Vaccine mandates: A suggestion

Anyone who has life insurance (whether you’re jabbed or not): Call your insurer and record the call. Ask them their policy on payout if you’ve had the jab or not. This would be an exceptionally interesting survey to conduct and get input on.

Not only that but if, like the guy in the video below, everyone is told by their insurer that they will not be covered if they have the jab, this provides for an IMMENSE argument against the vaccine and vaccine passports. Having hundreds, or thousands, of people recording calls with their insurers and being able to state that they are then left without insurance if they take the jab, would crush the mandate. All hell would break loose!

LIFE INSURANCE PAYS OUT IF YOU DIE OF “COVID” (which you won’t) BUT WILL NOT PAY OUT IF YOU TAKE THE EXPERIMENTAL VACCINE (which has a higher likelihood of you dying). So, all those who have taken the jab: Give your insurance company a call (if you have insurance that is). After all, what are your kids going to be left with if you cop it in the next few years if you get no payout?

Think of the £millions (if not £billions) that have been paid into life insurance policies by people over the years and now, having taken the vaccine – zero payout. They will get zero even if they die of something else but are shown to have taken the vaccine. Where do all of those premiums end up?

Of course the insurers don’t care if you take the vaccine! All those who have lined up without thinking it through have now voided their insurance premiums YET, I’d bet, they continue to pay into them!

This, seriously, would put the cat amongst the pigeons.

If you do call your insurer, do me (and you) a favour and let me know the outcome in a comment.

I do recognise that “Which?” have surveyed insurers and stated the following: https://www.which.co.uk/news/2021/06/does-the-covid-19-vaccine-invalidate-life-insurance/ but then the question has to be: Has this guy’s insurer just not got the memo? Or is he speaking bullshit? The only way to know, for sure, is to contact your own insurer.

You know they lie to you every single day so all I’m saying is test this statement out:

Dr dies. I’m left speechless.

I know. I recognise this is a terrible thing to say on someone’s passing but these people must be as dumb as f*ck (and by the way, I’m now way passed concern about using expletives in this world of ours. When you know there are people out there murdering others in huge numbers for a “noble purpose” – in their view – the odd expletive is the least of one’s concerns, or should be and I have never heard so many people who, otherwise, wouldn’t use them, using them, as I have recently. I think it’s because we’ve all come to the end of our tether with this, what can only be described as a, satanic agenda).

These people, though – seriously – need their heads examined. I’m sorry the video does not embed in wordpress (only youtube videos do unless one upgrades and I have no intention of doing that) but I’d urge you to listen to this news report:

Dr dies of “Covid 19” shortly after his Pfizer shot https://www.bitchute.com/video/Dr7FhAgEFHfm/

It is shocking how these people – his daughter, the news team and my guess, the entire family – are simply going along with “he died of Covid”.

“Sometime a little after his vaccine….” yet it doesn’t even occur to her (his daughter).

The new Netflix movie called “Don’t look up” again comes to mind. If you don’t look up, you won’t see what’s about to hit you. It appears there are millions of people around the globe who just refuse to “look up”. Even people in the medical field! However, is that so strange when you think that, perhaps because they may believe in their profession so much, they can’t even contemplate the thought that it was the “medicine”, purported to protect them, which is killing them.

There is something very wrong with the critical thinking pathways of a great number of people. Not being in the scientific field, I have no idea what it is but it definitely is a phenomenon or condition.

I have to admit, it scares me because there are just so many (even in the so called “awakened”) that these people will lead us into a very dark future which is, literally, just around the corner and we’re now turning that corner.

When I speak of those in the so called “awakened” camp being just as scary, it is because they appear to be the types that have to always see the “bright side” – the “awakening” – and believe that some universal force awakening humanity is going to get us out of this. I call them “fluffy cloud dwellers”: The self named “Light workers”. I have also noticed that, if you challenge them to support their beliefs and ‘vision’ with concrete, pragmatic (and blunt) questioning of how their smiles and meditation will overcome a tens of trillions of dollars juggernaut with monarchy, billionaires, military and police plus multi billion dollar global business backing and ask them how their “positive vibes” are going to manifest into real action to stop all of this, what you get back is “it all starts with you” – throwing the emphasis on you and that you’re to blame with your “negative vibes”.

Well, dearies, here’s the thing: I live and have lived in the real world my whole life. I have experienced what you haven’t nor ever will in this corrupt world. I’ve also read and covered far more ground in this overall picture while you’re still in the early stages of “euphoria” in your belief in the “awakening” and your understanding of the breadth and depth of what keeps us locked down both physically and mentally. You’ve “awakened” (trust me, a lot of you haven’t and, to a degree, I am still) in appreciating Covid 19 is a con but so so many of you just talk about beating the vaccine passports and mandates and “protecting the children”.

Let me touch on this “protecting the children” aspect just for a moment: Don’t misunderstand me here. I am all for protecting them but when do the children cease to be children? Is it 10 years old? 13? 18? What about your children who are in their 40s or 50s? When do you stop caring for your children? Do you see what I’m getting at?

You will have heard of the movie “Logan’s Run”. I think it’s aged 30 where everyone gets ‘renewed” but that renewal is actually death. So is 30 a good age for your kids to be ‘renewed’? You see, the point is that the elderly are being knocked off because they are a drain on the economy. As are the disabled (mentally or physically). This is why it is the elderly and those with underlying medical conditions such as obesity and diabetes, who are targeted in this democide – they have (and create) no value in the economy while are a drain on resources (not my view but the government’s).

So when you think of protecting the kids, it’s because you love them and they’re “innocent”. Aren’t we all “innocent” when faced with extermination? The government and establishment love your focus on the children because, by default, what you are suggesting is that you and all other adults (who are also the children of other adults) are fair game (or, at least, fairer game). So, when they kill your grandpa at 80, it might just be a case of “Well, he had a long life”. Why do you think they’re now introducing the concept and potential acceptance of euthanasia? You think that’s coincidence?

These children you’re so concerned for: Tell me? For how long do you wish them to live? Until they’re 30? 65? 90? Because once these kids you love, cherish and care about, hit some age in the future (or if they develop a serious medical condition), they’re going to be treated like the rest of us adults now, presently. So you cared for them until what age? what age does their life no longer matter?

The government want this type of thinking because what is going on today is, in great part, all about demographics and the demographic deficit I have spoken of before. The west is in demographic deficit (too many elderly – the west is “greying”). There aren’t enough babies being born (so, I guess far less children for you to be concerned about then, eh?) to bolster the future workforce (and that is also by design by the same designers) which would support the elderly, their pensions etc. Now, there are areas of the world with “demographic dividends” – meaning they have more than enough children being born and their workforce is more than sufficient to take care of their relatively fewer elderly population. THIS IS WHY THE WEST IS SEEING THE MASS OF LEGAL AND ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION INTO OUR COUNTRIES! WE ARE NOT MAKING ENOUGH BABIES TO SUSTAIN OUR ECONOMIES SO WE ARE IMPORTING THEM.

SO WHY DOESN’T THE GOVERNMENT GET US JUST TO HAVE MORE BABIES? BECAUSE THE WHOLE IDEA OF SUSTAINABILITY AND “CLIMATE CHANGE” AND “COVID” IS TO REDUCE THE OVERALL GLOBAL POPULATION!

Democide is a concept proposed by American political scientist Rudolph Rummel to describe “the intentional killing of an unarmed or disarmed person by government agents acting in their authoritative capacity and pursuant to government policy or high command.”^[1][2] According to Rummel, this definition covers a wide range of deaths, including forced labor and concentration camp victims, killings by mercenaries and unofficial private groups, extrajudicial summary killings, and mass deaths due to governmental acts of criminal omission and neglect, such as in deliberate famines, as well as killings by de facto governments, i.e. civil war killings.^[1][2] This definition covers any murder of any number of persons by any government.

Democide is the murder of any person or people by their government, including genocide, politicide, and mass murder. Democide is not necessarily the elimination of entire cultural groups but rather groups within the country that the government feels need to be eradicated for political reasons and due to claimed future threats.

Future threats like demographic deficits and overall, increasing population numbers. If you look at ANY official UN, WHO or Governmental or NGO documents related to population, you will notice three major threads in all of them:

1. Rising global population is a grave concern.
2. “Greying” economies another.
3. They are all, fundamentally, focused on economics. Not population well being.

Democide deals with them all.

Now, therein lies the leap many people have to make. Can you grasp the idea that there are very powerful people and groups, with immense wealth, who wish to dispense with you? If you can’t grasp that, then no amount of reading copious amounts of facts, data and evidence of it will convince you.

Think carefully about fighting this depopulation agenda

We are surrounded by depraved little minds. Remember: They’re the protected ones! Not you!

So who are you trying to ‘awaken’? And is it worth it?

A few tweets to share…. Sorry but they are depressing. However, one must face what one is up against and recognise it all before one can conclude anything.

And, believe it or not, the sick little bumboy liked the last comment. I can only conclude it was his father that introduced him to it. Or, perhaps, his rabbi!

As for my point about the dames. If you don’t realise Joanna Lumley is on the depopulation team, you need to do some further homework.

Joanna Lumley, actor (born 1946)

“I don’t think there’s any denying the fact that there are too many people in the world. I know that’s an awful thing to say, and people say you’re Hitler if you say it, but the human population is growing now so fast, and they need so much more to keep themselves alive — and indeed in developing nations, to reach a standard they would like to reach, i.e. with more cars, more TV sets. Which is completely understandable. But if a hundred people want a new car, that’s one thing — but if a million people want a new car… So I think the green issues — which is the cutting down of forests to make more room to graze more cows to make into more beef burgers — that comes from the quantity of people. And we’ve never addressed that.”

But why wouldn’t Lizzie give out special prizes to those doing her bidding? Of course she would!

Queen Elizabeth II (born 1926)
“One must remember that (St. Vincent’s) resources are finite and cannot accommodate indefinite population growth. Families must plan their families just as the Government has to plan the Nation’s development. There can be no long-term stability when the rate of population growth exceeds the rate of job creation.”

And as for those who still don’t quite get the “depopulation is climate change” issue:

James Lovelock, scientist and environmentalist (born 1919)

“Those who fail to see that population growth and climate change are two sides of the same coin are either ignorant or hiding from the truth. These two huge environmental problems are inseparable and to discuss one while ignoring the other is irrational.”

So, as you walk through your local Sainsburys (or most other chainstores or various types) and see the following displayed up on their walls as they virtue signal their “Sustainability” credentials, remember what that sustainability is all about: Sustaining the earth’s population at a level they want (and so many of you think you want because it’s been programmed into you that we’re overpopulated) in relation to how much land and resources they wish to use.

Half plastic use.

Reduce carbon emissions to “Net zero”.

Sustainable farming (but you never ask how many it is meant to sustain, do you?).

Sustainable fishing.

Overall sustainable consumption.

To sustain, halve and reduce to zero, you need to reduce overall consumption. How do you do that? There’s only one real way and, as Lovelock states above, it’s all about population.

How’s your booster doing? Any adverse reactions yet?

Shocking how stupid they think we are!

Here is an article about “flurona” (you couldn’t make it up – but they did!). Please read it and appreciate the obvious bullshit that it is:

Now, where’s the problem? You can see it clearly, can’t you?

But, no matter the bullshit they feed the masses, the masses will swallow.

[And for those who don’t see the problem: “Most patients who test positive….similar symptoms”. Yet they have only found one. If the rest are undiagnosed, they can’t be positive! – Ah, never mind. It’s like explaining Einstein’s theory of relativity to a gnat!]

Shocking how stupid they think we are! Unfortunately for many, however, they’re right. So they’ll laugh and laugh all the way to the bank while depopulating. I’m past caring. I just don’t wish to be collateral damage.

Funny how all the new stuff comes out of Israel though, eh?

Morons!

I kid you not. I have people on twitter stating “12 years before Covid even arrived on the scene?” when replying to my blogpost “THE EPIDEMIC THAT NEVER WAS”.

Mental midgets surround us, people. Inadequate brain matter which, if I’m honest, has me conclude there really are people who, perhaps, need to go.

I never really gave much thought to how stupid some of the human race could actually be in the 21st Century but, my god, I don’t need to think about it because it appears out of the woodwork every day!

It’s scary! And it’s why this con has worked and why democracy works for them!

Today’s ‘education’ is shocking!

Now read the fucking thing!!

To: Phillips, Sara (ELS-LOW) Wed, 29 Dec at 01:56

Subject: Covid 19 remarks by Richard Horton

Sara,
I want you to read this and be honest with yourself…. You cannot possibly ignore this. If you do, you need your head looking at. Now, once you read it and understand what it is telling you quite plainly, you then need to speak with your boss. If he then tells you to shut up about it, you then know there’s something very wrong.
Article: https://earthlinggb.wordpress.com/2021/12/22/the-epidemic-that-never-was-must-read/

“Earthling”
Ps: Now READ the fucking thing!!

Sara is Richard Horton’s (the Chief Editor of the Lancet) secretary.

To: Desmond Swayne Wed, 29 Dec at 01:59

Subject: For once in your life, have some balls!!

Desmond,
I want you to read this and be honest with yourself…. You cannot possibly ignore this. If you do, you need your head looking at. Now, once you read it and understand what it is telling you quite plainly, you then need to speak with your boss. If he then tells you to shut up about it, you then know there’s something very wrong.
Article: https://earthlinggb.wordpress.com/2021/12/22/the-epidemic-that-never-was-must-read/

“Earthling”
Ps: Now READ the fucking thing!!

I’m getting so pissed off with the morons, the intellectually lazy, the cretins, those that are that fucking lazy to read more or listen to more than 5 mins worth of information and need to be spoon fed.

And THAT covers one hell of a lot of people! And it covers those who get excited by Michael O’Bernicia and Dolores Cahill and Reiner Fuellmich etc etc. who think “At least they’re doing something!”.

NO, THEY’RE NOT! THEY AND YOU JUST THINK THEY ARE! YOU CANNOT FIGHT IN THE COURTS AGAINST THOSE WHO CONTROL THE FUCKING COURTS! PERIOD!! THE COURTS ARE FICTION – THEIR FICTION!

SOME OF YOU WHO HAVE JUST WOKEN UP TO THIS ‘GAME’ ARE SO FUCKING NAIVE, GULLIBLE AND STILL SWALLOW THAT SHIT CALLED ‘HOPE’ THAT YOU DON’T WANT TO LISTEN TO REALISM! THAT ‘HOPE’ PILL IS JUST TOO FUCKING TASTY. YOU THINK THIS WHOLE THING DIES IF AND WHEN YOU CAN GET PEOPLE JUST TO “WAKE UP” TO COVID! HAVE YOU EVER BEEN DREAMING AND IN THE DREAM YOU THINK YOU’VE JUST WOKEN UP BUT YOU’RE STILL ASLEEP? THAT IS EXACTLY WHERE YOU ARE!

WE WILL GET NOWHERE UNTIL PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THE WHOLE GODDAMNED THING – THE ‘BIG PICTURE’ AND THEN ORGANISE EN MASSE.

THE ‘BIG PICTURE’ INVOLVES THE MONEY, THE LAW, UNDERSTANDING COVID AND CLIMATE CHANGE AND HOW THEY ARE ONE AND THE SAME AND THEN UNDERSTANDING YOUR ENEMY WANTS TO ERADICATE 90% OF THE POPULATION. UNTIL YOU FULLY GET TO GRIPS WITH ALL OF THAT, FORGET IT!

Letter to the New York Times

I simply looked up their contact email and did not know, before writing this, what their stipulations were for writing to them. It wasn’t written from the perspective of getting them to publish the letter but simply to bloody act on it! Not that they would but someone’s gotta tell them they know this stuff!!

From: “Earthling”

Tue 28/12/2021 19:20

To: letters@nytimes.com

Dear Editor,
I simply wish to know how/why you cannot/will not bring this – your very own article from 2007 – to the attention of your readership?
Your own archive which questions (in fact, more than questions) the entire narrative of “Covid 19”.
Do not try and suggest to me that you are not aware of this article or it was just overlooked. Is it just that, since then, you were provided a substantial sum by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation?

“In an  August 2020 piece, Tim Schwab noted that he found at least 15  NY Times columns where  Bornstein or Rosenberg had written about  Bill and Melinda Gates, the Gates Foundation, or Gates-funded organizations, without any mention they were being paid on the side by the Foundation through SJN.  He recounted how he contacted Bornstein, Rosenberg, and their NYT editors, to inquire why there were no conflict-of- interest disclosures attached to these pieces.  

Tina Rosenberg responded that “We do disclose our relationship with SJN in every column, and SJN’s funders are listed on our website. But you are correct that when we write about projects that get Gates funding, we should specifically say that SJN receives Gates funding as well…Our policy going forward with the NY Times will be clearer and will ensure disclosures.” https://nycpublicschoolparents.blogspot.com/2021/08/ny-times-columnists-still-financially.html

NYC Public School Parents: NY Times columnists still financially benefitting from Bill Gates largesse -without acknowledgement from the Times8/27/21: I’ve updated this with more recommendation for what Solutions Journalism should do to avoid these conflicts of interest in the futu…nycpublicschoolparents.blogspot.com

And before you say it, yes I realise this funding was not direct to the NYT but let’s not play silly buggers! 
The following includes your article from 2007:

The Epidemic that never was: https://earthlinggb.wordpress.com/2021/12/22/the-epidemic-that-never-was-must-read/
As you will see in the blog, the incompetence of the scientific/medical community in initially accepting PCR tests as diagnostic, resulted in a false “epidemic” in Dartmouth and resulted in thousands of unnecessary vaccinations. The CDC documents (2017 & 2021) then support the outcome of the article by clearly stating that the PCR tests (those tests responsible for this entire “Covid Pandemic”) were (and are) not fit for purpose – as was plainly stated by Kary Mullis, the inventor of the PCR test, before he died.
Your unquestioning support of this “pandemic” displays either, ineptness or a willingness to be complicit in the fraud which it is.
Regards,

“Earthling” (real name supplied).
ps:

“I profiled one organization called the Solutions Journalism Network, which has received millions of dollars from the Gates Foundation (at the time, the foundation was the largest funder). The real problem with those grants is that the founders and directors of this Gates-funded organization are also frequent contributors to the New York Times, where they frequently write about the Gates Foundation — always in ways that are uncritical or favorable. So, after I did the story and did a follow up story, the New York Times finally issued corrections to disclose their financial conflicts of interest.

When you think about it, articles have been published at the highest level of journalism, the New York Times, about the Gates Foundation from journalists who have ties to it. So that, to me, became a really interesting story that allows you to see how far this influence travels.”

Arrticle: https://www.jacobinmag.com/2021/11/bill-gates-foundation-jeffrey-epstein-divorce-journalism

AUTOMATED REPLY

Letters, NYT <letters@nytimes.com>

Tue 28/12/2021 19:20

To: You

Thank you for your letter to The New York Times.

If your letter is selected for publication — in all editions (print and online) or only online, and possibly in The International New York Times as well — we will contact you within a week. 
We regret that because of the large number of submissions we are not able to respond to all of them, other than by this automated reply. (You will receive an auto-reply only once every four days.)
Here are some guidelines:

Letters should ideally be 150 to 200 words and may be shortened to fit allotted space. They must be exclusive to The Times (no prior publication in other news outlets, except for nytimes.com). They should generally refer to an article that has appeared within the last seven days.

We reserve the right to edit all letters, and to trim to fit allotted space.
 
To be considered for publication, letters should include the writer’s name, address, current location (where you are writing from) and daytime and evening phone numbers at your current location (for verification, not publication). If you have a disability, we will make every effort to make accommodations in our communication with you.
We do not accept anonymous or open letters.

We generally do not publish more than one letter from the same writer within any 60-day period, but reserve the right to be flexible. (This applies to the daily letters page, but feel free to submit letters to the weekly sections.) If we select your letter for publication, you consent to our right to republish it, in any and all media, and to license third parties to publish it as well.

If you submit your contact information as a result of this automated reply, please re-send the letter with it. (In the subject line, please indicate the headline of the article you’re responding to, and delete “automated reply.’’) 

Because of computer security concerns, we do NOT accept attachments; they will NOT be opened. Please re-submit your letter pasted into the body of an e-mail message.

——————————————————————————————————

It goes on but there’s zero point in pasting it all on here and it’ll go nowhere anyhow. However, if you were so inclined, it would be interesting to see if many people writing to them about it would have any effect. But then again, nobody will I guess. Apologies for the negativity but I’ve had 15 years of people doing bugger all and that includes people like Icke and UKColumn and others. All talk (like me) but they have huge audiences and yet they cannot/will not work together and organise. All just bloody talk! Same with Alex Jones on the other side of the pond.

I watched the Netflix movie called “Don’t look up!” last night and I couldn’t help laughing (in despair) at the piss they were taking out of everything and everyone by holding up a mirror to us all and saying “That is what you are!” – inept, cretinous fools more interested in “likes” and celebrity; Filled with platitudes and having to keep things ‘light’. Oh my God! Did I see so many people in that movie! Did the actors even recognise what they were doing? Essentially, taking the piss out of the worldwide population that take them seriously and laughing at them. They hypocrisy and the lack of depth in anything at all was a precise reflection of what we’ve become and why, at the end, they all fucking die! Frankly, they deserved it. So considering it’s a reflection on our present reality, I’d have to say so do we.

Some interesting little points and digs made it in it however. Two of which were:

1. Trust in scientists (and that little UN useful idiot – whatshisface – was the main one)
2. I’m sure they were having a dig at Elon Musk with the old, grey haired billionaire character.

Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984

Still in force. Still clearly states what it does under section 45E which is a section limiting the power to make regulations under sections 45B and 45C.

We know the reality of Covid so, even if regulations are made wrt Covid 19, we know they are based upon a fraud and should never have been made. However, given the present circumstances and their willingness to maintain this fraudulent “virus”, it is still useful to understand that, in law today within the United Kingdom, enforcing vaccine mandates is unlawful.

The Act: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/22

So, just an FYI.

An inept little MP called John.

From: Earthling
Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2021 2:04:57 PM
To: LAMONT, John >
Subject: I demand an answer to this!

Dear John,

Something incredibly distressing, to any member of the public, who would read this (including students) has come to my attention and it is not the fact that this lecturer, from Nottingham University (although Scottish) is broaching this subject, but that it needs to be broached at all!
However, I also demand an answer as to how and why it is considered ok for a University lecturer to discuss such and NOT be disparaged and vilified (not that I think he should be because it is obvious that where he is leading is a possibility given the government steps so far) by the government and media while I, or any other member of the public, are vilified if we dare to postulate such things.

See attached photos re the lecture coming up on the 6th December by Dr. Colin Alexander of Nottingham University.

I ‘attended’ a previous lecture by him on the subject of propaganda re Covid 19 by the government. He, like you, didn’t appear to know about (or perhaps in his case, didn’t wish to discuss) the subject of “Securitisation” which I am very familiar with, yet YOU are not!

It is well understood (via articles in the Telegraph and others) that the SPI Behavioural unit constructed what can only be described as “psyops” on the UK population using propaganda tools. Alexander covers this in his lecture, some of which, I recorded:

https://www.bitchute.com/video/qVsV6Hj9bPrn/https://www.bitchute.com/video/qVsV6Hj9bPrn/

How can the UK government and media disparage and vilify members of the public questioning the entire official narrative while allowing a University lecturer to broadcast that the government are both, propagandising the public and their being, potentially (“definitely” in my view), willing to ghettoise the unvaccinated, while moving on a trajectory toward ‘genocidal activity’?

I smell a rat and why? Because anyone in the science or medicine fields or in the climate change “denier” field, is shut down – fast and hard. This guy, meanwhile, they have no issues with, while he postulates genocide on the part of the government.

You, as a political ‘fraternity’, are quick to shut down me or any like me who will question the narrative of Covid 19 and climate change (and I can because I have studied it all extensively over years) but you allow this guy to lecture in a public university regarding the potential for genocide of “anti vaxxers”? Again, I wholeheartedly support his giving this lecture and support his postulation 100% and that is, from your perspective at least, because I AM a “conspiracy theorist” yet, again, you haven’t even heard of “securitisation” (hilarious, given your position).

I want this debated in Parliament and I want you to raise it! I want Dr Alexander to be put on record in Parliament regarding this and it brought to the public’s attention.

To be brutally frank: I am not interested in your ignorance or any of your ‘colleagues’ in Parliament. I am interested in a public forum which is then capable of bringing forth evidence of what Dr Alexander speaks of and what I speak of which surrounds this entire Covid/Climate subject so that we may “de-securitise” this. If you don’t understand securitisation then I jolly well suggest you get your face in front of a few academic papers and, perhaps, contact Dr. Barry Buzan who can explain it to you since, I’m sure, you consider me an insignificant member of the public: Good for a vote but nothing else!

I demand actual consideration of this email and its content and a considered response. This situation is getting way out of hand!

You are NOT going to ‘ghettoise’ anyone! Neither are you going to get anywhere near the genocide of anti vaxxers. In whichever way I can, I am going to make this as public as possible. I demand an answer and will also make that public. You people (that is the government, Parliament and the people you work for – and it isn’t us – plus your media and academia) are out of control. You have totally lost the plot. Then again, perhaps you haven’t, given the significant statistical evidence of psychopathy being attracted to power.

Coronavirus, Propaganda and the Coming Genocide?https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/coronavirus-propaganda-and-the-coming-genocide-tickets-214839309157

Coronavirus, Propaganda and the Coming Genocide?

This talk explores the extent to which the draconian actions of governments during the pandemic are similar to …

“This talk examines Stanton’s work and suggests that we are, at the very least, on stage 3 of 10 (Extermination being stage 9) within the current Coronavirus pandemic. The implication being that those who have refused Covid-19 injection(s) are being worryingly vilified, ostracised, misrepresented and discriminated against. Moreover, with little support from those happy to take the injections, ghettoisation beckons if these people do not have full access to employment opportunities. We are thus now at a stage where we can at the very least trace a trajectory towards genocidal activity.”

So let me be clear

I wish answers to the following:

1. Why is a University lecturer allowed to give a lecture on the potential of the government working through stages toward ultimate genocide of the unvaccinated without any disparagement by the UK government when I, or any other public member, would be demonised to the point of severe ridicule (or worse) for suggesting such?

2. I want an open public debate regarding this; Regarding the freedom of speech and thought surrounding both, Covid and Climate Change and the capability of members of the public (and scientists opposed to the IPCC findings) to bring evidence to bear on Parliament, which is academically sound.

3. I want a response from Mr Boris Johnson on the following:

a) His Statement, when London Mayor in 2007, that:

“As for motherhood – the fertility of the human race – we are getting to the point where you simply can’t discuss it, and we are thereby refusing to say anything sensible about the biggest single challenge facing the Earth; and no, whatever it may now be conventional to say, that single biggest challenge is not global warming. That is a secondary challenge. The primary challenge facing our species is the reproduction of our species itself.”

Boris Johnson: Global overpopulation is the real issuehttps://churchandstate.org.uk/2016/03/mayor-of-london-global-overpopulation-is-the-real-issue

Boris Johnson: Global overpopulation is the real issue

The single biggest challenge is not global warming. The primary challenge facing our species is the reproduction…

Is it not, then, the case that, because of the concern within political (and monarchical) circles, with discussing it, you don’t discuss it at all while allowing academia and media to do it for you? Allowing the propagandists within those circles to feed it into the public’s consciousness (similar to “Extinction Rebellion which is supported by the Club of Rome and Prince Charles himself). Then utilise the ‘cries’ from a “grassroots movement” to support the policies implemented by the government. Just as Greta Thunberg does on a global scale for the United Nations.

And before you, John, dismiss any of what I just said, I can support it all 100%. Do you people seriously believe the public are stupid? Ok, I’ll give you that one. In general, yes they are. More ignorant than stupid, however, but not us all. Not by a long shot. You make a mistake in underestimating everyone, John.

b) Was Mr Boris Johnson as conditioned by his father, Stanley, and his work at the United Nations and on Population issues as Bill Gates was by his father who worked with Planned Parenthood?

Let me share with you something from Planned Parenthood. Have a damned good read, John:

POPULATION AND DEVELOPMENT COLOMBO CONFERENCE
HL Deb 21 February 1979 vol 398 cc1839-70
1839
§
4.4 p.m.
§
Debate resumed.

§
Viscount INGLEBY My Lords, I, too, must join in thanking the noble Lord, Lord Vernon, for introducing the debate on this important subject of population control. I should like also to agree with the noble Baroness, Lady Elles, that it is not that the world is short of resources: it is that we have somehow or other failed to get those resources to the right place at the right time. However, I must disagree with some of the ideas which have been proposed to help this situation. The International Planned Parenthood Federation, which no doubt will be closely involved in the Colombo Conference, has interests far beyond the provision of family planning services to overburdened families in the underdeveloped countries. It has a strategy of legal reforms on matters such as the family, divorce, sterilisation, abortion, sex education and so on. This strategy it seeks to implement through family planning associations in various countries and it has a Government grant of £3 million.
As examples of some of the ideas that have been put forward, I should like to quote from a chart prepared by Frederick S. Jaffe, vice-president of Planned Parenthood World Population, a member-body of the International Planned Parenthood Federation. Table 1 is headed: Example of proposed measures to reduce US fertility by universality or selectivity of impact”. I apologise for the rather long words involved there. Under the heading of “Universal impact” Mr. Jaffe lists as “social constraints” the following: Restructure family (a) postpone or avoid marriage; (b) alter image of ideal family”. Next comes a heading referring to the compulsory education of children, followed by: Percentage increased homosexuality, educate for family limitation, healthy control agents in water supply”.
Then there is a heading referring to economic deterrents which include the following: Require women to work and provide few child-care facilities”. Under the heading of “Social controls”, Mr. Jaffe puts forward these suggestions: Compulsory abortion of out-of-wedlock pregnancies; compulsory sterilisation of all who have two children except for a few who would be allowed three; confine childbearing to only a limited number of adults; stock certificate-type permits for children”. The source is given as: Frederick S. Jaffe Activities Relevant to the Study of Population Policy /or the US: Memorandum to Bernard Berelson, March 11, 1969″. I am not suggesting that all or any of these suggestions form part of the present policy of the International Planned Parenthood Federation, although some of them may well do so, but I would ask the Government, when the question of the grant to the IPPF comes up, to look closely at their strategy for legal reforms.
Let me repeat a section of the above:
Under the heading of “Universal impact” Mr. Jaffe lists as “social constraints” the following: Restructure family (a) postpone or avoid marriage; (b) alter image of ideal family”. Next comes a heading referring to the compulsory education of children, followed by: Percentage increased homosexuality, educate for family limitation, healthy control agents in water supply”.
“Percentage increased homosexuality”: They even planned to measure it, John. Now how, do you think, they’d instigate the increase of homosexuality across the population, John? Any ideas?
It can take decades for such policies to even begin to be adopted so please do not suggest to me that “that was something suggested by Planned Parenthood in 1979!”
You propose to be my “representative” in Parliament yet you cannot possibly be when I raise an issue related to “Securitisation” and you don’t even know what it is!! How can I expect ignorance to represent me? And it is wilful ignorance on your part because, you have zero interest in promoting my interests as your constituent, but every interest in supporting your own which would be threatened if you were to speak against the “accepted wisdom”. You have no idea of the history of the population/climate and now, “Covid” construction. Have you even heard the names Alexander King (Imperial College) or Aurellio Peccei (Fiat) who came together and formed the Club of Rome? Do you have any clue whatsoever about MIT’s involvement in creating the computer model in the early 70s which ‘informed’ Denis Meadows and wife’s initial book for the Club of Rome: “Limits to Growth”? Or the follow up “The First global Revolution” which stated at the very beginning:

“Ah love! Could thou and I with fate conspire, to grasp this sorry scheme of things entire, would not we shatter it to bits and then, remould it nearer to the heart’s desire.” Omar Khayyam

What we are now seeing is the “shatter to bits” part and the remoulding referred to as “Build Back Better”. But you have literally no idea, do you? While the second book goes on to state:

The Limits of Democracy:
Democracy is not a panacea. It cannot organise every¬ thing and it is unaware of its own limits. These facts must be faced squarely, sacrilegious though this may sound. As now practiced, democracy is no longer well suited for the tasks ahead. The complexity and the technical nature of many of today’s problems do not always allow elected representatives to make competent decisions at the right time. Few politicians in office are sufficiently aware of the global nature of the problems in front of them and have little if any awareness of the interactions between the problems.

When they mention “Few politicians…..” they’re obviously speaking about people like you, John. It’s why people like me have zero confidence in people like you!

And then, to top it off, they say the following:

The Common Enemy of Humanity Is Man:
In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. In their totality and in their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which demands the solidarity of all peoples. But in designating them as the enemy, we fall into the trap about which we have already warned, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.

And that, John, is where the ghettoisation and potential genocide comes in.

But you’re uneducated in this (as they say and I do agree) so I will be kind and give you the link to the PDF version of the book:

https://img1.wsimg.com/blobby/go/a437931e-3d50-4da5-a130-ac99e488e617/downloads/The%20First%20Global%20Revolution_%20A%20Report%20by%20the%20C.pdf?ver=1624377297299https://img1.wsimg.com/blobby/go/a437931e-3d50-4da5-a130-ac99e488e617/downloads/The%20First%20Global%20Revolution_%20A%20Report%20by%20the%20C.pdf?ver=1624377297299

You may ignore all you wish. Dismiss it all, but you are doing so in abject ignorance.

Sure, debate inside that little box you are allowed to debate in, John. Nobody’s interested much.
Do you have interests in alternative fuels and energy, John? What are they telling you to ‘diversify’ into now? Lithium batteries and non bovine agricultural products?

But when all’s said and done and you’re an old man with your kids and grandchildren and they ask you “Why won’t the government allow me to have kids, Daddy?”, you can always sit up, be proud and say “Because I supported the steps they took to arrive at that policy”.
Then again, I don’t see a wife and kids on your Wikipedia profile so you may well be gay and offspring have no interest for you. That would stack up, if so.

You’re a stupid, ignorant man, John! You haven’t a clue, do you? Whether you take offence at that or not, holds no concern for me. You still “Work for me” (what a joke!).

In November 2017, it emerged that Lamont’s local party had accepted a £2,000 donation from one of the funders of the Global Warming Policy Foundation, a self-proclaimed “climate sceptic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_sceptic&#8221; organisation.

Well, all money’s good money, right? I mean a lawyer will represent anyone as long as they have the cash to afford him! What’s your price, John?

Earthling

RESPONSE FROM JOHN:

john.lamont.mp@parliament.uk <john.lamont.mp@parliament.uk>

To: Earthling Tue, 21 Dec at 15:46

Dear Earthling,

Thanks for your email.

Please could you confirm your address. Strict Parliamentary Protocol dictates that I only respond to my constituents.

Hope you have a happy Christmas.

Kind regards.

John

REPLY BY ME:

Earthling>

To:john.lamont.mp@parliament.ukWed, 22 Dec at 20:23

John,
How can I, or anyone else, possibly have a “Happy Christmas”? What planet are you on? Then again, while you advised you had had the vaccines (but not yet the booster), I still received no proof of this. I’m fully aware you guys are aware this entire ‘pandemic’ is bull.
My address (again) is: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Now, you may wish to have a good read of this John. From 2007 in the New York Times regarding an epidemic that never was because it was predicated on PCR testing. But again, no matter what is put in front of you and people like you, John, you’ll entirely dismiss it. John, you’re really not that important in the scale of things. When this agenda hits its peak, you and yours will be treated every bit the pleb as the rest of us and your self importance at this time will be long gone and forgotten. I think, perhaps, you’re just far. too arrogant at this point, in your protected little bubble of political life, to appreciate that. However, trust me, you and your parliamentary colleagues are already being sidelined and, over time, you’ll find out just how unimportant you are.

[Etc… (please see previous blogpost “The Epidemic that never was! (Must read)” for the rest of this New York Times article.]

So, it was the PCR test itself which ‘created’ the epidemic which was, later, proven false.

What do you think, John? You’d never seen that before had you? You had no idea how inadequate and misused the PCR can be and has been. Millions of people across the world building up the number of ‘cases’ and number of deaths due to “Covid” when the CDC itself, in 2017, even stated it should not be used on asymptomatic people, John. Yet here we are!Why do you think that is, John? Any ideas? Why would political and medical people utilise a test which even the inventor of it, Kary Mullis (Nobel Prize winner for it) stated should never be used for diagnostics since it can pick up whatever one wishes to pick up? What’s the game, John? 😉 

[Etc: Same as above]

Second section: “Only patients with signs and symptoms…should be tested by PCR.” “Testing asymptomatic persons should be avoided as it increases the likelihood of obtaining falsely-positive results” etc. Now, think of the millions upon millions of asymptomatic people being tested by PCR for “Covid 19” when none of them should be because of what the CDC, in 2017, said is the likely outcome. Yet, here we are!

In the third section, we read that anyone taking, or having taken, antibiotics during or relatively recently prior to the PCR test, may also supply a false result (negative OR positive). How many people up and down the country and worldwide, do you think, have been or are on antibiotics while taking a test? Yet this issue has never been raised either. You need to read, John. Think of it as going back to school during your law lectures. A lawyer once told me I’d make a damned fine ‘forensic lawyer’. I didn’t even know such existed at the time.Start using that brain god gave you! I might be blunt but I think I’m being exceptionally kind providing you with all of this information. It’s your dismissiveness and non-appreciation of it which results in the condescension presented. We, public, simply don’t appreciate the dismissive tone we are continually faced with by our politicians of every colour (red, yellow or blue). It’s like you all take some “better than thou” pill or sociopathic medicine when you enter those halls and find yourself having some semblance of power in creating legislation. ‘Public servants’ but none of you serve. You’re all there for power and money.
Oh last thing: As for the strict parliamentary protocol: It didn’t seem to enter into it when I sent you an email earlier in the year with what you would read as a more balanced and possibly, supportive tone. You were keen to try and win another supporter. Anyhow, as I said before, I hope your partner lives with you in the constituency otherwise it might cause problems if you say you can’t speak to them because they’re not one of your constituents! (That protocol always makes me laugh).

Earthling

RESPONSE FROM JOHN:

LAMONT, John <john.lamont.mp@parliament.uk>

To: Earthling Cc:HAWLEY, Katherine. Thu, 23 Dec at 08:38

Earthling,
I had my booster 2 weeks ago. It was widely reported (including photo) in the local press and on social media. I’m surprised you missed it.
Kind regards and Happy Christmas.
John
John Lamont MP Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk 01450 375948

REPLY FROM ME:

Earthling>

To: LAMONT, John Cc:HAWLEY, Katherine. Thu, 23 Dec at 15:58

John,
You did? Why surprised I missed it? Do you think your every move is of any importance? Of course you do!

Thanks for confirming one thing though, John: If you truly have taken the “booster”, I realise I’m communicating with someone who, while suggesting that, somehow, he represents me in parliament, is in fact a first class moron who reads nothing, knows nothing and is entirely inept. It’s like trying to communicate E=MC squared to a gnat! 
What a surprise!

Kind Regards and Happy Christmas!

Earthling

PS: To widely report something as mundane as getting a ‘vaccine’, one must view oneself as being some sort of “influencer”. Is that how you see yourself, John? 

Plus, such activity is nothing less than propaganda. Again, your self importance oozes from you! Which reminds me: I need to put the trash out.

I send all of the above information and all you have is “I’ve had my booster”. That’s on the same level as asking someone what they think of the statement by Boris Johnson that “Global Overpopulation is the real issue” and their answer is “I had fillet steak for my dinner last night”.

I recognise people will read the above and say “What do you expect by speaking to people like that?” But no, you have it very wrong. I expect nothing because, for over a decade now, I have written to, spoken directly to, in person, and had ongoing communications with politicians in this country where I have presented solid evidence of various issues. I have noted one encompassing issue with MPs: They are exceptionally self important yet not too bright while being extremely arrogant, ignorant and could care less about anything and everything you put to them unless A) It suits their own position or B) They can get mileage from it for themselves. They will never give anything due consideration – no matter how factual – unless it fits their existing position. You – no matter who you are as a member of the public – are no more than trash to them. They also are very sensitive little souls who will read such opinion of themselves and it will irritate them due to their ego.

I publish this for no more reason than to have you, the reader, understand and trust that, if you can know your subject and have confidence in the correctness of what you present to these cretins (either in written form or in person) you will find that they truly are not too bright. Mr Boris Johnson is not a bright guy. If that is not clear by now, you need to shake yourself. None of them are the intellectual giants (or anywhere near it) so many give them the name of. They do not deserve your respect and the more people who make it clear to them that they hold none, the better!

I expect nothing from the little creep. I just like “playing” with him. Would you respect an amoeba?

THE EPIDEMIC THAT NEVER WAS! (MUST READ)

Anyone who had a cough got a P.C.R. test, and so did anyone with a runny nose who worked with high-risk patients like infants.

“That’s how we ended up with 134 suspect cases,” Dr. Kirkland said. And that, she added, was why 1,445 health care workers ended up taking antibiotics and 4,524 health care workers at the hospital, or 72 percent of all the health care workers there, were immunized against whooping cough in a matter of days.

New York Times 22nd July 2007

The PCR test drives the tyranny: https://www.bitchute.com/video/HsW1vyHqvRO2/

Trust a Doctor? They misdiagnose themselves! THIS, my friends, is a beauty and it speaks volumes toward the fraud of “Covid 19”.

What you are about to read, I hope will astound you and, if you have been of the belief that Covid 19 is real and you have been frightened of it and believed the fear mongering by governments, medical and media, it will, finally, have you understand the reality of what has been ‘created’ through the fraudulent misrepresentation of the “PCR test” which has been heralded as the “gold standard” for diagnosing the “disease”.

While you read this New York Times article from 2007, bear in mind the following:

• From the beginning, the PCR test has been the absolute diagnostic test for Covid 19.
• The PCR test is the test which has been used to create the number of “cases” of the “disease” throughout the world.
• The PCR test has stopped millions of people (billions even) from travelling by air.
• The PCR test has caused lockdowns across the world.
• The PCR test has put millions of people out of business and/or out of work.
• The PCR test has – due to the policies created by it – had Police across the globe, beat the public, fine them and jail them.
• The PCR test (and the “cases” created by it) has had billions of people wearing masks in fear of a non isolated “virus”.
• The PCR test has created “millions of deaths due to Covid” throughout the world.

In the article you will read of the following:

• A doctor who believed, because she had a persistent cough, thought she had whooping cough.
• This Doctor was an ‘infectious disease specialist‘!
• She convinced herself (a Doctor!) that she may be in danger of causing an epidemic within her medical centre.
• Nearly 1000 workers were tested and furloughed.
• 142 people were told they had the disease (including the Doctor).
• Thousands given antibiotics and vaccines.
• All of this was due to PCR testing.
• The definitive test (actually growing the bacterium) then confirmed none of them had anything but what was likely: The common cold!
• Epidemiologists and Infectious disease specialists stated the problem lay in “too much faith” being put in PCR TESTING.

Yes, it is a MUST READ because, when you read it in its entirety, there is a very strong chance that the penny will drop and a light will switch on – finally! The article is ‘explosive’ if one appreciates, fully, its content.

These are qualified Doctors, Epidemiologists and Infectious disease experts who were entirely convinced (or convinced themselves) that they had a pertussis epidemic on their hands. It was purely fluke that a decision was made to grow the bacterium which, eventually, had them recognise they had deceived themselves. The article goes on to quote them stating, categorically, that the PCR test cannot diagnose a virus or disease!

I then go on to support this by using CDC documents from 2017 and today in 2021 which advise the same. This “Covid 19” pandemic must be appreciated for what it is: A case based, statistically created “disease” which we, as a global population, have bought into. I have already fully described, in other posts, that it was introduced as a catalyst for the sustainability and climate change agenda but, to understand that, perhaps you need to first understand how “Covid” has been created.

THE FOLLOWING MAKES IT AS CLEAR AS DAY THAT THE “COVID 19 PANDEMIC VIRUS” HAS BEEN A PCR TEST BASED, STATISTICAL VIRUS BUILT ON FALSE POSITIVES AND THAT THE CDC HAS ALWAYS KNOWN THAT SUCH TESTS SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN USED AS DIAGNOSTICS.

THE NEW YORK TIMES 2007

Original article: https://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/22/health/22whoop.html

So, it was the PCR test itself which ‘created’ the epidemic which was, later, proven false.

NOW TO THE CDC in 2017:

Now, from the above – first section titled “Best Practices….”, I readily admit I have absolute zero medical experience but when I read something like “does not require viable (live) bacteria present in the specimen”, I think “ok, PCR can amplify and find old, dead bacteria which, it would have to be accepted, either the patient’s immune system or a vaccine has since killed”. The patient may never have even been aware they had the virus (or had it at all) and had been asymptomatic, however. I am saying this from the perspective of giving the medical community the benefit of the doubt that they have, in fact, even isolated a virus called SARS-COV-2 which I have grave doubts about. In fact, from what I have seen, they haven’t isolated anything at all!

Second section: “Only patients with signs and symptoms…should be tested by PCR.” “Testing asymptomatic persons should be avoided as it increases the likelihood of obtaining falsely-positive results” etc. Now, think of the millions upon millions of asymptomatic people being tested by PCR for “Covid 19” when none of them should be because of what the CDC, in 2017, said is the likely outcome. Yet, here we are! While even those with symptoms who were tested, did not have the disease!

In the third section, we read that anyone taking, or having taken, antibiotics during or relatively recently prior to the PCR test, may also supply a false result (negative OR positive). How many people up and down the country and worldwide, do you think, have been or are on antibiotics while taking a test? Yet this issue has never been raised, either.

I know there have been many videos and articles related to the PCR test and its false positives. I even made one myself: https://s3.wasabisys.com/billgateswantstokillus.com/index.html#/videos/Earthling/New_Wikileaks_dump_RT_PCR_test_Mullis_v_Fauci-dMyM5Aaba_c

However, even if there are factual documents existing which state as clearly, as the above does, that the PCR test is not fit for diagnostic purposes when testing for Covid 19 (or any other virus or disease), then this, at least, serves as being another one and this also could be used in a court of law.

Every single ‘case’ (and, therefore, death) recorded as “Covid 19” and its variants, is predicated on absolute bullshit and deception. Yes, many of us know this but we need every scrap of evidence to support our assertions.

I will be sending a copy of this to my Parliamentary representative(s). You may wish to also. Just take copies, or link the New York Times article, and point out to them that an epidemic of pertussis (whooping cough) was asserted falsely on the basis of PCR testing back in 2007. They can read it for themselves. Your inference or supposition is then clear and you cannot be dismissed easily. Imagine the same number of people who protest around the world having such knowledge and, instead of protesting/marching, they were to organise and bombard their relevant parliaments and their “scientists” with such? They kept it up (because they would be ignored initially) and more and more learned and the numbers got even bigger. A “tsunami of Omicron”? Not at all. It would be a tsunami of “You’ve fed the world bullshit from the beginning”.

As for the masses who march and protest: Most are unwilling to sit down and concentrate and develop an understanding of the detail needed to be able to convey to others, or to authority, where the evidence of deception and fraud lies. The protests are akin to children protesting to their parents that “it isn’t fair! I don’t want to have to go to bed early!”.

Perhaps another 100 people will read this. Oh well, you can’t say I didn’t try for the last 12 years or so!

But there you have it in black and white: The PCR test created the “epidemic” and they have always known how inept the test is for diagnosing anything (just as the inventor, Kary Mullis, stated). We have just adopted the same incompetence (although, purposefully) globally.

Addendum:

The following CDC announcement from July this year (2021) entirely supports and corroborates the above implications and also explains why the flu disappeared. No matter what is put in front of people’s eyes, however (even if the whole damned world read this), it makes zero difference. Why? Because we live in a world full of fucking idiots!

Please – if this blog resonates and you appreciate there is nothing but pure fact here – share it as widely as you possibly can. I cannot believe that people who take the time to read and digest it, will not come to a profound realisation.

Addendum 2:

Just in on Twitter:

By all means, believe the CDC statement just released but you have just read what you’ve read, above. You will not understand the contradictions and the outright lies until you embrace the bigger picture and the goal of “Covid 19”.

They are desperate to convince you that PCR is diagnostic when it isn’t and never has been.

Typhoid inoculation cause of 1918 flu?

I tend to have times where I browse Parliamentary archives for hours on end. It can be fascinating and insightful.

Here is the outcome of one of those browsing sessions. It’s not much but it hints at something. From 1918…

Mr. CHANCELLOR

asked how many deaths have occurred during the past six months at the Crystal Palace and what diseases have been diagnosed as the causes of these deaths, giving the numbers attributed, respectively, to each disease?

Dr. MACNAMARA

There have been 120 deaths among men at the Crystal Palace during the last six months—117 from pneumonia following influenza, one from cerebrospinal meningitis, one from cerebral abscess, and one from Addison’s disease. The average number of men stationed at the Crystal Palace is roughly about 5,600. During the course of six months, the number of men passing through the Crystal Palace would be much greater than that. As my hon. Friend will observe, the main, practically indeed the only, mortality during that period has been from an epidemic of influenza which affected, I regret to say, over 1,000 men.

Mr. CHANCELLOR

asked the First Lord of the Admiralty if his attention has been called to the number of deaths occurring at the Crystal Palace from pneumonia following inoculation; and whether he will have an inquiry made by persons other than officials into these deaths and into the suitability of the Palace for its present purpose?

Dr. MACNAMARA

I gave the mortality figures in answer to the previous question. Of the 117 men who unhappily died from pneumonia following influenza, none were inoculated against influenza or pneumonia. Prior to the outbreak of influenza at the Crystal Palace, the average daily sick rate had been slightly less than 3 per cent.Though the building was not originally intended as a living place it has been satisfactorily modified subsequently to its being taken over at the beginning of the War, and the health reports prior to the present outbreak of influenza do not point to any serious objection to its continuing to be used for the purpose for which it was acquired. A very recent sanitary inspection of the building has been made as a result of which certain minor defects in ventilation are being remedied.

Mr. CHANCELLOR

I understand none was inoculated against influenza or pneumonia. Have any of them been inoculated at all?

[This, above, is the specific statement/question which caught my attention. It would seem Mr Chancellor had a suspicion that another type of vaccine/inoculation may have been the cause of the outbreak]

Dr. MACNAMARA

I do not know what the hon. Member means. None has been inoculated against influenza or pneumonia. If the hon. Member wants to know whether some time or the other some have been inoculated against small-pox, perhaps he will put that on the Paper.

Mr. CHANCELLOR

I do not want to know that. I want to know whether any of them have escaped inoculation against typhoid fever?

[“Escaped inoculation against typhoid fever”]

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER

The hon. Member had better put the question down more definitely.

[I think he did!]

Sir F. HALL

Is it not a fact that the percentage of deaths has not been larger than the percentage in all other large buildings where troops are housed?

Dr. MACNAMARA

I cannot say.

Sir F. HALL

Has not a report been received to that effect?

Colonel LOWTHER

Is inoculation against influenza considered official by the medical fraternity?

So, with reading that, it reminded me of something I read not too long ago……

THE 1918 INFLUENZA EPIDEMIC WAS A VACCINE-CAUSED DISEASE
Very few people realize that the worst epidemic ever to hit America, the ‘Spanish Influenza’ of 1918 was the after effect of the massive nation-wide vaccine campaign. The doctors told the people that the disease was caused by germs. Viruses were not known at that time or they would have been blamed. Germs, bacteria and viruses, along with bacilli and a few other invisible organisms, are the scapegoats which the doctors like to blame for the things they do not understand. If the doctor makes a wrong diagnosis and treatment, and kills the patient, he can always blame it on the germs, and say the patient didn’t get an early diagnosis and come to him in time.

If we check back in history to that 1918 flu period, we will see that it suddenly struck just after the end of World War I when our soldiers were returning home from overseas. That was the first war in which all the known vaccines were forced on all the servicemen. This mish-mash of poison drugs and putrid protein of which the vaccines were composed, caused such widespread disease and death among the soldiers that it was the common talk of the day, that more of our men were being killed by medical shots than by enemy shots from guns. Thousands were invalided home or to military hospitals, as hopeless wrecks, before they ever saw a day of battle. The death and disease rate among the vaccinated soldiers was four times higher than among the unvaccinated civilians. But this did not stop the vaccine promoters. Vaccine has always been big business, and so it was continued doggedly.

It was a shorter war than the vaccine-makers had planned on, only about a year for us, so the vaccine promoters had a lot of unused, spoiling vaccines left over which they wanted to sell at a good profit. So they did what they usually do, they called a meeting behind closed doors, and plotted the whole sordid program, a nationwide (worldwide) vaccination drive using all their vaccines, and telling the people that the soldiers were coming home with many dread diseases contracted in foreign countries and that it was the patriotic duty of every man, woman and child to get “protected” by rushing down to the vaccination centers and having all the shots.

Most people believe their doctors and government officials, and do what they say. The result was, that almost the entire population submitted to the shots without question, and it was only a matter of hours until people began dropping dead in agony, while many others collapsed with a disease of such virulence that no one had ever seen anything like it before. They had all the characteristics of the diseases they had been vaccinated against, the high fever, chills, pain, cramps, diarrhea, etc. of typhoid, and the pneumonia like lung and throat congestion of diphtheria and the vomiting, headache, weakness and misery of hepatitis from the jungle fever shots, and the outbreak of sores on the skin from the smallpox shots, along with paralysis from all the shots, etc.

The doctors were baffled, and claimed they didn’t know what caused the strange and deadly disease, and they certainly had no cure. They should have known the underlying cause was the vaccinations, because the same thing happened to the soldiers after they had their shots at camp. The typhoid fever shots caused a worse form of the disease which they called para-typhoid. Then they tried to suppress the symptoms of that one with a stronger vaccine which caused a still more serious disease which killed and disabled a great many men. The combination of all the poison vaccines fermenting together in the body, caused such violent reactions that they could not cope with the situation. Disaster ran rampant in the camps. Some of the military hospitals were filled with nothing but paralyzed soldiers, and they were called war casualties, even before they left American soil. I talked to some of the survivors of that vaccine onslaught when they returned home after the war, and they told of the horrors, not of the war itself, and battles, but of the sickness at camp.

The doctors didn’t want this massive vaccine disease to reflect on them, so they agreed among themselves to call it Spanish Influenza. Spain was a faraway place and some of the soldiers had been there, so the idea of calling it Spanish Influenza seemed to be a good way to lay the blame on someone else. The Spanish resented having us name the world scourge on them. They knew the flu didn’t originate in their country.

Due to vaccines, with the toxic drugs given on top, 100 million died of that “flu” epidemic, worldwide, and it seemed to be almost universal or as far away as the vaccinations reached. Greece and a few other countries which did not accept the vaccines were the only ones which were not hit by the flu. Doesn’t that prove something?

At home (in the U.S.) the situation was the same; the only ones who escaped the influenza were those who had refused the vaccinations. My family and 1 were among the few who persisted in refusing the high pressure sales propaganda, and none of us had the flu not even a sniffle, in spite of the fact that it was all around us, and in the bitter cold of winter.

Everyone seemed to have it. The whole town was down sick and dying. The hospitals were closed because the doctors and nurses were down with the flu. Everything was closed, schools, businesses, post office everything. No one was on the streets. It was like a ghost town. There were no doctors to care for the sick, so my parents went from house to house doing what they could to help the stricken in any way they could. They spent all day and part of the night for weeks, in the sick rooms, and came home only to eat and sleep. 

If germs or viruses, bacteria, or any other little organisms were the cause of that disease, they had plenty of opportunity to latch onto my parents and “lay them low” with the disease which had prostrated the world. But germs were not the cause of that or any other disease, so they didn’t “catch” it. I have talked to a few other people since that time, who said they escaped the 1918 flu, so I asked if they had the shots, and in every case, they said they had never believed in shots and had never had any of them. Common sense tells us that all those toxic vaccines all mixed up together in people, could not help but cause extreme body-poisoning and poisoning of some kind or another is usually the cause of disease.

Whenever a person coughs or sneezes, most people cringe, thinking that the germs are being spread around in the air and will attack people. There is no need to fear those germs any more, because that is not the way colds are developed. Germs can’t live apart from the cells (host) and can’t do harm anyway, even if they wanted to. They have no teeth to bite anyone, no poison pouches like snakes, mosquitoes or bees, and do not multiply, except in decomposed substances, so they are helpless to harm. As stated before, their purpose is useful, not destructive.

The 1918 flu was the most devastating disease we ever had, and it brought forth all the medical bag of tricks to quell it, but those added drugs, all of which are poisons, only intensified the over-poisoned condition of the people, leading to more deaths. 

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Yet, what you see today is continuous “fact checking” sites dedicated to deflecting any and all information relating to possible “Covid vaccine” or even just any vaccine injury and also “fact checking” determined to ensure “false information” is broadcast regarding what caused the 1918 “flu”.

Reuters Fact Check on 1918 flu: https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-vaccines-caused-1918-influe-idUSKBN21J6X2

The claim that the influenza pandemic of 1918 “was the after-effect of the massive nation-wide vaccine campaign” is unfounded. A vaccine against the flu did not exist at the time. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), having “no vaccine to protect against influenza infection and no antibiotics to treat secondary bacterial infections that can be associated with influenza infections” meant that “control efforts worldwide were limited to non-pharmaceutical interventions, such as isolation, quarantine, good personal hygiene, use of disinfectants, and limitations of public gatherings, which were applied unevenly.”

It is true that U.S. soldiers during World War I were subject to immunization requirements.

“The U.S. Military and the Influenza Pandemic of 1918–1919,” by the NCBI in 2010, it was “influenza and pneumonia [that] killed more American soldiers and sailors during the war than did enemy weapons.” The U.S. did not develop the first influenza vaccine until the 1940s and the first pneumonia vaccine until 1977.

[Sure, but what if that influenza and pneumonia were caused by a typhoid vaccine in the first place? This is what Mr Chancellor is hinting at in his question! The “fact check” keeps the reader focused on the fact that flu vaccines had not been introduced yet, therefore deflecting from the possibility that it was, perhaps, the typhoid (or other) inoculations which were the cause.]

VERDICT

False: the 1918 Spanish influenza pandemic was not caused by vaccines, WWI was not the first time that immunization was required for U.S. soldiers, more U.S. soldiers were killed by influenza and pneumonia, not “medical shots,” than by enemy fire during WWI.

You MUST read “fact checking” sites very carefully. Almost every word and sentence they write.

Dr Susan Hopkins: Exposes herself as a liar

Every time you get a yes/no question and you do not answer it yes or no while you keep repeating a ‘mantra’ over and over again when continuously asked the same question: You are a liar by omission. This exposes the sheer deception of a Doctor which the British public are putting their trust and faith in.

The British public really need to understand what it is they are dealing with when it comes to the people they are relying on for honesty because, across the board, no honesty exists. Why? Because, across the board, these people have lied to you from the outset.

Here is Doctor Susan Hopkins:

Bear in mind this woman is getting paid a fortune and is lying to you.

Doctor Susan Hopkins is the Public Health England theme lead for the Innovations in Behaviour Change theme of the HPRU in HCAI and AMR at Imperial College.

So, another Neil Ferguson type: An Imperial College liar.

She is also a SAGE advisor.

Remember this face. I know you’d rather not but if ever the time comes to hold these people to account, she will be one of them as will Jenny Harries the communist.

These are the people who will have attended Prince Charles’ speech in 2015 at the Royal Society where he impressed his worldview on the Doctors and Nurses to treat the planet as a patient. Again, people do not understand what they are dealing with while they line up for the jabs and boosters.

Nothing is actually hidden (except the ‘smoking gun’ admission and why would criminals give you that?). It is all available to be found. You have seen Imperial College’s document on finding a new way to frame “climate change” and why they had to. You have seen, in previous posts, the multitude of documentary evidence showing you they chose to reframe it as a health issue. You have seen all those dictating to you what you must do re masks and lockdowns, social distancing etc all outright lying to you as they break the rules themselves and why? Because they know “Covid” is a non existent, statistical disease being used to create the behaviour change they want to allow significantly greater control over people and their movements and consumption patterns (to ostensibly protect them from the virus but, in reality, it is to meet carbon emission targets over the following 10 to 30 years – 50% reduction by 2030 and 100% by 2050 – “Net zero”).

Those of us who understand this watch you who don’t and we know we cannot get through to you so, in essence, we are allowing you to take those ‘vaccines’ while we know there is a very dark agenda behind them. We’re sorry but what can we do? You won’t listen. You will just revert to ridicule and “Conspiracy theorist” as you listen to the authorities.

One last thing I wish to say to those of you who refuse to listen: ALL of the things they are shutting us unvaccinated out of doing, are things which, in time, they will shut you out of too because, again, it is all to do with carbon emissions and they will have to – at some point in the future – come up with further reasons to convince you that you no longer can participate in such events etc, either.

We know you don’t believe us and, again, you will never listen but I’m just putting it out there so I can turn, in years to come, and say “I told you”.

One final thing however: How many times, recently, have you heard or read “the conspiracy theorists were right again!”?

You see, here is why you have been taught to mock the “conspiracy theorists”. It’s so very easy. We are people (not all I admit. Some are off their rocker and, unfortunately, we then all get tarred by the same brush) who have researched deeply into politics, history and read copious amounts of material (for me, it has been all their own documents and journals plus parliamentary and congressional archives in the main) and, by doing so, can follow the steps they take and have taken; Read between the lines on news items and “pandemics” appearing, apparently, “out of the blue”. We understand what their ultimate purpose is and when you understand that, it is all very easy to follow.

You simply haven’t done that and they don’t want you to. Hence: “Don’t listen to those Conspiracy theorists”. Your ignorance, however, is creating the very conditions you wish to alleviate and maintains the statistical disease which is scaring you. Perhaps you’d rather believe in a statistical disease than face up to what is even scarier for you: A group of people hellbent on controlling you and reducing the world’s population.

What you are experiencing is true terrorism. Not by a fundamental islamist however.

15th January 2003 – Read carefully

Now, I would suggest the reader think about a few things re what they have just read:

1. What if there is no “Covid 19” actual spreading virus from early 2020? I have seen no proof of there being such a virus. Yes, I’ve heard the government and yes I’ve heard the media. Yes I have heard people “dying from Covid” on death certificates and people “catching Covid” based on entirely unreliable (and, in the words of the inventor of the PCR test AND Dr Anthony Fauci: It should not be used as a diagnostic at all plus, from Fauci: “It is useless at figures of 40 cycles” yet that is what has been used to get our “positives”). So, here’s the thing: The vast vast majority of people who have died in care homes and elsewhere, during this “pandemic” have been extremely elderly; Have had multiple co-morbidities and, you would have to conclude, their immune systems have been shot to pieces due to their condition. What are the chances that the “Covid vaccine” has presented a far greater danger to them (and, in fact, killed them)?
2. “The likelihood of suffering side effects is believed to be significantly higher for those with weakened immune systems than for others.” Have you even heard this being suggested by anyone at all pushing the “Covid vaccines” today? Not a single concern expressed, in any way, regarding how different people with different potential genetic ‘triggers’ or weakened immune systems for any reason, may react differently to being injected with a “vaccine” which didn’t even get the full safety tests of years before being introduced (yet millions are lining up for their third dose). Don’t you find that strange? Just “Get vaccinated or you can no longer operate fully within society”. Sure this is all about your health!
3. “Because the virus used in the vaccine is very contagious” it is important for people with immune system problems to stay away from the vaccinated!! Sure, we are told that the “Covid vaccine” has no live virus but it does have the protein and, being mRNA, it has the host create the virus themselves so that their system then generates antibodies to fight it. What if, again, the elderly and the immuno-compromised do not have the capability to generate those antibodies? Your “vaccine” will kill them! And here’s the thing: YOU KNOW IT!

Now let’s turn to the World Economic Forum for some advice shall we? Isn’t it odd that an “Economic forum” covers nearly every single aspect of life on planet earth? I guess they’ll say “Well, everything impacts and comes down to economics”. Yes, ok it does I’m sure but the question is why and for whom?

• It has been 37 years since HIV was first discovered as the cause of AIDS, but there is still no vaccine available against this disease.
• This contrasts with the rapid speed of the COVID-19 vaccine development and distribution.
• According to a professor of pathology, the delay is caused by the ‘remarkable HIV strain diversity and the immune evasion strategies of the virus’.
• In spite of the challenges, scientists are still researching a variety of solutions and have already made progress in the fight against this complex virus.

Smallpox has been eradicated from the face of the Earth following a highly effective, worldwide vaccination campaign. Paralytic poliomyelitis is no longer a problem in the U.S. because of development and use of effective vaccines against the poliovirus. In current times, millions of lives have been saved because of rapid deployment of effective vaccines against COVID-19. And yet, it has been 37 years since HIV was discovered as the cause of AIDS, and there is no vaccine. Here I will describe the difficulties facing development of an effective vaccine against HIV/AIDS.

I am a professor of pathology at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine. My laboratory is credited with the discovery of the monkey virus called SIV, or simian immunodeficiency virus. SIV is the close monkey relative of the virus that causes AIDS in humans – HIV, or human immunodeficiency virus. My research has contributed importantly to the understanding of the mechanisms by which HIV causes disease and to vaccine development efforts.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=pi2Aa5rUIdg%3Fenablejsapi%3D1%26wmode%3Dtransparent

HIV vaccine development efforts have come up short

Vaccines have unquestionably been society’s most potent weapon against viral diseases of medical importance. When the new disease AIDS burst onto the scene in the early 1980s and the virus that caused it was discovered in 1983-84, it was only natural to think that the research community would be able to develop a vaccine for it.

At a now famous press conference in 1984 announcing HIV as the cause of AIDS, then U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Margaret Heckler predicted that a vaccine would be available in two years. Well, it is now 37 years later and there is no vaccine. The rapidity of COVID-19 vaccine development and distribution puts the lack of an HIV vaccine in stark contrast. The problem is not failure of government. The problem is not lack of spending. The difficulty lies in the HIV virus itself. In particular, this includes the remarkable HIV strain diversity and the immune evasion strategies of the virus.

So, should we researchers give up? No, we shouldn’t. One approach researchers are trying in animal models in a couple of laboratories is to use herpes viruses as vectors to deliver the AIDS virus proteins. The herpes virus family is of the “persistent” category. Once infected with a herpes virus, you are infected for life. And immune responses persist not just as memory but in a continually active fashion. Success of this approach, however, will still depend on figuring out how to elicit the breadth of immune responses that will allow coverage against the vast complexity of HIV sequences circulating in the population.

The virus was first discovered in 1983-84.Image: Science Magazine

Another approach is to go after protective immunity from a different angle. Although the vast majority of HIV-infected individuals make antibodies with weak, strain-specific neutralizing activity, some rare individuals do make antibodies with potent neutralizing activity against a broad range of HIV isolates. These antibodies are rare and highly unusual, but we scientists do have them in our possession.

Also, scientists have recently figured out a way to achieve protective levels of these antibodies for life from a single administration. For life! This delivery depends on a viral vector, a vector called adeno-associated virus. When the vector is administered to muscle, muscle cells become factories that continuously produce the potent broadly neutralizing antibodies. Researchers have recently documented continuous production for six and a half years in a monkey.

We are making progress. We must not give up.

A few thoughts:

1. Why no AIDS vaccine? Perhaps because they never wished to cure it? Why a “Covid vaccine”? Perhaps because it gives you AIDS or, at least, puts the nail in the coffin of all those with compromised immune systems.
2. Isn’t it interesting that Margaret Heckler proclaimed there’d be a vaccine for AIDS within 2 years? And then there never was one? Was she that incompetent?
3. The point about some individuals making antibodies to the HIV virus with “potent neutralizing activity” then makes the point clear that there are differences between one human and another in their ability to fight off any virus or any disease – again, this points to my previous point about people with different potential genetic ‘triggers’ or weakened immune systems for any reason, may react differently to being injected with a “vaccine” and yet, not a single utterance regarding this from those pushing today’s vaccines.
4. Re the last paragraph stating “scientists have recently figured out a way……Researchers have recently documented continuous production for six and a half years in a monkey”. Do keep in mind that the “Covid vaccine” was (they say) developed within months and then administered into human arms within a year of the “outbreak”. You’d think that, with such ‘success’ over 6 and a half years in monkeys producing antibodies which killed HIV, they’d have it developed and administered by now. Why wait 6 and a half years? Safety? 😉 They’ve done more work on HIV than they have in testing the “Covid vaccine”. The HIV one seems to continuously produce the antibodies while they’ve introduced a “Covid vaccine” which can’t even stop transmission at all for any length of time (but they still want to keep pumping it into you).
5. What would you rather have a diagnosis for, by your Doctor? AIDS or Covid 19? There’s a question to ask yourself when considering whether to have a Covid shot for a “disease” that has killed next to nobody (if anybody at all) and seems to be promoted by statistics (I call it a “statistical disease”).

The only reason a “Covid vaccine” exists is to inject the disease into you!

As for FFauci:

1. “The body does not like to make a good immune response against HIV” – Question: Why would that be? Answer: ?
2. HIV is different (somehow). Could that have anything to do with HIV never being a natural virus in the first place? Could it be that the body can’t produce an immune response because HIV is “unnatural”? Could it be that AIDS was and is simply the depletion of the immune system due to other lifestyle factors (like “Covid’s” co-morbidities)?
3. “The best way to make a vaccine is to mimic natural infection”. Hmmm. Again, perhaps, HIV is not ‘natural’?
4. “With HIV we have to do better than natural infection”. Hmmm. So, the body has to make an even better immune response than it would to natural infection? Natural HIV infection? Why would a body not produce the reaction needed? For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Why would a sufficient reaction not be enough? That suggests it’s insufficient. It’s like saying you have an army of 10 guys facing your immune army of 10 guys. Your “immune army” fires 10 shots to the head – one for each head of the other side’s army but that is insufficient to kill them. They have bayonets and keep marching toward you and the question is: Do you have time to reload? You fire another 10 shots and still they keep coming. Sounds a little like “Covid” today doesn’t it? How much “better” does that immune response need to be? How long’s a piece of string? So to beat HIV, the body has to produce an immune reaction which is more than necessary to beat the infection? That doesn’t make logical sense unless HIV doesn’t make logical sense either! Sounds to me like he’s suggesting he wants to produce a cytokine storm. If they need to produce an immune reaction even stronger than needed then that simply means they have no clue what they’re dealing with and how strong they need to make that response. But then I’m no virologist and, to be frank, I think the lot of them are full of shit. Do they have a vaccine for that?

The world consistently says it doesn’t trust politicians yet it continues to trust in the “Covid” narrative!

‘Ahh but that’s because I’m listening to the science!’

Well two things moron:

1. The Washington State Dept of Health gave you science above. There are many more in the medical journals and academic literature over the years which have told you that, years after a drug or vaccine has been produced, they’ve found it was dangerous. Do you listen to that? Remember, at the time they were launched, the public were told they were amazing, great, just what you need to protect you against X,Y or Z. Just as they’re telling you today while forcing you to get jabbed. Are you nuts? You must be!
2. Every single scientist/virologist/epidemiologist/doctor/health minister pushing Covid today rely on politicians and others above politics to fund their lifestyle either by salary, grant funding or their own wish to progress in their chosen field. So you are listening to and trusting politicians. Even the head of the W.H.O is a politician and Bill Gates was never a Doctor!

So, again: Are you nuts? If you are, you should never be allowed on a plane again! People have nut allergies you know!

Dr Alan Cantwell, M.D.full”

Article from Dr Alan Cantwell, M.D. reproduced here

On May 11, 1987, The London Times, one of the world’s most respected newspapers, published an explosive article entitled, “Smallpox vaccine triggered AIDS virus.”

The story suggested the smallpox eradication vaccine program sponsored by the WHO (World Health Organization) was responsible for unleashing AIDS in Africa. Almost 100 million Africans living in central Africa were inoculated by the WHO (World Health Organization). The vaccine was held responsible for awakening a “dormant” AIDS virus infection on the continent.

An advisor to the WHO admitted, “Now I believe the smallpox vaccine theory is the explanation for the explosion of AIDS.”

Robert Gallo, M,D., the co-discoverer of HIV, told The Times, “The link between the WHO program and the epidemic is an interesting and important hypothesis.

I cannot say that it actually happened, but I have been saying for some years that the use of live vaccines such as that used for smallpox can activate a dormant infection such as HIV.” Despite the tremendous importance of this story, the U.S. media was totally silent on the report, and Gallo never spoke of it again.In September 1987, at a conference sponsored by the National Health Federation in Monrovia, California, William Campbell Douglass, M.D., bluntly blamed the WHO for murdering Africa with the AIDS virus.

In a widely circulated reprint of his talk entitled “W.H.O. Murdered Africa” , he accused the organization of encouraging virologists and molecular biologists to work with deadly animal viruses in an attempt to make an immunosuppressive hybrid virus that would be deadly to humans.From the Bulletin of the World Health Organization (Volume 47, p.259, 1972), he quoted a passage that stated: “An attempt should be made to see if viruses can in fact exert selective effects on immune function. The possibility should be looked into that the immune response to the virus itself may be impaired if the infecting virus damages, more or less selectively, the cell responding to the virus.”

According to Douglass, “That’s AIDS. What the WHO is saying in plain English is Let’s cook up a virus that selectively destroys the T-cell system of man, an acquired immune deficiency.'” The entire article can be read on google.com (“WHO Murdered Africa”).In his 1989 book, ‘AIDS: The End of Civilization,’ Douglass claims the WHO laced the African vaccines. He blames “the virologists of the world, the sorcerers who brought us this ghastly plague, and have formed a united front in denying that the virus was laboratory-made from known, lethal animal viruses. The scientific party line is that a monkey in Africa with AIDS bit a native on the butt. The native then went to town and gave it to a prostitute who gave it to a local banker who gave it to his wife and three girl friends, and wham – 75 million people became infected with AIDS in Africa. An entirely preposterous story.

Two jews to owe your life to (and pay in full): No refunds.

They just can’t help themselves, can they?

Imagine The Times writing about two christians (or muslims) in the same vein, suggesting the world owes their lives to them because, being christian or muslim, means they are so exceptional – they’re god’s “chosen people”. Imagine it.

Meanwhile, has anyone asked how many they’ve killed with their vaccine (in another vein)?

Now, the article:

A Greek Jew, two Turkish-born Germans, a Lebanese Armenian and an Israeli walk into a bar.
Actually – not a bar, but a research lab. And it’s not a joke. It’s about brilliant people, all of them émigrés, some Jewish, whose vaccines will hopefully save countless lives in Israel and the world.
And there is a back story – about a century of Jewish genius that changed the world. It is recounted brilliantly by Norman Lebrecht, a British journalist and novelist, and graduate of Bar-Ilan University, in his book Genius and Anxiety: How Jews Changed the World, 1847-1947.
Let’s begin with the vaccine.
On Friday, November 13, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu signed a deal with the giant US pharmaceutical company Pfizer to purchase millions of coronavirus vaccine doses. It was only days after Pfizer announced clinical trials showed the vaccine was 90% effective at preventing COVID-19. Later reports raised its effectiveness to 95%.

[Now, one has to interrupt here. “90% and 95% effective”? We are now in December a year later and it is quite obvious and proven that the vaccines are entirely noneffective. That statement didn’t age well, did it? Even if one believes in a “Covid 19” virus, one cannot but acknowledge the fact – as stated by Boris Johnson and his team of scientists and all around the world: “The vaccine does not stop transmission at all” so while people are still hospitalised and still die “of Covid 19”, we are adding to that figure with the deaths of younger people and very fit people who have taken the vaccine! I’d, therefore, suggest, not only is the vaccine noneffective against ‘Covid” but it is very effective in causing death.]

Pfizer’s CEO is Albert Bourla. Bourla is Jewish. He was born, raised and educated in Thessaloniki, in northern Greece. He left Greece with his wife when he was 34.
In early 2020, Bourla pushed to accelerate Pfizer’s development of a possible vaccine against COVID-19. He did this in partnership with the German company BioNTech, founded by a Turkish-born married couple, Dr. Ugur Sahin, 55, and Dr. Ozlem Tureci, 53, who were educated in Germany, where they now live and work. Bourla boldly ordered preparations for production to begin, well before approval from the US Food and Drug Administration.

[Sorry to interrupt again but I’d like you to take a look and read very carefully, what the two turks are saying:

Now, why wouldn’t a couple, working for Pfizer/Biontech, tell you “there’s good news” because they’re working on “more vaccines” to deal with the new variant while the existing vaccines didn’t deal with the existing variants! They wouldn’t say “we are safe” because – duh! – they wouldn’t sell any more bloody vaccines! How simple does this have to be for people?

Plus, they say “and we stated also that we will see a new normal”. These two said that! They used the term “new normal”. Well well well! That is telling because the “new normal” phrase is actually founded in the climate change literature well before “Covid” ever appeared. But as the developers of the vaccines and, in conjunction with Pfizer, they would, of course, support the whole idea of there being a “new normal” to create conditions where we’re ‘inoculated’ continuously while other, non medical approaches like lockdowns can also be introduced.

The new normal and Sustainability Stewardship: https://s3.wasabisys.com/billgateswantstokillus.com/index.html#/videos/Earthling/The_New_Normal-A8SQN61HaMA ]

Dr. Noubar Afeyan, 58, is co-founder and chairman of the biotech company Moderna. Afeyan is Armenian, emigrated from Lebanon to Canada and eventually did his doctorate at MIT. His company Moderna was born in the famous MIT lab of Prof. Robert Langer.
Moderna’s chief medical officer is Dr. Tal Zaks, an Israeli who completed his M.D. degree at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev. Like the Pfizer-BioNTech version, Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine, too, has proven highly effective in clinical trials. Dr. Zaks believes the initial doses will arrive in Israel in early 2021.
Now, back to the back story – how Jews changed the world during the remarkable one hundred years, 1847-1947, according to Lebrecht. Lebrecht begins his book with the Communist Manifesto, published in London by Marx and Engels in 1848, and ends in 1947 with the birth pangs of the State of Israel.
From 1820 through 1924, an unending flow of Jews made their way to America from Europe, ending in a massive surge of immigrants in the early 1900’s. My mother and father were among them, driven by economic hardship, persecution, and the huge political upheavals of the 19th century.
Millions of European Jews left their towns and villages and embarked on the arduous journey to the goldene medina of America (and Canada), where Jewish genius flourished. It is fascinating that a similar massive wave of emigration – a million Russian Jews who emigrated to Israel – fueled the growth of Israel’s hi-tech industry, from 1990 to 2000.
After you read this book, it comes as no surprise that two Jews, Bourla and Zaks, are spearheading two COVID-19 vaccines to which many may one day soon owe their lives.

I interviewed Lebrecht by email. Here are his responses to my questions.
You are widely known for writing about music. How did you come to write about how Jews in general changed the world? Was it perhaps because of your book about the Jewish composer Gustav Mahler? Mahler was Jewish, but very remote from Judaism.
I have written two books about Mahler, in 1987 and 2010. In both, I dealt with specifically Jewish aspects of his life and work that had not been treated before. Judaism was integral to Mahler. His conversion to Christianity did not inhibit Judaism’s influence on his life and music in ways too numerous to describe here.
But that is not the reason I wrote Genius and Anxiety. The anomaly that Jews, constituting a fraction of one percent of world population, should be responsible for almost half the breakthroughs in society, arts and the sciences between the middle of the 19th and 20th centuries, was a question that had preoccupied me for half my adult life. I had to try to explain it.” [There were about 3 million Jews in 1847, out of a world population of 1.2 billion – or 0.25%].
THERE IS an interesting theory about the origins of extraordinary Jewish achievement, by Maristella Botticini and Zvi Eckstein, The Chosen Few: How Education Shaped Jewish History, 70-1492. [See “The Chosen Few”, the Report, Septemer 9 2013]. They write: “The destruction of the Second Temple in 70 C.E. transformed Judaism from a cult based on ritual sacrifices to a religion whose main norm required every Jewish man to read and study the Torah in Hebrew and to send his sons to school or synagogue to learn to do so. The unifying force of the Temple was replaced by the unifying force of Torah. But this meant every Jew had to be literate, to know the Torah. As a result, Jews were literate when others were not. This gave Jews a comparative advantage in the burgeoning commercial economy, in “crafts, trade, commerce, moneylending, banking, finance and medicine”. A voluntary diaspora occurred when Jews dispersed in search of worldwide opportunities.” Jews simply got a big head start.
So, what is the Lebrecht explanation?
I am concerned here only with this specific period, 1847-1947, which was also the period of greatest creativity in human history. Why the Jews played such a large role is rooted in a collective cultural unconscious – a common way of thinking – allied to a constant fear of disruption, as I explain in the book.
When anyone writes about how a specific religious and cultural “tribe” excels, there are cries of racism. Have you faced such criticism? If so, how do you respond?
On the contrary, reviews of the UK and US editions by non-Jews have been very positive, some with an air of near-astonishment, indicating that previous historians had not connected the dots between the vast number of Jews who were active in the period. There is nothing racist in stating that Jews have been awarded one-fifth of the Nobel prizes in science. That’s a fact. What lies behind that phenomenon is what prompted me to write the book.
The only criticism I have faced on this score has been from some Israeli interviewers who wanted to know why I regard Jews who converted as remaining part of the Jewish cultural unconscious.
LEBRECH RECOUNDS the genius of such well-known figures as Marx, Freud, Einstein and Kafka. But there are great many other Jewish geniuses in his book, far less well-known. Among them: Karl Landsteiner, whose research enabled physicians to transfuse blood without endangering patients’ lives; Paul Erlich, pioneer of chemotherapy, who found a cure for syphilis; Magnus Hershfield, among the earliest advocates for homosexual and transgender rights; and my favorite, Rosalind Franklin, whose X-ray diffraction images of DNA at King’s College, London, led Crick and Watson to their pathbreaking discovery of the DNA double helix. Franklin was only 37 when she died of ovarian cancer; the many X-rays she absorbed in her lab may have been a factor. Had she lived, she should surely have shared the DNA Nobel.
I can’t resist giving a plug to the Jewish mother theory of genius, by the legendary Israeli entrepreneur and angel investor Yossi Vardi. Jewish mothers push their children to aspire to greatness and to genius, he explains.
They do, indeed; I had one. But I fell short. My son is a doctor, my mother would say – but not the kind that helps people.
Isadore Rabi, son of Russian émigrés, credited his mom with his Nobel Prize in physics. When he used to come home from school, she did not ask him what he learned that day, but rather asked, “what good questions did you ask in school today, Isadore?” Later, Rabi’s good questions helped led him to discover nuclear magnetic resonance – the foundation of today’s lifesaving MRI imaging devices.
The Talmud is full of argumentative Rabbis with good questions – and we Jews have been arguing and imitating them for at least two thousand years.
Lebrecht explains in his book that if Jews excel in various professions, their excellence is in general a result of culture, not DNA. Bitter experience has taught Jews to think differently from others and maybe to think more deeply than others. He observes that Mahler used to say, Jews are like swimmers with short arms, they must invest twice as much effort to reach safe shores. And anxiety, Lebrecht writes, impacts Jews just as the tax collectors did in Egypt – it spurs them to acts of genius.

[Like this “act of genius” I suppose?

Meanwhile, as you watch and listen, ask yourself how many times you have heard of PROSECUTORS recommending no jail sentence. Also ask yourself the question: “How much of a coincidence is it that this same rabbi gets shot in a “anti semitic attack” on his specific synagogue”? He then, gets zero jail time while the others he ratted on, get 10 years or more. Don’t you smell one god almighty HUGE rat?]

More than a few of those in the book, Lebrecht notes, fit this elusive category – men and women who find the strength, in a time of crisis, to forge new paths in superhuman ways, with incredible genius for action and invention. Some are born geniuses; others, he notes, have genius thrust upon them at a certain point in their lives.
Is that, in fact, the story of the two “Jewish” vaccines?

The writer heads the Zvi Griliches Research Data Center at S. Neaman Institute, Technion and blogs at http://www.timnovate.wordpress.com
Genius & Anxiety: How Jews Changed the World, 1847-1947
Norman Lebrecht
Simon and Schuster, 2019
432 pages, Amazon $25.95
Hebrew edition: Kinneret, Zmora, Dvir: Modi-in, 2020, 511 pages

How many deaths and other adverse reactions due to their “miracle vaccines” which are entirely noneffective?

This might give you a summary: https://www.goyimtv.tv/view?v=1313872600

Medical communism via a needle

“We have lived our lives by the assumption that what was good for us would be good for the world. We have been wrong. We must change our lives so that it will be possible to live by the contrary assumption, what is good for the world will be good for us. And that requires that we make the effort to know the world and learn what is good for it.” Wendell Berry, From The Long-Legged House (1969)

What is planetary health? In the final report of The Rockefeller Foundation–Lancet Commission on Planetary Health, we define it this way: “the achievement of the highest attainable standard of health, wellbeing, and equity worldwide through judicious attention to the human systems—political, economic, and social—that shape the future of humanity and the Earth’s natural systems that define the safe environmental limits within which humanity can flourish. Put simply, planetary health is the health of human civilisation and the state of the natural systems on which it depends”.

Why might the idea of planetary health be useful? There are two dimensions that planetary health seeks to bring to human health. First, it situates human health within human systems. The threats that our species faces are not abstract physical risks, such as disease, climate change, ocean acidification, or chemical pollution. The risks we face lie within ourselves and the societies we have created. When we consider climate change, the main metric of danger is greenhouse gas emissions. But that measure should also include the capacity of human systems to monitor the threat, understand its importance, and act on that knowledge. Second, planetary health concerns the natural systems within which our species exists—for example, the health and diversity of the biosphere. Human beings live within a safe operating space of planetary existence. If the boundaries of that space are breached, the conditions for our survival will be diminished.

Currently, natural systems are being degraded to an extent unprecedented in history, with known and as yet unknown and unquantified effects on human health. For example, although evidence for causality between environmental change through deforestation and Ebola virus disease outbreaks is inconclusive, loss of forest land has brought people and wildlife into closer contact—with the inherent risks of zoonotic disease. There is surely an intergenerational responsibility to do no further harm and to create the systems to allow future generations to thrive and prosper—mentally, physically, and materially.We have previously tried to set out the minimum conditions for planetary health. 

As Stephen Boyden wrote in his book, The Biology of Civilisation, “While the main threats to humankind today are the consequence of the human aptitude for culture, our only hope for overcoming them lies in this aptitude”. Human cultures contain both the threat and opportunity for human flourishing. Civilisations come and civilisations go, typically over 300–500 year cycles. One should not be surprised by this time-bound civilisational history. Our museums are replete with artifacts from once great and dominant human cultures. Why should our civilisation be any different from the Assyrians, Mesopotamians, or Mayans? But, as Karl Butzer notes in his survey of the science of civilisations, “Much of the current alarmist literature that claims to draw from historical experience is poorly focused, simplistic, and unhelpful…Undue attention to stressors risks underestimating the intricate interplay of environmental, political, and sociocultural resilience in limiting the damages of collapse or in facilitating reconstruction”.

Butzer prefers to focus instead on the importance of “leaders, elites, and ideology”. In other words, governance and stewardship. Here is where human history meets current human predicaments.What is abundantly clear today is that the dangers facing our species will demand “urgent collective action at both local and global levels”.⁷ Cooperation will be indispensable for our survival. But every day we see the limits of our ability to collaborate with one another—conflict, nationalism, competition. One active area of research that is not obviously mainstream for global health, but which is core to the idea of planetary health, is understanding what helps or hinders human cooperation. Is it binding democratic voting? Or “mutual coercion, mutually agreed upon”? Or universal education? Or independent accountability? The recent Lancet Commission on Health and Climate Change will use an accountability mechanism over the next 15 years to track, support, and communicate progress and success in addressing the connections between health and climate.

View Large ImageCopyright © 2015 Barcroft/Contributor/Getty Images

The Rockefeller Foundation–Lancet Commission on Planetary Health first met in Bellagio, Italy, in July, 2014. Chaired by Andy Haines of the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, the Commission is a diverse group of global experts in environmental health, medicine, biodiversity, and ecology who reached a powerful consensus around key messages and the urgency of planetary health as an idea in jeopardy. The Commission’s report outlines three challenges that must be addressed to enhance human health in the face of unprecedented environmental challenges.

First, a conceptual challenge to account for the future health and environmental harms to development and prosperity that many countries face. Second, knowledge and information challenges, including lack of transdisciplinary research and a failure to identify the social and environmental drivers of ill health. Finally, governance challenges.

Planetary health is a new science that is only beginning to draw the coordinates of its interests and concerns. It demands new coalitions and partnerships across many different disciplines to meet the pervasive knowledge failures identified by this Commission. It demands new attention to governance and implementation. And, perhaps most of all, it demands more creative imagination among scientists and practitioners working in health—redefining the meaning of human progress, rethinking the possibilities for human cooperation, and revitalising the prospects for the health of human civilisations.

We thank The Rockefeller Foundation for their generous financial support to The Rockefeller Foundation–Lancet Commission on Planetary Health and for hosting meetings in Bellagio, Italy, and New York, USA. We thank Andy Haines for his chairing of the Commission and Sarah Whitmee for her lead authorship. We thank Tim Shorten for project management of the Commission and Micheline Kennedy of GMMB for leading communications around global launches. We thank Commissioners for their commitment to this Commission report and its dissemination, and peer reviewers for their thoughtful contributions to the process. We also thank the participants of The Rockefeller–Economist Visionaries Unbound Planetary Health workshop for providing Commissioners with a broad background discussion to focus the first Commissioners meeting.