“Use your mind, to speak your own truth as coherently as possible, and repeat that truth over and over. It’s all one person can really do.”—John Trudell (1998)
I keep coming back to John Trudell’s appreciation of what it means to be a human being, and from that, to understand how this world we belong to by right of birth actually operates. I was gifted to have my mother be Elizabeth Adda Robinson Ratcliffe. The youngest of three children, Elizabeth’s father, Harold Wesley Robinson, was a minister and her mother, Mary Elizabeth Stambaugh, was a teacher. Born in Barre, Vermont in 1923 while her family was on furlough in the U.S., Elizabeth was raised in China from 1925 to 1940. Growing up “third culture” she came to perceive and know this world through a wider lens than her contemporaries raised in the United States.
Born in the mid-1950s and the youngest of four children, my own coming of age trailed behind the bursting open consciousness of the post-World War II generation who did not experience the 1930s depression, 1940s global war and dawn of the atomic age as our parents had. Instead, we found ourselves alive in a world of nuclear weapons-power, the false mystery of President Kennedy’s assassination—with the same dynamic operative in those of Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, and Robert Francis Kennedy—and the U.S. war against Vietnam.
Last November in National Day of Mourning and the 4th Industrial Revolution, I reflected on ancestral inheritance and illuminated souls informing this life by further widening the lens my mother fostered in me:
Ancestors in my Father’s and Mother’s family lines were variously involved in the genocide, dispossession, subjugation, and cultural colonization and assimilation of Original Free Peoples of Turtle Island, extant here for millennia before the arrival of Europeans. Living with this inheritance, it is life-affirming and life-honoring to psychically acknowledge and find ways to atone for the misguided and Life-negating actions of my ancestors.
A way sought to mend the Sacred Hoop is to amplify voices exercising intuition and creative intelligence expressed by human beings devoted to honoring and serving Life’s needs here on Mother Earth including—and not limited to—such illuminated souls as Steven Newcomb, John Trudell, James Douglass, Elisabet Sahtouris, Oren Lyons, John Gofman, Jerry Mander, Richard Grossman, Ed Curtin, Helen Caldicott, Vincent Salandria, John Judge, Fletcher Prouty, and Mary Lou Williams to name but a few.
Along with playing piano and sharing my love of music this instrument creates through teaching children and adults, I find great meaning in amplifying the intuitive wisdom, intelligence and understanding of souls highlighted on ratical.org and ratical.earth.
In what follows, please understand: this is the truth as I see it. Each one of us must decide for our self how we perceive our world and what we choose to act upon, stand up for and stand with. Having and exercising the freedom to think and the freedom to choose is what it’s all about. I appreciate how Charles Eisenstein frames this: “Don’t let me or anyone else tell you what to do or when to do it. We are fighting for the end of the time of dictating each other’s choices, thinking I know better than you what you should be doing.”
David Bohm was an exemplar in the fields of theoretical physics, neuropsychology and philosophy. In the last years of his life he conducted weekend-long gatherings on dialogue and the nature of thought. I listened repeatedly to numerous recordings of these meetings during the long drives commuting from Santa Cruz to Mountain View, California in the 1990s. One of the many areas covered was exploration into the meaning of the word “meaning”:
Bohm: We can hold a block of concrete in our hands; that’s what is called ‘manifest’. In Latin, ‘manifest’ means literally ‘what you hold in your hand’. But the thing that holds society together isn’t manifest. You can’t put it in your hand. The things you can put in your hand will not hold society together.
We have raised the question: what is the nature of this subtle concrete, glue, cement? I say it is the sharing of meaning. I am saying that the concrete basis of society is that meaning—whatever meaning is.
Now, meaning is not just abstract. You see, behind the abstraction is something concrete—the concrete reality of the very thought process itself—or more generally, of the overall mind process. And underlying this is meaning. In an elementary case it is thought which has a certain meaning, words which have a certain meaning; but there may be more subtle meanings....
Culture is the shared meaning. And meaning includes not only significance, but also value and purpose. According to the dictionary, these are the three meanings of the word ‘meaning’. I am saying that common significance, value and purpose will hold the society together. If society does not share those, it is incoherent and it goes apart. And now we have a lot of subgroups in our society which don’t share meanings, and so it actually starts to fall apart.... significant, you may sense it as having a high value. The word ‘value’ has a root which is interesting—the same root as ‘valor’ and ‘valiant’. It means ‘strong’. You might suppose that in early times, when people sensed something of high value they didn’t have a word for it, although it moved them strongly. Later they found a word for it and said it has high value. And then later the word itself may convey that.
If something is significant it may have a high value. And if it has a high value, you may have or you may develop a strong purpose or intention to get it, or sustain it, or something. Things that do not have high value will not generate any very strong purpose. You would say, “It’s not interesting. It doesn’t mean much to me.”
“It means a lot to me” means it has high value. And “I mean to do it” is the same as to say, “It’s my purpose.” You can see that the word ‘meaning’ has those three meanings. And I don’t think it is an accident; I think they are very deeply related. -->
The “emotional currency” of our culture’s shared meaning has come to be almost completely debased. Beginning more than one-and-one-half years ago, all indications are that the agenda underlying the unprecedented, globally-coordinated, worldwide lockdowns of most of humanity—what was previously known as “house arrest”—is by degree being institutionalized. The resulting strictures and new rules show all the signs of being “required” indefinitely. Pressure is increasing on people exercising their inalienable right of informed consent not to be injected with an experimental biologic that continue to be conducted in Phase 3 Clinical Trials—AstraZeneca trials go to 14 Feb 2023, Moderna trials go to 27 Oct 2022, Pfizer-BioNTech go to 2 May 2023, and Janssen (Sisnoke Ad26.COV2.S) go to 2 Jan 2023—before they are licensed by the FDA as a vaccine and released on the open market.
What was the trigger giving rise to such a heretofore unimaginable global lockdown and subsequent push to inject every person on Mother Earth with an experimental biologic? In the beginning months of 2020 the narrative implemented by degree revolved around what was termed a novel virus, radiating out of China and, we were told, threatening to kill millions of human beings if not contained.
From this conception, Lockdown World was created. Emergency declarations were declared. At first it was to be for some weeks to “flatten the curve”. As the weeks went by, “experts” affirmed the time-span of Lockdown World needed to be increased in order to “stay safe”. This unfolding story in turn has been transmuted into a kind of unceasing Escheresq möbius strip with no end. The driver underlying this process has been promotion of a narrative founded on fear of death grievously out of all proportion to what has actually occurred. The “impossible constructions” of Maurits Cornelis Escher illustrate our dilemma. In such renderings of what are termed Penrose Stairs, we can visualize the “endless loop” we have collectively and psychologically been herded into.
|
A summary listing of some of the antidotes to the four pillars are presented in the Appendix.
The concerted suppression of any perspective and analysis contrary to the official narrative is the actual source of increasing danger. Censorship is the ultimate tool to smother and extinguish the free exchange of ideas and from this the freedom to think. Robert Heinlein captured the essential power exercised by censorship in his 1949 novel, Revolt in 2100. The story revolved around efforts to overthrow a 100-year theocratic totalitarian United States of America:
I began to sense faintly that secrecy is the keystone of all tyranny. Not force, but secrecy ... censorship. When any government, or any church for that matter, undertakes to say to its subjects, “This you may not read, this you must not see, this you are forbidden to know,” the end result is tyranny and oppression, no matter how holy the motives. Mighty little force is needed to control a man whose mind has been hoodwinked; contrariwise, no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything—you can’t conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him.
Adopting today’s corporate empire medical dogma approaches a religious acceptance of sacrificing an array of inalienable rights—including freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of movement, freedom to conduct commerce, and from these, freedom of thought—for the false promise of being safe via monetized media and big tech information cartels’ 24/7 fear programming. It is painful and wrenching to confront any situation where one has been misled by sources one has implicitly trusted. The concerted and increasing suppression of the free flow of information, is the Red Alert indicator Benjamin Franklin warned of when he wrote, “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” George Carlin channelled Ben Franklin on this. Further, Ernest Becker’s classic book, The Denial of Death (1973) looks squarely at our society’s manic avoidance of that which all will experience. From the opening of the Preface:
The prospect of death, Dr. Johnson said, wonderfully concentrates the mind. The main thesis of this book is that it does much more than that: the idea of death, the fear of it, haunts the human animal like nothing else; it is a mainspring of human activity—activity designed largely to avoid the fatality of death, to overcome it by denying in some way that it is the final destiny for man.
The bedrock of this crisis is the PCR process which cannot distinguish between live—read infectious—and dead DNA strands. A thorough scientific analysis of this process is detailed in The PCR Disaster, Genesis and Evolution of the ››Drosten Test‹‹. Yet this manufacturing technique is THE CDC’s “gold standard” for identifying cases of Covid-19. For more than 18 months this illusion has been perpetrated and perpetuated by public health authorities and their stable of experts, dictated by public policy and political directives and carried out by the suffocating reach of Big Tech’s global censorship operation.
Physicians promoting inexpensive, effective prevention and early treatment options for Covid-19 are uniformly attacked by monetized media and disciplined by medical boards for their steadfast adherence to the Hippocratic Oath and remaining true to the World Medical Association Declaration of Cordoba on Patient-Physician Relationship. As well, physicians, epidemiologists, virologists, immunologists, and other medical scientists challenging the efficacy and calling out the serious risks and deaths caused by the AstraZeneca, Moderna, Pfizer-BioNTech, and Johnson & Johnson experimental injections—in Phase 3 Clinical Trials until 2022 and 2023—are censored and vilified as well as having their medical and scientific credentials questioned and for M.D.s, the potential of their licenses being suspended or revoked.
In Apprehending the False Promise of Biosecurity (Nov 2020), I sourced statements Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. made in his 23 July 2020 debate with Alan Dershowitz regarding regulatory capture of U.S. public health agencies:
FDA gets 50 percent of its budget from vaccine companies, from the industry. Fifty percent.[13] The CDC has an $11.5 billion budget and 4.9 billion of that is buying and selling and distributing vaccines.[14] CDC is a vaccine company. It owns 57 vaccine patents[15] so it can make money on every sale of a vaccine. NIH owns hundreds of vaccine patents.[16] NIH owns half the patent for the Moderna vaccine.[17] There’s five individuals in NIH and the rules at NIH is if you’re a scientist or an official who worked on a vaccine, you’re allowed to collect $150,000 a year in royalties on sales that that vaccine makes.[18] These regulatory agencies are actually vaccine companies.[19] The vaccine marketing sales part of those agencies is the tail that is now wagging the regulatory dog.
All empires eventually collapse of their own corrupting weight. The U.S. is the latest entrant, having made its recent so-called exit from the graveyard of empires, Afghanistan. Yet this fading global hegemon continues projecting its iron curtain of fear, endeavoring to hold the masses in a perpetual paralysis of crimestop with its singularly approved medical dogma. For this paralysis to be effectively maintained, censorship must be complemented by incessant, pervasive propaganda, blanketing all manner and form of communication media. As Professor of Media Studies Mark Crispin Miller has observed:
Propaganda wants no argument. It’s not like oratory in ancient Greece where one speaker would follow another, they would disagree publicly, and the people would listen and make up their own minds. That’s not how propaganda works. Propaganda wants to monopolize all the space around it. It wants to monopolize every mind within its reach. It wants no contradiction. Those who dissent, those who disagree are either censored or vilified or both and that’s one sign of the fact that we’re living in the shadow of a totalitarian roll out, the likes of which the world has never known because this is global.
|
“
|
In the present Orwellian era, where propaganda and deception are ubiquitous, one of the signposts of truth that I have learned to respect is that the most important truths are the most heavily censored.
—Josh Mitteldorf, Unthinkable Thoughts
|
In recent years, incarnations of Orwell’s Ministry of Truth have sprung up as self-proclaimed Arbiters of Reality pronouncing what is Safe and can be trusted and what is False and dangerous. Three groups stand out in this totalitarian business of managing perceptions:
Foot soldiers of global oligarchs and financial power centers provide keys to deciphering the influence behind these faux benevolent corporate agencies. NG’s Advisors include:
TNI partners include: BBC, Facebook, Alphabet/Google/YouTube, Twitter, Microsoft, AFP, Reuters, European Broadcasting Union (EBU), Financial Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Hindu, CBC/Radio-Canada, First Draft, Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.
CC’s 170+ “team of leading experts in health, education, and the economy” include Chris Christie, Arne Duncan, Robert Gates, General Stanley McChrystal, Tom Ridge, Reed Tuckson, Philip Zelikow.
Agents of these self-anointed Truth Police Ministries have significant professional, financial, and personal interests in the system of corporate governance serving authoritarian elements in society: wealthy plutocrats, oligarchs, families, and individuals. A thin slice of the above Truth Umpires highlight service to corporate/government intelligence and security interests:
Retired health sciences librarian Elizabeth Woodworth’s critical analysis, “COVID-19 and the Shadowy ‘Trusted News Initiative’, How it Methodically Censors Top World Public Health Experts Using an Early Warning System” illustrates the war-is-peace, black-is-white, slavery-is-freedom inverted reality humanity is being subjected to and oppressed by. Among many cogent observations Woodworth articulates, what disinformation actually means is especially relevant here:
Further, detailing the suppression of seven primary areas of censorship effected by TNI, Suppression #2: Denial of Early Treatments for Covid demonstrates Heinlein’s “This you may not read, this you must not see, this you are forbidden to know” warning:
As we have seen, the medical literature is full of peer-reviewed published studies showing both the prophylactic and early treatment efficacy of a range of safe, inexpensive, readily available drugs and substances. During the March-December 2020 period, these were claimed to be ineffective by government and the media in order to pave the way for FDA Emergency Use Authorizations for remdesivir (whose efficacy is now under question) and the mRNA vaccines. Scandalously, hundreds of thousands of people died while waiting for the vaccines to arrive in December 2020. Why did they die? Because their doctors were blocked from prescribing the repurposed drugs HCQ and IVM that have long been on the WHO list of essential medicines. The TNI, by censoring the truth that the public so desperately needed, has been a primary enabler of this catastrophic, vaccine-friendly policy. During July 2021, instead of acknowledging the early treatment evidence they had housed [for example, it was reported in 2005 that “Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread,” Martin J. Vincent et al, Virology Journal, vol. 2, no. 69, 2005; Virology Journal is well known to the NIH, and is available on its website] all along (thus being directly complicit in these deaths), the government-media complex doubled down on its intense campaign to vaccinate every one of us. Incredibly, on August 3, 2021, 16 months and 612,386 deaths too late, Anthony Fauci, in an excerpt supplied by TNI partner Reuters, “floats [a] pill to ‘knock out’ COVID early”, given once daily for seven to ten days.
The only way the experimental mRNA injections—in phase 3 clinical trials and thus not licensed for general market use by the FDA—can be legally used in the U.S. is via the Emergency Use Authorization. The legal framework for the EUA is that “FDA may allow the use of unapproved medical products ... when ... there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives.” While there are “adequate ... and available alternatives” they are not approved by the FDA. Thus the charade of the EUA for the experimental drugs can be maintained and the billions of dollars of profits continue flowing to AstraZeneca, Moderna, Pfizer-BioNTech, and J&J. Who benefits and whose interests are served by continuing the EUA causing needless untold deaths while denying people access to inexpensive, effective, non-patentable repurposed drugs?
|
“
|
This is far and away the most lethal, toxic biologic agent ever injected into a human body in American history and it’s going strong with no mention of safety by our officials, with wild enthusiasm by our hospitals and hospital administrators with doctors supporting it. |
By increments We the People are colluding in the implementation of tyranny through tacitly accepting increasing suppression of freedom of speech resulting in the subjugation of freedom of thought. Dictated by public policy and political directives and enforced by ersatz truth cutouts, the agendas being executed are qualifiable Crimes Against Humanity when evaluating the risks and consequences posed by the experimental injections.
In 1986 Congress granted pharmaceutical corporations complete blanket legal immunity from liability for injury caused by licensed vaccines right up to the present day with Covid-19 experimental injections including Moderna and Pfizer experimental gene therapies in phase 3 clinical trials for more than 12 months. The actual ongoing effects and repercussions of these injections will never be acknowledged by the truth cutouts:
That these official reporting systems of Covid vaccine injury and fatality data—estimated to account for only ONE PERCENT of harms caused—are being uniformly ignored, censored, and suppressed both by corporate media and corporate truth police, reveals one level of the totalitarian agenda of subjugation and domination being pursued by what Catherine Austin Fitts calls Mr. Global. More on this below.
Additional references
Ashmedai, Resisting the Intellectual Illiterati
... I am a computer programmer with subject matter expertise in the healthcare data analytics field, an honor that allows me access to Medicare and Medicaid data maintained by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). I earned a B.S. degree in Mathematics and have, over the last 25 years, developed over 100 distinct healthcare fraud detection algorithms, both in the public and private sector. It has been my mission to protect federal tax dollars by preventing and detecting healthcare fraud, a process which leads to both recovery of overpayments and law enforcement leads. A large part of what I do is focused on the quality of care for the beneficiary; for example, I identify providers who prescribe an egregious amount of opioids to patients with a history of overdosing. Instead of titrating the patient off of opioids, they prescribe more, oftentimes leading to patient death. When the COVID-19 vaccine clearly became associated with patient death and harm, I was naturally inclined to investigate the matter.
It is my professional estimate that VAERS (the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) database, while extremely useful, is under-reported by a conservative factor of at least 5. On July 9, 2021, there were 9,048 deaths reported in VAERS. I verified these numbers by collating all of the data from VAERS myself, not relying on a third party to report them. In tandem, I queried data from CMS medical claims with regard to vaccines and patient deaths, and have assessed that the deaths occurring within 3 days of vaccination are higher than those reported in VAERS by a factor of at least 5. This would indicate the true number of vaccine-related deaths was at least 45,000. Put in perspective, the swine flu vaccine was taken off the market which only resulted in 53 deaths.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on July 12, 2021.
Dr Robert Malone, the original architect of the mRNA vaccine platform, is very clear that these drugs “are NOT traditional vaccines” as articulated in interviews on 25 Jul 2021, Are the COVID-19 vaccines “gene therapy-based?” and 18 Aug 2021, “Injections & Injuctions” Part 1/2-Paradox. Other analyses of deaths caused by adverse effects of these experimental gene therapies range across still higher death counts including Steve Kirsch on 15 Dec 2021: Latest VAERS estimate: 388,000 Americans killed by the COVID vaccines where he explains how “An independent derivation of the VAERS URF [under-reporting factor] using the CMS death data leads to a URF of 44.64 which then leads to a 388K excess death estimate.”
In addition to government recording systems, the following sources bear witness to people suffering injuries as well as deaths from these experimental pharmaceutical injections:
Steve Kirsch is the founder of the COVID-19 Early Treatment Fund. He has made public the 100 questions and 161 slides prepared for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Related Biological Products Advisory Committee meeting held on 27 Oct 2021. The committee endorsed Pfizer’s COVID vaccine for 5- to 11-year-olds, over the objections of Kirsch and multiple scientists and physicians. Among the questions Kirsch asked was: How could committee members do a risk-benefit analysis with Pfizer’s COVID vaccine if they did not know the under-reporting factor (URF) of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)? “This is extremely, extremely important,” Kirsch told the committee. “You have been assuming it has been one. It is not one. Using a URF of 41, which is calculated using CDC [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] methodology, we find more than 300,000 excess deaths in VAERS. If the vaccine didn’t kill these people, what did?”
Dr Peter McCullough is following his conscience with supreme devotion. Speaking at the 78th annual meeting of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons on 2 October, Dr McCullough gave a presentation on Winning the War Against Therapeutic Nihilism and the Rush to Replace Trusted Treatments with Untested Novel Therapies. McCullough’s 172-page Curriculum Vitae begins on page 12 of his Declaration in support of Aaron Kheriaty, MD, Motion for Preliminary Injunction Legal Case in a suit filed in Federal court challenging the constitutionality of the University of California’s vaccine mandate on behalf of Covid-recovered individuals, whose natural immunity is equal to (indeed, superior to) vaccine-mediated immunity. Speaking at the AAPS meeting, Dr McCullough emphasized the experimental injections—especially for children—are “simply not safe under any conditions, period. Full stop” and the nature of how “We are in a free-fall of a lawless state”:
beginning at 07:44:
There’s 27 of these [vaccines] in development. But this idea that the vaccine was the only way that we were going to get out of this pandemic, it alarmed all of us. By May, this paper, 57 authors, 17 countries, Bruno and colleagues, I’m in the author block, basically said, Listen if we don’t have safety mechanisms in place for the vaccine programs, shut them down. Shut them down because it’s safety, safety safety. Our concerns were this was a dangerous mechanism of action. We had skipped all the critical testing to understand what this is going to do long-term to the human body. We had a concerning bio-distribution study from Japan showing hyper-concentration of the lipid nanoparticles in the ovaries. Moderna separately had shown a reduced fertility study to the EMA that was concerning, not to the threshold to kill the program.
There’s been no external advisory committees, no human ethics committee, Data Safety Monitoring Board. The FDA and the CDC are the sponsors of the program. They cannot be the adjudicators of death. They cannot. That violates every regulatory law that we know. And the CDC and FDA and the NIH work for us. They are public servants to us. They do not issue rulings to us. They don’t have authority to issue rulings to us. They should serve us. The doctor and the patient sit in the fiduciary relationship above those three entities. And we have the authority to make that claim. Very important. Authority is a very important word.
beginning at 18:16:
We know Myocarditis is another risk. The FDA agrees. The FDA and the CDC reviewed cases in June. They had 200 cases of younger individuals and they show that 90% were hospitalized. It looks serious. We now have raced up to 5,000 cases of myocarditis in the United States. We heard yesterday that Gavin Newsom is just mandated mandatory vaccinations for all children in California with absolutely no concern regarding this effect, which will occur in many, many children as they’re forced into the vaccine.What do we know? This paper from California, Tracy Høeg has just published this, looking at multiple safety sources—and this is a very high quality paper—that the myocarditis is certainly very real, it’s due to the vaccine. The chances of myocarditis and hospitalization with myocarditis for one of these children who is going to be forced into vaccination, the chances of hospitalization for a cardiac problem is greater than being hospitalized for COVID-19. So it’s much better for the children to not get vaccinated and take the risk of the respiratory infection. This analysis supports this. What did she find out? Eighty-six percent of these thousands of cases of myocarditis which opponent EKG changes, a reduced left ventricular function, chest pain, early development of heart failure, require hospitalization. We know now that boys with no underlying health conditions, the chances of one of these cardiac hospitalizations is greater than taking the risk with a natural infection alone.
Look at this tight temporal relationship with shot two that occurs on the upper panel. The myocarditis is explosive, and it’s far more in boys than girls, and what Hoeg has analyzed from the V-safe and other data systems, is that the rates of myocarditis are much higher than what the CDC even forecasted. So this has to be abundantly clear. The FDA says: Warning, this causes myocarditis. Don’t do it. The FDA has told us this. The CDC agrees with all the data. That doesn’t equal mandatory vaccination for children. It mandates just the opposite: an unbelievable, relentless, and unbreakable resistance to having the children vaccinated. It is simply not safe under any conditions, period. Full stop.
Without Protection from Pharmaceutical Laws, Vaccines Will Do More Harm. There’s no doubt about it. We are in a free-fall of a lawless state. A lawless state is developing. The Office of Human Research Protections in the US FDA right now, in enforcing research protections for subjects, everybody who takes a vaccine in the United States is in research. The fact that there is no absolutely no protections for research subjects, and we have no enforcement of pharmaceutical laws, is putting us into complete freefall. The vaccines are not safe for human use on either side of the Atlantic and the Evidence Based Consulting Group in the U.K. agrees—Dr. Tess Lawrie who leads that group—that’s the principle, contract consulting group for the World Health Organization—has concluded: “An immediate halt to the vaccination programme is required whilst a full and independent safety analysis is undertaken to investigate the full extent of harms.” [Report]
It’s clear across the world that this first generation of vaccines is not safe. I’m personally not against vaccines. I just had one last week for the flu. I’ve had every single vaccine I’m supposed to. I’ve gone to India, I’ve gotten extra vaccines. I’m not against vaccines. But these vaccines, multiple experts agree—it’s not just me—it’s not just you—multiple experts agree, they’re not safe. They are not safe enough in everyone for us to do this. There are citizen petitions from physician groups led by Linda Wastila and Peter Doshi at the British Medical Journal as well as the nursing group to the FDA to not approve these.
Compounding this unprecedented collective madness—to inject every human being on Mother Earth with a set of “one size fits all” unlicensed experimental drugs including Moderna and Pfizer experimental gene therapies for a virus with a 99% survival rate and absolutely no medium or long -term data about the resultant biological consequences—is the parallel agenda censoring knowledge and suppressing employment of a host of inexpensive, effective, non-patentable repurposed drugs with decades-long track records of efficacious therapeutic value. As Dr. Henry Ealy has observed, “Ivermectin, Vitamin D, Vitamin C, Vitamin A, Zinc, Quercetin, HCQ, Doxycycline...all have literally HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS of doses administered over DECADES and their COMBINED injury history is FAR less than 1% of what the experimental COVID inoculations have accrued in just 7 months.”
The censorship of the efficacy of life-saving drugs is wrong, criminal, ethically and morally bankrupt, and evil. If these repurposed drugs with decades-long track records of health benefits—including Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine, both of which are listed on the WHO’s Model List of Essential Medicines—had been used beginning last year, needless untold deaths would have been averted and state-declared emergencies enabling totalitarian rulings that have nullified civil, constitutional, and human rights would have ceased.
If Covid-19 is such a deadly disease, isn’t it strange that even after more than a year and a half, public health authorities have not announced any early treatment or prophylaxis protocols? NO ONE of leading United States Public Health Officials—including Anthony Fauci, Francis Collins, Deborah Birx, Robert Redfield, Stephen Hahn, Robert Kadlec, Janet Woodcock, Rochelle Walensky, Vivek Murthy, Xavier Becerra—have used their Bully Pulpits to constantly emphasize and encourage inexpensive, essential immune system support using, at a minimum, Vitamins D, C, and Zinc. Whose interests are being served in this situation?
Despite Big Tech’s parroting bought-and-paid-for official pronouncements courtesy of corporate -funded and -directed so-called experts, there is a wealth of information regarding repurposed drugs found to be highly efficacious in treating the SARS-CoV-2 virus by practicing physicians and focused researchers. Two treasure-troves illuminate the true healers following their consciences, physicians who will forever be revered for risking their careers to save lives: Dr Justus R Hope MD’s Ivermectin Represents Human Rights and Psychologist Diane Perlman’s Open Letter and Challenge for Rachel Maddow - Ivermectin: Truth or Consequences.
The flip side of this is the unconscionable injury and death being caused by A.] the suppression and censorship of the efficacy of repurposed drugs that would otherwise have saved countless lives, B.] the hyperinflation of death certificates—that have been substantiated in the U.S.—claiming exponentially higher deaths from Covid-19 than actually have occurred (see Appendix A: Counting Deaths from Covid), and C.] the horrifying numbers—given what the Lazarus Report states (on p.6), that “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported”—being recorded and logged in VAERS and EudraVigilance (see above).
A final point regarding people following their consciences and not adhering to official medical dogma. On 10 Oct 2021 investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson broadcast on Full Measure, her national TV news program: Amish Covid: 'No hospitalization, isolation or vaccines = herd immunity'. The 5+ minute program showed how the Amish people faced the coronavirus head on and did not give up their culture of working, going to church, getting together with family and not going to the hospital.
|
“
|
They who design the trials and control the data also control the outcome.
So this system in focus of industry-led trials needs to be put to an end.
Data from ongoing and future trials of novel covid treatments must be
independently controlled and analyzed. Anything less than total
transparency cannot be trusted.
With regard to the evidence pyramid there needs to be a new approach, an integrated evidence approach instead of a tiered hierarchical approach. Instead of a pyramid, in my opinion a circle would be more appropriate where the center represents the integrated body of evidence from different sources. Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials would then represent one of several types of evidence including observational studies, real-world data, qualitative data on people’s views and experiences and doctor’s expert opinion. This would inform clinical practice decision-making in a much more holistic way.... At this fateful juncture we must therefore choose: Will we continue to be held ransomed by corrupt organizations, health authorities, big pharma and billionaire sociopaths? Or will we do our moral and professional duty to do no harm and always do the best for those in our care?
—Dr Tess Lawrie,
25 Apr 2021, Conclusion, 1st Intl Ivm for Covid Conf
|
The Nazi Doctors Trial, U.S.A. vs Karl Brandt et al, was prosecuted in 1946-47 against 23 doctors and administrators accused of organizing and participating in war crimes and crimes against humanity in the form of medical experiments and medical procedures inflicted on prisoners and civilians. As a result of the verdict on 19 August 1947, the Nuremberg Code on medical experimentation was enacted. With numerous grave violations of this Code being caused by injection of the AstraZeneca, Moderna, Pfizer-BioNTech, and Janssen experimental biologics, it is of vital necessity to review the complete set of 10 principles here.
|
Source: Trials Of War Criminals Before The Nuernberg Military Tribunals Under Control Council Law No. 10,
Volume II - The Medical Case, Nuernberg, October 1946-APRIL 1949,
pp. 181-182
THE PROOF AS TO WAR CRIMES AND CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY
Judged by any standard of proof the record clearly shows the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity substantially as alleged in counts two and three of the indictment. Beginning with the outbreak of World War II criminal medical experiments on non-German nationals, both prisoners of war and civilians, including Jews and “asocial” persons, were carried out on a large scale in Germany and the occupied countries. These experiments were not the isolated and casual acts of individual doctors and scientists working solely on their own responsibility, but were the product of coordinated policy-making and planning at high governmental, military, and Nazi Party levels, conducted as an integral part of the total war effort. They were ordered, sanctioned, permitted, or approved by persons in positions of authority who under all principles of law were under the duty to know about these things and to take steps to terminate or prevent them.
PERMISSIBLE MEDICAL EXPERIMENTS
The great weight of the evidence before us is to the effect that certain types of medical experiments on human beings, when kept within reasonably well-defined bounds, conform to the ethics of the medical profession generally. The protagonists of the practice of human experimentation justify their views on the basis that such experiments yield results for the good of society that are unprocurable by other methods or means of study. All agree, however, that certain basic principles must be observed in order to satisfy moral, ethical and legal concepts:
1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.
This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment. The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs, or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity. 2. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature. 3. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment. 4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury. 5. No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects. 6. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment. 7. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability or death. 8. The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment. 9. During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible. 10. During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probably [sic] cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required of him that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject. |
Although the Nuremberg Code of 1947 is generally considered the first directive to set ethical regulations for human experimentation based on informed consent, ethical issues for western civilization in this sphere were first recognised in the nineteenth century. The following is derived from two sources: World Council For Health and Alliance for Natural Health International.
Primary keywords in the Nuremberg Code are voluntary consent, experiment and coercion. Since 1947, informed consent is a foundational principle of medical ethics and central to the concept of patient autonomy. Informed consent means that before you undergo a medical treatment or a procedure, you fully understand everything involved in that procedure including risks, benefits, alternative treatments, and potential side effects. In addition, informed consent means that your decision to accept a given medical treatment or procedure is completely voluntary.
Public health authorities around the world claim covid-19 vaccines are “safe”. According to Websters safe means, “not able or likely to be hurt or harmed in any way : not in danger”. “Safe” claims are are routinely made by the UK National Health Service, the CDC and the WHO. Given the recorded injuries and deaths in VAERS and EudraVigilance—which include only a fraction of the actual adverse effects—it is deceptive, deceitful, criminal, and evil to refer to these experimental drugs as “safe”. Further, given there are no risk-benefit outcomes and subsequent analysis for medium-term data in the one-to-two year range after injection, much less long-term data in the five-to-ten year span, humanity is being subjected to the largest laboratory test ever by the pharmaceutical cartel that is free-and-clear of any liability from injury or death. Who benefits? Whose interests are being served here?
Attorney Tom Renz is utterly devoted to fighting the good fight. In his 8 June 2021 testimony (begins at 2:10:16) before the Ohio House Health Committee on H.B. No. 248, Enact Vaccine Choice and Anti-Discrimination Act, Renz, describes (beginning at 2:11:38) the following, developed with a group of attorneys and doctors, being “what informed consent looks like for the Covid-19 shots”:
The COVID-19 vaccines are experimental and only authorized under an Emergency Use Authorization. This means that this particular vaccine has not been fully studied and we cannot be certain of all of the impacts it could have on you. Risks of the COVID vaccination include but are not limited to: death, failure to prevent the disease being vaccinated against, risk of anaphylaxis, irritation at the injection site, muscle soreness, tingling in the hand and/ or arm, bleeding from the injection site, other bleeding that may be life-threatening such as brain hemorrhage, internal bleeding, bleeding into the eye, gastrointestinal bleeding, neurologic complications including paralysis that may or may not completely resolve, focal paralysis such as Bell’s palsy, transverse myelitis, Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (Lou Gehrig’s disease), headaches, dizziness, narcolepsy (inability to remain awake), thrombocytopenia (lack of platelets that prevent bleeding), pancytopenia (lack of all blood elements such as red and white blood cells), infection, miscarriage, blood clots, etc. Additionally, problems may arise even years after vaccinations. These issues may include “immune enhancement” in which case the vaccination may cause increased risk of severe or fatal worsening of COVID or other similar diseases and influenza like illnesses. Also, the risk of infertility, birth defects, and cancer is unknown, and late onset of neurologic disorders, autoimmune disease. There have been reports of passage of the vaccine in breast milk that caused fatal bleeding in a nursing baby. The benefit of this vaccination is an overall absolute risk reduction of negative outcomes of approximately 1% and the potential to have lesser severity of symptoms if you do catch COVID-19 (which may still happen). Please sign here if you consent to this injection.
Signature:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ If you received the COVID-19 vaccination and were not made aware of this information it may have been a violation of the law and you should consult with a local attorney.
The AstraZeneca, Moderna, Pfizer-BioNTech, and Janssen are experimental pharmaceutical injections. They can not be licensed by the FDA as vaccines until their Phase 3 Clinical Trials are completed. These Phase 3 Clinical Trials run to the following endpoints: AstraZeneca trials estimated completion date is 14 Feb 2023, Moderna trials estimated completion date is 27 Oct 2022, Pfizer-BioNTech trials estimated completion date is 2 May 2023, and Janssen (Sisnoke Ad26.COV2.S) trials estimated completion date is 2 Jan 2023. None of the above experimental biologics have been subject to proper trials including the completion of Phase 3 Clinical Trials before being administered to significant numbers of human beings.
Today we are subjects and witnesses to a unique global human experiment, unprecedented in the history of humanity, being conducted in violation of numerous Principles of the Nuremberg Code.
In concert with humanity being subjected to a massive medical experiment is the terrifying level of coercion being exercised by governments and corporations forcing obedience to being injected with an experimental drug. This is genuine, rubber-meets-the road terrorism being carried out by global corporate state governance. People standing up and speaking out against this are exemplars of what freedom truly means. Dr Julie Ponesse was a professor of Ethics at Huron College at the University of Western Ontario. Less than 12 hours after publishing the following short statement, she was dismissed from her 20-year teaching position:
listen beginning at 0:18:
Today I’m going to teach you a short lesson on the universally accepted ethics of coercing people into medical procedures. I’ll be the example. My employer has just mandated that I must get a vaccine for Covid-19. If I want to keep working at my job as a professor I have to take this vaccine. Here’s my conundrum. My school employs me to be an authority on the subject of ethics. I hold a PhD in ethics and ancient philosophy. And I’m here to tell you it’s ethically wrong to coerce someone to take a vaccine. If it happens to you, you don’t have to do it. If you don’t want a Covid vaccine, don’t take one. End of discussion. It’s your own business.
But that is not the approach of the University of Western Ontario which has suddenly required that I be vaccinated immediately or not report for work. So with the school year beginning in a few days, I am facing imminent dismissal after 20 years on the job, because I will not submit to having an experimental vaccine injected into my body.
I’ve had plenty of vaccines in my life but I’ve never been forced to take one. It’s always been my choice. I don’t work in a high risk environment. I’m not a doctor in an emergency room. I’m a teacher and a university professor. My job is to teach students how to think critically. To ask questions that might expose a false argument. Questions like, Says who? Who is the authority giving this order? Should I trust them with control over my body?
As a professor I don’t have to watch the news to find out if the Covid vaccines are safe. I read medical journals and I consult my colleagues who are professors of science and medicine. I had learned from doctors that there are serious questions about how safe these vaccines really are. There are questions about how well they work. Nobody’s promising that I won’t get Covid or transmit Covid if I get the vaccine.
But ultimately none of that matters to me because I’m a professor of Ethics and a Canadian, I’m entitled to make choices about what does and does not enter my body, regardless of my reasons. If I’m allowed back into my University, it’s my job to teach my students that this is wrong. I’m hired to teach them that it is ethically wrong to impose an experimental medical procedure as a condition of employment.
This is my first, and potentially my last lesson of the year. Ethics 101: in the spirit of Socrates, who was executed for asking questions, this lesson will consist of only one question. The answer is multiple choice. Please listen carefully. When a person has done the same job to the satisfaction of her employer for twenty years, is it right or is it wrong to suddenly demand that they submit to an unnecessary medical procedure in order to keep their job? In this case the procedure is an injection of a substance that has not been fully tested for safety. It has not yet been shown to be effective. It is designed to prevent an illness that poses little threat to the employee. The employee is not allowed to ask questions. She may only submit to the procedure, or be fired. To my first year student: Is this right, or is this wrong?
People in many lines of work including nurses, fire-fighters, police, and teachers are being subjected to the same violations of the Nuremberg Code prohibiting coercion as Dr Ponesse has been. This has never occurred to this level of global catastrophe since the Nuremberg Code was instituted in 1947. The implications of this criminal imperative are profoundly dangerous for every human being.
There is absolute denial, obfuscation, and resistance in primary corporate and alternative media to acknowledge or make any comparison of Nazi medical experiments with what is now occurring. Public health officials continue to claim the experimental pharmaceutical injections including Moderna and Pfizer experimental gene therapies being aggressively pushed by governments around the world are necessary to stop the deadly SARS-CoV-2 virus and that there is no alternative to these experimental drugs.
The following extract of the Nuremberg prosecution’s expert witness, Dr. Andrew C. Ivy, from more than 74 years ago focuses on “the breaking of ethical and moral principles” and “the importance of the maintenance of the principles of medical ethics”. Dr Ivy’s responses in June 1947 mirror precisely what we are confronted with today, not just by one national government, but by a majority of governments throughout our world: “The reason that we must be very careful in the use of human beings as subjects in medical experiments is in order not to debase and jeopardize this method for doing great good by causing the public to react against it.”
|
Source: Trials Of War Criminals Before The Nuernberg Military Tribunals Under Control Council Law No. 10,
Volume II - The Medical Case, Nuernberg, October 1946-APRIL 1949,
page 42
EXTRACT FROM THE TESTIMONY OF PROSECUTION EXPERT WITNESS DR. ANDREW C. IVY
CROSS-EXAMINATION
Dr. Servatius: Witness, take the following case. You are in a city in which the plague is raging. You, as a doctor, have a drug that you could use to combat the plague. However, you must test it on somebody. The commander, or let us say the mayor of the city, comes to you and says, “Here is a criminal condemned to death. Save us by carrying out the experiment on this man.” Would you refuse to do so, or would you do it? Witness Dr. Ivy: I would refuse to do so, because I do not believe that duress of that sort warrants the breaking of ethical and moral principles. That is why the Hague Convention and Geneva Convention were formulated, to make war, a barbaric enterprise, a little more humane. Q. Do you believe that the population of a city would have any understanding for your action? A. They have understanding for the importance of the maintenance of the principles of medical ethics which apply over a long period of years, rather than a short period of years. Physicians and medical scientists should do nothing with the idea of temporarily doing good which, when carried out repeatedly over a period of time, would debase and jeopardize a method for doing good. If a medical scientist breaks the code of medical ethics and says, “Kill the person,” in order to do what he thinks may be good, in the course of time that will grow and will cause a loss of faith of the public in the medical profession, and hence destroy the capacity of the medical profession to do its good for society. The reason that we must be very careful in the use of human beings as subjects in medical experiments is in order not to debase and jeopardize this method for doing great good by causing the public to react against it. Q. Witness, do you not believe that your ideal attitude here is more or less that of a single person standing against the body of public opinion? A. No I do not. That is why I read out the principles of medical ethics yesterday, and that is why the American Medical Association has agreed essentially to those principles. That is why the principles, the ethical principles for the use of human beings in medical experiments, have been quite uniform throughout the world in the past. |
The power of corporate empire medical dogma that has influenced so many people’s conception of reality has also infected the minds of so many physicians in the medical establishment. A 2012 paper in International Journal of Law and Psychiatry on Why did so many German doctors join the Nazi Party? explores an aspect of this. From the Abstract:
Given the medical oath to “do no harm,” many postwar ethical analyses have strained to make sense of these seemingly paradoxical atrocities. Why did physicians act in such a manner? Yet few have tried to explain the self-selected Nazi enrollment of such an overwhelming proportion of the German Medical Society in the first place. This article lends insight into this paradox by exploring some major vulnerabilities, motives, and rationalizations that may have predisposed German physicians to Nazi membership—professional vulnerabilities among physicians in general (valuing conformity and obedience to authority, valuing the prevention of contamination and fighting against mortality, and possessing a basic interest in biomedical knowledge and research), economic factors and motives (related to physician economic insecurity and incentives for economic advancement), and Nazi ideological and historical rationalizations (beliefs about Social Darwinism, eugenics, and the social organism as sacred). Of particular significance for future research and education is the manner in which the persecution of Jewish physician colleagues was rationalized in the name of medical ethics itself. Giving proper consideration to the forces that fueled “Nazi Medicine” is of great importance, as it can highlight the conditions and motivations that make physicians susceptible to misapplications of medicine, and guide us toward prevention of future abuse.
The word conscience, which means our ability to judge our own actions according to right and wrong, is derived from the Latin word conscientia, meaning a knowing together with another or others. That word in turn derives from con (cum) = with + scire = to know. Thus conscience, which usually refers to one person’s conscience, also involves a sharing with others, a knowing with. The word science as we understand it today, also derives from scire, and in the 19th century before the modern understanding of science developed, the word science simply meant knowledge. Furthermore, the word consciousness also has the same root, suggesting the connection between conscience and consciousness and the social nature of the sense of right and wrong and shared human consciousness.
Sharing with others the grounded understanding of right and wrong is a beacon, illuminating the pathway out of the contrived fear pandemic holding humanity in thrall. In 1988 Guy Debord analysed the way in which individual sovereignty had been pre-empted by the religion of The Market:
In 1967, in a book entitled The Society of the Spectacle, I showed what the modern spectacle was already in essence: the autocratic reign of the market economy, which had acceded to an irresponsible sovereignty, and the totality of new techniques of government that accompanied this reign....
Spectacular domination’s first priority was to eradicate historical knowledge in general; beginning with just about all rational information and commentary on the most recent past.... With the destruction of history, contemporary events themselves retreat into a remote and fabulous realm of unverifiable stories, uncheckable statistics, unlikely explanations and untenable reasoning....
All experts serve the state and the media and only in that way do they achieve their status. Every expert follows his master, for all former possibilities for independence have been gradually reduced to nil by present society’s mode of organization. The most useful expert, of course, is the one who can lie. With their different motives, those who need experts are falsifiers and fools. Whenever individuals lose the capacity to see things for themselves, the expert is there to offer an absolute reassurance....
Money = power and power = money is the supreme religion of our age. The high priests of this church are extolled in such venues as Forbes World’s Billionaires List - The Richest in 2021: “The number of billionaires on Forbes’ 35th annual list of the world’s wealthiest exploded to an unprecedented 2,755—660 more than a year ago.” As a ratio, the current 2,755 moguls make up 0.0000003 percent—or one “priest” per 2,867,832 humans—of the 7.9+ billion souls now on Mother Earth. The influence this religious cult exerts managing and directing the perceptions of humanity serves one of the oldest time-proven strategies for power and control: divide and conquer. Consider: today’s largest global investment corporations are Blackrock [†][††] and Vanguard. As of October 2021, Vanguard has more that $7.50 trillion assets under management (AUM), second to Blackrock, Inc with $9.01 trillion AUM. These two firms combined own The New York Times, other legacy media, and Big Pharma.
I see the present day crisis as what my parent’s generation experienced from the 1930s up to the Battle of Stalingrad in 1942. Prior to that, it was not at all clear that (unknown at the time) Wall Street’s sock puppet in Germany would be defeated. Today, while billionaires continue making a killing during the fear pandemic, it is not at all clear that the push by oligarchs and plutocrats—including the World Economic Forum crowd, G7 Central Bankers, Klaus Schwab, Bill Gates, Rockefeller Foundation, Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg Group, Rothschilds & Pope Francis, WHO, etc., to implement the kind of “Great Reset” the Klaus Schwabs of the world intend—will be defeated AND a truly equalitarian framework will be implemented by and for our SINGLE, SUPREMELY GIFTED HUMAN FAMILY.
Our species is confronted with a psychological operation at the instigation of oligarch and plutocrat antagonists. The following depict elements of the Spiritual Global War being waged against humanity. To appreciate the level of global totalitarian lockstep occurring consider the following sign posts:
The essence of totalitarianism – regardless of which costumes and ideology it wears – is a desire to completely control society, every aspect of society, every individual behavior and thought. Every totalitarian system, whether an entire nation, a tiny cult, or any other form of social body, evolves toward this unachievable goal ... the total ideological transformation and control of every single element of society (or whatever type of social body it comprises). This fanatical pursuit of total control, absolute ideological uniformity, and the elimination of all dissent, is what makes totalitarianism totalitarianism....
The way I see it, the next six months will determine how successful the initial stages of the roll-out of this new totalitarianism will be. By April of 2022, either we’ll all be showing our “papers” to the New Normal Gestapo to be able to earn a living, attend a school, dine at a restaurant, travel, and otherwise live our lives, or we will have thrown a monkey wrench into the machinery. I do not expect GloboCap to abandon the roll-out of the New Normal over the longer term —they are clearly committed to implementing it —but we have the power to ruin their opening act (which they’ve been planning and rehearsing for quite some time). So, let’s go ahead and do that, shall we? Before we get purged, or unpersoned, or whatever. I’m not sure, as I haven’t seen a “fact-check” yet, but I believe there are some commercial airline pilots in the USA who are showing us the way.
|
“
|
However critical the situation and circumstances in which you find yourself, despair of nothing; it is on the occasions in which everything is to be feared that it is necessary to fear nothing; it is when one is surrounded by all the dangers that it is not necessary to dread any; it is when one is without resources that it is necessary to count on all of them; it is when one is surprised that it is necessary to surprise the enemy himself.
—Sun Tzu, The Art of War
|
Despite the increasingly dangerous course pursued by the majority of governments throughout the world—at the behest of their corporate / foundation “men behind the curtain” managers—which are debasing and jeopardizing human medical experiments for doing great good, many physicians—including Doctors for Covid Ethics and World Doctors Alliance—are following their consciences, risking their careers, medical licenses, and more by standing up and speaking out against the advancing medical tyranny humanity has been increasingly subjected to and injured by since Spring 2020.
As of 1 December, described by the Global COVID Summit, the Physicians Declaration contains more than 15,000 signatures. These professional physicians and scientists, many of whom are on the front lines of treating Covid patients, accuse Covid-19 policy-makers of crimes against humanity for preventing the use of life saving treatments on their patients. The following is cited in multiple sources as being from Dr Robert Malone, original architect of the mRNA vaccine platform, who read the Rome Declaration at the Global Covid Summit, however this text is not in the Declaration:
Thousands have died from Covid as a result of being denied life-saving early treatment. The Declaration is a battle cry from physicians who are daily fighting for the right to treat their patients, and the right of patients to receive those treatments – without fear of interference, retribution or censorship by government, pharmacies, pharmaceutical corporations, and big tech. We demand that these groups step aside and honor the sanctity and integrity of the patient-physician relationship, the fundamental maxim “First Do No Harm”, and the freedom of patients and physicians to make informed medical decisions. Lives depend on it.
As stated in the Nuremberg Charter, Crimes Against Humanity are defined to be: “murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population, before or during the war or persecution on political, racial, or religious grounds ... Leaders, organizers, instigators and accomplices, participating in the formulation or execution of a common plan or conspiracy to commit any of the foregoing crimes, are responsible for all acts performed by any persons in execution of such plan.”
Today, it is the diktats of unelected, unaccountable public health officials, their paraded experts, politicians following in lockstep and fronting for the oligarch class, all of whom are responsible and liable for the increasing injuries and deaths from the experimental pharmaceutical injections. Also culpable in these crimes against humanity are the CEOs, CFOs and scientists of Moderna, AstraZeneca, Pfizer, BioNTech, and Johnson & Johnson pharmaceutical corporations as well as all physicians, nurses, and other people who have operated without any accountability by not providing informed consent forms for each and every person who has been injected with these experimental biologics.
In the legal realm redress and relief is being pursued on many fronts. While by no means inclusive, Lawsuits Challenging Covid-19 False Claims chronicles some of the more sweeping forensic analyses, legal actions being pursued in judicial proceedings and legal rulings and decisions. Although most of these pursuits are being ignored, omitted, and censored by big tech and media, the legal professionals so engaged are likewise following their consciences to annul the expanding medical tyranny extinguishing people’s inalienable rights. The following are instances of legal analyses and redress being pursued given what has is described and detailed in the above.
Beginning 14 July 2020, the Committee has conducted live multi-hour sessions with worldwide experts and witnesses on a variety of questions about the virus, crisis management, and repercussions. Committed to independent, transparent and evidence-based analysis, there have been 78 Sessions totalling more than 380 hours as of 18 Oct. A detailed chronological Index is included in the CC section of the Lawsuits compilation.
Dr Fuellmich presented Summary Findings of the Corona Investigative Committee in September 2021 describing in detail the results of the group’s fact finding inquiry over the past 15 months as listed in the statement’s outline:
In an August 2020 interview for the in-production film, Planet Lockdown, former Assistant Secretary of Housing and Federal Housing Commissioner at the US Dept of Housing and Urban Development in the first Bush Administration, Catherine Austin Fitts (president of Solari, Inc., publisher of the Solari Report, and managing member of Solari Investment Advisory Services, LLC) described Mr Global’s Bid for Economic Totalitarianism and Transhumanism. Essential understanding of the bid for economic totalitarianism is the Solari Report, 2020 Wrap Up on the Going Direct Reset with John Titus.
Recently through a whistleblower, two U.S. government documents were obtained and analysed by Renz covering Fact Checking DHHS and DOD COVID Files. In the former he details how the U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Service (CMS) database is the largest available system to study Covid-19 trends as it contains approximately 59.4 million Medicare beneficiaries and how “Nearly 50k Medicare patients died soon after getting COVID shot”. In the latter, DOD stamped documents show how Antibody-Dependent Enhancement is increasing in the fully vaccinated:
An AI-powered Dept. of Defense program named “Project Salus,” run in cooperation with the JAIC (Joint Artificial Intelligence Center), has analyzed data on 5.6 million Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 or older. Data were aggregated from Humetrix, a real-time data and analytics platform that tracks health care outcomes.... The findings show the vast majority of covid hospitalizations are occurring among fully-vaccinated individuals and that outcomes among the fully vaccinated are growing worse with each passing week. This appears to fit the pattern of so-called Antibody Dependent Enhancement, where the treatment intervention (mRNA vaccines) is worsening health outcomes and leading to excess hospitalizations and deaths. These data, presented here, shatter the official Biden / Fauci narrative that falsely claims America is experiencing, “a pandemic of the unvaccinated.” The data show that the pandemic actually appears to be accelerated by covid-19 vaccines, while unvaccinated individuals are having far better outcomes than the vaccinated. Furthermore, according to these data (shown below), the single best strategy for avoid post-vaccine infections and hospitalizations is natural immunity derived from a previous covid infection.
What I’m trying to get across here—here’s an intelligent human being criminal law lawyer, very very experienced, very sharp, very street smart, in complete fear. And not wanting to investigate. Because those people are intelligent and they’re telling the truth. So that consciousness is predominant. It’s in a lot of places where people do not wish to make the investigation. This is where the danger lies. The danger lies in those who don’t want to pay attention to what’s happening around them, see what’s happening around them, and do something about it. They’re quite content to listen to officialdom lie to them and then follow their instructions. That’s what the problem is, 100 percent....
The consciousness of humanity is really what’s at play here. And how we’re able to influence or raise the consciousness of humanity is really the task....
By increments we’re implementing tyranny. So why is there a spiritual component to this then? What is the meaning, what is the essence of the spiritual component? The essence of the spiritual component is number one, all of us are divine beings having a physical experience. That’s the first thing. People don’t know. People don’t understand that aspect of things because of dogma. That dogma has been put on people to take away the idea of their own divinity and put it in the hands of someone else, between you and spirit. And therefore, that tyranny started with that idea of laying dogma on people and pulling them away from their own relationship to spirit.
What we have to come to grips with as human beings as individuals, is our own connection to spirit. Because everything that you see everywhere happens because of spirit. It’s the breath of the Divine that allows everything to grow and breathe and be. And so within that, that’s a very powerful force, much more powerful than the tyrannical force of this insane consciousness that is imposed on humanity. It represents the dark force. And what we represent in the end is the light force. So therefore, we have an added reservoir in addition to law. And what that added reservoir is, is our relationship to spirit that we can connect with every single day. And therefore, give yourself the ability to have magic, magic come into your life and you’ll be amazed at how things will change just by virtue of making that connection.
My takeaway—springing from something that Robert said about freedom of speech—as a Constitutional Lawyer, when I am asked “What do you do?” I simply in a word say to them “I protect human attributes and humanity.” The framers of the U.S. Constitution had it right when they talked about inalienable rights, meaning the rights that were given to you by your Creator, even if you believe your creator is just your mother. And so, they’re suppressing our freedom to think. If you can think, but can’t speak, your freedom of thought is useless. If you can speak but can’t associate, your freedom of speech is useless. If you can associate but can’t assemble, your freedom of association is useless. So they are one unbroken—although we break them down for analytical purposes—these Constitutional Rights that are attached to the person, are human attributes and this whole Covid agenda has done in lockstep everything it can do, or try to do, to dehumanize us. And Robert was quite right, with the implementation of devices into our—experimental implementation of devices that’s already out there through the World Economic Forum, it is a movement with AI towards a Borg-like transformation of humanity and that is dehumanizing, and we have to resist it.
On 16 Aug 2021 Mr. Galati and Action4Canada founder Tanya Gaw filed a 391-page comprehensive Statement of Claim challenging the various Covid measures in the province of British Columbia. As Mr Galati states in the 26 Aug Press Conference beginning at 0:58:
The Statement of Claim has 20 Plaintiffs, Action4Canada and 19 other private Plaintiffs seeking constitutional relief and monetary damages for the damages caused to them because of the oppressive, unlawful, criminal, and unconstitutional measures implemented in that province through the government and the Chief Medical Officer, Dr Bonnie Henry. The Statement of Claim canvases the history of Covid, the scientific and medical evidence, the law, and the constitutional rights that are violently and depravedly being violated against every citizen of that province and in fact every citizen in Canada. The measures are not only oppressive and devastating, they are unscientific, non-medical, illegal, criminal, and unconstitutional. They have had the effect, intentional or unintentional, of setting up a police state dictatorial regime with a singular aim, and obsession, with vaccination regardless of whether that vaccination program is illogical which it is. Furthermore the measures are clearly—it’s not even in dispute anymore by any person who’s not in a comma—that the measures are killing more people than the purported Covid deaths are. This is not a public health agenda we are witnessing in our country, or around the world for that matter. It is a political-socio-economic control agenda and all the facts to support this proposition are set out in the Statement of Claim. We are going to take the B.C. and Trudeau governments to task through this claim. Although the Prime Minister talks a lot of nonsense, the jurisdiction over the Covid measures is very limited and it’s limited to quarantine. While he used the threat of federal vaccine passports as political vote getter, the federal government has no jurisdiction whatsoever under the constitution to enforce any medical treatment. That’s the provincial jurisdiction and he knows it. Because if he did, he could have put in the law before the election and it would have been challenged.
These lawsuit filings must be thoroughly researched and referenced with unassailable facts that will stand up to the scrutiny and refutation by government lawyers seeking to discredit and de-legitimize these challenges and to have these cases rejected by judges and thrown out of court. In this way, the following is a compelling and profoundly important history of what has occurred since before Lockdown World was declared. And that the facts herein are what people have been oppressed by and continue to experience outside British Columbia and outside Canada are indicative that this lockstep program is a global agenda being instituted everywhere with the same authoritarian iron fist interlock stripping away the falsehood that this has anything to do with health.
(00:03:20): Four things need to exist or need to be in place if you want a large scale mass phenomenon to emerge. The first thing is that there needs to be a lot of socially isolated people, people who experience a lack of social bonds. The second one is that there needs to be a lot of people who experience a lack of sense-making in life. And the third and the fourth conditions are that there needs to be a lot of free-floating anxiety and a lot of free-floating psychological discontent....
(00:07:46):All people who have been describing, who have been studying, mass formation, such as Gustave Le Bon, for instance [William] McDougall, [Elias] Canetti have remarked that mass formation is not similar to hypnosis; that mass formation is exactly equal to hypnosis....
(00:09:57): Mass formation is actually a symptomatic solution for a real psychological problem. In my opinion, this crisis in the first place is a large societal and psychological crisis much more than a biological crisis, let’s say. From this state of mental intoxication you can explain all the rest of the phenomenon of totalitarianism. The mental intoxication leads to a narrowing of the field of attention. It makes people only see what is indicated by the narrative....
(00:34:09): That’s something that Gustave Le Bon says, for instance: that it’s very difficult if mass formation happens at a very large scale in a society, it’s very difficult to wake up the masses. He says that usually you cannot do that. It’s impossible to do. Because the masses only wake up after a lot of destruction usually. But he says that if people who do not agree with the mass narrative, if they continue to talk, they prevent the masses to commence their largest crimes. That’s very important. You can make the hypnosis less deep by continuing to talk. And that’s what we all have to do. The people who have different opinions, the people who know about the different narrative, they have to continue to speak in the public space. That’s extremely, extremely important. I’m convinced that in this way, we will succeed in keeping open a certain part besides the mainstream....
(0:55:35) Even if we would succeed in waking up the masses now, they would fall prey to a different story in a few years. And they would be hypnotized again, IF, IF we do not succeed in solving the real problem of this crisis. Namely the question: Why did we as a society get in this state in which a large part of the population feels anxious, depressed, experiences a lack of sense, feels socially isolated? That is the real problem. And if we do not succeed in finding out where this problem comes from then the masses will always be susceptible to leaders who try to lure them into a mass formation. So I think the real question in this crisis is: What is there in our view of man and of the world in the way in which we look at life that makes us experience lack of sense-making? In my opinion we must conclude that it is something in our materialistic mechanistic view of man in the world that leads up to a radical destruction of the real social structures and social bonds and of the feeling that life makes sense.
What I think is important to understand is that he’s a technocrat. No matter how expert, no matter how important and pervasive and thorough his expertise, you still need democracy to control the apparatchiks and the technocrats. What irritates me a lot is when I see Joe Biden and other people who are leading the Democratic party constantly say “We need to trust the experts” because as you know I’ve fought hundreds of law suits in my time and in every law suit and every trial that I’ve ever had there are experts on both sides and they’re both equally convincing. And that’s why when we go to a doctor we get a second opinion. Doctors and experts should not be running our democracy. We don’t allow that. We don’t say we are going to appoint an expert and then we are going to just trust everything he says. That is not democratic. That’s how totalitarian regimes work....
Part of democracy is, when my uncle had the Cuban missile crisis, the experts were in the room—virtually everybody wanted—of the 13 people that he had assembled as his experts—virtually every one of them with the exception of my father and Bob McNamara wanted to drop nuclear bombs on Cuba. If that had happened—we now know that the missiles in Cuba that the Russian had there were already armed and that the individuals who were running those sites had independent authority to launch if they found themselves under attack.
We would have obliterated the world. We would have had nuclear winter. We would have destroyed the planet. My uncle said I want to see the aerial photographs myself. And he questioned the experts. And he made them explain things to him and he got both sides of the story and he brought in the best people to criticize them. And he made that investigation separately. He didn’t just trust the experts and say the military and CIA are telling me they know this area and they are telling me to bomb. You don’t do that. The job of a politician is to take advice from experts, to respect them and respect expertise. But you don’t let them run the country.
You question them and you try and figure out—listen, Tony Fauci, even if he is the best expert in the world, okay, on epidemiology or on pathogenic proliferation, let’s say he knows more than anybody and he can predict exactly how many people are going to die depending on masks and lockdowns—he has no expertise in the economy. How many people are going to die when you shut down the economy? When you close 60 million businesses? When you obliterate the social safety net? When you starve—there are 10 thousand children dying a month in Africa because of a lockdown.
|
“
|
The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present—and is gravely to be regarded. Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.
—President Eisenhower, 17 Jan 1961, Farewell Address
|
Educated in the classics, philosophy, literature, theology, and sociology, Edward Curtin is a profoundly gifted writer and former sociology teacher. I met Ed in mid-December 2012 at a weekend workshop chaired by Jim Douglass and Paul Schrade on JFK, the Unspeakable & 2013. Occasionally I suggest an image or some links to Ed in his writings. Searching for a visual complement to his 19 June What I Know and Don’t Know about SARS-CoV-2 Virus, I stumbled onto Elze van Hamelen tweeting the inspired PCR house of cards. After Ed included the drawing in his article, I put it as the centerpiece at the top of Lawsuits Challenging Covid-19 False Claims:
With inspired understanding the conscience of this artist holistically captures the global situation of the fear pandemic influencing so many hearts and minds. Along with Elze van Hamelen who is following her conscience to assist “individuals and organisations in charting a course towards a free and democratic society”, many, many, many other human beings on Mother Earth—including, and by no means limited to, the physicians, medical scientists, economists, psychologists, journalists, attorneys, epidemiologists, statisticians, virologists, writers, small business owners, researchers, artists, and just plain people referenced in Pandemic Parallax View—likewise possess the antidote to the addictive fear drug being pushed by a very, very, very small number of the 7.9+ BILLION-HUMAN-SOULS-currently-on-Mother-Earth. These psychopaths and sociopaths are intent on remaking this world according to their own craven and delusional desires.
Former President of the Czech Republic Václav Klaus spoke in May on the subject of The Progressively Growing Self-Destruction of the West and Its Acceleration by the Covid Epidemic:
In the moment of the fall of Communism we were convinced that this evil, corrupted and oppressive system was over, and we believed it could never come back. We wanted to make full use of our historic chance and go ahead and re-establish freedom, traditional values and institutions, free markets, sovereignty of nations, free and independent universities, academies, etc... Our thinking was based on three constants, on three fundamental building blocks of free society, on three entities which we considered crucial for the European (and Central European) civilization – the man, the family, and the nation.... These three pillars have been brutally attacked during the last decades by the new progressivist ideology, which succeeded in controlling and dominating our today’s world....
It is our task to stop it. We have to interrupt moving into the brave new world so eloquently described by Aldous Huxley 90 years ago. We shouldn’t capitulate to the powerful, loud and unscrupulous opponents of free society and to the various aggressive pressure groups (financed by well-known “unselfish” and “altruistic” sponsors and patrons).... The contemporary degree of manipulation and indoctrination, however, reminds those of us who were grown-up, who were alert and who lived with open eyes in the era of late communism that it is our task to explain it to the current generations....
We are the witnesses of a continuation and acceleration of pre-existing tendencies. In January 2020, a year and half ago, I spoke at a conference in Vienna [Digitalization needs politics (or vice versa: do politics and society need digitalization?)] about the growing social isolation of individuals and about the expanding processes of exclusion and of the impoverishment of personal relationships. It was before covid. These processes have been strengthened by the digitalization of our societies and by its impact on democracy. China’s digital social credit system represents an extreme version of a digital society. We see its coming, however, not only in China. Digitalization unnecessarily and dangerously centralizes a vast amount of data in unknown, uncontrolled and uncontrollable hands. It also helps to create “a secondary reality, which is steadily displacing the primary reality” of our lives. This seems to be unstoppable and irreversible. We should look at it sharply. It is a threat, not a positive symptom of modern era as it is often wrongly interpreted....
I agree with Ed Feulner, the founder and long-time president of The Heritage Foundation, that we are deeply in another Cold War but this time – according to him – the struggle is internal. I am afraid this kind of struggle is more damaging because it leads to a struggle among ourselves. Some of our fellow-citizens seem to be ready to give up personal freedoms and liberties and to accept forms of governance resembling that of communism. They are getting prepared for the Great Reset which would lead to the reincarnation of communism under a new banner.
To summarize, our present discussions do not represent a clash of views about coronavirus, but a clash of views about human freedom and the substance of our societies. We, the Czechs and the Poles, received our own vaccination of communist propaganda and should have developed an immunity to the similar virus. I wish it were the case because it is necessary to fight back, to be prepared to resist the destabilization of basic values of our societies.
Regarding the meaning of what is now occurring, in the segment quoted at the beginning, David Bohm described how the three definitions of the word are different aspects of the same thing:
‘Significance’ has the word ‘sign’ in it, indicating that it sort of points to something: ‘What is the significance of what we are talking about? What is the significance of what we are doing?’ That is one idea of meaning.
Value is something which is part of it. If something is very significant, you may sense it as having a high value. The word ‘value’ has a root which is interesting—the same root as ‘valor’ and ‘valiant’. It means ‘strong’. You might suppose that in early times, when people sensed something of high value they didn’t have a word for it, although it moved them strongly. Later they found a word for it and said it has high value. And then later the word itself may convey that.
If something is significant it may have a high value. And if it has a high value, you may have or you may develop a strong purpose or intention to get it, or sustain it, or something. Things that do not have high value will not generate any very strong purpose. You would say, “It’s not interesting. It doesn’t mean much to me.” “It means a lot to me” means it has high value. And “I mean to do it” is the same as to say, “It’s my purpose.” You can see that the word ‘meaning’ has those three meanings. And I don’t think it is an accident; I think they are very deeply related.
Humanity is being tested. Unlike the ersatz “test” for a virus that has a mortality rate commensurate with seasonal flu, all of us here on Mother Earth in this epoch are taking a mandatory final exam. It is for each of us to understand the meaning of what we are participating in and partaking of. Preparation for this exam includes the level of sensitivity we have consciously nurtured within to assist in navigating around the shoals of incoherent meaninglessness we are daily bombarded with from the fearsome power Jerry Mander detailed regarding “the one speaking to the many”. In a 1989 seminar on dialogue and the nature of thought, Bohm pinpointed the relationship between incoherent behavior and sensitivity:
I think our whole society tries to stabilize itself by starting out to destroy sensitivity to incoherence starting with very young children. If people could see the vast incoherence that is going on in society they would be disturbed and they would feel the need to do something. If you’re not sensitive to it you don’t feel disturbed and you don’t feel you need to do anything.
I remember an instance, a daughter was telling her mother, “this school is terrible, the teacher is terrible, very inconsistent, doing all sorts of crazy things,” and so on. Finally the mother was saying, “You’d better stop this—in this house the teacher is always right.” Now she understood that the teacher was wrong obviously, but the message was, it was no use. Even the message may have been right in some sense, but still it illustrates that the predicament is that in order to avoid this sort of trouble, starting with very young children, we are trained to become insensitive to incoherence. If there is incoherence in our own behavior, we thereby also become insensitive to it.
On 1 October, marking the 75th year of the 1946-1947 Nuremberg Trials, Dr. Daniel Nagase spoke in Vancouver, Canada about his experience giving Covid patients Ivermectin in a small hospital in Rimbey, Alberta. He described working with three patients on oxygen and extremely short of breath. While waiting for a pharmacist who was following his conscience to get ivermectin, Dr Nagase started everyone on “the next best thing, Hydroxychloroquine which the hospital did have.” He also gave them Vitamin C, D, and Zinc, inhalers, and azithromycin. Later in the day the ivermectin arrived and Dr Nagase gave it to each of his “3 patients with their exact dose of according to their weight.”
Within hours of receiving the ivermectin, Dr Nagase got a call from the Central Zone medical director, Dr Jennifer Bestard who told him it was a violation of Alberta Health Services Policy to give Ivermectin for COVID. Although Dr Nagase responded, “I told her she’s never met the patients, she’s not their doctor, and had no right to be changing the care of my patients without the patient’s permission,” he was relieved of his duties the next day with 15 minutes notice. He went on to say:
I found out later that no sooner had I left Rimbey hospital, the next doctor who came to replace me stopped the antibiotics, stopped all the vitamins, she even stopped the patients inhalers.... No doctor would take away antibiotics and inhalers for ANY viral pneumonia, never mind COVID. No doctor would do that to ANY patient with a pneumonia. Unless they were... Well, I’ll let you think about that. We are remembering Nuremberg after all. And for healthcare professionals, I want us all to think very deeply about that.... Just a week after I filed a complaint that Dr. Gerald Lazarenko was withholding a life saving medication from an entire province, the Alberta college of physicians and Surgeons forbade doctors and pharmacists from giving patients ivermectin.
We must remember. We are here to remember. Not just the people who died from medical experimentation. We are here to remember the people today. We are here to remember every single doctor, lawyer, and medical ethicist that sits on the board of the BC college who is investigating Dr. Charles Hoffe for speaking the truth. We are here to remember every doctor who stopped patients from having a live saving medication. And what for? To boost mortality? To create an ICU “crisis”? To create a state of emergency? All to push a vaccine? We must remember, the people of the past. And the people of today. History repeats itself. Nuremberg will happen again. We must remember.
Dr Nagase is another soul listening to and following his conscience to act and speak out on what is true and life-serving and of what is good and what is evil. The horrors of World War II are being magnified globally now. Following their consciences, Holocaust survivors and their descendants delivered a letter, We For Humanity, to the European Medicines Agency (EMA) on 25 August 2021. Signed by Concentration Camp survivors, their sons, and daughters, and grandchildren, including persons of goodwill and conscience, it began with:
We, the survivors of the atrocities committed against humanity during the Second World War, feel bound to follow our conscience and write this letter.
It is obvious to us that another holocaust of greater magnitude is taking place before our eyes. The majority of the world’s populace do not yet realize what is happening, for magnitude of an organized crime such as this is beyond their scope of experience. We, however, know. We remember the name Josef Mengele. Some of us have personal memories. We experience a déjà vu that is so horrifying that we rise to shield our poor fellow humans. The threatened innocents now include children, and even infants.
In just four months, the COVID-19 vaccines have killed more people than all available vaccines combined from mid-1997 until the end of 2013 – a period of 15.5 years. And people affected worst are between 18 and 64 years old – the group which was not in the Covid statistics.
We call upon you to stop this ungodly medical experiment on humankind immediately.
What you call “vaccination” against SARS-CoV-2 is in truth a blasphemic encroachment into nature. Never before has immunization of the entire planet been accomplished by delivering a synthetic mRNA into the human body. It is a medical experiment to which the Nuremberg Code must be applied. The 10 ethical principles in this document represents a foundational code of medical ethics that was formulated during the Nuremberg Doctors Trial to ensure that human beings will never again be subjected to involuntary medical experimentation & procedures.
The letter goes on to cite Principles 1, 6, and 10 of the Nuremberg Code. The terrible horrors of unconscionable human suffering and death carried out by other human beings resulted in the Nuremberg Military Tribunals and from this, the Nuremberg Code was created as a bulwark against such madness ever occurring again.
Active public resistance to the global totalitarian edicts being imposed is being expressed and must increase if our species is to survive and mature. On the 20th anniversary of the 11 September 2001 Crimes Against Humanity, Professor Francis Boyle who drafted the U.S. domestic implementing legislation for the Biological Weapons Convention known as the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989 (passed by both Houses of Congress) gave a presentation on How to Indict Individuals and Organizations for Covid-19 Pandemic. In it, he lays out strategies for filing indictments though local—not federal—states attorneys, district attorneys, attorney generals, and county prosecutors. Hundreds of thousands of people are taking to the streets all over the world, including in London, Berlin, Paris, Australia, and Brazil. The approaching winter season in the Northern Hemisphere will no doubt increase the demands for ever greater lockdowns, injections, and mandates, all for the “health and benefit of humanity”.
|
“
|
We’re digitizing everything, but it includes the human body as well and the human mind. So this system comes with complete control, not only of your ability to transact financially, which is hooked up to your body, but very sophisticated mind control technology through the media and those cloud connections. Basically you’re talking about hooking up into the Borg, if you will. And so transhumanism and technocracy go hand in hand.
Now I would describe this as a slavery system. So we’re talking about shifting out of freedom, where we have freedom to roam and freedom to say what we want into a complete control system, 24/7, including mind control. Now, the challenge before us is if the committee that runs the world—my nickname being Mr. Global—if Mr. Global wants to go to a slavery system and we want to remain a human civilization, then we have a fundamental disagreement. And that is the disagreement before us.
—Catherine Austin Fitts, mid-August 2020
|
We find ourselves living in a time described by the meaning of the word from the Hopi language, ko.yaa.nis.qatsi: noun 1. crazy life. 2. life in turmoil. 3. life out of balance. 4. life disintegrating. 5. a state of life that calls for another way of living.
Thousands of years old, Divide and Conquer has kept our species—our unitary single human family we all belong to—separated and fragmented within false divisions: male against female, young against old, "black"-"red"-"yellow"-"white" against "white"/"yellow"/"red"/"black", "left" against "right", "democrat" against "republican", "conservative" against "liberal", one faith against another, "vaxed" against "unvaxed" ... How many separations can you name and identify? What about rich against poor? Is that the same divide? Think feudalism, the Doctrine of Discovery, colonialism, slavery, imperialism.
The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights begins with “Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world ...”. One definition of the term inalienable rights is rights that are not transferable or capable of being taken away or nullified. Inalienable rights are our divine birthright bestowed upon each of us by our Creator. Michael Swinwood reminds all of us are divine beings having a physical experience, how dogma has been put on everyone to take away the idea of our own divinity and put it in the hands of someone else, and that tyranny started with that idea of laying dogma on people and pulling everyone away from their own relationship to spirit:
What we have to come to grips with as human beings as individuals, is our own connection to spirit. Because everything that you see everywhere happens because of spirit. It’s the breath of the Divine that allows everything to grow and breathe and be. And so within that, that’s a very powerful force, much more powerful than the tyrannical force of this insane consciousness that is imposed on humanity. It represents the dark force. And what we represent in the end is the light force.
All of us who can dispel the hypnotic effects of corporate empire coercive dogma have a duty to our conscience, to our fellow humans, and to all who follow us here to resist and collapse the imposition of tyranny causing harms exponentially greater than the Second World War. Non-violent resistance following in footsteps of such souls as Mohandas Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Philip and Daniel Berrigan, David Dellinger, Cesar Chavez, Sister Megan Rice, John Schuchardt, James Douglass is the most creative, constructive way to resist, oppose, and stop the increasing brutality of unfolding coercive totalitarianism and police state intimidation and violence. In the final analysis we answer to our Creator for what we express in these lives we’ve been given, here in this place at this time. It is always our decision how we perceive our world and what we choose to act upon, stand up for and stand with.
The Nuremberg Code is a map, created in response to incomprehensible suffering caused in a struggle where many people fought back for the sake of free will and freedom to choose one’s course without coercion. Evermore relevant and vital today, it is a light—remembering and honoring the sacrifices made—to shine the way for our species’ creative evolutionary adaptation into our post-industrial-mind conscience and experience of lived meaning. All our descendants yet to be born and explore their own lives look to and depend upon us here, now to champion their inalienable right to self-determination and the freedom to choose. We have a profound response ability to protect and defend their future lives in the choices we make and actions we take now.
|
|||
Dr John Gofman received the Right Livelihood Award in 1992 ‘for his pioneering work in exposing the health effects of low-level radiation’. In Bio-Medical “Un-Knowledge” And Nuclear Pollution: A Common-Sense Proposal, written on the occasion of this honor, Gofman summarizes Some Basic Rules of Believable Bio-Medical Research. While Gofman’s focus was on the Chernobyl catastrophe, the lead-in of Basic Rules is as relevant now as then concerning accurate and verifiable data on deaths from Covid:
A Trustworthy Database: A Sacred Obligation of Humanity ... If the database itself is false—either from careless work or from intentional bias—it poisons every conclusion which emerges from it. A false database causes innocent analysts of such data to fill the medical journals and textbooks with un-knowledge. It renders all its users into agents of possibly deadly mis-information.
Prior to 2009, the World Health Organization definition of an influenza pandemic was: “An influenza pandemic occurs when a new influenza virus appears against which the human population has no immunity, resulting in epidemics worldwide with enormous numbers of deaths and illness.” Leading up to the swine flu pandemic in 2009, the WHO removed the severity and high mortality factors (full text) changing the definition of a pandemic to be “a worldwide epidemic of a disease.” This is analysed in attorney Reiner Fuellmich’s Crimes Against Humanity October 2020 statement regarding What happened in May 2019 and then in early 2020, and what happened 12 years earlier with the swine flu?
An underlying dynamic in this situation is that the CDC changed the rules on 24 March 2020 about counting deaths from Covid with COVID-19 Alert No. 2. Covered in If COVID Fatalities Were 90.2% Lower, How Would You Feel About Schools Reopening? (CHD, 24 Jul 2020), focus on the fourth key finding listed at the top:
Had the CDC used its industry standard, Medical Examiners’ and Coroners’ Handbook on Death Registration and Fetal Death Reporting, 2003 Revision, as it has for all other causes of death for the last 17 years, the COVID-19 fatality count would be approximately 90.2% lower than it currently is.In February 2021 Stand for Health Freedom conducted a panel of experts to discuss the ramifications of Data Disaster: A Call for an Investigation Into the CDC’s Conduct During Covid-19. A summary on Death Certificates – Now and Then demonstrates how the CDC suddenly changed death recording protocols altering aggregation and interpretation of mortality data without official notification in the Federal Register to initiate federal oversight and allow for mandatory public comment—as required by law. The following bar graph is presented in COVID-19: Restoring Public Trust During A Global Health Crisis (GreenMedInfo, 2021). It presents data current through 1 February 2021 and demonstrates the resulting comparison between Total Covid-19 Fatalities based on the 24 March 2020 CDC & NVSS COVID-19 Alert 2 and the 2003 Medical Examiners’ & Coroners’ and Physicians’ CDC Reporting Handbooks:
Had the CDC continued as it had for the past 17 years adhering to the 2003 Revisions of Medical Examiners’ and Coroners’ Handbook on Death Registration and Fetal Death Reporting and the Physicians’ Handbook on Medical Certification of Death for death certificate reporting—including actual Covid-19 fatalities—there would not have been an Emergency Declaration in the United States and Lockdown World would not have been justified nor implemented. The implications of the March 2020 change is analyzed in COVID-19 Data Collection, Comorbidity & Federal Law: A Historical Retrospective, Science, Public Health Policy & the Law 12 Oct 2020 2:4-22, with the final sentence of the Abstract emphasizing, “If the fatality data being presented by the CDC is illegally inflated, then all public health policies based upon them would be immediately null and void.”
Former Death Certificate Clerk Joy Fritz has written an evidence-based analysis about this situation in Systematically Flawed Mortality Statistics Should Not Be Guiding Science, Medicine or Public Policy. Her constructive response to what has occurred is especially informative given her background and experience and concludes with A Call To Action: We The People Can Fix This.
If the way in which deaths were accounted for through altered metrics since March 2020, measuring what today constitutes a “pandemic”, and actual SARS-CoV-2 fatalities were “front page news” this crisis would cease.
Kary Mullis received the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1993 for his invention of the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) process. Speaking in 1997 about the uses of PCR with respect to AIDS, Mullis said:
if they could find this virus in you at all—and with PCR, if you do it well you can find almost anything in anybody—it starts making you believe in the sort of Buddhist notion that everything is contained in everything else. Because if you can amplify one single molecule up to to something that you can really measure, which PCR can do, then there’s just very few molecules that you don’t have at least one single one of them in your body.
With a background in biology and medical study, science writer David Crowe produced concise summaries in 2020 on Issues with the RT-PCR Coronavirus Test and Isolation versus Purification with respect to the SARS-COV-2 virus. In an interview with journalist Celia Farber about Kary Mullis, he lamented how “I’m sad that he isn’t here to defend his manufacturing technique ... Kary did not invent a test. He invented a very powerful manufacturing technique that is being abused. What are the best applications for PCR? Not medical diagnostics. He knew that and he always said that.”
The RT-PCR process is a quantitative process that exponentially replicates a fragment of RNA-modified-into-DNA many times over in order to visually see it. However, government-sanctioned corporate medical cartels are using this process qualitatively and falsely claiming the result of the process demonstrates live Covid-19 infectivity from an RNA fragment. Kary Mullis was very clear that the PCR process should never be employed as a diagnostic tool. This fact is reflected in “Intended Use” statements on PCR test kits such as: Creative Diagnostics® - “Regulatory status: For research use only, not for use in diagnostic procedures.” and altona Diagnostics “For research use only (RUO). Not for use in diagnostic procedures.”
In November 2020 the Corman-Drosten Review Report published an external peer review by 22 scientists—with concentrated expertise in the field in question—of the RTPCR test to detect SARS-CoV-2. It revealed 10 major scientific flaws at the molecular and methodological level. Consequences of false positive results included analysis of the number of amplification cycles, termed the Ct (cycle threshold) value: “if someone is tested by PCR as positive when a threshold of 35 cycles or higher is used (as is the case in most laboratories in Europe & the US), the probability that said person is actually infected is less than 3%, the probability that said result is a false positive is 97%”. After an unprecedented review time of only two days once being submitted, the Corman-Drosten Report, published 23 January 2020, was instrumental in creating the basis for the RT-qPCR protocol that became the world standard.
A thorough scientific analysis of the Polymerase Chain Reaction process is detailed in The PCR Disaster, Genesis and Evolution of the ››Drosten Test‹‹, by Illa, with a contribution from Prof. Ulrike Kämmerer (Verlag Thomas Kubo, Feb 2021). From the Introduction: “This booklet exposes a cornerstone of the Corona narrative—testing based on Polymerase Chain Reaction. The author, Illa, wants to remain anonymous. But the sources she uncovers and her analytical mind emerge all the more clearly for it. Illa reveals patterns that reach before the Corona year 2020. She also reveals a subtle web of actors and institutions that profit from society’s fear of an invisible enemy.”The severity of what is being termed the 2020 Covid-19 “pandemic” rests on the basis of the Polymerase Chain Reaction process being used as a test it was never designed for. Kary Mullis stated that: “[PCR is] just a process that’s used to make a whole lot of something out of something. It doesn’t tell you that you’re sick and it doesn’t tell you that the thing you ended up with really was gonna hurt you or anything like that.” Why is the PCR test, invented as a DNA manufacturing technique, the CDC’s “gold standard” for diagnosing the presence of actively infectious SARS-COV-2 when its inventor always affirmed it was never intended to serve as a medical diagnostic tool? When SARS-CoV-2 testing kits state “For research use only, not for use in diagnostic procedures” why does this test continue to be used to diagnose live infectivity of Covid-19? That such life-and-death critical and fundamental questions are not raised, debated or even acknowledged by public health authorities and monetized media, lay bare the epidemic corruption of government policies claiming Lockdown World is justified. It is essential to recognize such corruption has been developing for a very long time as Dr Peter Gøtzsche has covered in Deadly Medicines and Organised Crime: How Big Pharma Has Corrupted Healthcare (2013) and Death of a Whistleblower and Cochrane’s Collapse (2019).
|
“
|
In order to be a good source of respiratory virus, to be able to infect others well, you need plenty of the virus in your airway. But if you do, it’s inevitable that you will have symptoms. You don’t get a choice. There’s not a delay. If you’ve got a lot of virus in your airways, it’s busy killing the lining cells of your airway, which produces symptoms. And your immune system is busy, fighting back, and that produces symptoms. So it’s impossible for you to be a very good source of infection and to be symptom free. That’s just simple, basic logic. It’s also been tested empirically and it’s true. And so the people who are actually being lied to, it’s not like there’s some disputed science, it’s just not true.
—Mike Yeadon, at 39:22, 20 Aug 2021, Corona Comm, Chain Reaction
|
Before 2020, going to the doctor was preceded by feeling symptoms of fever, congestion, and/or sore throat. The physician would check your symptoms and conclude you had flu or something else. If you had no symptoms then you were not sick.
In January 2020 Anthony Fauci stated:we would really like to see the data, because if there is asymptomatic transmission, it really impacts the policies regarding screening, etc. But the one thing historically that people need to realize is that even if there is some asymptomatic transmission, in all the history of respiratory-borne viruses of any type, asymptomatic transmission has never been the driver of outbreaks. The driver of outbreaks is always a symptomatic person. Even if there’s a rare asymptomatic person that might transmit, an epidemic is not driven by asymptomatic carriers.
On 15 December 2020 attorney Reiner Fuellmich, PhD, sent a Cease & Desist Order to Prof. Dr. Christian Drosten, Creator of SARS-CoV-2 PCR test. While Mr. Drosten did not cease his false risk assessment, this process was a necessary element in laying the ground work for initiating legal accountability and recourse for lawsuits being developed by the Corona Committee and other organizations. In this order five lockdown fallacies are enumerated, the second being Symptomless risk of infection. One of the points made in this section is the following:
The immunologist Beda Stadler, Professor Emeritus at the University of Bern, pointed out in a highly regarded article in the Swiss weekly, Weltwoche, that the idea that viruses can multiply uncontrollably in the human body without the individual noticing this is immunologically unthinkable. However, it is precisely this uncontrolled multiplication that creates the risk of infection in the first place (second publication at https://www.achgut.com/artikel/corona_aufarbeitung_warum_alle_falsch_lagen; and English translation). It can hardly come as a surprise that not a single asymptomatic transmission of SARS CoV-2 was detected for the Corona outbreak in Wuhan (Shiyi Gao et al. in (2020) 11:5917 | https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-19802-w).
The false claim that a person can pass on the virus without symptoms is particularly perfidious, because it corrodes society: everyone sees in his fellow man only a highly dangerous virus spreader and reacts to this with disgust, aggression or at least with fear and panic. Since even schoolchildren are indoctrinated by parents and teachers, massive behavioral and developmental disorders are already foreseeable. You will also be held liable for this.
In Covid-19 Restoring Public Trust During A Global Health Crisis (Ealy et al, GreenMedInfo, 2021) the Wuhan Participant Study by Shiyi Cao et al is compared to the U.S. Projection Study endorsed and authorized by the CDC. In Wuhan, 9,898,828 enrolled participants were assessed by PCR testing with a Ct of 37 to 40. Of the almost 10 million enrollees, 300 possible asymptomatic were identified:
Of the 300 possible asymptomatic carriers, all were tested using live cell cultures to determine if their PCR samples could produce replication-competent virus. All 300 live cell cultures were negative for being able to produce replication-competent virus, indicating that none of the 300 people identified as potential asymptomatic carriers from the 9,898,828 people tested were infectious. Therefore 0.00% of COVID transmissions were asymptomatic.U.S. Projection Study - Zero participants were enrolled, yet the study was still sanctioned by the CDC. This published manuscript is a mathematical projection model estimating the percentage of people that tested positive and were presumed asymptomatic based upon a number of dubious assumptions. It asserts that 59% of COVID transmissions in the United States were asymptomatic.
|
Wuhan Study:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-19802-w
Post-lockdown SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid screening in nearly ten million residents of Wuhan, China US Study: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2774707 SARS-CoV-2 Transmission From People Without COVID-19 Symptoms |
The psychological injury and trauma fomented by pervasive fear of physical proximity to another person being biologically dangerous is breeding catastrophic mental and psychic harm to our species. This is especially true for children who are growing up learning to fear every person they are near. That the basis for this danger is unfounded should be cause of gravest concern amongst all still in possession of a calm mind that can reason despite the dread being daily promoted and repeated in broadcast, print, and digital media largely funded and “edited” by pharmaceutical corporate interests as well as individuals like Bill Gates. A graphic of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Funding & Partnerships maps the global reach of a man with no medical training or regulatory experience who has leveraged his unconscionable financial wealth to become the leading individual fiscal contributor to—and exercising unparalleled influence over—the WHO, other U.N. and U.S. government executive branch agencies, as well as corporate players making up the pharmaceutical cartel.
|
“
|
[T]he [PCR] tests say nothing, because it’s known that if you’re not ill, you will never spread the disease Covid-19, which is the pneumonia, to anyone. There’s no documented case in the world where it has been shown that a severely diseased individual with COVID-19 pneumonia contacted this from a non-symptomatic individual, not a single case in the world.
—Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi,
at 16:26,
12 Feb 2021, Planet Lockdown
|
I met with my Primary Care Physician in August 2020 to ask her assessment regarding the efficacy of Hydroxychloroquine in treating Covid-19. Before my appointment I sent a few sources as background including “The Key to Defeating COVID-19 Already Exists. We Need to Start Using It | Opinion,” Harvey A. Risch, MD, PhD, Newsweek, 23 Jul 2020:
As professor of epidemiology at Yale School of Public Health, I have authored over 300 peer-reviewed publications and currently hold senior positions on the editorial boards of several leading journals. I am usually accustomed to advocating for positions within the mainstream of medicine, so have been flummoxed to find that, in the midst of a crisis, I am fighting for a treatment that the data fully support but which, for reasons having nothing to do with a correct understanding of the science, has been pushed to the sidelines. As a result, tens of thousands of patients with COVID-19 are dying unnecessarily. Fortunately, the situation can be reversed easily and quickly.
I am referring, of course, to the medication hydroxychloroquine. When this inexpensive oral medication is given very early in the course of illness, before the virus has had time to multiply beyond control, it has shown to be highly effective, especially when given in combination with the antibiotics azithromycin or doxycycline and the nutritional supplement zinc.
One of the other sources was the framework encapsulated by Drs. Fareed, Jacobs, and Pompan in Open letter to Dr. Anthony Fauci regarding the use of hydroxychloroquine for treating COVID-19, Deseret Review, 13 Aug 2020. The letter contains an array of 120 questions in the following groups: Questions Regarding: Early Outpatient Treatment (34), Safety (19), Methodology (18); Comparisons Between U.S. and Other Countries Regarding Case Fatality Rate (6); Giving Americans the Option to Use HCQ for Covid-19 (32); Final questions(11). My PCP was not familiar with the sources I had sent. Due to her own time constraints she had not read them and indicated a lack of interest in learning about this repurposed drug.
Dr Peter McCullough, MD, is an internist, cardiologist, and professor of medicine at Texas A&M University Health Sciences Center. He is distinguished as the most published person in history in his field and an editor-in-chief of two major medical journals. In November 2020 Dr McCullough testified before the Senate Homeland Security Committee Hearing on COVID-19 Outpatient Treatment along with Drs Harvey Risch and George Fareed. In his articulation of the Four Pillars of Pandemic Response, Dr McCullough emphasized how early home treatment is grossly overlooked: “This virus infects individuals and they sit at home for two weeks. We have a two-week opportunity to treat this problem and we hear nothing about it. We hear nothing about early ambulatory treatment. There’s no updates. There’s no viewpoint to Americans of what’s going on outside of the United States where early ambulatory treatment is a standard of care in countries that are doing much better than the United States. It’s grossly overlooked.”
Speaking to the question of suppression of using HCQ as an effective tool for early treatment, Dr McCullough described how his field of academic medicine committed academic fraud:
There were two fraudulent papers, one in the New England Journal of Medicine [18 June 2020], one in Lancet [22 May 2020], published by individuals interested in doing evil to the world with respect to a beneficial treatment of hydroxychloroquine. In an unprecedented manner these two manuscripts were withdrawn after two weeks where they could scare the public and the world’s physician audience. Since that time there have been dozens of fraudulent papers.... the New England Journal of Medicine and Lancet acknowledged that they were fraudulent papers. They were scare papers, to scare people on hydroxychloroquine. Since that time there’s been dozens of pile-on scare tactics in academics. This isn’t the government. This is people in my field, in academic medicine who are committing academic fraud.
So academic medicine is committing a fraud, is committing, I think, a crime against humanity. There must be a motivation behind this that’s much bigger than just democrat versus republican. I am extremely concerned, honestly, about the academic contribution to scare tactics in the world. Now it’s not working everywhere. In India it’s given first line and India is such a crowded country. I’ve been there myself. Their deaths per million population is a tiny fraction of America.
In December 2020 Dr Pierre Kory, MD, testified in the same Senate Committee on Medical Response to COVID-19 along with Drs Jane Orient, Ramin Oskoui, and Jean-Jacques Rajter. Dr Kory described the dedication of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance he represents to develop effective protocols by identifying repurposed and available drugs to treat the illness:
We are a group of some of the most highly published physicians in the world. We have near 2,000 peer reviewed publications among us.... We have [one] hundred years of medicine development. We know, we are expert in all the medicines we use, and I do not know of a task force that has been focused on repurposed drugs. I will tell you that my group and our organization, I will say that we have filled that void. That is all we have done, is focused on the things we know and things we do.... We have a solution to this crisis. There is a drug that is proving to be of miraculous impact. And when I say miracle, I do not use that term lightly. And I don’t want to be sensationalized when I say that. That is a scientific recommendation based on mountains of data that has emerged in the last three months.
When I am told, and I just heard this in the opening sentence, that we are touting things that are not FDA or NIH recommended, let me be clear: the NIH, their recommendation on ivermectin, which is to not use it outside of controlled trials, is from August 27th. We are now in December. This is three to four months later. Mountains of data have emerged from many centers and countries around the world showing the miraculous effectiveness of ivermectin. It basically obliterates transmission of this virus. If you take it you will not get sick.
Established in March 2020, the Frontline Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance has focused its expert panel of reputable, published, treating physicians on identifying and producing prevention and treatment protocols for Covid-19.
Beginning in June 2020 c19study.com (then named COVID-19 Treatments) began assembling Global studies covering efficacy of HCQ for Covid-19. The site has evolved to its present day name of COVID-19 early treatment. As of 18 October 2021 the site provides real-time analysis of 1,041 studies for Covid-19 early treatment: “707 present results comparing with a control group, 629 are treatment studies, and 78 analyze outcomes based on serum levels. There are 14 animal studies, 36 in silico studies, 50 in vitro studies, and 58 meta analyses.” (This quotation—and its increasing figures—is in the second-to-last paragraph at the bottom of the c19early.com page; click the Submit Feedback link.) These include:
|
This source is updated on a daily basis. The numbers listed in the paragraph above continue to increase. The three graphics are linked to the source readouts and they will change as the days proceed. As explained in the COVID-19 early treatment FAQ: Who is @CovidAnalysis? “We are PhD researchers, scientists, people who hope to make a contribution, even if it is only very minor. You can find our research in journals like Science and Nature. We have little interest in adding to our publication lists, being in the news, or being on TV (we have done all of these things before but feel there are more important things in life now). Why should we trust @CovidAnalysis? “There is no need to. We provide organization and analysis, but all sources are public and you can easily verify everything. For the meta-analyses, all data required to reproduce the analysis is contained in the appendix, with direct links to the original source papers.” Who funds this research? “We have no funding, this is done in our spare time and we pay the web hosting fees personally (about $100 per month).”
World-class researcher and consultant to the World Health Organization, the clients of Dr Tess Lawrie, MD happen to be those who are involved in the suppression of repurposed drugs. Since last December Dr Lawrie has worked tirelessly following her conscience to speak out in protest against the current medical establishment at considerable personal risk. She co-founded the British Ivermectin Recommendation Development (BIRD) panel, an international group of experts dedicated to the transparent and accurate scientific research of Ivermectin. On 24 April 2021, she convened the first International Ivermectin for COVID Conference, the first such symposium in the world held to focus on Ivermectin to prevent and treat COVID-19. During the conference, she delivered a monumental closing address, one that will be recorded in the annals of medical history. On 7 May 2021, Dr Lawrie presented an incisive analysis on Why Are We Not Using Ivermectin For Covid? in the Truth Over Fear Summit. Her concluding statement reflects her exercise of intelligence with clarity and coherence:
As doctors and scientists, we currently find ourself at a peculiar place in medical history where rigorous scientific evidence, doctor’s expertise and experience, the foundations of our practice have been undermined by a relentless onslaught of disinformation. Why won’t the world’s health authorities and developed country governments approve ivermectin for Covid? I’ll leave it up to you to figure out. But if I could offer one piece of advice from my heart to yours, please take responsibility for your health. Stop outsourcing it.
World renowned authority on COVID, Dr McCullough is indefatigable in his commitment to challenging today’s corporate empire medical dogma. From getting Covid himself, testifying in the U.S. Senate on Outpatient Treatment to a recent presentation on State of the Art of Covid Treatment, Dr McCullough follows his conscience and exercises his birthright intelligence with magnificent clarity and coherence. On 29 Apr 2021, in COVID-19 Tribunal Exposing Willful Misconduct, he summarized his understanding of what this crisis game plan has been:
In 2020, something happened in the world that’s very, very different. My practice as an academic, internist, and cardiologist didn’t change. When my patients developed Covid-19 I treated them. I quickly learned about the illness. Within a few months we knew that it was very age-dependent in terms of severity and risk of hospitalization and death and we understood that a single drug wasn’t going to work and we would use drugs in combination to treat them. So it was a very natural thing for me to do to attempt to save my patients lives and to spare hospitalization.
I think the shocking thing that happened to all of us was an enormous, complete, pervasive, steadfast suppression of any attempt to help patients with Covid-19. It was extraordinary. Myself and others attempting to help patients, just like I would try to help them with a heart attack or a stroke or pneumonia. Suddenly we were crushed by a variety of powerful stakeholders that would hear nothing about this. And interestingly, we’re over a year into this pandemic. Think about this, America: Harvard, Johns Hopkins, Mayo Clinic, UCLA, Emory, our esteemed medical facilities in the United States. They have not attempted to treat a single patient with Covid-19 to prevent hospitalization and death. A complete lapse of academic medicine. It’s stunning.
By this time we should be using the Harvard Protocol, the Emory Protocol. How about Hopkins? I’ll take any one of them. None of them have anything. None of them have even tried. So it is extraordinary what’s happened. We seem to somehow develop a uniform game plan that maybe you and I and Dr McCullough and a few other people, we just didn’t get the playbook. But the game plan was: Do nothing to help patients with Covid-19; passively allow as much suffering, hospitalization, and death as possible; create enormous amounts of fear in our society; and then be prepared for mass vaccination.
Many physicians are following their conscience, standing up to challenge the game plan of mass vaccination and recognizing the benefit of employing repurposed drugs to end this crisis. Doctors for Covid Ethics includes hundreds of doctors and scientists who “have written three letters to the European Medicines Agency, urgently warning of short term and long term dangers from COVID-19 vaccines, including clotting, bleeding and platelet abnormalities. We first began warning of blood-related risks before media reports of clotting led to vaccine suspensions around the world. In the absence of crucial safety data, we are demanding the immediate withdrawal of all experimental gene-based COVID-19 vaccines. We oppose vaccine passports, which threaten public health and violate Nuremberg and other protections. We are warning that ‘health passes’ place coercive pressure on citizens to submit to dangerous medical experimentation, in return for freedoms that once were human rights.”
In addition to the individuals, groups, and sources cited above, the following organizations are worthy of mention here.
Mission: provide the latest unbiased scientific guidance as collected from around the world. This doctor-led guidance is to help the public make the best health decisions. The World Council for Health is an umbrella coalition, starting with 45 health-focused groups from around the world. They will provide refreshingly honest medical leadership during the covid health emergency and for many other matters of health now and in the future. One of the World Council for Health’s fundamental principles is to build trust with the public. Confidence in public institutions has been eroding, so The World Council for Health has established itself to be completely independent of governments, pharmaceutical companies and other financial and political stakeholders. In this way the council is free to promote factual and effective health care advice. Meet Our Experts: Clinicians and scientists from a range of specialties have contributed to our knowledge of COVID-19 treatment. While contemporary medicine is divided into narrow categories, we believe combatting COVID-19 requires the fruitful exchange of insights between specialties. The Early COVID Care Experts bring broad practical experience and deep scientific understanding to COVID-19 treatment. They have no financial interest in the treatments described here; their commitment is based solely on the obligations conferred on physicians by the Hippocratic Oath.
COVID Treatment Advocates
The movement for COVID-19 treatment is a global community of groups and individuals united by the common goal of saving lives and reducing suffering. Below is a list of some of the other groups in the network:
|
“
|
As doctors and scientists, we currently find ourself at a peculiar place in medical history where rigorous scientific evidence, doctor’s expertise and experience, the foundations of our practice have been undermined by a relentless onslaught of disinformation. Why won’t the world’s health authorities and developed country governments approve ivermectin for Covid? I’ll leave it up to you to figure out. But if I could offer one piece of advice from my heart to yours, please take responsibility for your health. Stop outsourcing it.
—Dr Tess Lawrie,
7 May 2021, Why Are We Not Using Ivermectin For Covid?
|
