“Only the vaccinated died” That is the lesson from the ‘Spanish Flu’ pandemic of 1918 which killed more people than died from bombs and bullets throughout the entire First World War (1914-18).
Many lies and half truths have been spun about the deadly pandemic of 1918 which killed over 50 million. However, as recently as 2008 Dr Anthony Fauci, the chief medical adviser to the US President during the COVID19 pandemic, admitted that bacterial pneumonia, not a flu virus, was responsible. As Fauci and his co-authors concluded:
“the majority of deaths in the 1918–1919 influenza pandemic likely resulted directly from secondary bacterial pneumonia caused by common upper respiratory-tract bacteria.” [1]
The Unmasked buried the Masked during the Spanish Flu Pandemic 1918
Watch this informative video and realise that history as told to us, is a Big Lie. For generations we have been merely the disposable pawns of a self-serving elite.
Fort Riley in Kansas, not Spain, was the where the deadly 1918 pandemic began after an experimental vaccine was given to soldiers about to leave for Europe to fight in the trenches. Soldiers and the civilian population were told they needed the vaccine because of the likely spread of disease from the sodden, filthy trenches where the soldiers spent most of their war.
The parallels between then and now are frightening. The source of the 1918 vaccine was the Rockefeller Institute and the outcome of mass death was the likely intended consequence because, then as now, a globalist elite are preoccupied with ‘culling the herd’ of humanity due to their avowed eugenicist beliefs that people are a plague on this planet – ‘their’ earth, not ours.
If the 1918 pandemic was truly an influenza virus then it would have killed the elderly and weak first. But, in fact, it was more deadly among the young and healthy and those who had been vaccinated!
The Rockefeller Foundation Funded the Eugenics Movement in America
Did you know the Rockefellers are staunch eugenicists?
“In 1975, CONGRESSMAN LARRY P. MCDONALD, said the following words about the Rockefellers; “The drive of the Rockefellers and their allies is to create a one-world government combining super-capitalism and Communism under the same tent, all under their control… Do I mean conspiracy? Yes I do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations old in planning, and incredibly evil in intent.”
The Rockefeller Foundation’s Legacy Of Funding Eugenics
According to Edwin Black of Cleveland Jewish News, “More than 27 [to be exact, by 1936, 35] states joined the shameful, decades-long utopian campaign to medically engineer racial supremacy.”
“Their eventual goal was to eliminate as much as 90% of the population from the reproductive future of America.””[2]
Those prophetic words from Congressman McDonald from 1975 should sound a chilling warning to us all today.
By a process of “shedding” the vaccinated infected the unvaccinated to cause the most deaths from 1918-1920. This is entirely what appears to be occurring today with the COVID19 experimental ‘vaccines.’ Coincidentally (or not!) the head medical expert then was Frederick Gates working to implement the Rockefeller vaccine plan. Today, it is billionaire, Bill Gates implementing the latest Rockefeller vaccine plan. Are you worried yet?
About John O’SullivanJohn is CEO and co-founder (with Dr Tim Ball) of Principia Scientific International (PSI). John is a seasoned science writer and legal analyst who assisted Dr Ball in defeating world leading climate expert, Michael ‘hockey stick’ Mann in the ‘science trial of the century‘.
A new poll on the public’s views of Covid restrictions has been doing the rounds this week, and the results may come as a shock to many. They find that, of the people surveyed, 40% wished to continue with masks permanently, 26% were in favour of shutting casinos and clubs forever, and an astonishing 19% were in favour of a permanent 10pm curfew. Has Britain become a nation of authoritarians?
NEW: @ipsosmori polling for The Economist shows some Brits support anti-covid restrictions *permanently*, regardless of covid risk. Inc:
We’ve seen results like this before. Over the last 16 months, poll after poll has shown high levels of public approval for lockdowns and restrictions, which feels hard to square with the scenes of people emphatically celebrating the England victory on the streets this week.
That may be because, as a new study shows, the polling data is not all that it seems. Examining public attitudes towards restrictions, researchers at the Royal Society asked a sample of the public about their opinions on lockdown, twice over a 6 month period, first in June 2020, then again in December. Beyond standard questions about approval for lockdown and restrictions, they dug a little deeper, and asked participants what their views were on topics such as the side effects and trade-offs of restrictions, how they judged the threat of covid, and whether they felt this threat was mostly an individual threat, or a societal threat.
As anticipated, participants were in favour of lockdowns and almost all restrictions suggested. But when they were asked about their feelings about side effects (e.g. depression, obesity and abuse) of these policies, the picture changed. In fact, a majority of people appreciated that there were significant side effects and were generally unsure if the trade-offs were worthwhile. Essentially, a picture of ambivalence emerged.
There were some other interesting findings: public assessment of the risk of Covid was generally not related to individual threat, but to the threat to society as a whole. The fact that lockdown was considered necessary by the Government itself increased perception of the threat Covid posed to society. This in turn fed into public approval of lockdowns, essentially making it a self-fulfilling prophecy.
The researchers also found that this applied to support for restrictions. Due to the “apparent moralisation” (just this week, a WHO member accused the Government of “moral emptiness” for loosening restrictions) of the issue, there was more support for tighter measures. This then fed into participants’ responses, who in wishing to give socially acceptable answers, voiced support for restrictions.
It would therefore seem that public attitudes towards restrictions are far more complex than the headlines and polls suggest. Public feelings on restrictions are nuanced, and multifaceted — as one would expect, given the benefits, risks and huge trade-offs. Distilling complex issues into soundbites and simple figures only muddies the water further. So next time you see a poll claiming that nearly one-fifth of the population supports a permanent curfew, treat it with a heavy dose of scepticism. Journalists and politicians, that applies to you too.
Amy Jones is an anonymous doctor working in the NHS, who has a background in Philosophy & Bioethics.
Sociology professor Robert Dingwall has vowed to stop wearing a face mask in solidarity with children and the disabled, asserting that he won’t be lectured by mask proponents on the morality of not covering up.
England is set to exit all COVID restrictions on July 19, dubbed “freedom day,” although lockdown proponents are desperately scrambling to maintain levels of fear that would see mask mandates remain in place.
Dingwall, who sits on the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation, has vowed to set the example by ditching his face mask on that day.
The professor says he is doing so in order to show “solidarity” with “people with communication difficulties, whether auditory and unable to lip-read,” as well as “all the small children whose education has been disrupted by the lack of visual clues, especially in language development.”
While mask zealots who want mandates to remain permanently often vilify those who don’t cover up as selfish and immoral, Dingwall isn’t having any of it.
“I will not allow them to suggest that I am less moral or caring and I will expect them to respect my choices as I respect theirs,” the professor told Sky News.
He also expressed doubt that masks have any benefit whatsoever in stopping the spread of COVID-19, asserting that arguments in favor of wearing them “have always been uncertain because the quality of the evidence in both directions is so weak.”
Despite members of the mask cult insisting that they are helping save lives, the science on face masks is dubious at best.
Back in February 2020, Dr. Anthony Fauci admitted that a typical store-bought face mask “is not really effective in keeping out virus, which is small enough to pass through material.”
A peer-reviewed study in Denmark involving 6,000 participants found that “there was no statistically significant difference between those who wore masks and those who did not when it came to being infected by Covid-19,” the Spectator reported.
Indeed, forcing populations to wear masks, particularly in the UK, appears to have been more of a social engineering experiment by behavioral scientists to try to establish a form of collectivism in order to encourage mass compliance with lockdown rules in general.
No longer associated with Wikipedia as it now operates, its co-founder Larry Sanger called its original “neutral point of view” (NPOV) dead in a 2020 op-ed, explaining:
Its unacceptable new policy “endorses the utterly bankrupt canard that journalists should avoid what (Wiki) call(s) “false balance.”
The notion drove a stake through the heart of truth and full disclosure on all issues, especially on most important cutting-edge ones.
One of many political examples is Wiki material on Trump — a figure I sharply criticized for legitimate reasons, not invented ones.
One-sidedly bashing him, Wiki excludes supporting views, Sanger explained.
In stark contrast, “glowing Hillary” material extols the unprosecuted war goddess, racketeer, perjurer — a member of the notorious Clinton crime family with husband Bill and daughter Chelsea.
Sanger stressed the importance of neutrality, saying the following:
It’s vital on all things “political and many other topics because we want to be left free to make up our own minds” based on unfiltered facts, adding:
“Reference, news, and educational resources aimed at laying out a subject in general should give us the tools we need to rationally decide what we want to think.”
“Only those who want to force the minds of others can be opposed to neutrality.”
Corrupted by abandonment of neutrality bias, Wiki failed the test.
It falsely calls alternative medicine information based on science “pseudoscience (sic),” saying:
“Alternative medicine describes any practice that aims to achieve the healing effects of medicine, but which lacks biological plausibility (sic) and is untested (sic), untestable (sic) or proven ineffective (sic).”
The above claim turned scientific truth-telling on its head in support of anti-science.
It’s notably true on all things related to flu/covid.
State-sponsored/media and Wiki-supported Big Lies and mass deception back the mother of all scams — genocide on an unparalleled scale. More on this topic below.
Sanger called for Wiki “to come clean and admit that it has abandoned NPOV” in favor state-approved bias and suppression of what’s most important for everyone to know, adding:
“Wikipedians are unlikely to make any such change.”
“They live in a fantasy world of their own making.”
What’s needed is “an independent and decentralized encyclopedia network, such as I proposed with the Encyclosphere” — free from bias and suppression of contrary views and dissent from the official fabricated narrative.
Days earlier, Sanger called Wiki “more one-sided than ever,” saying:
There’s “a crucial difference between propaganda and information that supports individual deliberation. The difference is neutrality.”
“So does Wikipedia meet its own ideals of neutrality? Hardly!
It fails dismally on all issues mattering most.
It defied reality by calling toxic flu/covid jabs “95%” effective (sic) — while slamming science-based views otherwise as “misinformation.”
It calls legitimate concern about their hazardous side effects “overblown.”
“(I)nformation from the many skeptical physicians and medical researchers” explaining otherwise is suppressed, said Sanger, adding:
Wiki “openly repudiates neutrality…”
Its “editors embrace their biases sometimes so fervently that their articles emerge more as propaganda than as reference material.”
Operating as “a kind of thought police,” unbiased truth and full disclosure is banned on its pages.
The official narrative message is featured exclusively on all issues mattering most.
A Final Comment
On Tuesday, Joseph Mercola reported that “Wikipedia scrub(bed) inventor of mRNA… technology (Robert Malone’s) scientific contributions” in response to its mass-jabbing dangers he explained on a YouTube posted podcast, now deleted.
He expressed concern “about government not being transparent about risks, and that people are being coerced into taking these experimental injections, which violates bioethics laws,” Mercola explained, adding:
Through mid-June, his “contributions were extensively included in the historical section on RNA vaccines’ Wikipedia page.”
They’re now deleted, along with his other scientific accomplishments.
Mercola explained that officially reported deaths from flu/covid jabs — the tip of an exponentially greater total — exceed numbers from “more than 70 vaccines combined over the past 30 years…”
They’re “about 500 times deadlier than the seasonal flu vaccine…”
Flu/covid jab drugs were designed to harm health, not protect and preserve it as falsely claimed by US/Western dark forces, their press agent media and Wikipedia.
Something very weird happened yesterday, even by the standard of the COVID crazies.
UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced the end of masking and social distancing requirements as of July 19.
Shortly afterward, someone on Twitter warned that this was a bad move:
“My brother has just tested positive for Covid. The delta variant. He has been double jabbed. How on earth can Johnson go ahead with relaxing the rules on the 19th July? It’s madness.”
Now before you start thinking of replies to this person — and there are many — I want you to notice something. Apparently this guy has a lot of brothers:
Well, whatever happens to this guy, at least he’ll have a big family by his side!
1. COVID-19 vaccination is voluntary research. The COVID-19 public vaccination program operated by the CDC and the FDA is a clinical investigation and under no circumstance can any person receive pressure, coercion, or threat of reprisal on their free choice of participation. Violation of this principle of autonomy by any entity constitutes reckless endangerment with a reasonable expectation of causing personal injury resulting in damages.
2. COVID-19 vaccines do not work well enough. The current COVID-19 vaccines are not sufficiently protective against contracting COVID-19 to support its use beyond the current voluntary participation in the CDC sponsored program. A total of 10,262 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine breakthrough infections had been reported from 46 U.S. states and territories as of April 30, 2021. Among these cases, 6,446 (63%) occurred in females, and the median patient age was 58 years (interquartile range = 40–74 years). Based on preliminary data, 2,725 (27%) vaccine breakthrough infections were asymptomatic, 995 (10%) patients were known to be hospitalized, and 160 (2%) patients died. Among the 995 hospitalized patients, 289 (29%) were asymptomatic or hospitalized for a reason unrelated to COVID-19. The median age of patients who died was 82 years (interquartile range = 71–89 years); 28 (18%) decedents were asymptomatic or died from a cause unrelated to COVID-19. Sequence data were available from 555 (5%) reported cases, 356 (64%) of which were identified as SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern, including B.1.1.7 (199; 56%), B.1.429 (88; 25%), B.1.427 (28; 8%), P.1 (28; 8%), and B.1.351 (13; 4%). None of these variants are encoded in the RNA or DNA of the current COVID-19 vaccines. In response to these numerous reports, the CDC announced on May 1, 2021, that community breakthrough cases would no longer be reported to the public and only those vaccine failure cases requiring hospitalization will be reported, presumably on the CDC website.
3. COVID-19 vaccines have a dangerous mechanism of action. The Pfizer, Moderna, and JNJ vaccines are considered “genetic vaccines” or vaccines produced from gene therapy molecular platforms.[i][ii] They have a injurious mechanism of action in that they all cause the body to make an uncontrolled quantity of the pathogenic spike protein from the SARS-CoV-2 virus. This is unlike all other vaccines where there is a set amount of antigen or live-attenuated virus. This means for the Pfizer, Moderna, and JNJ vaccines it is not predictable among patients who will produce more or less of the spike protein. The spike protein itself has been demonstrated to injure vital organs such as the brain, heart, lungs, as well as damage blood vessels and directly cause blood clots. Additionally, because these vaccines infect cells within these organs, the generation of spike protein within heart and brain cells in particular, causes the body’s own immune system to attack these organs.
4. There is a burgeoning number of cases of myocarditis or heart inflammation among individuals below age 30 years.[iii] The Centers for Disease Control has held emergency meetings on this issue and the medical community is responding to the crisis and the US FDA has issued a warning on the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines for myocarditis.[iv] It is known that myocarditis causes injury to heart muscle cells and may result in permanent heart damage leading to heart failure, arrhythmias, and cardiac death. Because this risk is not predictable and the early reports may represent just the tip of the iceberg, no individual under age 30 under any set of circumstances should feel any obliged to take this risk with the current genetic vaccines particular the Pfizer and Moderna products.
5. The US FDA has given an update on the JNJ vaccine concerning the risk of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis in women ages 18-48 associated with low platelet counts.[v] Because this risk is not predictable no woman under age 48 under any set of circumstances should feel at all obliged to take this risk with the JNJ vaccine.
6. COVID-19 vaccines are generating record safety reports. In 1990, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting Systems (“VAERS”) was established as a national early warning system to detect possible safety problems in U.S. licensed vaccines.[vi] VAERS is a passive reporting system, meaning it relies on individuals to voluntarily send in reports of their experiences to CDC and FDA. VAERS is useful in detecting unusual or unexpected patterns of adverse event reporting that might indicate a possible safety problem with a vaccine. The total safety reports in VAERS all vaccines per year up to 2019 was 16,320. The total safety reports in VAERS for COVID Vaccines alone through June 25, 2021 is 411,931.[vii]
7. People are dying and being hospitalized in record numbers in the days after COVID-19 vaccination. Based on VAERS as of June 25, 2021, there were 6,985 COVID-19 vaccine deaths reported and over 23,257 hospitalizations reported for the COVID-19 vaccines (Pfizer, Moderna, JNJ). By comparison, from 1999, until December 31, 2019, VAERS received 3167 death reports (158 per year) adult death reports for all vaccines combined. Thus, the COVID-19 mass vaccination is associated with at least 39-fold increase annualized vaccine deaths reported to VAERS. COVID-19 vaccine adverse events account for 98% of all vaccine-related AEs from Dec 2020 through present in VAERS.
8. The safety profile is unknown and there is a reasonable expectation for harm for the following groups at all age ranges: COVID-19 recovered, suspected COVID-19 recovered, women of childbearing potential, children, persons with one or more chronic diseases.
9. Any personal choice or protected health information concerning the COVID-19 vaccine and its complications is confidential and anonymous according to federal law, otherwise, you will be subject to additional federal fines and penalties for violation of protected health information laws and statutes.
In conclusion, the investigational, genetic COVID-19 vaccines are not safe for general use and cannot be deployed indiscriminately unless proven otherwise. Please cease and desist pressure/harassment/mandates for COVID-19 vaccination.
References
[i] To KKW, Cho WCS. An overview of rational design of mRNA-based therapeutics and vaccines. Expert Opin Drug Discov. 2021 May 31. doi: 10.1080/17460441.2021.1935859. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 34058918.
[ii] Doerfler W. Adenoviral Vector DNA- and SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-Based Covid-19 Vaccines: Possible Integration into the Human Genome – Are Adenoviral Genes Expressed in Vector-based Vaccines? Virus Res. 2021 Jun 1;302:198466. doi: 10.1016/j.virusres.2021.198466. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 34087261; PMCID: PMC8168329.
[iii] Abu Mouch S, Roguin A, Hellou E, Ishai A, Shoshan U, Mahamid L, Zoabi M, Aisman M, Goldschmid N, Berar Yanay N. Myocarditis following COVID-19 mRNA vaccination. Vaccine. 2021 Jun 29;39(29):3790-3793. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.05.087. Epub 2021 May 28. PMID: 34092429; PMCID: PMC8162819.
The Times newspaper is claiming this morning, that vaccine passports or covid certificates will be a condition of entry to pubs nightclubs and restaurants this Autumn. The paper reports:
Entertainment venues in England would be forced to make customers use so-called vaccination passports from autumn, to prove that they had either had both doses or a negative test the day before.
Recent figures have shown a reduction in the take-up of vaccines with first doses halving in two weeks. Fewer than 100,000 a day are being given out on average for the first time since April.
The government will justify the draconian measure by claiming that it is necessary to prevent a fourth wave of coronavirus overwhelming the NHS this Winter.
Government ministers have told The Times that by mid-September all over-18’s will have had the chance to be double jabbed. According to The Times :
Another government figure added: “If we can show real benefits of getting vaccinated in terms of everyday life then it could be quite a useful tool.”
I did call this early last year, before anyone had ever heard of a vaccine passport. I said that in the very near future people would need to prove that they were safe in order to travel or to socialise.
When vaccine minister Nadhim Zahawi said that the UK wasn’t “the sort of country to introduce such measures,” I said he was lying. It’s open tyranny now. Yet there will be very little outrage and lots of compliance.
This isn’t a dystopian novel. It’s life now. Your government is telling you that unless you submit yourself for regular injections and constant testing, you cannot leave the country and are forbidden to socialise.
Life will be very different for the have jabs and the have nots. If I thought that they would leave the have nots alone, I could live with it. But they won’t. The coercion will continue. They will not accept that we won’t surrender to the jab.
The most depressing thing about the last 17 months is not what our governments have done. I have always expected governments to be corrupt and inept. They are merely acting in character. No, the truly depressing thing about the last 17 months is how people have acted, in particular, my family and friends.
My parents are practising Christians who marched against the Vietnam War and got arrested for protesting at nuclear submarine bases. They raised me to believe that the elites controlled the world and acted through intelligence agencies such as the CIA. They considered it self-evident that such ‘deep state’ actors killed John F Kennedy, Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King. My siblings and I all absorbed the idea that the highest calling in life was to fight the tyranny of the wealthy over the common people.
I took this worldview with me. I sought out friends who appeared to share these values and whose intellects I respected. We spent countless late nights, over great quantities of beer, trying to peer behind the curtain to figure out exactly who ran the show. We went to New York City to participate in a No Nukes demonstration. I remember looking at my friends on the train back home: I thought, ‘We are the people.’ I felt lucky to have such good allies in this world. I was sure that they would stand beside me in the trenches should our country ever be threatened by tyranny.
All that said, I was neither naïve nor overly idealistic. On the contrary, as an adult, I was deeply cynical, at least about worldly institutions. But I had faith in the inherent goodness of people, the durability of common sense, and the wisdom of my friends and family, and my people in general.
In the last year and a half, this faith in humanity has been completely shattered, and that has shaken me to the core.
My parents have drunk deeply at the well of government propaganda. Despite the fact that their son’s business (mine) has been destroyed and their grandchildren’s education and social lives ruined, they cannot bring themselves to utter a peep of protest. They’ve accepted the closing of churches with perfect equanimity, apparently unaware that had the early Christians been so cowardly in their faith, Christianity would never have survived long enough for them to become Christian in the first place. They’ve acquiesced to the sacrifice (‘vaccination’) of children to ‘protect’ the elderly.
When presented with facts and data that contradict the mainstream narrative, my parents and siblings react with real anger. They refuse to discuss any of it. Years ago, even if we disagreed about a topic, we could discuss it without it threatening our relationship. Not any more. They don’t want to hear anything that goes against the media narrative.
As for my group of 20 or so close friends, most of them either ardently support the mainstream narrative or simply can’t be bothered to oppose it. They’ve not only accepted the theft of their most basic freedoms, they defend that theft.
These same guys who used to treat the mainstream media with healthy suspicion now parrot their talking points without a hint of irony. They seem completely unaware that the mainstream media have undergone a drastic transformation in the last five years, changing from sources of information to strident propaganda organs broadcasting a steady narrative of divisive woke talking points designed to split the masses into warring groups, while a tiny elite solidifies their control of the world’s wealth. They’ve gone from deriding the mainstream media as consent-manufacturing organs of the Machine to having a childlike faith in the latest pronouncements of Big Brother.
People I knew to be filled with curiosity and hungry for knowledge now display a kind of allergic reaction to any new information. Faced with something from outside the mainstream narrative, their reaction ranges from annoyance to outrage.
Only three of my close friends have resisted the Covid narrative. We’ve engaged in a running battle with our group about the latest abomination committed in the name of fighting Covid-19, but we’ve made no headway. We’ve finally come to the conclusion that no argument, however clever, and no data set, however telling, would change their minds. They are beyond reach.
We keep falling back on the metaphor of Invasion of the Body Snatchers, a 1956 sci-fi film remade in 1978 in which the human race is taken over by an interstellar virus: the people around us look the same as they did, but something is different. They aren’t there any more; the lights have gone out. Where common sense and reason once prevailed, there is now nothing but mindless repetition of talking points from the mainstream media. What happened to these people?
The most depressing thing is the utter shabbiness of the deception that has fooled my friends, family and countrymen. Satan is often portrayed as attractive, urbane and intelligent. It would be natural that people would be taken in by such a beguiling personality. We could forgive people for falling for his blandishments. But to see them fooled by a gang of such third-rate charlatans really boggles the mind. I mean, look at them: that creepy waxy cadaver, Joe Biden; the evil homunculus, Anthony Fauci; that crooked schoolboy, Matt Hancock; and that carefully calculated rumpled act of Boris Johnson. The merest glimpse of any of them sets my bullsh*t alarms ringing.
And the story they’ve swallowed! A few low-budget clips from China of people collapsing in the streets and endlessly recycled shots of lines of ambulances and crowded ICUs. People have completely ignored their own experience. Does this look like a pandemic? Where are the field hospitals crowded with dead and dying? Where are the mass graves? Where are the trucks calling for us to ‘bring out the dead’? Without the internet and mass media, not a soul on earth would think anything out of the ordinary was happening.
I’ve always attributed to humanity a certain animal intelligence and strength of character. But faced with a third-rate propaganda production delivered by a shoddy cast of charlatans, our most ‘educated’ people have shown all the discernment and mental acuity of the gormless rubes at a professional wrestling match. They’ve given up their most important freedoms and allowed their own children to be tortured, injured and killed without raising a finger in their defence.
The most telling realisation of the last 17 months is this: the mass of people are incredibly easy to propagandise and brainwash. Indeed, they seem to hunger for it, even at the expense of their own lives and those of their children.
I honestly thought we were better people. I thought that common sense, fair play and humanity were our default settings. I didn’t think that sheep-like obedience and cowardice were our deepest traits. But, the last 17 months have disabused me of this belief. And I don’t think I’ll ever recover from that loss.
Now, faced with ever more immersive media and more addictive and manipulative technology, all of it controlled and owned by sociopathic billionaires, I truly despair for our future. I keep thinking of the refrain from Ohio by Neil Young: ‘We are finally on our own.’
A new study out of England quantifies just how tiny the risk of death from coronavirus is for children. Two in a million — that is the number of children under the age of 18 killed by coronavirus in England over 12 months according to the study by scientists at University College London, and the Universities of York, Bristol, and Liverpool.
A report at the BBC regarding the study also notes that, of the total of 25 children the study found to have died from coronavirus, “[a]round 15 had life-limiting or underlying conditions, including 13 living with complex neuro-disabilities.” The BBC report further notes that the study found a relatively small number of children experienced severe illness from coronavirus, with only about 250 children in all of England having been placed in intensive care related to coronavirus.
The study results confirm, and put some numbers to, what was known since the early days of governments across the world placing extreme restrictions on children in the name of countering coronavirus: Coronavirus poses nearly zero risk of death or serious injury for children. Indeed, the risks are quite minimal for healthy non-elderly individuals as well.
Though this low risk to children was known, governments persisted in imposing restrictions on children month after month, including mask and “social distancing” mandates (pseudoscience-based mandates never demonstrated to reduce the spread of coronavirus for people of any age), school and other closings, gathering prohibitions, and lockdowns.
Given the small risk to children from coronavirus, it is particularly abominable to upturn their lives in the name of protecting them from coronavirus. Also abominable is pushing that children nearly impervious to coronavirus be given experimental shots that carry known — and likely unknown as well given the rushed process of bringing the shots into production — serious risks.
While governments should respect the right of individuals of all ages to live their lives as they choose no matter the risk of coronavirus, governments’ bossing around of children in the name of advancing “public health” does not even have the slightest connection to reality. It is pure destructive behavior pursued under obviously farcical pretext.
The Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, the organization co-founded by Dr. Pierre Kory in response to COVID-19, has in my opinion been one of the greatest displays of humanity during this situation. Through their work, inexpensive protocols that both prevent and treat COVID-19 have been developed and taken up by countless doctors worldwide, and have influenced the public health policies of many national and regional governments around the world. In this interview with Bret Weinstein, Kory describes his journey tackling COVID first-hand as a doctor, and the uphill battle it has been trying to get the world to accept protocols that actually work. https://flccc.net
FLCCC’s COVID Prevention & Treatment Protocols: https://covid19criticalcare.com/covid-19-protocols/
Ivermectin for COVID-19, summary of the current research: https://ivmmeta.com/
Summary of the current results from COVID early treatment studies: https://c19early.com/
How to Get Ivermectin: https://covid19criticalcare.com/guide-for-this-website/how-to-get-ivermectin/
Mark Crispin Miller, Professor of Media Studies, New York University June 10, 2021 Dumbo, New York
Interview by John Kirby
Editing by Francis Karogodins
Research by Evan Dominguez, Billy Clayton Miller
“Propaganda is the executive arm of the invisible government,” wrote Edward Bernays, the father of modern propaganda. In part one of Episode 17, Mark Crispin Miller, professor of Media Studies at New York University, discusses the propaganda onslaught that defined the year 2020, when what was dismissed one week is confirmed the next, and why questioning official narratives “necessarily means taking ‘conspiracy theory’ seriously.”
By Mahdi Darius NAZEMROAYA | Strategic Culture Foundation | 30.03.2015
The United States and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia became very uneasy when the Yemenese or Yemenite movement of the Houthi or Ansarallah (meaning the supporters of God in Arabic) gained control of Yemen’s capital, Sanaa/Sana, in September 2014. The US-supported Yemenite President Abd-Rabbuh Manṣour Al-Hadi was humiliatingly forced to share power with the Houthis and the coalition of northern Yemenese tribes that had helped them enter Sana. Al-Hadi declared that negotiations for a Yemeni national unity government would take place and his allies the US and Saudi Arabia tried to use a new national dialogue and mediated talks to co-opt and pacify the Houthis.
The truth has been turned on its head about the war in Yemen. The war and ousting of President Abd-Rabbuh Manṣour Al-Hadi in Yemen are not the results of «Houthi coup» in Yemen. It is the opposite. Al-Hadi was ousted, because with Saudi and US support he tried to backtrack on the power sharing agreements he had made and return Yemen to authoritarian rule. The ousting of President Al-Hadi by the Houthis and their political allies was an unexpected reaction to the takeover Al-Hadi was planning with Washington and the House of Saudi. … 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.