Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

The Great Reset Demands Firing All Unvaccinated Employees

By Dr. Joseph Mercola | September 7, 2021

Over the past year and a half, I’ve written many articles detailing the evidence supporting the claim that the COVID pandemic is a ruse to usher in a new system of global centralized governance by unelected leaders, the so-called Great Reset.

The recent release of the House Foreign Affairs Committee report1 entitled, “The Origins of COVID-19: An Investigation of the Wuhan Institute of Virology,” presented solid evidence that many of the “conspiracy theories” about the virus were in fact true. For example, using some intelligence reports and other public documents, the committee found that:2

“… we now believe it’s time to completely dismiss the wet market as the source of the outbreak. We also believe the preponderance of the evidence proves the virus did leak from the WIV and that it did so sometime before September 12, 2019.”

They presented evidence of genetic modification and wrote this:3

“This report also lays out ample evidence that researchers at the WIV, in conjunction with U.S. scientists and funded by both the PRC [People’s Republic of China] government and the U.S. government, were conducting gain of-function research on coronaviruses at the WIV …

In many instances, the scientists were successful in creating ‘chimeric viruses’ — or viruses created from the pieces of other viruses — that could infect human immune systems.

With dangerous research like this conducted at safety levels similar to a dentist’s office, a natural or genetically modified virus could have easily escaped the lab and infected the community.”

The idea of the Great Reset may feel like a conspiracy theory, especially if life as you know it where you live has not dramatically changed. You still go to work, buy food, go to the gym, go out to eat and attend events. There may be people wearing masks, and you may see or hear news reports about vaccine mandates and vaccine passports, but it hasn’t reached your employer and you may not be personally affected … yet.

But, make no mistake, unless we all do our part to peacefully protest the changes being planned, write to our legislatures, and talk to our neighbors and friends, what is happening in New York,4 France,5 Germany6 and Israel,7 will soon be knocking on your front door.

Does ‘Great Reset’ Sound Like a Conspiracy? It May Be Worse

An article titled, “Welcome To 2030: I Own Nothing, Have No Privacy and Life Has Never Been Better” appeared in Forbes Magazine8 in November 2016. It was written by Ida Auken, a member of the Denmark Parliament9 and agenda contributor at the World Economic Forum (WEF).10

The article was frightening in the simplistic way it describes the dissolution of society as we know it. And, as time marches forward, we see more evidence of what the WEF has proposed as “perfect sense”11 coming true.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau suggested in September 2020 what other world leaders have also promoted12 — that the COVID-19 virus, that has killed and devastated the health of many people, provided the world is an:13

“… opportunity for a reset … our chance to accelerate our pre-pandemic efforts to re-imagine economic systems that actually address global challenges like extreme poverty, inequality and climate change.”

More than 20 world leaders came together to suggest, “At a time when COVID-19 has exploited our weaknesses and divisions, we must seize this opportunity and come together as a global community for peaceful cooperation that extends beyond this crisis.”14 And while that sounds noble, altruistic and humanitarian, it is the plan for the future that is in stark contrast to the statement.

Ivan Wecke, a journalist from Open Democracy, did a deep dive into some of what lies behind the WEF’s Great Reset plan and found what he called something “almost as sinister hiding in plain sight. In fact, more sinister because it’s real and it’s happening now. And it involves things as fundamental as our food, our data and our vaccines.”15

Although Wecke discounts the plans of the Great Reset to abolish private property, use the virus to solve overpopulation and enslave the remainder of humanity as “nebulous and hard to pin down,” he goes on to illustrate in detail how the fundamental structure of the world that controls food and data, and ultimately humanity, is being upended and restructured so that private corporations have more control and influence than governments.

WEF Calls It ‘Stakeholder Capitalism’

It comes down to “stakeholder capitalism,” which are the magic words that Klaus Schwab, WEF chairman, has been promoting for decades, and is a central theme in the organization’s Great Reset plan.16 The concept as Wecke describes it is to transform global capitalism, so corporations create value for stakeholders.17

These stakeholders can be consumers, employees, communities and others. This will be carried out through multi-stakeholder partnerships of governments and private-sector businesses across the globe. As he dug deeper into the concept, it became more apparent that this means giving corporations more power and taking that influence away from democratically elected institutions.

The initial plan was drafted after the 2008 economic crisis and included the vision that governments around the world would be only one influencer in a multi-stakeholder model. When he asked himself who would be the other nongovernmental stakeholders, Wecke only had to look at the WEF partners that meet each year in Davos, Switzerland.

These partners are some of the biggest companies in oil, food, technology and pharmaceuticals. In other words, the companies that could ultimately restructure society and control the supply chain are those that provide everyday necessities. These proposed concepts appear to have started taking shape in a strategic partnership agreement which the WEF signed with the United Nations in 2019.

Harris Gleckman, senior fellow at the Center for Governance and Sustainability from the University of Massachusetts18 calls this move an inroad to creating a place for corporations inside the United Nations.19

The WEF is using the concept of multi-stakeholders to change the current system that countries use today to work together. This multilateral system may not always be effective and may have too many layers of bureaucracy, but Wecke says it is “theoretically democratic because it brings together democratically elected leaders of countries to make decisions in the global arena.”20

Big Tech May Run the Roadmap for Digital Cooperation

What’s really happening here, though, is the move toward placing unelected stakeholders in positions of power does not deepen democracy but, rather, puts decision making in the hands of financially focused corporations. As Wecke points out, this will have real-world implications for how medications are distributed, food systems are organized and how Big Tech is governed.

Under a democratic rule of law, six corporations already control 90% of the news media consumed by Americans. Tech Startups calls this an “illusion of choice and objectivity.”21 How much more propaganda will be thrown in the face of consumers when Big Tech is monitoring and controlling Big Tech?

The year 2030 holds significance for the WEF’s vision22 which is to scale technology and facilitate “inclusive growth.” In the fall of 2021, the UN will bring together the Food Systems Summit to achieve sustainable development goals by 2030.23 Yet, Sofia Monsalve of FIAN International, a human rights organization focused on food and nutrition, told Wecke:24

“’Abandoning pesticides is not on the table. How come?’ asks Sofia Monsalve of FIAN International, a human rights organisation focused on food and nutrition.

‘There is no discussion on land concentration or holding companies accountable for their environmental and labour abuses.’ This fits into a bigger picture Monsalve sees of large corporations, which dominate the food sector, being reluctant to fix the production system. ‘They just want to come up with new investment opportunities.’”

Wecke also dug into a long list of participants in the 2020 Roadmap For Digital Cooperation25 and found influencers included Microsoft, Google, Facebook and the WEF.26 The functions for the group appear to be vague, but if the group comes to fruition, it will be a decisive victory for those Big Tech companies that have been pushing to expand their power,27 are fighting antitrust rules28 and are facing accusations of tax evasion.29

The move by the UN and WEF has not gone unnoticed. A group of more than 170 civil organizations have signed an open letter30 detailing why they oppose the plan. At a time when stronger regulations are needed to protect consumers, it appears that the new UN digital roadmap may be seeking less.

Firing the Unvaccinated Is the Start of the Great Job Reset

Finally, Wecke addresses the issue of global vaccine distribution.31 Instead of the World Health Organization, which is “the directing and coordinating authority for health within the United Nations system,”32 being responsible for vaccine access, another initiative was created called COVAX. According to the WHO, COVAX is co-led by the WHO, UNICEF, CEPI and GAVI.33

As a quick reminder, GAVI (the Vaccine Alliance) and CEPI (Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations) have strong ties with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the WEF and are connected with large pharmaceutical companies such as Pfizer, AstraZeneca and more.34

The influence these groups have on the global distribution of the COVID vaccine may have been best illustrated when South Africa and India requested a temporary lift on the rules governing intellectual property to increase manufacturing and distribution to developing countries. Wecke reports35 that although the WHO director-general publicly said that he backed a proposal, others in the COVAX initiative strongly opposed it, and it didn’t happen.

There appears to be enough vaccines available in industrialized nations for the WEF to support any and all employees being fired if they choose not to take the vaccine. The National File 36 published a tweet the WEF made in May 2021 which said, “Get your COVID-19 jab — or you could face consequences from your employer #COVID19 #JobsReset21.”

Additionally, the WEF had posted an article37 on their website that made a variety of claims about the percentage of companies that would require employees to be vaccinated and juxtaposed mental health concerns and burnout through the pandemic with being unvaccinated in the article.

After intense backlash, the tweet was deleted and replaced with a question, “Will employees be required to get the COVID-19 vaccination?”38 The new post quickly filled with screen shots of the original post.

Two Cities Promising to Fire Employees

Even before the FDA announced their approval of the Pfizer vaccine,39 Cincinnati, Ohio, area hospital systems had announced that starting October 1, 2021, all health care workers and volunteers are required to be vaccinated. Among those participating in the vaccine mandate are the University of Cincinnati Health, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center and the Christ Hospital Health Network.40

Health care workers in Cincinnati have now filed a lawsuit against six of the hospital systems saying requiring vaccines for employment is unlawful and violates workers’ Constitutional rights. The lawsuit says, “When there was no vaccine, the workers had to go to work. They were heroes. Now that there is a vaccine, they have to get the vaccine or be fired. Now they are ‘zeros.’”41

April Hoskins is a lab assistant at St. Elizabeth Edgewood who has worked for 20 years in family practice and hospital oncology. She told a reporter from WLWT5,42 “You’ve trusted us this whole time to take care of these patients, unvaccinated, without the proper PPE. And now out of nowhere, you have to get it or you’re going to be terminated? Like, something is wrong with that picture.”

August 23, 2021, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio announced that all public school teachers and staff would be required to have at least one dose of the vaccine by September 27, 2021, or they would no longer have a job. Not soon afterward, the United Federation of Teachers union issued a statement from union president Michael Mulgrew reiterating their desire and priority to keep the students and teachers safe. He went on to say:43

“While the city is asserting its legal authority to establish this mandate, there are many implementation details, including provisions for medical exceptions, that by law must be negotiated with the UFT and other unions, and if necessary, resolved by arbitration.”

It Is Important to Point Out the Inconsistencies

This was the second announcement from de Blasio, who first mandated vaccinations for approximately 400,000 employees in the Department of Education, New York Police Department and the Fire Department of New York.44 In tandem with New York, California Long Beach Unified School District also announced mandatory vaccinations, as has Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot for all Chicago Public School employees by October 15, 2021.

New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy also announced mandatory vaccinations or twice-weekly testing requirements for all state employees, effective October 18. It is clear that as different states and municipalities add their own mandates, it’s essential to be aware of what is happening in your local and regional areas, as well as to speak up at public meetings and demand public hearings on the matter.

The mayor of Orland Park, Illinois, a suburb of Chicago, describes an example of how decisions behind closed doors can have a different outcome than those in public.45 He also says what is happening now is about “our processes, Constitutionality and the rule of law.”

The inconsistencies from health experts are deafening. Even the World Health Organization advises people who are vaccinated to continue wearing masks due to the Delta variant because “vaccine alone won’t stop community transmission.”46 Simultaneously, the public is told that everyone needs the vaccine to prevent spread of the infection47 and if you have the vaccine, you can still spread the virus and put others at risk.48

Each person has a responsibility to speak up, share information and ensure that as people make up their minds about vaccination, vaccine passports, civil liberties and the right to free speech, they have all the information they need and not just what’s shared in mainstream media.

To that end, I encourage you to share my articles with your friends and family. As you know, they are removed from the website 48 hours after publication. Please copy and paste the information, with the sources, and share it!

Sources and References

September 7, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Challenging Vaccination Policies At Work

UK Freedom Project | August 31, 2021

The UK Government has played a duplicitous game over recent months regarding COVID-19 vaccines and proof of vaccination status.

Background

Early in 2021, in response to a petition calling for the government to commit to not implementing COVID-19 vaccine passports that received over 375,000 signatures, the Vaccines Minister repeatedly stated that mandating vaccines and implementing a passport system would be discriminatory and a dangerous first step onto a very slippery slope.

Yet here we are at the end of August with a vaccine mandate in place for care home workers and the government allowing, and indeed enabling, private businesses to set their own policies regarding vaccination and vaccine status for both employees and customers.

While many employers are jumping on the bandwagon and are either making COVID-19 vaccination a condition of continued employment or are implementing various discrimination measures such as segregating non-vaccinated staff from the rest of the workforce, most have failed to appreciate that there is already well established law in effect that protects the rights of employees (and human beings in general) and prevents employers enacting such policies.

Action Needed

If you are faced with loss of employment, change of duties or are being treated differently as a result of your choice not to have a COVID-19 vaccine, then the law is on your side.

We have collaborated with a solicitor to put together a letter that you can send to your immediate line manager (and your HR department and employer) that states your position, your rights and the law.

It is important that all employees take a stand.  Employers will only get away with this if employees cave in and either accept changes to their employment or leave of their own volition to find alternative work.

As well as the letter, we have compiled a set of explanatory notes to give to your employer, so that they (and you) fully understand the various pieces of domestic and international legislation that their actions and attitudes are breaching. […]

To see more, and to access the documents, see here: ukfreedomproject.org

September 7, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , | Leave a comment

Dr. Chant: COVID Will be With us “Forever,” People Will Have to “Get Used To” Endless Booster Vaccines

By Paul Joseph Watson | Summit News | September 6, 2021

Australian health chief Dr. Kerry Chant says that COVID will be with us “forever” and people will have to “get used to” taking endless booster vaccines.

The New South Wales Chief Health Officer made the alarming comments during a recent press conference.

“We need to get used to being vaccinated with COVID vaccines for the future … I can’t see COVID is not going to be with us forever,(sic)” said Chant said during a press conference last week.

“As a public health doctor we always want to have diseases go, to be totally eliminated, but that is not on the horizon in the near future,” she continued. “Booster doses and repeat doses will be part of it.”

“I can assure you that the commonwealth government has purchased large quantities of vaccine into 2022 and this will be a regular cycle of vaccination and revaccination as we learn more about when immunity wanes.”

In a separate answer to a reporter, Chant again asserted that people “will be getting vaccinated regularly” against COVID.

Given that Australians were previously told authorities “wouldn’t hesitate” to go door to door to carry out COVID tests, what’s to stop them doing the same thing for vaccines?

As we previously highlighted, the infamously stern-faced Chant previously warned Aussies that they shouldn’t even be talking to their own friends and neighbors, even if they’re wearing a mask.

“Whilst it’s human nature to engage in conversation with others, to be friendly, unfortunately this is not the time to do that,” said Chant.

“So even if you run into your next door neighbor in the shopping center… don’t start up a conversation, now is the time for minimizing your interactions with others, even if you’ve got a mask, do not think that affords total protection,” she added.

Australia continues to pursue a disastrous ‘zero COVID’ policy enforced via endless lockdowns that have characterized the country as a “prison island” with no escape anywhere on the horizon.

Anyone who challenges the policy via protests faces fines of up to $11,000 dollars while police have also carried out home visits to people who merely promote anti-lockdown demonstrations via social media.

September 6, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

Ticket Sales “Flatlining” as Rebellion Against Vaccine Passports Grows

By Paul Joseph Watson | Summit News | September 6, 2021

Ticket sales for events in the UK that could require vaccine passports are “flatlining” according to industry insiders, as the rebellion against the onerous system grows.

The government has asserted that it will continue to pursue the policy despite multiple warnings that it will create a two tier society and put countless venues out of business.

From the end of the month, people seeking to enter a nightclub in the UK will have to prove that they have been double jabbed.

Proof of a negative test will no longer be accepted despite the fact that vaccinated people can still carry and pass on the virus.

With nightclubs operating at a net profit margin of 15 per cent, and with around 25 per cent of young adults in the UK remaining unvaccinated, the industry faces potential financial ruin.

The scheme is also expected to cover all venues where crowds of over 500 people gather, which includes some of London’s larger west end theatres.

“There is a significant proportion of people who don’t want to use passports or are not vaccinated. It has settled at 20 per cent in France. We expect something similar here,” said Kate Nicholls, the chief executive of Hospitality UK.

Nicholls noted that with the industry already struggling desperately as a result of lockdowns, the administrative costs combined with the loss of income as a result of people staying away will deliver “a further nail in the coffin of returning for many venues.”

According to Michael Kill, of the Night Time Industries Association, ticket sales for events at the end of September and beyond are already “flatlining.”

“We are seeing a lot of pushback from people who don’t want to come and have to show their health status on entry,” he told the Telegraph.

Plans to introduce the passports are also going ahead despite Israel, which was the first major country to launch a similar scheme, now experiencing its highest COVID wave since the start of the pandemic.

Numerous major European countries have also been rocked by weeks of protests and rioting against the measures, while many businesses in France have simply stopped enforcing them.

As we highlighted earlier, the BBC is already reporting that vaccine passports are going to be rolled out with no mention of the fact that in a democratic society, such a scheme would require a Parliamentary vote.

September 6, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science, Solidarity and Activism | , , | Leave a comment

Victoria, Australia will ‘Lock Out’ unvaccinated people from its economy

A woman scans a QR code to enter a store in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, June 11, 2021 © Reuters / Sandra Sanders
By Paul Joseph Watson | Summit News  | September 6, 2021

Authorities in Victoria, Australia have announced they will “lock out” unvaccinated people from being able to participate in the economy.

Premier Dan Andrews made the announcement during a press conference where he told citizens, who remain under a draconian lockdown and a 9pm-5am curfew, that the unvaccinated will be kept under such restrictions indefinitely.

“There is going to be a vaccinated economy, and you get to participate in that if you are vaccinated,” Andrews said. “We’re going to move to a situation where, to protect the health system, we are going to lock out people who are not vaccinated and can be.”

“If you’re making the choice not to get vaccinated, then you’re making the wrong choice,” he added.

Andrews then portrayed the unvaccinated as some kind of horde of unruly lepers, commenting, “It’s not going to be safe for people who are not vaccinated to be roaming around the place spreading the virus.”

The whole system will of course be enforced via a vaccine passport that will serve to reclassify the unvaccinated as second class citizens living in a segregated society.

The pronouncement once again underscores how vaccines are being used as a tool for population control, with the unvaccinated set to be frozen out of access to health care, social activities and the economy in general.

This is all happening while Israel, one of the most highly vaccinated countries in the world, experiences its highest ever COVID infection wave, because the efficacy of the vaccines is waning fast.

As we highlighted earlier, Australian health chief Dr. Kerry Chant says that COVID will be with us “forever” and people will have to “get used to” taking endless booster vaccines.

The timetable is now set for people to be forced to take government jabs every year simply to be allowed to perform basic lifestyle functions.

Those who refuse will at first be denied access to social activities and eventually could be barred from having bank accounts or even being able to make purchases as the true extent of the west’s chilling social credit score vaccine passport system comes into full view.

September 6, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , | Leave a comment

Support our campaign to repeal the unjustifiable and dangerous Coronavirus Act

By Kathy Gyngell | TCW  Defending Freedom | September 6, 2021

THE Coronavirus Act 2020 received Royal Assent on March 25 last year after passing through the House of Commons without a vote, such was the panic engendered by media images of overwhelmed medical services in Italy and Imperial College’s massively exaggerated Covid death predictions. The Act granted the government emergency powers to handle the Covid-19 pandemic. These allow the government to limit or suspend public gatherings, to detain individuals suspected to be infected by Covid-19, and to intervene or relax regulations in a range of sectors to limit transmission of the disease, ease the burden on public health services, and assist healthcare workers and the economically affected. Areas covered by the act include the National Health Service, social care, schools, police, Border Force, local councils, funerals and courts.

The Act was originally designed to expire at the end of March 2022 without interruption, but thanks to former Brexit Secretary David Davis it became subject to a six-monthly renewal vote in Parliament. Davis’s amendment tabled on March 21 last year to restrict the Act to a ‘brick-wall stop’ of one year failed, but this and the threat of a backbench rebellion led to the government’s own amendment to the Bill requiring parliamentary renewal of its powers every six months. The first of these came at the end of September 2020, the second in March 2021. Each time, shamefully, its extension has been voted through by a large majority of MPs. Only 24 MPs voted against the first time, and a very disappointing 76 the second time.

The one party to date to make a formal stand against its extension are the Liberal Democrats. Their leader, Ed Davey, has accused the Government of making ‘false claims’ over the need for an ongoing Coronavirus Act to enforce emergency lockdown restrictions. Notable critics to take a stand against it in the Conservative Party include Sir Charles Walker, Sir Graham Brady and Sir Desmond Swayne.

The argument that the Coronavirus Act is not important because most of the restrictions that have been irrationally imposed on society have been under section of the 1984 Public Health Act is mistaken. Nothing has been more symbolic of the slide into tyranny than this rubber-stamped Act. Numerous prosecutions have been attempted and indeed made under its provisions. If MPs fail to repeal it for the third time they will be allowing the government – and indeed the media which they appear to lead by the nose – to continue with the charade that there is a Covid crisis national emergency. There is not.

Powers in the Act remain dangerous. Schedule 22 gives the government extraordinary powers to prohibit gatherings, meaning that protests, vigils and political assemblies could be banned. It has never been activated in England and so is plainly unnecessary, but neither is it proportionate in a democracy. All the time it sits on the statute books it poses a threat to the right to free expression, freedom of assembly and democracy.

The fact is that none of the measures were ever necessary. They were granted in the middle of a panic to prevent a worst-case scenario that never came to pass. Since then the government has used these powers irresponsibly, if not abused them. The Coronavirus Act has made the problem worse, not better. There was and is no justification for extending these powers. All the data accumulated in the last eighteen months says this Act is not needed, as has been documented endlessly on these pages, on Lockdown Sceptics (now the Daily Sceptic), by HART and by numerous other independent scientists and doctors. As James Delingpole put it brutally and accurately at the beginning of the year, most of the government Covid statistical analysis is bollocks and designed to engender false fear.

Now, in less than three weeks, the vote for renewing this unjustifiable Act is coming up for a third time.

In March we advised readers to write to their MPs and set out a specimen letter. We fear repeating this letter is a waste of time. We suggest instead that readers concentrate their MPs’ minds by telling them that if he or she fails to vote against this next Coronavirus Act extension you will be giving your vote to the LibDems next time round, as the only party taking a decisive stand on the Act’s immediate repeal, or any other emergent party taking an equally decisive stand.

We’d also encourage you to sign this Repeal the Coronavirus Act petition here and forward it to like-minded friends.

Finally we invite readers to suggest or design their own TCW Defending Freedom car and window stickers to promote our ‘Repeal the Coronavirus Act’ campaign. And we invite your suggestions, below the line and via email to info@conservativewoman.co.uk on how to further our campaign and which other groups we could or should join forces with.

It’s time to end the charade. It’s time to end this legislative symbol of fear and to take away these tyrannical powers from an immoral government that looks quite capable of using them. Please make your voice heard.

September 6, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Full Spectrum Dominance, Solidarity and Activism | , , | Leave a comment

David Davis: “Vaccine Passports Are Dangerously Misleading!”

By Richie Allen | September 6, 2021

The former Brexit Secretary David Davis has described vaccine passports as dangerously misleading. The Conservative Party MP also said this morning, that he will be opposing the extension of “unnecessary emergency powers” in a vote in Parliament this month.

Speaking to Talk Radio’s Julia Hartley-Brewer, Davis said:

“On the so-called coronavirus passport, it is an idea looking for a problem. It’s not actually gonna do any good. If you have been vaccinated, it protects you! It doesn’t particularly well protect other people.

It stops you getting a very serious illness. but it doesn’t stop you becoming infected and it doesn’t stop you infecting other people. So we’re now going to have a certificate saying we’ve got a vaccine protecting ourselves, and we’re pretending that it’s protecting everybody else.

It’s misleading. Apart from all the civil liberty issues, it’s also dangerously misleading. And again, I hope the opposition parties grow some courage over this, because I think there’s a growing opposition to it on the Tory benches including me.”

Davis was responding to Vaccine Minister Nadhim Zahawi’s confirmation yesterday, that vaccine passports will be required to enter a nightclub and other indoor venues from the end of the month.

On the government’s wish to extend the covid emergency powers for another six months, something which will require parliamentary approval later this month, Davis said:

“We ought to have a freedom bill to revoke every law passed under the emergency powers act.”

September 6, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , | Leave a comment

Australia Sen. Malcolm Roberts: Big Pharma, Big Tech, & Big Gov ‘have blood on their hands’ for suppressing Ivermectin

September 2, 2021

Straight talking Australian Senator who is also a doctor calls out Big Pharma for taking over government Officials. If Ivermectin is witheld from the people as a treatment “they have blood on their hands.”

September 6, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | , , | Leave a comment

This Week in the New Normal #5

OffGuardian | September 5, 2021

This Week in the New Normal  is our weekly chart of the progress of autocracy, authoritarianism and economic restructuring around the world.

1. MANDATORY VACCINES FOR NHS WORKERS?

The UK’s health secretary Sajid Javid is said to be considering mandatory Covid “vaccines” for all NHS employees. Such a move could be disastrous, and likely intentionally so.

The UK already has mandatory vaccinations for carehome workers, a policy which is predicted to cause 10,000s of posts to be emptied. Almost every care facility and old person’s home in the country already has a sign out front almost begging for staff.

The same policy in the NHS would see the same results… but worse. The NHS is the biggest single employer in Europe, with over 1.3 million full-time staff. A mass exodus of even 1-5% of them would mean tens of thousands of newly unemployed. Not to mention the effect on logistics and standard of care.

To enforce this policy in the autumn, just before the winter flu surge which cripples the NHS every single year, would be an intentionally destructive act. As staff leave rather than face forced injections, patient care will suffer, people will die… and the deaths will be blamed on Covid, and the unvaccinated, despite being the predictable result of bureaucratic mismanagement.

If it goes forward, this will not be incompetence, but deliberate sabotage.

2. THE TWO FACES OF JENNIFER

Jennifer Rubin is a warmonger who writes for the Washington Post, but I repeat myself. Her out put, from Syria to Ukraine to vaccines to Trump is exactly what you’d expect from the CIA’s paper of choice.

She’s also got a beautiful example of media “liberal” doublethink for us this week.

Here is Jennifer on abortion rights in 2019:

… and here is Jennifer suggesting vague legal repercussions for refusing the Covid “vaccine”.

Yup.

Oh, and be sure to out her latest for the WaPo too, where she extolls the virtue of fear as a tool of public manipulation, demands legal mandates for vaccines for everyone, insists that funding should be cut for schools who don’t force their pupils to wear masks, and says “If eligible people insist on remaining unvaccinated, it should be increasingly difficult for them to interact with others.”

In short, she’s a monster.

3. THE DANGEROUS ILLUSION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS … continue reading

September 5, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Progressive Hypocrite | , , | Leave a comment

WHAT’S GOING ON IN JAPAN? – QUESTIONS FOR CORBETT

Corbett • 09/03/2021

Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed

It’s been a while since Questions For Corbett tackled everyone’s burning question: So what’s going on in Japan, anyway? From states of emergency to ivermectin to tainted vaccines to boring old Japanese politics, today James gives you the latest updates from the Land of the Rising Sun.

Watch on Archive / BitChute / Minds.com / Odysee or Download the mp4

SHOW NOTES

How is Japan Reacting to the Crisis? – Questions For Corbett #057

How is Japan Reacting NOW? – Questions For Corbett #061

Gov’t considers extending state of emergency by 2 weeks

Tokyo governor says lockdown in Japan is ‘impossible’

Upper House passes bills allowing fines for defying antivirus steps

Restaurant chain sues Tokyo government over COVID hour curbs

Japanese restaurant chain sees shares tumble after short-lived Gamestop-style rally

Global-Dining, Inc.7625.T

Japan to introduce “vaccine passports” for international travel

Japan’s vaccine passport to initially be valid in five countries

Japan’s vaccine passports: Here’s what you need to know

1.6m Moderna doses withdrawn in Japan over contamination

Japan probes two deaths after jabs from tainted Moderna batch

モデルナワクチン、新たに異物　使用中止と別の製造番号―沖縄

Contaminants found in more Moderna COVID vaccine in Japan

Foreign matter in Moderna COVID vaccine identified as stainless metal

Japan health minister says Moderna vaccine contaminants likely from needle stick

Parasite-killing drug ivermectin heads into coronavirus trials

Ivermectin not approved for COVID use in Japan (Aug 4)

「今こそイベルメクチンを使え」東京都医師会の尾崎治夫会長が語ったその効能

The Tokyo Olympics are rigged to fail. Why hasn’t the media noticed?

Suga says he intends to resign

FOCUS: Taliban’s takeover in Afghanistan may prompt China to value Japan

Japan seeks record military spending in 2022 to counter Chinese influence

Odysee channel translating independent media into Japanese

Japanese coronavirus truth page

Japanese truth bitchute channel

Japanese flyers/materials about coronavirus

September 5, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | , | Leave a comment

Legal Information About How To Refuse Vaccine Mandates, Etc.

Weston A Price Foundation, London Chapter | July 27, 2021

Below is a helpful guide for anyone in the common law nations (UK, US, Canada, NZ, Australia, etc) concerned about unlawful impositions of COVID19 government mandates on vaccines, masks, exemptions, etc.

Vaccines in UK are not mandatory. There is an exemption on evidence of medical reasons and the Supreme Court recognises at common law that denial of free and informed consent is a self certified medical reason. See Montgomery v Lanarkshire [2015] UKSC 11  https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2013-0136-judgment.pdf …In R Wilkinson v Broadmoor : [2001] EWCA Civ 1545

In that case Lady Justice Hale, Supreme Court President, confirmed that forced medical procedure without informed consent “may be sued in the ordinary way for the (common law) tort of battery”.  https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2001/1545.html …In the judgement it was held that acting under statutory authority provides no defence, therefore the Employer will be guilty of coercion on the threat of battery with regards to unlawful dismissal if express evidence of denial of informed consent are unlawfully rejected.This will result in a breach of contract and also a Tort that can be sued.

The Above Is Why Mask “Mandate” Exemptions Were Self Certified.

It is unlawful for Doctors to interfere with the process of free and informed consent. Informed consent is defined in Montgomery as follows:

  1. That the patient is given sufficient information – to allow individuals to make choices that will affect their health and well being on proper information.
  2. Sufficient information means informing the patient of the availability of other treatments (and forms of testing).
  3. That the patient is informed of the material risks of taking the medical intervention and the material risks of declining it.If consent is given but the Patient subsequently proves that information provided at the time breached the above common law test of informed consent, the Tort of battery is committed and the medication is unlawful.

The High Court has found children incapable of providing Gillick Competency for experimental medicines with unknown long term effects. Schools therefore risk being sued for battery if ignoring Parental preferences.

See Bell v Tavistock [2020] EWHC 3274 https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Bell-v-Tavistock-Judgment.pdf …

These principles are discussed without reference to case law on this important NHS page on Free and Informed Consent and Gillick Competency.  See:

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/consent-to-treatment/ …

The fundamental common law right to free and informed consent, based on the ancient Tort of battery (tresspass to the person), are valid in all 16 Commonwealth Realms and both the Republic of Ireland and USA, where English common law is retained as a body of law.

In Ireland, evidence that English common law rights are retained can be found in the Statute Revision Act (2007) which retained Magna Carta and most of the English Bill of Rights (1688) and much, much more.  http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2007/act/28/enacted/en/html …

In USA, English common law rights are retained by the 9th Amendment of the Constitution

“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”, hence why US courts refer to them.  https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-

9/ … Law that provides rights sit above normal laws in English law and provide lawful excuse to statutory obligations with this acknowledged by courts. see Art.29 Magna Carta (1297), which states: “we will not deny or defer to any man either Justice or Right.”  https://www.legislation.gov.uk/aep/Edw1cc1929/25/9/section/XXIX …

Another case to read is Burton Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2017] EWCA Civ 62 regarding Doctor’s obligation to provide information to inform consent.  https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2017/62.html …

Happy for Solicitors to DM and work with me or folk who want to work on template letters to send out.For those not familiar with our organisation, here are the articles we have written on Covid.  See: https://www.westonaprice.org/coronavirus/

Covid passports also recognise self certified free and informed consent.

“If you have a medical reason which means you cannot be vaccinated or tested, you may be asked to self-declare this medical exemption.” https://www.gov.uk/guidance/nhs-covid-pass …

Also see Art.IV Acts of Union (1706-7):

“That all the Subjects of the UK of GB shall from & after the Union have full freedom & Intercourse of Trade & Navigation to & from any port or place within the said UK & the Dominions” https://www.legislation.gov.uk/aep/Ann/6/11/part/4 …

For our friends in New Zealand, you also have these common law rights, but additionally, Art.11 of your 1990 Bill of Rights states: ”Everyone has the right to refuse to undergo any medical treatment.” https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1990/0109/latest/DLM224792.html …

Full thread

September 4, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Why all the fuss about Ivermectin?

By Brian C. Joondeph | American Thinker | September 3, 2021

First hydroxychloroquine, now ivermectin, is the hated deadly drug de jour, castigated by the medical establishment and regulatory authorities. Both drugs have been around for a long time as FDA-approved prescription medications. Yet now we are told they are as deadly as arsenic.

As a physician, I am certainly aware of ivermectin but don’t recall ever writing a prescription for it in my 30+ years’ medical career. Ivermectin is an anthelmintic, meaning it cures parasitic infections. In my world of ophthalmology, it is used on occasion for rare parasitic or worm infections in the eye.

Ivermectin was FDA approved in 1998 under the brand name Stromectol, produced by pharmaceutical giant Merck, approved for several parasitic infections. The product label described it as having a “unique mode of action,” which “leads to an increase in the permeability of the cell membrane to chloride ions.” This suggests that ivermectin acts as an ionophore, making cell membranes permeable to ions that enter the cell for therapeutic effect.

Ivermectin is one of several ionophores, others including hydroxychloroquine, quercetin, and resveratrol, the latter two available over the counter. These ionophores simply open a cellular door, allowing zinc to enter the cell, where it then interferes with viral replication, providing potential therapeutic benefit in viral and other infections.

This scientific paper reviews and references other studies demonstrating antibacterial, antiviral, and anticancer properties of ivermectin. This explains the interest in this drug as having potential use in treating COVID.

Does ivermectin work in COVID? I am not attempting to answer that question, instead looking at readily available information because this drug has been the focus of much recent media attention. For the benefit of any reader eager to report this article and author to the medical licensing boards for pushing misleading information, I am not offering medical advice or prescribing anything. Rather, I am only offering commentary on this newsworthy and controversial drug.

What’s newsworthy about ivermectin? A simple Google search of most medications describes uses and side effects. A similar search of ivermectin provides headlines of why it shouldn’t be taken and how dangerous it is.

YouTube screen grab

The Guardian describes ivermectin as horse medicine reminding readers considering taking the drug, “You are not a horse. You are not a cow”, saying it’s a medicine meant for farm animals. The FDA echoed that sentiment in a recent tweet, adding “Seriously, y’all. Stop it,” their word choice making it obvious who the tweet was directed to.

Perhaps the FDA didn’t realize that Barack and Michelle Obama often used the term “y’all” and that some might construe the FDA tweet as racist.

The FDA says ivermectin “can be dangerous and even lethal,” yet they approved it in 1998 and have not pulled it from the market despite it being “dangerous and lethal.” Any medication can be “dangerous and lethal” if misused. People have even overdosed on water.

It is true that ivermectin is also used in animals, as are many drugs approved for human use. This is a list of veterinary drugs with many familiar names of antibiotics, antihypertensives, and anesthetics commonly used by humans. Since these drugs are used in farm animals, should humans stop taking them? That seems a rather unscientific argument against ivermectin, especially coming from the FDA.

And healthcare professionals are not recommending or prescribing animal versions of ivermectin as there is an FDA-approved human formulation.

Does ivermectin work against COVID? That is the bigger question and worthy of investigation, rather than reminding people that they are not cows.

A study published several months ago in the American Journal of Therapeutics concluded,

Meta-analyses based on 18 randomized controlled treatment trials of ivermectin in COVID-19 have found large, statistically significant reductions in mortality, time to clinical recovery, and time to viral clearance. Furthermore, results from numerous controlled prophylaxis trials report significantly reduced risks of contracting COVID-19 with the regular use of ivermectin. Finally, the many examples of ivermectin distribution campaigns leading to rapid population-wide decreases in morbidity and mortality indicate that an oral agent effective in all phases of COVID-19 has been identified.

To my knowledge, these 18 studies have not been retracted, unlike previous studies critical of hydroxychloroquine which were ignominiously retracted by prestigious medical journals like The Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine.

Yet the medical establishment refuses to even entertain the possibility of some benefit from ivermectin, castigating physicians who want to try it in their patients. 18 studies found benefit. Are they all wrong?

Podcaster Joe Rogan recently contracted COVID and recovered within days of taking a drug cocktail including ivermectin. Was it his drug cocktail, his fitness, or just good luck? Impossible to know but his experience will keep ivermectin in the news.

Highly unvaccinated India had a surge in COVID cases earlier this year which abruptly ended following the widespread use of ivermectin, over the objections and criticism of the WHO. In the one state, Tamil Nadu, that did not use ivermectin, cases tripled instead of dropping by 97 percent as in the rest of the country.

This is anecdotal and could have other explanations but the discovery of penicillin was also anecdotal and observational. Good science should investigate rather than ignore such observations.

The Japanese Medical Association recently endorsed ivermectin for COVID. The US CDC cautioned against it.

There is legal pushback as an Ohio judge ordered a hospital to treat a ventilated COVID patient with ivermectin. After a month on the ventilator, this patient is likely COVID free and ivermectin now will have no benefit, allowing the medical establishment to say “see I told you so” that it wouldn’t help.

By this point, active COVID infection is not the issue; instead, it is weaning off and recovery from long-term life support. The early hydroxychloroquine studies had the same flaw, treating patients too late in the disease course to provide or demonstrate benefit.

These drugs have been proposed for early outpatient treatment, not when patients are seriously ill and near death. Looking for treatment benefits in the wrong patient population will yield expected negative results.

Given how devastating COVID can be and how, despite high levels of vaccination in countries like the US, UK, and Israel, we are seeing surging cases and hospitalizations among the vaccinated, we should be pulling out all the stops in treating this virus.

Medical treatment involves balancing risks and benefits. When FDA-approved medications are used in appropriate doses for appropriate patients, prescribed by competent physicians, the risks tend to be low, and any benefit should be celebrated. Instead, the medical establishment, media, and regulatory authorities are taking the opposite approach. One has to wonder why.

September 4, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »