were used to create the vaccine.
In 1976, twelve soldiers at Fort Dix were diagnosed with swine flu. This kicked off a round of public health hysteria that led the US government to mandate that every citizen in the country be vaccinated. In the end, only one soldier at Fort Dix died of the swine flu and no one outside of the base even tested positive for it, but the emergency immunization program went ahead. It was brought to an abrupt end after hundreds who had received the rushed vaccine began to display severe neurological disorders.
MIKE WALLACE: Remember the swine flu scare of 1976? That was the year the U.S. government told us all that swine flu could turn out to be a killer that could spread across the nation, and Washington decided that every man, woman and child in the nation should get a shot to prevent a nation-wide outbreak, a pandemic.
Well 46 million of us obediently took the shot, and now 4,000 Americans are claiming damages from Uncle Sam amounting to three and a half billion dollars because of what happened when they took that shot. By far the greatest number of the claims – two thirds of them are for neurological damage, or even death, allegedly triggered by the flu shot.
During the hysteria over swine flu in 2009, GlaxoSmithKline rushed a vaccine called Pandemrix to market in several European countries that was later associated with increased risk of narcolepsy. Years later, it was admitted that the 2009 flu season was no deadlier than any other flu season, but the British Medical Journal revealed that the body that advised the WHO on the declaration of the public health emergency that caused governments to purchase billions of dollars of vaccines was itself populated by advisors with direct financial ties to the Big Pharma vaccine manufacturers.
In each of these cases, the public was told to “follow the science,” and in each of these cases an unknown and perhaps unknowable number of people paid for that blind faith with their health. Now the revolver is once again being put to our heads and, with an assurance that that revolver probably contains a lot of empty chambers, the public is being asked to play Russian Roulette in the name of “trusting the science.”
NEIL DEGRASSE TYSON: I think we’re in the middle of a massive experiment worldwide. And that is—
STEPHEN COLBERT: —And we’re the guinea pigs?
TYSON: Maybe. The experiment is: will people listen to scientists?
Surely those who wish to be the test subjects in this ongoing experiment should be free to make themselves into guinea pigs for the Big Pharma manufacturers. But every mandate or compulsion to force the vaccine on an unwilling recipient sets a dangerous precedent, a precedent that will one day lead to a tracked and surveilled population unable to resist the next generation of injectable bioelectronics.
This is not a game, this is not a test. Billions of people are being asked to participate in a gigantic experiment, not just an experiment in medical technology, but an experiment in compliance and blind trust.
The pressure to say yes and to go along with the crowd in this experiment is enormous. But if we lose the freedom to say “no” to this, then we may lose control over our bodily autonomy—and, ultimately, our humanity—forever.
We’ve seen this movie before, and it ended with the largest power grab in world history.
“It’s just a travel ban.”
“It’s just two weeks to stop the spread.”
“It’s just for non-essential workers.”
“Just wear a mask. It will allow for society to reopen.”
“It’s just a ‘pause’ on non-essential activities and businesses.”
2020, the year that will be defined by corona hysteria and unprecedented global power grabs, is coming to an end, and the simulation is apparently resetting. The conversation surrounding coronavirus mania has somehow reverted back to square one, with:
“It’s just a travel ban to the UK.”
Social media and news feeds are now rife with prominent politicians, “public health experts,” commentators and reporters discussing the merits of a travel ban to the United Kingdom, after reports surfaced that the Brits have discovered a new strain of the coronavirus, which is being advertised as 70% more infectious (!) than the last variant. According to the “public health experts,” it’s time to panic again, and take dramatic action to stop this virus.
Over 40 countries have now decided — following the reported discovery of the new variant of the coronavirus — to impose travel bans from the United Kingdom. With that has come a new pressure campaign in the United States, led by the likes of New York Governor Andrew Cuomo and other lockdown advocates, to launch a new round of travel restrictions.
It seems that so many across the political spectrum have learned absolutely nothing from the pandora’s box of tyranny that was opened up at the beginning of the year, following the failure of travel bans to stop the spread of a respiratory virus with a 99.9% recovery rate.
Like it or not, the United States is a very interconnected nation, serving thousands of international flights per day. The U.S. is not New Zealand. We are not a tiny island nation that can just cut itself off from the rest of the world at a moment’s notice. If there’s a virus reportedly spreading across the Atlantic, it’s probably already here, too.
Additionally, many in the corona hysteria space seem to not understand the rudimentary science behind mutations. They’re seemingly too busy panicking and demanding further restrictions to be thoughtful about what to do next.
If a virus has mutated into an even more transmissible form, that can mean that the virus has become less lethal. This also means that mitigation and suppression pseudoscience measures, such as lockdowns, masks, curfews, and the like have even less of a chance of working this time around, given that they did not work to slow or stop the spread with a less transmissible variant.
If a disease with an approaching 99.9% recovery rate is becoming more transmissible, and possibly even less lethal, the idea that we should take dramatic, sweeping action to “fight” it is absolutely preposterous. Before corona madness, anyone who advocated for a travel ban to stop seasonal influenza or the common cold would have been laughed out of the room. The discourse surrounding “stopping the spread” of a virus has become so nonsensical and pointless, yet at the same time, these people and organizations are credentialed as “experts,” when their record of absolute failure would demonstrate otherwise.
We need to stop the spread of corona hysteria by rejecting any and all restrictions in the name of fighting a virus. Stop empowering government bureaucrats and “public health experts” to run roughshod over our lives. As we observed over the course of the year, a travel ban can fast transform into a devastating lockdown, when the travel ban inevitably fails in its mission. The only path forward involves advocating solely for a full reopening and a restoration of individual rights, not more restrictions in the name of stopping a virus that we have no control over.
In this three-part series we will exam the transformation from COVID lockdowns to climate lockdowns. In Part I we established a timeline of the dark side of the environmental movement and now we’ll be looking into the specifics of what a climate lockdown really means, and what impact current lockdown measures have had on the environment. In Part III we will see how it fits into the bigger picture of sustainable development as described by international organizations such as the United Nations and what can be done to derail this agenda.
As we saw in Part I of this series, the environmental movement has a dark streak running through it. Many of the architects of the movement hold a Malthusian, eugenics-obsessed view of the world and their fingerprints are all over the growing call for a global climate lockdown. A movement based on the best of intentions is once again being hijacked to centralize power and eviscerate human rights.
With that established it is time to closely examine what exactly Mariana Mazzucato is proposing when she threatens a climate lockdown. In her view, and those on whose behalf she writes, humanity must be willing to undergo a total restructuring of society at the hands of the elite in order to save the planet or continue to live in lockdown. The brave new world she envisions is a sort-of technocracy, a government based on the management of society by unelected technical experts. Ultimately, this vision is less about driving electric cars and switching to a plant-based diet and more about a hostile takeover of the world’s resources.
The Calls for A Climate Lockdown Begin
With Mazzucato’s questionable climate science already addressed it’s time to move on to investigating her criticisms of society as we know it. But first we need to understand where this message is coming from. Mazzucato’s story comes to us from Project Syndicate, a news organization which distributes “high-quality commentaries to a global audience.” The publishing of these commentaries is made possible by funding from George Soros’ Open Society Foundation, The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Mastercard Foundation, and the Google Digital News Initiative among others. Let’s just say her view doesn’t exactly represent the disenfranchised or any grassroots movement.
Mazzucato’s opinion piece is more of a threat than anything else. She believes we are living through a series of crises during the “disease of the Anthropocene,” an anti-human echo from her environmental forefathers, that center around the climate, economic and social inequality, and public health. Neither government nor the private sector are capable of addressing such catastrophic situations in her estimation so we must undergo a “green economic transformation” or else be locked down like prisoners until the problem is resolved.
What she has to say on what would happen during a climate lockdown itself is actually quite brief:
Under a “climate lockdown,” governments would limit private-vehicle use, ban consumption of red meat, and impose extreme energy-saving measures, while fossil-fuel companies would have to stop drilling. To avoid such a scenario, we must overhaul our economic structures and do capitalism differently.
The brevity of this proclamation is curious as these propositions for reducing carbon emissions and “going green” are nothing new. Environmentalists have been advocating for these changes for decades now, though notably without the need for literally confining people to their homes. The bulk of the article is dedicated to the overhaul of the economy, revealing her true message to the masses.
The Future In Her Eyes
This transformation entails building whatever an “inclusive, sustainable” economy is and requires that government assistance to the private sector be reigned in. Not by stopping the public-private revolving door, upholding justice through the legal system, enabling a free market, or simply ending taxpayer bailouts, but continuing all of these practices so long as the government attaches strict conditions to how that money is used. Governments should also add new taxes on raw materials and legislate “job guarantees” into existence somehow. Under this system the political and economical elite still siphon off money from the lower classes, but by dictating that “firms need to listen to trade unions and workers’ collectives, community groups, consumer advocates, and others” this fascist system will solve the problem of inclusivity.
The state must also continue to steer the course of finance through investments. When the financial crisis hit in 2008 it wasn’t the cozy relationship between Washington and Wall Street that kept money circulating through the financial sector rather than entering the larger economy, but “bad investments” on the government’s part. Bad because they didn’t invest long term in eco-friendly energy like wind power or support green infrastructure projects according to her. She gives no explanation as to how these investments would allow money to flow into Main Street.
When looking for positive examples of state investments she cites New Zealand’s “Wellbeing Budget” and the Scottish National Investment Bank (SNIB). The Wellbeing Budget is the name given to the New Zealand federal government’s fiscal budget for the year 2019 and represented a shift away from making monetary decisions based on GDP and towards spending based on “wellbeing”. It made for an excellent public relations move which portrayed a government concerned about the wellness of its people but in reality transferred many budgetary decisions to experts and bureaucrats rather than elected officials, a hallmark of a technocratic society. New Zealand has enacted one of the world’s harshest lockdowns in the name of the coronavirus which may be why it gets a nod here.
The SNIB is set to launch by the end of 2020 and while she doesn’t mention it in her article, Mazzacuto has played a key role in developing this institution. This state-owned institution will offer grants, soft loans, credit guarantees and co-investments to companies in pursuit of certain missions. These missions are still being finalized but aim to mimic the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals which center around climate change, shifting demographics, and economic inclusion. Like New Zealand’s Wellbeing Budget, the SNIB framework ultimately takes power out of the hands of the public and into the hands of a technocratic elite. The figures who will run the SNIB and direct it’s funds will be unelected and unaccountable to the public but will use taxpayer funds to steer the direction of the economy nonetheless.
These examples are the blueprints all nations should be using according to Mazzucato. In a follow-up interview with the Irish Times, she makes it unambiguously clear that central economic planning is the proper role of government:
This crisis, and the recovery we need, give us an opportunity to understand and explore how to do capitalism differently. This requires a rethink of what governments are for: rather than simply fixing market failures when they arise, they should move towards actively shaping and creating markets to take on society’s most pressing challenges… This will secure the direction of travel we want – green, sustainable, and equitable.
Given her connections to some of the world’s most powerful people it is highly unlikely that “we” refers to the common man. It seems clear that she is speaking on the behalf of the elite behind the scenes.
Mazzucato’s final claim, dropped out of nowhere and without citation or follow-up, is that an economy centered around renewable energy is the antidote to our otherwise disastrous future. She then menacingly reminds the reader that “radical change is inevitable,” so either go along with their plan, or face climate lockdowns while they do it anyway.
How Have Lockdowns Impacted The Climate So Far?
With much of the world under house arrest, carbon dioxide emissions declined in the first half of 2020 as one would expect. Correspondingly, air pollution dropped off in many industrialized areas. This was touted as a victory for the climate, especially when photos of the Himalayas, free of their usual smog in India, went viral. This was a relatively short-lived victory however as numbers began rising again in the second half of the year.
While air pollution dropped more plastic waste has ended up in our oceans than ever before. Disposable face masks have been worn, and disposed of, in the billions this year and are contributing to environmental degradation, littering in public places, and increasing the levels of microplastics in the oceans. Takeout dining has been a staple for many during lockdown which has meant single-use plastics have become more prevalent and sadly ended up in in the sea in increased numbers as well.
More studies and information will surely come out in the months and years ahead but as of now this is the picture we have of the climate in a locked down world and it isn’t very convincing that by continuing these practices the world will be free of man’s impact on it. The desire for clear skies, clean air, and habitable oceans are all noble and improvements can and will be made but the idea that in order to achieve these things we need society reshaped at the hands of a shadowy elite is still insane and speaks to a larger agenda at play.
The Big Picture
When looking into the environmental impact of lockdowns there is a chilling refrain in the mainstream media. The initial decrease in emissions is cheered on but the rebound is seen as a sign that while the current lockdowns are doing some good it just isn’t enough (see here, here, here, here, here, and here to see that message repeated).
What is needed according to these writers and groups is a reengineering of society. This Great Reset will come at the expense of the many, to the benefit of the few. In the final installment of this series we will see how climate lockdowns and the reconfiguration of society fits perfectly into the big picture that the elite have in mind.
Recently, a landmark study was conducted by Dr. James Lyons-Weiler and Dr. Paul Thomas. The study compared vaccinated children and unvaccinated children and was published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health on November 22, 2020 after being peer reviewed.
Dr. Weiler, a research scientist and co-author of the study, was recently interviewed by Activist Post Contributor Spiro Skouras. In the interview, Weiler breaks down the data from the study which indicates children who were vaccinated showed a higher rate of medical office visits and experienced an elevated rate of medical symptoms ranging from Asthma and behavioral issues, to ADHD and Anemia.
In this report, Spiro interviews Dr. Paul Thomas, a prominent pediatrician in Portland, Oregon who also co-authored the study and used 10+ years of data from his medical practice to conduct the study.
Shortly after the vaccinated versus unvaccinated study was published, five days in fact, the Oregon State Medical Board held an emergency meeting declaring that Dr. Paul was an immediate threat to his patients and the public and suspended his medical license.
In this must-see interview, Dr. Paul addresses the accusations leveled against himself and his practice, in addition to breaking down in detail the study’s findings. Dr. Paul also weighs in on the CDC recommended vaccine schedule and the experimental Covid vaccine.
The US congress just passed their Covid stimulus bill, or the “Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021” to give its official title. So what’s actually inside it? What has just been passed into law?
The answers to that is “nobody really knows”, least of all the members of congress, who passed the law without reading it, as they so often do. It’s the longest bill in US history, at over 5500 pages and it sailed through the voting mostly sight unseen.
We’ve downloaded a copy of the full document and will embed it for those of you patient or masochistic enough to tackle the whole thing. We’ve read some already, and will point out the highlights:
“Foreign aid” is a big winner. Egypt is getting $1.3 billion, Sudan, Israel and Ukraine get over 500 million each, and many other countries around the world sizeable contributions, much of which will be spent on “defense”. Which is to say sent straight back to America via massive arms purchases.
Not all the money being sent overseas is for buying weapons, some is for backing coups. Venezuela and Belarus get special mention here, each getting their own section of the bill detailing how terrible their “illegal regimes” are. There’s also a large section on “combating Chinese influence”.
For some reason there’s another section on copyright law, which makes illegal streaming copyrighted content a federal crime, punishable by up to three years in prison.
Nearly 300 million is put aside to develop influenza vaccines and prevent a future influenza pandemic.
4 BILLION dollars for the Gates-funded GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance.
Vaccine “misinformation” is also a concern, and the bill provides for a pro-vaccine propaganda campaign – or rather a “PUBLIC AWARENESS CAMPAIGN ON THE IMPORTANCE OF VACCINATIONS”
So – huge amounts of foreign aid, support for various coups, totally irrelevant copyright laws, provisions for pro-vaccine propaganda campaigns… it’s not your typical “stimulus bill” so far, is it?
Civil forfeiture is a massive unjustified threat to property and due process rights. As the third edition of Policing for Profit: The Abuse of Civil Asset Forfeiture shows, most state laws still stack the deck against property owners and give law enforcement perverse financial incentives to pursue property over justice.
Proponents claim forfeiture is an important crime-fighting tool, but new research finds otherwise: There was no increase in crime after New Mexico abolished civil forfeiture and the profit incentive in 2015. Strong forfeiture reform does not sacrifice public safety.
As states and Congress look for ways to create a fairer criminal justice system, one reform everyone should be able to agree on is ending civil forfeiture and the perverse profit incentive that fuels it.
By Jacob Sullum | From the January 2021 issue of reason
When cops invaded Ginnifer Hency’s home in Smiths Creek, Michigan, they seized TV sets, ladders, her children’s cellphones and iPads, even her vibrator. “They took everything,” she told state legislators a year later. The July 2014 raid turned up six ounces of marijuana.
Hency, a mother of four with multiple sclerosis, was using marijuana for pain relief based on her neurologist’s recommendation, as allowed by Michigan law at the time. … continue
Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) have teamed up to introduce a bill designed to repeal the Patriot Act.
The two House members are proposing bipartisan legislation designed to limit government surveillance of people without warrants and probable cause.
The Protect Our Civil Liberties Act would repeal both the Patriot Act and the FISA Amendments Act that permitted government agencies to collect mass telephone and email data. Gabbard and Massie argue that this surveillance violates Americans’ right to privacy and their civil liberties.
In a video announcement Wednesday, Gabbard said the bill would make sure that Congress “reexamines how best to strike this balance of protecting our national security interests while also ensuring that the constitutional rights of every single American is preserved.”
“Protection of our civil liberties is essential,” she later said. “Join us in making sure that our constitutional rights are upheld.”
The Hawaii Democrat also called out the intelligence community, saying it “has not been transparent or honest with the American people or even Congress about what they’ve been doing.”
The bill would also make retaliation against any federal national security whistleblowers, such as Edward Snowden, illegal and require that the Government Accountability Office “regularly monitor domestic surveillance programs.”
It would also ban “government-mandated back doors” built into electronics and software that allows the government to get past any privacy technology, Gabbard said.
Massie retweeted Gabbard’s video and said he is “honored to cosponsor a bill to repeal the Patriot Act with my friend across the aisle @TulsiGabbard.”
In a statement, Massie said the Patriot Act violates the Fourth Amendment and has expanded domestic surveillance in the country.
“Our Founding Fathers fought and died to stop the kind of warrantless spying and searches that the Patriot Act and the FISA Amendments Act authorize,” he said. “It is long past time to repeal the Patriot Act and reassert the constitutional rights of all Americans.”
H.R.8970, the Protect Our Civil Liberties Act, a bipartisan bill, would repeal the USA PATRIOT Act as well as amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to address dangerous changes made to it in the years following the 9/11 attacks. and which were not addressed by subsequent FISA amendments made by Congress. The USA PATRIOT Act along with changes to FISA have been used to undermine Americans’ civil liberties, particularly Fourth Amendment protections.
The Protect Our Civil Liberties Act would:
Repeal the PATRIOT Act (which contains provisions allowing for mass telephone metadata collection)
Repeal the FISA Amendments Act (which contains provisions allowing for mass email collection), except for provisions regarding FISA court reporting and WMD intelligence collection.
Makes retaliation against federal national security whistleblowers illegal and provides for the termination of individuals who engage in such retaliation.
Ensure that any FISA collection against a U.S. person can only occur with a valid warrant based on probable cause (which was the original FISA standard from 1978 to 2001).
Retain the ability for government surveillance capabilities to be targeted against a specific non-U.S. person, regardless of the type of communications method(s) or device(s) being used by the subject of the surveillance.
Retain provisions in current law dealing with the acquisition of intelligence information involving weapons of mass destruction from entities not composed primarily of U.S. persons.
Prohibit government-mandated “back doors” in electric devices or software that allow the government to bypass encryption or other privacy technology built into said hardware and/or software.
Increase the terms of judges on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) from seven to ten years and allow their reappointment.
Mandate that the FISC utilize technologically competent technical and legal experts (Special Masters) to help determine the veracity of government claims about privacy, minimization and collection capabilities employed by the U.S. government in FISA applications.
Mandate that the Government Accountability Office (GAO) regularly monitor such domestic surveillance programs for compliance with the law, including responding to Member requests for investigations and whistleblower complaints of wrongdoing.
Explicitly ban the use of Executive Order 12333 as a way of conducting surveillance on U.S. persons or mass collection of information
A video of a confrontation between Ventura County, California health officials and restaurant owner Anton Van Happen has gone viral. The health officials were ordering Mr. Van Happen to close his business because he allegedly violated California’s ban on outdoor dining. Mr. Van Happen asked the health officials if the government will pay his employees and his rent while his business is indefinitely closed.
Mr. Van Happen is hardly the only small business owner worried about how to pay bills during the lockdowns. Many small businesses operate on a narrow profit margin, so being forced to “temporarily” shut down or limit the number of customers they can serve is a virtual death sentence.
The lockdowns have already caused as many as 200,000 small businesses to permanently close. Lockdowns, by shrinking the number of employers, lead to long-term unemployment or lower wages for many workers.
While governments have terrorized small businesses, they have typically deemed the big chain stores “essential businesses” so they can remain open. The lockdowns are thus another government policy that gives big businesses a competitive advantage over their smaller competitors.
The benefits big businesses get from the lockdowns — including fewer competitors, more customers, and a job market with more workers competing for fewer jobs — may explain why many big businesses are not fighting the lockdowns. Instead, most big retail chains are requiring their workers and customers to wear masks. Many big businesses may soon deny service to those who refuse to receive a Covid vaccine.
One would think that progressives who claim to oppose policies that benefit big corporations like WalMart, Target, and Amazon would oppose the lockdowns. Sadly, even many progressives are unquestioningly parroting the Covid propaganda and demonizing those who dissent.
By slowing down the development of herd immunity among the population, the lockdowns could put those truly at risk in greater danger. Lockdowns have also had negative effects such as increases in drug and alcohol abuse and increases in domestic violence. Meanwhile, many schoolchildren are deprived of the opportunity to interact with their teachers and their peers. Instead, these children are subjected to the fraud of “virtual learning.”
Resistance to Covid tyranny is growing as more people figure out that lockdowns and mandates are both unnecessary and harmful. This resistance was largely started by small business owners faced with a choice between obeying the government or making sure they, and their employees, can feed their families. Small business owners have been leaders in recent anti-lockdown protests across America.
Eventually the resistance will grow to the point where the politicians will be forced to either double down on authoritarianism or admit the lockdowns were a mistake. Either way, those of us who know the truth must resist the Covid tyranny until government officials no longer terrorize small businesses for the crime of serving willing consumers.
As the American media continues to claim that no evidence for widespread voter fraud exists, many independent forensic data analysts, who have analyzed data scrapes from Edison Research found quite the opposite.
Since November 4th, there have been dozens of statistical analyses completed by data scientists, showing statistical impossibilities in hundreds of counties across the country.
One thorough scientific analysis published calls into question the legitimacy of Biden victories in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Georgia.
This analysis was a through review of 8,954 vote updates and highlighted four decisive updates, which were the most anomalous updates in the entire data set. The experts found that each of the vote updates do not follow the generally observed pattern, and the anomalous behavior of those updates is particularly extreme.
Another scientific analysis by data scientists revealed How Pennsylvania Democrats Used Fake Voter Registration “Birthdays” to Commit Voter Fraud.
The analysts constructed a new metric of potential voter fraud using suspicious distributions of birthdays in Pennsylvania voter registration data. Under this metric, a number of counties in Pennsylvania have extremely unlikely distributions of voter birthdays. Seven counties representing almost 1.4 million votes total (Northumberland, Delaware, Montgomery, Lawrence, Dauphin, LeHigh, and Luzerne) have suspicious birthdays above the 99.5th percentile of plausible distributions, even when using conservative assumptions about what these distributions should look like.
Another statistical analyst recently revealed a scenario of how Democrats pulled off massive fraud in Montgomery county, Pennsylvania with ballot harvesting on a massive scale.
Another scientific analysis looked at the shift in voting patterns that occurred between the 2016 and 2020 elections to identify suspicious counties. The two with the largest shifts were Oakland and Wayne in Michigan.
Experts analyzed the election data from the two Michigan counties, and concluded that there are major statistical aberrations that are extremely unlikely to occur naturally. Using more conventional statistical analyses, they identified nine total different counties in Michigan alone with abnormal results.
Their expert recommendation was that those Michigan counties should have an audited recount for every ballot and signature.
According to another analysis by William M Briggs, PhD, approximately 154,000 votes have gone missing across several states. In Pennsylvania alone, there were around 30,000 Republican ballots not accounted for.
According to yet another expert analysis by Dr. Kershavarz-Nia who has a B.A., M.A., and Ph.D in various areas of computer engineering, Dominion memory cards with cryptographic key access to the systems were stolen in 2019.
Kershavarz-Nia has also trained with the CIA, NSA, and DHS office of Intelligence & Analysis. He is arguably the best and most experienced cyber security expert in the world. His technical expertise was touted by the New York Times and he has been described as a hero in the Washington Monthly. The findings in his nine-page affidavit is summed up as follows:
“I conclude with high confidence that the election 2020 data were altered in all battleground states resulting in hundreds of thousands of votes that were cast for President Trump to be transferred to Vice President Biden. These alterations were the result of systemic and widespread exploitable vulnerabilities in DVS, Scytl/SOE Software and Smartmatic systems that enabled operators to achieve the desired results. In my view, the evidence is overwhelming and incontrovertible.”
With many of the swing states ending in razor thin margins, many republicans have called for an audit to determine exactly how many non-citizens voted in the election. In an election where the difference in results is within 1% in key states, this is a legitimate concern considering their turnout has been confirmed to swing elections in the past.
One scientific study from 2014 concluded that participation in US election by non-citizens has been large enough to change meaningful election outcomes including Electoral College votes, and Congressional elections.
Despite the media consistently claiming that there is no evidence, endless scientific analyses, countless anomalies, and hundreds of affidavits exist that say otherwise.
Scientifically Analyzing Vote Spikes
In the early hours of November 4th, 2020, Democratic candidate Joe Biden received several major vote spikes that substantially and decisively improved his electoral position in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Georgia.
Much skepticism and uncertainty in the scientific community surrounds these vote spikes. Suspicious vote counting practices, extreme differences between the two major candidates’ vote counts, and the timing of the vote updates, among other factors, casts doubt on the legitimacy the spikes.
Pennsylvania
In Pennsylvania, there were multiple very questionable vote spikes. In the early morning hours of November 4th, one particular vote spike of 337,000 votes, almost all for Joe Biden appears in the data. Approximately only 3,000 of those votes were for President Trump.
There was also a major vote spike in Georgia of approximately 107,000 votes for Joe Biden, while only a few thousand votes in the batch went for for President Trump. There were numerous other similar vote spikes in Michigan and Wisconsin, at similar times and dates, with similar results.
No forensic data scientist can provide an explanation for this phenomenon, other than potential illegal ballot harvesting and other forms of fraud at a massive scale. The likelihood of these early morning vote spikes in mail-in ballots legitimately breaking for Joe Biden at the margin they did, is statistically 0% in these states.
Georgia
Michigan:
Wisconsin:
The Red Mirage?
Many point to the ‘red mirage’ hypothesis to explain why these vote spikes favored Joe Joe Biden in key swing states. The red mirage scenario predicted that at the end of election day, it would erroneously appear that President Trump won the election because most states would count the ballots cast in-person on election day first. The hypothesis concluded that after tallying the mail-in ballots, Joe Biden would pull ahead because mail-in ballots tend to favor the democrats more than the republicans.
Outside of the impossibility that these vote spikes favored Joe Biden at margins they did – some as high as 99% – this explanation is particularly impossible considering republicans led in mail-in ballots requested and mail-in and early in-person ballots returned.
According to NBC News on election day, in Michigan Republicans led 41% to 39% in mail-in ballots requested. Republicans also led 42% to 39% with mail-in and early in-person ballots returned.
In Wisconsin on election day , Republicans led in mail-in ballots requested 43% to 35%, and mail-in and early in-person ballots returned 43% to 35%.
Historic Low Mail-in Ballot Rejection Rate
In a normal election year in any given state, hundreds or even thousands of mail-in ballots get tossed out for everything from late postmarks to open envelopes.
North Carolina rejected 546 ballots for just missing witness signatures in the 2012 presidential race. Virginia tossed 216 ballots in the 2018 midterms because they arrived in an unofficial envelope. Arizona discarded 1,516 ballots for non-matching signatures the same year.
In October, USA Today predicted that absentee ballot rejection totals would reach historic levels.
“At least 1.03 million absentee ballots could be tossed if half of the nation votes by mail. Discarded votes jump to 1.55 million if 75% of the country votes absentee. In the latter scenario, more than 185,000 votes could be lost in Florida, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin – states considered key to capturing the White House.”
In Georgia alone, it was predicted that over 100,000 absentee ballots would be rejected based on the normal percentage that are rejected in an average year.
That’s not what happened.
Mail-in ballots in Pennsylvania specifically have been accepted at almost 30times the rate compared to historical norms. This raises serious questions in a swing state in which Democratic challenger Joe Biden is the projected to be the winner.
Reports about the rejection rate for mail-in ballots in the general election suggest that it was a fraction of a percent, which is up to 30 times lower than absentee ballots in an election without mass vote-by-mail.
The below graph shows the estimated rejectable votes vs the Biden margin of victory in key swing states.
Pennsylvania Impossibilities
In Pennsylvania since 2016, Democrats have lost over 50,000 registered voters. During the same time period, Republicans have gained over 150,000 registered voters statewide.
Not only did President Trump lose this state after leading by almost 800,000 votes on election day, but Joe Biden also annihilated Barack Obama’s 2012 numbers, as well as Hillary Clinton’s 2016 totals by 500,000 each.
While President Trump dominated in Ohio, Indiana, and Florida – flipping blue counties that haven’t been red for decades – he also lost in several demographically identical counties in Pennsylvania and Georgia, and is projected to lose those states.
The below graph depicts these highly questionable results.
According to data scientists, there were also over 200,000 ballots either returned a day before they were mailed out, returned on the same day, or one day
More than 20,000 absentee ballots in Pennsylvania have impossible return dates and more than 80,000 have marked return dates that raise questions, according to a researcher’s analysis of the state’s voter database.
“Over 51,000 ballots were marked as returned just one day after they were sent out, while nearly 35,000 were marked returned on the same day that they were mailed out.”
Another more than 23,000 have a return date earlier than the sent date. More than 9,000 have no sent date.
A screenshot of publicly available mail ballot data in Pennsylvania showing the date when ballots were sent out (3rd column from right) and received (2nd column from right) only one day apart. (Data source: Pennsylvania Secretary of State)
According to Politico, it was the ballots found in postal facilities that put Biden over the top in Pennsylvania. Postal workers found thousands of ballots in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh facilities Thursday after election day.
There also happens to be a record number of 90-year-olds registered to vote – in one year – than at any point in Pennsylvania history.
Another analysis of voting data in Pennsylvania shows that even if Joe Biden won 95% of returned Democrat mail-in votes, 21% of returned Republican votes, and 80% of returned independent votes, he would still have come up short of his margin of victory reported in the unofficial tally.
Exit polls showed Biden getting just 8% of the GOP vote overall. While the 95% number for Democrat mail-ins is closer (exits showed him getting 92%), the notion that 80% of mail-in ballots from independents went to Joe Biden is impossible. Exit polls showed Joe Biden winning around 52% of the independents vote overall.
Arizona Impossibilities
In Arizona, Joe Biden completely blew Barack Obama’s 2008 totals out of the water by approximately 700,000 votes. This is despite the fact that republicans gained 30,000 more registered voters than democrats this year in the state. Republicans also led in registered voters by over 100,000 voters in Arizona.
Even after adjusting for the voter registration increase – which republicans led in by a wide margin – a massive gap of hundreds of thousands of votes remains.
Nevada Impossibilities
A recent analysis of Nevada vote tallies uncovered an unprecedented jump in ‘problem voter’ registrations, which will likely prove the Trump legal team with another avenue to challenge Joe Biden’s victory in another state.
In an affidavit filed in the state, a data scientist found a questionable surge of incomplete voter registrations, and those giving casinos and temporary RV parks as “their home or mailing addresses.”
The expert, Dorothy Morgan, said that her initial study of the records showed a ‘historically strange’ jump in voter registrations missing the sex and age of the voter, making any confirmation by poll workers impossible.
She found that in the presidential election of 2016, there were 68 voter registrations missing this particular critical data. In the 2020 election, it was 13,372.
Additionally, over 70% of the incomplete registrations took place between July and September of this year.
In her two-page affidavit, Morgan wrote, “This investigation found over 13K voters whose voter registration information revealed no sex or date of birth. Not only does this mean we cannot verify whether these voters are old enough to vote, it is also historically strange: While one does not expect voter registration information to be perfect, it is very strange that there were very, very few of these kinds of imperfect records with missing or invalid information until this year – when there are 13,372 of them.”
Several addresses were odd too, she wrote.
Sworn Affidavits and Testimonies of Fraud
According to an affidavit in one Michigan lawsuit, one one particular township in the state had a voter turnout of 781.91%
According to the lawsuit, the townships of Zeeland Charter and Grout had 215% and 460% respectively, while ten others had 100% turnout.
In 3,000 precincts in Michigan voter turnout was reported at anywhere between 90% and over 700%.
Another election lawsuit filed in Michigan alleges there was massive voter fraud in vote-counting procedures in Wayne County, a Democratic stronghold and home to the city of Detroit.
Witnesses filing sworn affidavits under oath allege that Wayne County elections officials encouraged fraud, including changing legal names and dates on ballots, ballot-harvesting, voter intimidation, and preventing poll watchers from challenging irregularities in the vote-counting process.
“This type of widespread fraud in the counting and processing of voter ballots cannot be allowed to stand. Michigan citizens are entitled to know that their elections are conducted in a fair and legal manner and that every legal vote is properly counted,” said David A. Kallman, an attorney with the Great Lakes Justice Center.
Read this sworn affidavit from GOP poll challenger, and former Assistant AG for Michigan, Zachary Larsen, on the alleged fraud he observed in Detroit. This is Third World stuff, and every American should be outraged if these allegations are true https://t.co/63nLXJxAZFpic.twitter.com/9WbamMw4Yc
Another sworn statement from Detroit indicates that several boxes of ballots were brought in through the back door of the TCF center at 9pm on Wednesday. Election rules state that all ballots needed to be inputted into the system by 9pm on Tuesday, November 3rd.
Election workers inputted the entire batch into the QVF system and manually added each voter to the list after 9pm.
Here's some more of the shenanigans detailed in a lawsuit coming out of Detroit on raft of alleged fraudulent actions observed during election night count. What does Joe Biden have to say about these allegations? Are these witnesses Russian traitors too? https://t.co/JPrGh4uNo6pic.twitter.com/5tk8feDD54
Another part of the statement claims election workers assigned ballots to random names already in the Qualified Voter File to people who haven’t voted in the 2020 election. The sworn statement alleges that election workers systematically used false information in order to be able to process the absentee ballots, such as false birthdays.
“Election workers assigned ballots to random names already in the QVF to a person who had not voted. Defendants systematically used false information to process absentee ballots, such as using incorrect of false birthdays. Many times the election workers inserted new names into the QVF after the election and recorded these new voters as having a birthdate of 1/1/1900”
Outperforming Election Norms
Biden underperformed Hillary Clinton’s 2016 totals in every urban county in the United States, yet he outperformed her in only the metropolitan counties of Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania.
Biden is set to become the first president in six decades to lose Ohio and Florida, yet win the presidential election. For over 100 years, these states have consistently predicted the national outcome of the election.
Joe Biden lost almost every historic bellwether county across the country, yet is on his way to becoming the 46th president of the United States. The Wall Street Journal recently analyzed the results of 19 counties around the United States that have almost perfect presidential voting prediction records over the last four decades. President Trump won every single county, except Clallam County in Washington state.
Additionally, Joe Biden received more votes than any other candidate in history, despite Democrats’ massive and widespread losses in the House of Representatives.
Donald Trump was the only incumbent president in U.S. history to lose his re-election while his own party gained seats in the House of Representatives.
Confirmed Errors
On and after election day, there were several confirmed reporting errors that were fixed upon being revealed by journalists as they watched the numbers roll in.
• Arizona
In Arizona according to Politico, an error found in Edison Research data that was identified by a journalist showed that 98% of the vote had been counted on November 4th in Arizona when in fact only 84% of the vote had been counted. Officials corrected this mistake when it was pointed out.
• Georgia
In Georgia, Voters were unable to cast machine ballots for a couple of hours in Morgan and Spalding counties after the electronic devices crashed, state officials said.
The companies “uploaded something last night, which is not normal, and it caused a glitch,” said Marcia Ridley, elections supervisor at Spalding County Board of Election. That glitch prevented poll workers from using the pollbooks to program smart cards that the voters insert into the voting machines.
“That is something that they don’t ever do. I’ve never seen them update anything the day before the election,” Ridley said. Ridley said she did not know what the upload contained.
Additionally in four Georgia counties, there were misplaced memory cards with votes that officials forgot to upload and tally. When the memory cards were discovered, the uncounted voted decreased the margin in the state by a few thousand votes.
• Michigan
There was also something suspicious about the vote reporting in Antrim County, Michigan, where Trump beat Hillary Clinton by 30 points in 2016. Initial vote totals there showed Biden ahead of Trump by 29 points, a result that can’t possibly be accurate, as plenty of journalists noted.
When NY Times journalist Ben Rothenberg pointed this out on Twitter, they corrected the totals and called this an ‘error.’
According to the Detroit Free Press, a USA Today affiliate, officials further investigated the wonky election results in Antrim County.
Antrim County Clerk Sheryl Guy said results on electronic tapes and a computer were somehow scrambled after the cards were transported in sealed bags from township precincts to county offices and uploaded onto a computer.
In 2016, Trump won Antrim County with about 62% of the vote, compared with about 33% for Democrat Hillary Clinton. Trump beat Clinton by about 4,000 votes.
The day after election day, Antrim results showed Democrat Joe Biden leading Trump by slightly more than 3,000 votes, with 98% of precincts reporting.
These results were of course reversed.
In Oakland County’s 15th county commission district, a fixed computer glitch turned a losing Republican into a winner. A computer error led election officials in Oakland County to hand an upset victory Wednesday to a Democrat, only to switch the win back to an incumbent Republican a day later. The incumbent, Adam Kochenderfer appeared to lose by a few hundred votes, an outcome that seemed odd to many in his campaign. After the apparent computer error was found and fixed, Kochenderfer ended up winning by over 1,000 votes.
There were many other confirmed errors, including in Virginia where 100,000 extra votes were tallied for Joe Biden, and more may be revealed as the weeks go on.
Georgia Chaos
In just three counties, Joe Biden’s campaign was able to surpass Barack Obama’s historic 2008 performance by a combined 302,576 votes.
This is nearly 24 times more than the current margin of 12,670 votes, in a state Trump won in 2016. The results defy reason.
There were also many processing delays, specifically in Fulton county Georgia where a pipe suddenly ‘burst’ in the processing center.
On November 4th, at approximately 6:07 a.m., the staff at State Farm Arena notified Fulton County Registration and Elections of a burst pipe affecting the room where absentee ballots were being tabulated.
As of 7 p.m. on Wednesday Fulton County Elections officials said 30,000 absentee ballots were not processed due to a pipe burst. Officials reassured voters that none of the ballots were damaged and the water was quickly cleaned up.
But the emergency delayed officials from processing ballots between 5:30 a.m. and 9:30 a.m.
Officials in Georgia have not been able to produce any invoices or work orders related to a “burst pipe” at Atlanta’s State Farm Arena that was blamed for an abrupt pause in vote counting on election night.
According to Georgia GOP Chairman David Shafer, a third county in Georgia discovered a memory card with uncounted votes, a majority of which were cast for President Donald Trump.
“Our monitors tell us that Walton County election officials have found a memory card that was apparently not uploaded. The number of uncounted votes is not as large as in Floyd or Fayette but the President will pick up votes,” Shafer said on Twitter.
Previously, in Georgia’s Floyd and Fayette Counties, memory cards were also discovered with uncounted votes, mostly for President Trump. Of the roughly over 5,000 total votes discovered, approximately two thirds of those votes were for President Donald Trump.
The memory cards unearthed in the three counties add up to over 1,400 net votes for Trump, closing his gap with Biden from 14,156 minus 12,753.
Georgia’s Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger blamed the problem on Floyd County election officials failing to upload votes from a memory card in a ballot-scanning machine.
Former Data Chief and Strategist for Trump for President, Matt Braynard also recently discovered an alarming trend happening in Georgia.
Postal facilities like UPS and FedEx were apparently used to cast votes, with their addresses disguised as apartments.
Update:
– Sample of the postal facilities (USPS, FedEx, UPS) addresses disguised as apartments, etc. in Georgia.
I will release the full dataset for GA and PA with the package that includes the survey toplines, etc. pic.twitter.com/ifXe0SPKBk
According to Braynard, in Georgia nearly 100% of the voters who disguised a postal facility as their residential address voted absentee, with nearly zero voting on Election Day.
Under federal law, it is illegal to use a post office mailing address to cast your ballot. According to section 2 of this federal document, you cannot use a post office box mailing address.
Even if it was legally allowed under federal law to use a PO box as a residential address for your ballot, most of the postal facilities found in the data do not even have post office boxes at their facilities.
Thus far, Braynard and his team have discovered nearly 1400 early and absentee voters who have registered their residential addresses to postal facilities.
Massive Enthusiasm Gap:
Joe Biden with almost record low enthusiasm, underperformed across many major cities compared to Hillary Clinton in 2016.
In New York City, Chicago, and Miami, he was down 201,408, 260,835, and 6,945 respectively.
However, in the states Biden needed to overtake Trump in 2020, he gained massively. According to the Associated Press vote total data, in Atlanta, Milwaukee, and Pittsburg, he was up 76,518, 67,630, and 29,150 respectively.
According to polling, The difference in enthusiasm for the candidates is significant. Trump leads 52.9 percent to 45 percent among the 51.2 percent of registered Rust Belt voters who say they are “Extremely Enthusiastic” about voting for their preferred candidate. Among likely voters who are extremely enthusiastic, the president enjoys a double-digit advantage—60.5 percent to 44.9 percent.
Less than half of the supporters of former vice president Joe Biden, (46.9 percent) said they were voting for Joe Biden because they like the candidate. Approximately 8 in 10 voted for President Trump because they wanted his as President.
I recently wrote a satirical speech by our Prime Minister, in which I imagined him coming up with all sorts of absurd rules for the Christmas season. It was really hard. Not because I was unable to come up with hundreds of such rules, were I minded to do so, but because the whole point of satire is to raise the absurdities up a step or two, in order to highlight the ridiculousness of what is happening. But how do you do this when the real-life absurdities have already been turned up to 11 on the amplifier? I kid you not when I tell you that my original list included a rule against playing certain board games over Christmas — which I rejected — only to see a few days later SAGE coming out and advising against the playing of board games.
We have now had nearly nine months of being treated like utter imbeciles. A once great country with a once free people has been reduced to the level of being governed by pathetic, childish slogans. And for some reason we have allowed ourselves to be infantilised.
I am utterly baffled as to how people can have sat through some of these slogans being introduced without responding with howls of laughter.
“Stay Alert. Control the Virus. Save Lives.”
What on earth is this actually supposed to mean? Stay Alert? For what? Are we supposed to be on our guard for a virus that is approximately 120 nanometres, or around 1,000th the width of a human hair? Are we to carry an electron microscope around with us wherever we go, just in case? One of my favourite signs is an electronic one I sometimes see on my occasional drives into the office. On one day, it says, “Stay Alert. Control the Virus.” On another, it says, “Stay Alert. Watch out for Cyclists.” It should be noted that cyclists are considerably bigger than 120nm and even often wearing the kind of hi-vis jackets that coronaviruses refuse to wear.
Control the Virus? Say what? You mean they actually think we’re stupid enough to think they’re clever enough to devise schemes that can actually control those little invisible 120 nm virus particles that are in the air and on surfaces. Apparently so.
Save Lives? I am yet to hear a convincing argument as to how I and my family, not having any symptoms and thus not being infected by the virus, can possibly stop the spread of said virus that we don’t have by staying at home or wearing a piece of cloth over or respiratory passages, such that we save lives.
More recently, it has been decided that the slogans were maybe a bit too high-brow and needed to be simplified further, this time into monosyllables: “Hands. Face. Space.” Although I tend to avoid watching Comrade Johnson and Co as they spout this nonsense at their regular stand-ups, on the occasions when I have had that misfortune, it has felt eerily like suddenly being thrust into the world’s largest Kindergarten with teacher talking down to his little charges as if they were really, really stupid.
I won’t sport with your intelligence by mentioning all the other mind-numbing slogans we’ve been fed this year, suffice it to say that phrases such as “social bubble” and “Covid-secure” would be deeply funny were it not for the seriousness of the situation into which those coming up with such tripe have placed us (as an aside, are such buildings for which it is claimed that they are “Covid-secure” also “Flu-Secure” and “Cold-Secure”?)
But the infantilising of an entire population is by no means the worst thing they have done to us. Worse by far has been the dehumanising of millions of people, which has been done via a number of enormously destructive methods.
Chief of them is the idea that we must all avoid each other. I cannot even begin to think how destructive this has become. In a normal society, if you or I have symptoms of a particularly nasty seasonal respiratory illness, which is what Covid-19 is, we would avoid one another. Obviously. But the idea of perfectly healthy people avoiding other perfectly healthy people must qualify as one of the most absurd concepts ever dreamt up. Not only is it self-evidently unnecessary, it is bound to have long-term consequences for the way we view one another, the way we relate to one another, the way we behave around one another. It turns us from seeing one another as humans, made in the Image of God, to walking virus carriers and a potential risk. Some people now literally behave as if they are navigating their way through a crowd of potential terrorists, rather than simply walking through a group of fellow humans.
People avoidance is not just deeply destructive from a psychological and social perspective, it is also deeply cruel. The idea that a grandparent cannot have contact with their children or grandchildren is just obscene. And the very thought of the elderly being left to fester away in care homes, rather than being allowed contact with their families is sick. Yet that’s what we’ve done, or allowed to be done.
And of course, I cannot leave off talking about dehumanisation without mentioning masks. These wretched things were introduced in the Summer, long after the epidemic had waned, at a time when they could not possibly have done any good, even if they had been capable of doing any good. Why were they introduced? Partly to keep the fear-narrative going, even though there was extraordinarily little risk of dying of a seasonal respiratory virus at that time of the year. But even more important, they are a sign of submission. They are a, “we can do with you what we like moment.” They are nothing to do with health. They are a psychological mask, and even more than the social distancing, they have served to alter the way we see one another and are seen by others.
Millions of people humiliated by the Marketing Team of Covid-19 and their infantile slogans. Millions of people dehumanised by having their faces, their smiles, their laughter, their thoughtfulness etc covered to make them into expressionless drones. That was the year we just lived through. Will 2021 be the year a critical mass try to escape the Kindergarten and return to being human?
“Our Government, along with Governments around the world will shortly announce the quarantining of whole populations for a seasonal respiratory virus which leaves 99.8-99.9% of those who get it in the land of the living. What is more, they will also announce a shutdown of the entire economy for months and then, when the epidemic has actually gone, will mandate that you cover the lower half of your face with a bit of cloth. They will do this by frightening people into compliance with a barrage of propaganda, slogans, data entirely taken out of context, and the threat of massive fines.”
Anyone making this claim at the beginning of the year would rightly have been thought to have mislaid the plot and their marbles, long ago. But here we are, at the end of that same year, and it is precisely what has happened.
Only it is much worse than that.
Had you somehow been persuaded to give credence to this insane prophecy, you would probably have been comforted by the following thought: “They’ll never get away with it. The people will never stand for it.”
Not a bit of it. Somehow, millions of people across the country, and in fact across the world, were persuaded to accept it. By far the majority somehow thought that quarantining whole nations of healthy people for a virus, for the first time in history, was a good idea. Well, actually the second time in history to be precise. It was tried in 2009 by the Mexican Government during the Swine Flu outbreak, but they had the good sense to end it after a couple of weeks after realising how much it would devastate the country.
Yet not only do we have our imaginary conspiracy loon’s mad ravings come true, but those same people who have accepted it look upon those of us who have been pointing out the madness of it all as if we were those who had taken leave of our senses. Oh irony, thou hast had a field day in 2020. As St. Antony the Great put it:
“A time is coming when men will go mad, and when they see someone who is not mad, they will attack him, saying, ‘You are mad; you are not like us.’”
To cut to the chase, we have gone and thrown out reason, rationality and proportionality this year. A coronavirus, which posed a danger to a very small proportion of our society, but which actually has an Infection Fatality Rate of around 0.2% – 0.26% (not too dissimilar to a bad seasonal flu), and which could thus have been dealt with proportionality, somehow became the catalyst for the biggest mass hysteria in the history of the human race. Indeed, many were so taken in by the great hypnotic spell set in motion by charlatans with their “hard-hitting emotional messaging,” that they adopted practices so irrational and disproportionate to the threat, one wonders how they managed to live before this year.
The history books tell of one of our great Kings, Canute, demonstrating to his courtiers that contrary to their supposition, he could not in fact control the waves. In our day, it’s like King Canute has gone rogue, telling his subjects that he can control the waves and viruses, and his subjects have responded by not only believing him, but by taking any action he tells them they must do to stop the waves or the virus, including confining themselves to their homes, closing their businesses, wearing cloths on their faces, along with umpteen other truly bizarre and wholly useless diktats. Then, when the waves or the virus continue doing what waves and viruses do, a wave of Covidian Logic bursts over us and we find it is our fault that they have not been controlled. We didn’t shut down hard enough or long enough, or we played board games at Christmas.
In the real world, the only thing that got controlled this year was not a virus, but people. That all went off spiffingly, or spaffingly as Comrade Johnson might put it. People were suppressed, people were controlled, people were — you might say — owned. And by and large they acquiesced in putting their hand to this National Suicide Plan.
Of course, the reply that comes the way of anyone who points this out is, “Ah, but if we hadn’t locked down and masked up, the deaths would have been in the hundreds of thousands.” To which the answer is simply, “Nope. Lockdown cannot be shown to have saved a single life.” Sweden, by not turning itself into a basketcase, failed to have anything like wave of mass deaths predicted by the Enthusiasts for Lockdown. Nor did other nations that took a similar approach. A recent peer-reviewed study from France, looking at 188 countries, has confirmed what should have been obvious all along:
“Stringency of the measures settled to fight pandemia, including lockdown, did not appear to be linked with death rate.”
Then of course there was the Danish RCT study, which showed no significant statistical difference between infection rates of those wearing surgical masks, and those with no masks.
Imagine that!
Imagine that we were put under house arrest for months, made to cover our respiratory passages with bits of cloth, forced to alter our lives, and threatened with fines for non-compliance — and none of it made any difference to mortality.
Imagine that this Government and Parliament caused the complete shutdown of the economy for months, putting millions on the dole, wrecking 1,000s of businesses, causing the worst recession in 300 years, and piling up a future of debt, poverty, mental health issues and reduced life expectancy — and none of it saved any lives.
Imagine that we are still in this situation, with people still acquiescing in the destruction of their own country, the Government and media still feeding us lies, and with no real plausible end to this madness.
Actually, you have no need to imagine it. Even though it is so outlandish that even the most unhinged, basement-dwelling “conspiracy nut” on the planet could not have come up with this, it is indeed the year you just lived through. We lost the plot in 2020, and the most pressing question is: will we get it back in 2021?
This piece is the first in a series of five articles I will be publishing over the next couple of weeks looking at various aspects of our new Covidian State in 2020. These pieces are also due to be published on The Conservative Woman website from 27-31 December.
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.
