BY TOBY YOUNG | THE DAILY SCEPTIC | JANUARY 29, 2023
A shadowy unit of the British Army, as well as secretive ‘disinformation’ agencies within Whitehall, spied on British citizens who challenged the Government’s pandemic response, including Peter Hitchens and me. These revelations are contained in a report by Big Brother Watch due to be published tomorrow, which includes the results of subject access and freedom of information requests submitted by me and others. The Mail on Sunday has more.
A shadowy Army unit secretly spied on British citizens who criticised the Government’s Covid lockdown policies, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
Military operatives in the UK’s ‘information warfare’ brigade were part of a sinister operation that targeted politicians and high-profile journalists who raised doubts about the official pandemic response.
They compiled dossiers on public figures such as ex-Minister David Davis, who questioned the modelling behind alarming death toll predictions, as well as journalists such as Peter Hitchens and Toby Young. Their dissenting views were then reported back to No. 10.
Documents obtained by the civil liberties group Big Brother Watch, and shared exclusively with this newspaper, exposed the work of Government cells such as the Counter Disinformation Unit, based in the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, and the Rapid Response Unit in the Cabinet Office.
But the most secretive is the MoD’s 77th Brigade, which deploys ‘non-lethal engagement and legitimate non-military levers as a means to adapt behaviours of adversaries’.
According to a whistleblower who worked for the brigade during the lockdowns, the unit strayed far beyond its remit of targeting foreign powers.
They said that British citizens’ social media accounts were scrutinised – a sinister activity that the Ministry of Defence, in public, repeatedly denied doing.
Papers show the outfits were tasked with countering ‘disinformation’ and ‘harmful narratives… from purported experts’, with civil servants and artificial intelligence deployed to ‘scrape’ social media for keywords such as ‘ventilators’ that would have been of interest.
The information was then used to orchestrate Government responses to criticisms of policies such as the stay-at-home order, when police were given power to issue fines and break up gatherings.
It also allowed Ministers to push social media platforms to remove posts and promote Government-approved lines.
How did the Government manage to convince these supposedly independent state agencies, with powers to monitor the activities of British citizens, that critics of its barmy lockdown policy were enemies of the state? And does this mean James Delingpole has been right all along? We will discuss tomorrow on London Calling and I’m going to write about it for this week’s Spectator.
Worth reading in full.
By Dan Frieth | Reclaim The Net | January 29, 2023
Activist group Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) for all records and communications between the Surgeon General’s office and social media companies about COVID-19 vaccines.
Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit after the HHS refused to adequately respond to a FOIA request filed in March 2022.
We obtained a copy of the complaint for you here.
The request was for: “All records, including, but not limited to, electronic mail, texts, memoranda, and handwritten notes, of, regarding, referring, or relating to any efforts of Alexandria Phillips, Communications Director, Office of the Surgeon General, to contact any employee of Facebook, Twitter, TikTok, Instagram, Snapchat, Reddit, YouTube, LinkedIn, Tumblr, and Pinterest concerning COVID-19 vaccines.”
Surgeon General Vivek Murthy has previously called for censorship of Covid misinformation. In 2021, he published a report titled “Confronting Health Misinformation,” which aimed to “slow the spread of health misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.”
The report encouraged platforms to censor vaccine misinformation and other misinformation related to the pandemic.
In March 2022, Murthy ordered social media platforms to hand over information about accounts spreading Covid misinformation.
Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton said, “Biden’s Surgeon General is abusing his office to pressure Big Tech companies to censor Americans. This lawsuit aims to uncover the details of this government attack on the First Amendment.”
Related: US Surgeon General Vivek Murthy suggests Joe Rogan should be censored
RT | January 29, 2023
US drugmaker Pfizer admitted on Friday that it “engineered” treatment-resistant variants of Covid-19 in order to test its antiviral medicine. The admission partially backs up earlier claims by an executive with the company who told an undercover reporter that Pfizer was deliberately “mutating” the virus to “preemptively develop new vaccines.”
In a statement posted on its website, Pfizer said that it “has not conducted gain of function or directed evolution research,” referring to the practice of amplifying a virus’ ability to infect humans and the process of selecting ‘desirable’ traits of a virus to reproduce, respectively.
However, the pharma giant said that it combined the spike proteins of new coronavirus variants with the original strain in order to test its vaccines, and that it created mutations of the virus to test Paxlovid, its antiviral drug.
“In a limited number of cases… such virus may be engineered to enable the assessment of antiviral activity in cells,” the company said, adding that this work was carried out in a secure laboratory. The work also sought to create “resistant strains of the virus,” it added, describing a process commonly understood as being ‘gain of function’ research.
Pfizer’s statement came two days after Jordon Trishton Walker, an executive involved in the firm’s mRNA division, told an undercover reporter that the company was “exploring” ways to “mutate [covid] ourselves so we could create, preemptively develop, new vaccines.” Walker said that scientists were considering infecting monkeys with the virus, who would then “keep infecting each other.”
“From what I’ve heard, they [Pfizer scientists] are optimizing it, but they’re going slow because everyone is very cautious,” he explained. “Obviously they don’t want to accelerate it too much. I think they are also just trying to do it as an exploratory thing because you obviously don’t want to advertise that you are figuring out future mutations.”
Pfizer’s statement makes no mention of the supposed plan to infect monkeys, instead explaining that any work on live viruses is carried out in vitro, meaning inside test tubes or other lab equipment.
Walker was told on camera that he was speaking to a journalist with Project Veritas, a conservative outlet known for its hidden-camera sting operations. After hearing this, Walker insisted that he was lying to impress his date, before attempting to steal an iPad from Project Veritas CEO James O’Keefe.
The Highwire with Del Bigtree | January 26, 2023
The WEF has lost integrity and faces a future of obscurity due to its tone deaf agendas they’ve attempted to force upon humanity. In addition, its leader Klaus Schwab is facing an internal mutiny for his inability to let go of the reins.
The Highwire with Del Bigtree | January 26, 2023
An underreported story of great significance as a top Australian medical society has just given notice to its doctors that they aren’t covered for damages from the Covid shots.
Brownstone Institute | January 22, 2023
This letter has been signed by Dr. Rachel Corbett, Dr. George Fareed, Dr. Melanie Gisler, Dr. Brian Hooker, Dr. Pierre Kory, Dr. Katarina Lindley, Dr. James Lyons-Weiler, Dr. Robert Malone, Dr. Peter McCullough, Dr. Liz Mumper, Dr. Meryl Nass, Dr. David Rasnick, Dr. Richard Urso and hundreds more physicians, scientists and medical professionals.
The original authors are Michael Kane and Meryl Nass, M.D., and it is being distributed by Children’s Health Defense. Medical and scientific professionals can sign the letter, which is a basic statement of principles that should be at the core of medicines but which have sidelined or violated since the beginning of the crisis.
Executive Summary
Informed consent is the basis of medical ethics. Shared decision-making is a model of the patient-physician relationship that is considered the most desirable by both the US and UK government health establishments. Patients want to make their own medical decisions, and they have the legal right to do so. They expect their physicians to share knowledge with their patients to inform the best choices.
The corollary to informed consent is that medical decisions ought to be made by individual patients based on their individual situation and personal best interest. ‘One-size-fits-all’ medicine is incongruent with these principles. It denies informed consent and personal autonomy.
During the last three years, we have experienced unprecedented interference with the doctor-patient relationship by the government. Considerable financial incentives were paid to medical industries and medical providers to offer certain treatments and to refuse others.
When financial incentives did not achieve universal vaccination, mandates were imposed. One way this was done was by requiring COVID-19 vaccinations for healthcare workers whose employers received Medicare payments after we had learned that vaccinations did not protect patients or coworkers from infection.
Grants to school districts were conditioned on mask mandates in schools. These newly imposed incentives, and punishments for noncompliance, fly in the face of long-established medical ethics, especially informed consent and shared decision-making. They must end.
COVID-19 Mandates
There is general agreement that all available COVID-19 vaccines fail to prevent viral transmission and only briefly reduce cases. After several months, people who are vaccinated become more susceptible to COVID-19 infections than the unvaccinated. Therefore, mandates for COVID-19 vaccines are scientifically and logically indefensible.
In response, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) adapted its guidelines for managing COVID-19, quietly suggesting that both vaccinated and unvaccinated Americans should be treated identically with respect to isolation, quarantining and testing. Yet the CDC continues to exhort Americans to receive more COVID-19 vaccine booster doses and supports federally imposed vaccine mandates.
Essentially everyone in our country has been exposed to COVID-19 by now, and nearly everyone has been infected at least once. We can anticipate that the US will continue to face evolving COVID-19 variants, but we can also anticipate that COVID-19’s severity will keep weakening over time.
Yet patients and doctors are still not permitted to choose the COVID-19 therapies best suited to each patient. Mandates must end, and patients and doctors must reassert their human and legal rights to determine the medical care each patient receives.
Vaccine and Mask Exemptions
Patients are individuals. They experience different risks from vaccinations and may have medical or psychological issues that preclude safe masking. Pretending that these differences don’t exist is denying reality. Historically, doctors were able to issue waivers for masks and vaccinations, as they were considered to have the best knowledge and judgment to issue such waivers.
Although every state by law accepts that doctors can issue medical waivers for vaccines and masks, many health and education departments have started nullifying these waivers, superseding physician authority. States have also been investigating and punishing doctors for issuing medical waivers. It appears that federal and state governments want to make themselves the arbiters of these medical decisions. This must not stand.
Parental Rights
States decide on the age of consent, and until that age is reached, parents are wholly responsible for their children, with a few limited exceptions. But during the past two years, we have seen a dangerous trend. State requirements that parents must consent to vaccinations given to their underage children are being ignored in multiple jurisdictions. This happened in Washington, DC, for children ages 11 and older by order of the Mayor and City Council. The law they passed kept the fact that their children had a medical procedure secret from the parents. While Congress, which oversees the law in the District of Columbia, could have said no, it instead failed to act. A lawsuit challenging this law was won in November 2021, so the law no longer stands in DC.
However, in Philadelphia, PA, San Francisco, CA and Kings County, WA, the local health officers issued guidelines in early 2021 allowing local medical providers to vaccinate children as young as age 12 without parental permission, which still stand.
This is a dangerous usurpation of parental rights by local public health authorities. It also violates state and federal law. Furthermore, there has been a recent accompanying trend by ‘medico-legal’ professionals to assert in published journal articles that 12-year-olds have the maturity to decide on their own medical procedures.
Most states don’t allow children to consent to use tanning salons or get tattoos below the age of consent. To bypass parents and allow underage children to decide what gets injected into them is inconsistent with state laws, medical ethics, common sense, and optimal medical care of children. It needs to end.
Free Speech for Medical Professionals
An attack on the free speech of doctors and medical scientists is being waged across America today. While controversy is inherent in scientific advancement, and scientific knowledge continuously evolves, disagreement with the federal public health recommendations has led to draconian censorship and suppression. Doctors have been investigated, lost their specialty board certifications, and even lost their medical licenses for speaking out publicly against federal guidelines.
Yet no health authority is infallible, and the COVID-19 pandemic proved this. In fact, both the World Health Organization (WHO), NIH and CDC changed their COVID-19 policies, guidelines, and recommendations numerous times throughout the pandemic.
The suppression of medical professionals’ speech is illegal, according to the First Amendment and state statutes, and must immediately end.
This letter continues to be signed by medical professionals and scientists around the world. View the growing list of signatures.
By Pierre Kory | Brownstone Institute | January 27, 2023
Whenever I republish my newspaper op-eds on this Substack, I tend to introduce them with some comments on “how I really feel,” instead of the more staid language and arguments used in those pieces. In this one, I essentially argued that the new Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government should be ground zero for investigating how the administration is using COVID-19 to wage war on doctors who won’t follow its orthodoxy.
Although I am not under the delusion that its actions will actually result in meaningful changes in public health policy, I felt I should provide some guidance to them in the support we doctors (and thus patients) really need. I highlighted some of the most harmful actions taken to silence and suppress physicians, which would have been absolutely unthinkable a few years ago but now are becoming the norm, what with Clownifornia’s new bill (which just got slapped with an injunction!) threatening doctors’ livelihoods if their speech does not support the dominant consensus, er, I mean “narrative.”
I am doing this while every week new data piles up showing the immense toxicity and lethality and negative effectiveness of the latest vaccines. Yet the Biden administration and its allies in media and medicine only push them harder, inventing batshit crazy narratives to explain their shortcomings. Imagine their gratitude learning about this Canadian physician’s discovery of a “stroke season!”
By now we all understand that these profoundly anti-scientific, unethical positions are driven by an unholy and terrifying alliance of government, the pharmaceutical industry, and media. The evidence is damning in how they have co-opted public health institutions to suppress dissent so they can continue raking in astronomical profits. The American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM), a nonprofit organization that certifies physicians’ medical licenses, is chief among the once-trusted institutions that has bent the knee.
Last year, the ABIM accused myself, Paul Marik, and Peter McCullough of spreading “misinformation” and threatened our ability to practice medicine, ignoring the ever-widening disconnect between the Biden administration’s statements and the reality on the ground.
A reality which literally amounts to a humanitarian catastrophe with young people dropping dead “unexpectedly” and the best analyses estimating over 500,00 having died directly from the vaccine in the US alone with further millions disabled. And we wonder why restaurants often cannot open or ski mountains can only run half their lifts on even the most bluebird of powder days (of course there are multiple factors leading to this reality, but the vaccine lethality is the only “never mentioned” one).
As an aside, although it is devastating to do so, I think that everyone should read Mark Crispin Miller’s Substack and his daily series entitled “In Memory of Those Who Died Suddenly.” He compiles and presents media reports of human deaths at a frequency and regularity that is difficult to behold (especially for an expert in sudden cardiac death, a subject I studied deeply during my years as an expert in therapeutic hypothermia in post-arrest patients, an event which was distinctly rare in active healthy people outdoors prior to the vaccination campaign).
I feel responsible to read/witness what he is presenting to the world. I am tired of dueling and conflicting medical papers and agency data, cherry-picked or manipulated to support the dominant delusion that these vaccines are benign. When you read Mark’s Substack, you are faced daily with reading about the untimely and sudden ends to the lives of real people, every day, around the world, amidst this terror of a global vaccination campaign.
They are dying “unexpectedly” at enormous rates and falling ill with cancer at enormous rates. He seems to be the only one who is presenting these data in such a human, highly personal way by compiling individual media stories of the sudden ending of human lives at ever younger ages with an unimaginable regularity. Unfortunately, as per the most visited English language media outlet in the world, doctors don’t know why yet and the vaccines are not even mentioned as a possibility in this clown article published in the Daily Mail.
Unrelenting reports of people in largely perfect health, out in society doing routine or pleasurable activities and then dropping dead or unconscious, often being captured on television studio sets, auditorium stages, subway platforms, street surveillance cameras, playgrounds, sporting events, athletic fields, and even broadcaster desks. To date, I am not aware of a single newspaper report (even from tiny local papers) which openly implicates the vaccine as even a possible cause let alone an almost certain one. An unimaginably dystopian nightmare all around us… while society seemingly carries on as normal.
Back to the ABIM: despite its status as a private organization with no statutory authority (insane right?), the ABIM has morphed into an “enforcement” arm of the government, wielding the ability to control certification and the livelihood of doctors, who are subject to career-ending threats for trying to alert the public to all the death and disability resulting from the vaccine campaign. Paul and I are fighting those charges tooth and nail. I am looking forward to soon sharing on this Substack the brilliant response we worked on with our assassin of an FLCCC lawyer, Alan Dumhof. I predict a clown world of a response and will share with you as soon as we get it.
Anyway, here is my Op-Ed:
Two years of one-party rule in Washington are over, and the new Republican House majority must now restore balance through vigorous oversight. The Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government is expected to focus on allegations of collusion between social media companies and the Biden administration.
But it should expand its focus to include the government’s use of COVID to wage war against doctors — which continues to this day.
The suppression of doctors’ freedom to advise and treat patients began early in the pandemic. Promising alternative courses of treatment, such as generic drugs like ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine, were shouted down by false news narratives.
Media companies took their cues from public health agencies, which exaggerated concerns over people using medicines to treat COVID in ways that were not intended and against medical advice. Positive clinical data was ignored.
The next major front in the war on doctors opened up with the vaccine rollout. President Joe Biden, Dr. Anthony Fauci and other public officials promised these novel, rushed vaccines would prevent illness and even transmission.
Biden’s declaration that, “If you get vaccinated, you won’t get COVID” has now been exposed as a lie, but it’s crucial to understand how it came to this.
In the past, broad skepticism would have greeted plans to mass distribute a “safe and effective” vaccine that was developed and approved in just 12 months.
And society would have flatly rejected government mandates that pushed people to get vaccinated or risk losing their jobs and becoming social outcasts. Science and medicine, practiced correctly, should challenge the powers that be, not blindly follow them.
But in our ongoing ordeal, no skepticism has been allowed, no discussion, no options. Those who raised questions or suggested different approaches were smeared as “deniers” or even worse, “anti-vaxxers.”
Even as the public learned more about the virus’s actual threat, the vaccines’ disappointing performance, and the tragic reality of vaccine injuries which began occurring at an unprecedented scale, the political imperative from Biden and Fauci never wavered.
They continued to preach a single-minded focus on the experimental vaccines. More and more vaccine products were rushed through Emergency Use Authorizations from the Food and Drug Administration, resulting in astronomical profits for their manufacturers.
This unholy alliance of government, the pharmaceutical industry and media deprived the public of full and fair advice from the medical community. The American Board of Internal Medicine (ABIM), a nonprofit organization that certifies physicians’ medical licenses, has issued letters to me and my colleagues threatening our ability to practice medicine.
They accused us of spreading “misinformation” — ignoring the huge disconnect between the government’s statements and the medical reality on the ground. Despite their status as a private organization with no statutory authority, the ABIM has morphed into the “enforcement” arm of the government, wielding the ability to control certification and the livelihood of doctors, who are subject to career-ending threats for veering from the government’s narrow and singular approach.
And this month, California’s new law empowering state agencies to disbar medical professionals who deviate from the party line has taken effect. Gov. Gavin Newsom recently called California the “True Freedom State.” The scores of its residents—and its doctors—fleeing for Florida and Texas know better.
A “one-size-fits-all” approach to vaccines, or to any other health issue, is almost never warranted. Here, proponents of vaccine (and of government and Big-Tech coercion and censorship) flatly refuse to consider patient factors, such as age, medical history, and overall health, to determine who needs what treatment.
By virtue of their professional training, doctors must advise patients on available treatments and known risks of any treatment or procedure. By threatening doctors who might provide information different than their preferred worldview, ABIM is disrupting the doctor-patient relationship.
When allowed to practice their craft freely, physicians can prevent societal disaster by focusing on individual patients, informed by clinical experience.
Groups like the ABIM, and public medical officials like Fauci, should support and encourage evidence-based debate and patient-centered care.
Instead, they have suppressed both that debate and treatment approach by persecuting its proponents. This campaign must be stopped, its origins and evolution must be thoroughly documented, and it must never be allowed to recur. Physician autonomy must be restored lest all patients suffer.
Oversight is a core congressional function, and it’s particularly important when the government is under divided party control.
The new Select Subcommittee has a long to-do list, but the people deserve a thorough accounting of the ongoing war on doctors.
Pierre Kory is a Pulmonary and Critical Care Specialist, Teacher/Researcher. He is also the President and Chief Medical Officer of the non-profit organization Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance whose mission is to develop the most effective, evidence/expertise-based COVID-19 treatment protocols.
By Todd Hayen | OffGuardian | January 28, 2023
Everyone is asking the question: Why can’t people see the obvious? Why can’t people believe what is going on and stand up and do something about it?
And we have heard a lot of possibilities in response, from mass psychosis to 5G affecting the brain, to totalitarian brainwashing, to raw fear of death and illness, to the loss of critical thinking skills.
All, or most of these things may certainly be in place, but there is possibly not a “one reason” answer to the question. I for one have seen people utterly terrified of the “virus,” as well as people not at all afraid of the disease, but with no interest in going against authority in a stable and structured culture (so they think).
I’ve seen people who have no clue there is any resistance to the mandates and if there is, it is coming from hillbillies living out of touch with reality. Even the “New World” Google definition of “psychosis” includes an example:
[psychotic people] may be worried that the government is trying to harm them and their loved ones.”
That includes you and me, folks. Welcome to the loony bin.
I saw a post from a long-time Facebook friend the other day: “Well, it finally got me, after 3 years staying indoors and away from people, two Covid vaccines and three boosters, I finally got Covid. It is horrible! I can’t stop coughing, I have a fever, and every time I swallow I feel like I am swallowing glass.”
The post is followed with dozens of sympathetic responses: “Got it too! Hang in there!” “Prayers for you, five shots later I have the same thing.” On and on.
What is it with these people? Have they REALLY not heard at least a rumour that the vaccines MIGHT be unsafe, MIGHT not be effective? Really?
I sincerely can’t answer that question. Maybe they really haven’t heard even a rumour of truth, which opens up a whole new discussion. And then if they have heard something why hasn’t it at least gotten them curious, or cautious, at least a little bit?
And you would think that if this person were proudly exclaiming their misfortune in getting whacked with the bug after being so careful to do everything to avoid it, they would put two and two together and not be so proud of their ineffable stupidity.
I almost posted my flippant response: “Well, thank god you got all those shots!” But I refrained because I knew the irony of my comment would be lost, eliciting the reply, “I know!! I would probably be dead if I hadn’t!!” They can ALWAYS say that… ignoring completely that everyone on that side of the hill said, from day one, “You will not get Covid if you take these shots.”
“Oh, oh, oh… that’s ok they said that, they just didn’t know. You know, they didn’t know EVERYTHING about the shots, they had to move so fast to save humanity,” so say the little lambs.
How come if they readily make that as an excuse when it comes to efficacy, why can’t they present that same explanation regarding the purported safety of the vaccine? “Oh, I know thousands are dying, but, you know, they didn’t know EVERYTHING about the shots at first… blah, blah, blah, baa, baa, baa” Selective logic.
Maybe it is because they have not died, or been horribly compromised, other than the “not so bad” glass shards in their throat and suffering a 104 temperature for a week. “At least I’m not dead.” I wonder if when they actually DO die from the vaccine-induced failure of their immune system, they will say, right before their last breath, “Well, at least I didn’t die of COVID… dying from the vaccine is just the price we have to pay to keep from dying of this wicked virus.”
I met a guy the other day who told me he contracted Bell’s palsy right after taking the fourth jab. He treated it like you would treat a sore arm after a shot. “Oh, that’s nothing.” Really? “At least I didn’t die.” And why would that even be an acceptable possibility after taking a vaccine for something (Covid) that would probably be less invasive than Bell’s palsy? What weird logic reasoning, “spooky science.”
More than likely these people are embarrassed to admit their decisions were totally ludicrous and irrational. They have to make up some reason for their actions. “Oh, I drank that glass of arsenic that burned out my stomach lining and put me on my death bed (only a few more hours to live!), because I had some parasites in my stomach. Those bastards are dead for sure, at least I didn’t die from THAT.”
Although this may be a possibility, it would have to be an unconscious realization. And it would have to be dependent on the supposition that at least their unconscious was aware of the truth. I never get the impression that people’s egos are so big that they have to consciously make up a story to save face. It may come to that for some people. But right now I really do not think the realization that they are fools is conscious.
People are always making stuff up to rationalize their irrationality in making stupid decisions. Many people make up stuff to keep themselves from looking stupid, or feeling stupid. The key here is that these rationalizations are compelled unconsciously.
Otherwise we (those of us who do this) would be liars. And most people are not chronic liars (I might be an unconscious liar at times, but I don’t think I am too often a conscious one). As for this Covid stuff, the unconscious reason to make up stories that fit our actions could be largely to avoid an inconvenience.
Most people who do this probably are mortified (unconsciously at the moment) they have done something so preposterously stupid as to allow an injection into their body for no good reason (and honestly, there never was a good reason). I do think when the truth really hits the mainstream they will get angry and blame everyone who was lying to them, maybe not, but if they do, this will be horribly inconvenient.
They will then have to scream and yell at everyone responsible, politicians, doctors, friends and family, etc. That’s a lot of work and a lot of energy. Since this awareness is not wholly conscious yet, why not just go along with it all (the illusion). Accept SOME inconveniences like a bad case of SOMETHING causing symptoms—what they conveniently call Covid, or the flu, or whatever else it might be.
Another inconvenient truth they would have to accept is that all us “anti-vaxxers” were right, and all their sheep friends were wrong. That is very inconvenient.
Their whole world will come crashing down, and that is the most inconvenient event imaginable. Much easier to just continue to play along, until there is no choice but to accept the truth, which is for the most part pretty dark, and, of course, quite inconvenient.
Audit finds lax oversight of EcoHealth grants for “enhanced potential pandemic pathogens (ePPPs)”
By John Leake | Courageous Discourse | January 27, 2023
Three years after SARS CoV-2 broke out, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of Inspector General (OIG) just issued a dry-as-dust report on its audit of the NIH grants to EcoHealth Alliance “totaling approximately $8.0 million, which included $1.8 million of EcoHealth’s subawards to eight subrecipients, including the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV).”
The auditors concluded that:
Using its discretion, NIH did not refer the research to HHS for an outside review for enhanced potential pandemic pathogens (ePPPs) because it determined the research did not involve and was not reasonably anticipated to create, use, or transfer an ePPP. However, NIH added a special term and condition in EcoHealth’s awards and provided limited guidance on how EcoHealth should comply with that requirement. We found that NIH was only able to conclude that research resulted in virus growth that met specified benchmarks based on a late progress report from EcoHealth that NIH failed to follow up on until nearly 2 years after its due date.
In plain English, the NIH financed a company conducting dangerous and illegal research that likely resulted in or contributed to a viral pandemic that inflicted incalculable damage on the entire human race. Note the Orwellian sleight of hand trick of using the term “enhanced potential pandemic pathogens ePPP” instead of the “Gain-of-Function,” which the public now understands to be illegal.
And what does the OIG recommend be done about this? Its recommendations are written in such toothless and boring prose that the average reader will likely fall asleep before reaching the end of the paragraph.
We recommend that NIH ensure that EcoHealth accurately and in a timely manner report award and subaward information; ensure that administrative actions are appropriately performed; implement enhanced monitoring, documentation, and reporting requirements for recipients with foreign subrecipients; assess whether NIAID staff are following policy to err on the side of inclusion when determining whether to refer research that may involve ePPP for further review; consider whether it is appropriate to refer WIV to HHS for debarment; ensure any future NIH grant awards to EcoHealth address the deficiencies noted in the report; and resolve costs identified as unallowable as well as possibly unreimbursed costs.
The OIG report suggests that the HHS is now maneuvering to throw retired NIAID director Anthony Fauci under the bus for these “regrettable indiscretions,” while giving the appearance of taking corrective action. Fauci will enjoy his retirement, only occasionally interrupted by theatrical Congressional hearings that will result in zero disciplinary action. EcoHealth Alliance will continue receiving generous grants like the $3 million it was just awarded, and its officers will continue pocketing much of the money for themselves. Business as usual in the Land of the Racketeers will continue.
The Naked Emperor’s Newsletter | January 17, 2023
I try not to write about anyone who has died because if it was my family member I would not want to read any speculations about their death. However, in this case I feel that justice has not been given a chance and therefore it needs highlighting.
The tragic story begins on 10 May 2020. Stephanie Warriner, who had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) attended Toronto hospital because she was struggling to breath.
This is where the first piece of anti-science takes place. A population whipped up into a frenzy about Covid is on high-alert. They have been convinced that touching a parcel which hasn’t been quarantined for at least 72 hours, is likely to be riddled with the new virus and will cause them to die. Therefore, anyone with a cough is a walking weapon.
Due to Stephanie’s cough she was assumed to be COVID positive – anti-science mistake no.1. She was therefore placed in the Covid ward. Later, after testing it was found that she was in fact negative.
After a night in hospital, Stephanie left the Covid ward to go and get some food. Sitting in the hospital lobby she committed the terrible anti-science crime of wearing her mask around her neck.
Anti-science mistake no.2. People have been told that useless masks will stop people transmitting a virus. There’s no need to go into the science of it but let’s put it this way, an asbestos removal man doesn’t wear a loose piece of cloth to stop him getting lung cancer.
This was in 2020, before vaccines, so people couldn’t release their pent up fear by getting aggressive with the vaccine hesitant. Instead this pressure-release valve was opened up on the maskless.
At 6.38 a.m. a nurse and a security guard approach Stephanie and are seen talking to her. Another security guard and another member of staff are close behind. Remember Stephanie has her mask on her chin so is extremely dangerous, four people are required.
In the video, it seems like the nurse is angrily telling Stephanie something, to which Stephanie stands up, gently pushes the nurse and tries to walk off. The nurse then bundles her against a wall and the security guard assists.
At this point, the CCTV operator turns the camera away from the scene. Moments later, at 6:41, the video captures a motionless Stephanie being wheeled away from the scene by the pair that bundled her into the wall. Her feet drag along the floor showing that she is clearly unconscious.
As CBC News reports, much of this information has been subject to a publication ban until now. The reason being that the case has now been quashed and the Crown won’t appeal.
That’s despite the available video footage, two security staff who testified the accused placed weight on her upper body while she was held chest down, a forensic pathologist who testified Warriner would still be alive had she not been restrained that day — and revelations one of the guards admitted he falsely claimed Warriner threw the first punch.
Toronto criminal lawyer, Frank Addario, said “to see a judge decide to quash a case in this way is rare”. ”It’s not common for a judge to screen out a case before it’s set for trial… The system is set up so after a preliminary inquiry, the cases are generally sent on to trial because the bar to get a case sent on to trial is very low.”
There was no CCTV footage of the incident because the guard in charge of the camera “panicked” and “got really anxious”, so panned away.
The nurse claimed she took Warriner to the wall “as a last resort, after extensive efforts to verbally de-escalate an aggressive patient”. However, the nurse’s supervisor testified that he felt her actions were wrong.
Two eye witnesses said that 125-pound Stephanie was held down by her upper body despite training and policies warning not to. Both guards claimed this was because Stephanie repeatedly assaulted the nurse but during an internal investigation this turned out to be false. The guard said Stephanie punched the nurse’s face and was kicking but after being confronted with footage he sobbed “I’m sorry. I would have never said the things I said in there if I knew there was a video”. Got to love genuine remorse.
A coroner’s report would conclude Warriner died from a brain injury resulting from a lack of oxygen “due to restraint asphyxia following struggle and exertion,” with her underlying lung disease a possible factor.
Disgusting behaviour.
Tragically, Stephanie lost her life because of anti-science. Anti-science, together with fear, made people believe that the world would end if a piece of cloth was not worn on one’s face correctly. It also gave the power-hungry an excuse to target people who were just minding their own business.
And it seems anti-science is playing its part in the justice system as well. Whilst we don’t know all of the facts that made the Judge quash the case, the CBC article hints at this not being normal. The Judge even noted that “there is evidence that death could have been the culmination of the factors he [the forensic pathologist] described”.
Anti-science killed a lot of people over the last few years and this is just one, tragic and specific example of that.
Fortunately, with enough data analysis and push back, the anti-science was shown for what it truly was. Otherwise, tragic stories, such as Stephanie’s, would still be happening today (maybe they still are but hopefully to a lesser extent).
A Better Way to Health with Dr Tess Lawrie | January 24, 2023
This is a story about the value of standing your ground, and never letting THEM (The Hierarchy Exploiting Medics) dupe you into believing they have power over you. Truth wins out.
On 30th September 2021, I gave an invited academic lecture at a philosophical institute in Bath called Bath Royal Literary and Scientific Institution (BRLSI). As the General Medical Council (GMC) states in its letter to me:
“The Institution is an independent charity that promotes science, literature and art to the City of Bath; tickets for its lectures can be bought by both member and non-members of the Institution.”
The title of my lecture was ‘Covid and the State of Evidence-based Medicine’ and I covered what I knew at the time about early treatments for Covid, as well as the emerging evidence on the Covid-19 vaccines suggesting serious safety issues. I have alluded to this talk and associated investigation in a previous Substack article.
There were probably not more than forty people in the room, with a number attending via Zoom too. Towards the end of the talk, a man’s voice came loudly through the microphone, facilitated by whomever was controlling the Zoom permissions, drowning out mine, and declaring that I should be ashamed of myself for what I had said.
The lovely organiser of the meeting was suitably embarrassed, but it was clear that his feelings were not shared by his masked and furious medical colleague, who had clearly facilitated the heckler’s dramatic outburst. The colleague later denied access to the lecture recording, which was never more widely published as is usually the case for these events.
A couple of months later I was notified by the GMC that I was under investigation for “misconduct” in relation to my lecture at the BRLSI, the allegations being that I “denied the safety of Covid-19 vaccines and spread misinformation about Covid-19 treatments”. The GMC investigation was opened to determine whether I had made “inaccurate and/or misleading comments about Covid-19 and Covid-19 vaccines”.
I received excellent advice from Solicitor Philip Hyland who responded to the GMC quite simply on my behalf pointing out that “taken at its highest there is a substantial body of medical opinion that supports what Doctor Lawrie is saying.”
This week I received the outcome of the GMC’s investigation, which is “closure of the case with no action”. In its letter to me, the GMC noted that:
“During the investigation the GMC obtained a video copy and transcript of the Lecture. During the initial part of the Lecture Dr Lawrie presented her views on the evidence on ivermectin as a treatment for Covid-19, later in her lecture Dr Lawrie presented her views on vaccines.
“It was established during the GMC investigation that the advertisement for the Lecture stated that Dr Lawrie was an external consultant to the World Health Organisation, a clinical practice guideline expert, and that she was Director of the Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy Ltd and Ebmcsquared CIC. The Ebmcsquared CIC website states that it was established by Dr Lawrie as a ‘a non-profit company in March 2021 in response to the tremendous need for independent and objective health care research and provision, arising out of the Covid-19 health emergency.’
Dr Lawrie’s comments
On 10 February 2022, Dr Lawrie’s representatives submitted that ‘taken at its highest there is a substantial body of medical opinion that supports what Doctor Lawrie is saying.’
Reasons for our decision
As case examiners we must decide whether there is a realistic prospect of establishing that a doctor’s fitness to practise is currently impaired to a degree justifying action on his or her registration.
This test has two parts.
- We must decide if the allegations are serious enough to warrant action on the doctor’s registration.
- We must also consider whether the allegations are capable of proof to the required standard, namely that it is more likely than not that the alleged events occurred.
In making decisions, we should have regard to the GMC’s objectives. These are to protect, promote and maintain the health and safety of the public; promote and maintain public confidence in the profession; and promote and maintain proper standards and conduct for members of the profession.
Doctors are entitled to hold and express personal views, however they also have an overriding duty to patients and to uphold the public’s confidence in the profession. In the absence of expert or other evidence capable of proving that Dr Lawrie’s conduct was such that public confidence in the medical profession would be undermined, or that it risked the health, safety and well-being of the public, or that it undermined proper standards and conduct for members of the profession, we agree that there is no realistic prospect of establishing evidentially that Dr Lawrie’s fitness to practise is impaired to a degree justifying action on her registration.
Conclusion
For the reasons given above, we have decided to close the case with no action.”
To my medical colleagues out there, I do hope that this will reassure you and encourage you to speak out now.
Please remember, as the GMC letter states, that you “have an overriding duty to patients and to uphold the public’s confidence in the profession”, which is unequivocally at an all-time low. We know how busy you are, that you had little time to do your own investigations, and that being at the frontline of what was communicated to be a deadly pandemic was probably terrifying. We know you were told that the Covid-19 vaccines were safe and effective.
However, now that you know the Covid-19 vaccines are not safe and effective, that they are not the same as traditional vaccines, that there are unprecedented numbers of adverse drug reactions (ADR) reported to the official ADR databases, and that Covid ‘boosters’ are systematically destroying people’s immunity not ‘boosting’ it, please stand up for the truth, uphold your Hippocratic Oath, and do what is right. It is a strength not a weakness to be able to change one’s mind when new information comes to light. We have been waiting for you, now please stand up together with us. There’s undoubtedly a better way forward for health and wellbeing!
A few next steps you can take as a doctor
For doctors in the UK, you will find that www.doctorsforpatientsuk.com is a good starting point for peer learning and support.
Please find further reassurance in this article about GMC complaints related to Dr Aseem Malhotra’s BBC interview in which he called for a halt to the Covid vaccination programme. This interview has been viewed over 20 million times and counting.
If you are considering leaving the NHS and starting private practice, I encourage you to register as a practitioner on World Council for Health’s new community platform, Source. This is an online platform connecting local people with doctors and other health professionals in their area. Registration is free – the only condition is that you agree to abide by the Better Way Charter. We receive requests every day from people seeking doctors they can trust: allow us to direct them to you via Source.
Lastly, everything I said at BRLSI on 21 September 2021 about ivermectin and the safety issues with Covid injections is as applicable now more than ever. I will present an updated version of this lecture, ‘Covid and the State of Evidence-based Medicine’ at the ‘Harmonising Modern Medicines with Natures Remedies’ conference in The Philippines in February. Perhaps I’ll see you there!
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
Involuntary servitude is good for business
By Kurt Nimmo | Another Day in the Empire | April 20, 2026
In 2025, Alex Karp, the CEO of government and military tech contractor Palantir, published The New York Times best-seller, The Technological Republic: Hard Power, Soft Belief, and the Future of the West. The Wall Street Journal praised the book as a cri de coeur, a passionate appeal “that takes aim at the tech industry for abandoning its history of helping America and its allies,” while Wired praised the book as a “readable polemic that skewers Silicon Valley for insufficient patriotism.”
On April 18, 2026, Palantir posted twenty-two points to social media summarizing the book. In addition to taking Silicon Valley to task for insufficient patriotism, advocating a role for AI in forever war, and denouncing the “psychologization of modern politics,” the Palantir post on X declares: “National service should be a universal duty. We should, as a society, seriously consider moving away from an all-volunteer force and only fight the next war if everyone shares in the risk and the cost.”
National conscription, a form of involuntary servitude, and the wars it portends, is good for business, especially for corporations within the orbit of the Pentagon, the CIA, and the national security state. Palantir fits comfortably within this amalgamation. … continue
Aletho News If Americans Knew No Tricks Zone
Aletho News 