Please do your own research. The information I share is only a catalyst to expanding ones confined consciousness. I have NO desire for anyone to blindly believe or agree with what I share. Seek the truth for yourself and put your own puzzle together that has been presented to you. I'm not here to teach, preach or lead, but rather assist in awakening the consciousness of the collective from its temporary dormancy.
♦ In late March 2022, New Zealand recorded 20,000 cases of COVID-19 infection (yesterday), and announces they are dropping almost all COVID restrictions, removing vaccination mandates and eliminating COVID passports.
Nothing shouts ‘scamdemic‘ louder than the government’s own behavior in this example.
Was COVID-19 ever more concerning than a severe flu, which was then weaponized by government to induce a global fear and trigger mass formation psychosis as a gateway for a new model society?
That question is for the history books. However, the changed political landscape, in combination with the Florida result, appear to hold the answers. (…)
Keep in mind, this announcement is happening at the same time COVID-19 infections are higher than at any time previously in Kiwi history.
You will never be able to convince the masses of people that they have been victimized by the most widespread global hysteria in modern history.
Indeed, it would be a futile effort to do so, just like it would be futile to try and stop the people who are thirsting desperately for their fourth, fifth or whatever booster shot.
People now define themselves and others by their behavior during the pandemic scare of the past two years. It would be an exercise in futility to try and convince anyone; and factually it would be exhausting and wasteful.
However, for anyone who can intellectually look at the landscape, it is impossible not to have seriously well founded questions about the statistics of the COVID-19 pandemic – when contrast against two ordinary years of a strong flu season in both the northern and southern hemisphere.
One of the key *tells*, amid this entire COVID fear timeline, is the difference between how western government leaders spoke publicly about the rules, regulations, mandates and restrictions, and how they personally acted in private when they didn’t know they were being watched.
And now we find ourselves with barely enough time to take down the COVID-19 decorations before those same western government officials began weaponizing the Ukraine fear.
Here is the announcement, straight from the horse’s mouth:
Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, of the center-left New Zealand Labour Party, announced in a video that if people sent to the camp refuse to be tested, they will be required to remain another two weeks after their initial two-week stay.
Ardern called the warning a “pretty good incentive” to get tested for COVID-19.
“You either get your test done and make sure you are cleared, or we will keep you in a facility longer,” she said.
“So I think most people look at that and say, ‘I will take the test.’”
Hanson told host Laura Ingraham that such draconian measures that Ardern’s orders make no sense given how little the pandemic has affected the island nation.
“They have a nation of 5 million people,” Hanson explained.
“They’ve only lost, tragically, but they lost 25 people. That’s an astoundingly low number to throw away personal freedom.”
“Here in the United States, whether it is [California Gov.] Gavin Newsom or Michelle Obama or Joe Biden, they have all said that this is an opportunity not to let go to waste” he added.
Later in the segment, Ingraham cited a German media report that the European Parliament and the European Commission is using China-made thermal imaging cameras in an effort to prevent the spread of COVID-19.
The DW.com report noted that the company that makes the cameras is also accused of supplying technology used by Beijing to patrol and surveil Muslim internment camps in Xinjiang province.
“Are these the type of scenarios we are going to be facing under a Biden administration?” she asked Hanson.
“Yeah, it’s frightening,” he responded.
“Here, the virus started in China, spread from China, and now China is offering the West the methodology and technology of fascism to supposedly cure what they started.”
Asleep: I’m OK. Just trying to stay safe with all this death and suffering going on.
Awake: I can see that. Look at you all decked out — mask, plastic gloves, 6-foot tape measure, hand-sanitizer. CoronaVirus doesn’t stand a chance against you!
Asleep: Oh this thing is bad, I tell ya. A friend of a friend’s uncle’s brother-in-law’s father just died in the nursing home.
Awake: That’s just awful. How old was he?
Asleep: He was 95. He also smoked and had diabetes too.
Awake: Oh. I see.
Asleep: Bill Gates is saying that this might be a once-in–century pandemic. You should be wearing a mask, my friend! Aren’t you worried?
Awake: Not at all. At worst, this is just another strain of flu.
Asleep: What?!! No. No. No. You are badly mistaken. This is not like the flu. It attacks the lungs. It’s much deadlier than any flu.
Awake: Actually, it’s not. You see, the only measure of deadliness that truly matters is the actual body count. And according to the published numbers of the all-mighty, all-knowing CDC, the death tolls attributed to Covid-19 — which are being deliberately and grossly inflated, by the way –– are actually lower than many past flu seasons. Take the 2017-2018 season, for example — 61,000 deaths were linked to the flu in the United States (here). Covid deaths in 2020, on the other hand, are now leveling off after just 26,000. So, what’s all the fuss all about? Are you willing to shut down the world, throw millions into unemployment, and surrender your freedom for the cold & flu season every year?
Asleep: Well, I see your point about the relative numbers. But, Dr. Fauci said that if we hadn’t practiced social distancing, many more would have died.
Awake: How does the heck that sneaky little rat bastard know that?
Asleep: Well, computer models indicated that 2 million Americans might have died. Dr. Oz and Dr. Gupta on TV said so too.
Awake: You know what they say about computer models, right? Garbage in — garbage out. A better way — a more scientific way — to evaluate such hypothetical scenarios would be to examine the death toll per one million of population in those countries which did not impose social distancing, mask-wearing, quarantines or shelter-in-place policies. Sweden and Belarus, for example, kept the children in school and the businesses open. Their deaths-per-million number is actually lower than the alleged death numbers in the United States!
frightened Asleep people will feel better once they know the facts- instead of believing Fake News. 2. The numbers tell the truth. Flu deaths of previous years were much higher than CV-19 deaths on the same time range. 3. GIGO = Garbage In – Garbage Out. CV-19 models demostrates how “science” via computer models is often No science at all.
Awake: As even Fauci’s sidekick, Dr. Deborah Birx, has admitted — the U.S. has what she calls “a very liberal” procedure for categorizing Covid deaths. No distinction is being made between people who die with the virus versus those who may have died because of the virus. Let me pull it up on my I-phone. Here is her exact quote:
“I think in this country, we’ve taken a very liberal approach to mortality. There are other countries that if you had a pre-existing condition, and let’s say the virus caused you to go to the ICU [intensive care unit] and then have a heart or kidney problem. Some countries are recording that as a heart issue or a kidney issue and not a COVID-19 death. The intent is if someone dies with COVID-19, we are counting that as a COVID-19 death.” (here)
What do you have to say about that?
Asleep: Wow! So, you’re saying that not only are the numbers lower than annual flu deaths, but are being exaggerated as well?
Awake: That is correct. But it’s not really me saying it. I’m just telling it. But it get worse! Did you know that MediCare has incentivized hospitals and nursing homes to classify as many patients as they can as having Covid? The average payment for a Covid diagnosis is about $10,000. If the patient is placed on a dangerous (often deadly) ventilator, the reimbursement grows to a whopping $40,000. To top it off, the government will also issue payments for “end-of-life” care. (here)
Given that family members are no longer allowed to visit their elderly loved ones in solitary captivity, there’s no telling what type of mischief these administrators are up to. Grandmom is worth more dead to them than alive! For all these reasons, the numbers are being rigged upward. Make sense?
Asleep: Oh my God! Yes. That does make a lot of sense! Nonetheless, in spite of the logical points you have raised — they are saying on the News that this virus is killing young people and children too — not just the elderly and sick. The regular flu doesn’t do that.
Awake: Really? Let me pull up some headlines — all from “respected” outlets of the “mainstream news” — about flu deaths and young people from previous years and also this year before Covid came onto the scene.
Wired.com: January, 2014: Why is This Year’s Flu So Dangerous for Young Adults? (here)
The Atlantic: November, 2016: Why Some Flus are Deadliest in Young Adults (here)
NBC News: January, 2018: Every Year, Flu Carries Away Perfectly Healthy Young Adults and Children (here)
NBC News: January, 2020: 2 Prominent Flu Strains are Hitting Kids and the Young Particularly Hard (here)
CNN News: January, 2020: A Teen’s Final Days with the Flu (here)
AAP Medical News, 2020: Flu Figures Show 125 Deaths of Children — Record High Hospitalization (here)
Plenty more where those stories came from. What do you have to say about that?
Asleep: Wow. I’m speechless! So then, what is all the hysteria all about? I don’t get it? Is it about money for Big Pharma?
Awake: That’s part of the motive, but there is a much bigger picture above that. The primary agenda here is all about a Control that has been taking place between a few evil entities on one side; and us, the majority.
Asleep: Thanks for the information! I will look into it. — And stay safe.
The push for 5G forges on regardless of any safety testing. The mainstream continues to tout the idea that no science shows dangers associated with 5G radiation, but there are also no studies to show that it is safe.
The truth is, there are medical and health experts who have been raising their concerns with regards to 5G technology, and human exposure to electromagnetic frequencies for quite some time. I’ve published multiple articles expressing these concerns.
For example, Dr. Sharon Goldberg, an internal medicine physician, a former medical school assistant professor, and academic with more than two decades in the field gave her testimony regarding electromagnetic radiation and 5G in Michigan, after an industry sponsored 5G wireless infrastructure legislation recently passed through the Michigan House Energy Policy Committee with a vote of 15 to 4. You can watch that and read more about that here.
So, it’s not like awareness is not getting out there, a few months ago, a number of doctors, scientists and activists sent a National 5G Resolution letter to President Trump, requesting a moratorium on 5G technology until the potential hazards for human health have been appropriately investigated.
The Environmental Health Trust is actually a great place to access more of the science on this topic if you’re interested in learning more.
Unfortunately, President Donald Trump recently signed into law a pair of bills designed to boost wireless and broadband networks: the Secure 5G and Beyond Act and the Broadband Deployment Accuracy and Technological Availability Act. You can read more about that here.
Despite all of the concerns being raised, the international body in charge of setting limits on exposure to radiation, The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), A Germany-based scientific body that assesses the health risks of this kind of thing, is claiming that 5G radiation is completely safe.
Dr. Eric van Rongen, the ICNIRP chair, said:
“We know parts of the community are concerned about the safety of 5G and we hope the updated guidelines will help put people at ease. The guidelines have been developed after a thorough review of all relevant scientific literature, scientific workshops and an extensive public consultation process.
“They provide protection against all scientifically substantiated adverse health effects due to [electromagnetic field] exposure in the 100 kHz to 300 GHz range.” (source)
The question is, why is there so much conflicting information, with some scientific bodies claiming that it’s safe, and others claiming that it’s not? Clearly, there are some issues here.
Why would they refer to such concerns being published by doctors and scientists in peer-reviewed literature as “conspiracy theories?” Why do they constantly use the ridicule factor instead of simply sharing both sides from a place of neutrality?
Why is this “conspiracy theory” narrative constantly used within the mainstream instead of actually addressing the concerns that many scientists and health experts are having?
Perhaps this conflict comes as a result of corporate influence? Paul Bischoff, a tech journalist and privacy advocate, recently compiled data regarding telecom’s political contributions to influence policies that benefit their industry, it’s quite revealing.
A study published in 2019 is one of many that raises concerns. It’s titled “Risks to Health and Well-Being From Radio-Frequency Radiation Emitted by Cell Phones and Other Wireless Devices.”
It outlines how, “In some countries, notably the US, scientific evidence of the potential hazards of RFR has been largely dismissed (. Findings of carcinogenicity, infertility and cell damage occurring at daily exposure levels—within current limits—indicate that existing exposure standards are not sufficiently protective of public health.
“Evidence of carcinogenicity alone, such as that from the NTP study, should be sufficient to recognize that current exposure limits are inadequate.”
It goes on to state that “Public health authorities in many jurisdictions have not yet incorporated the latest science from the U.S. NTP or other groups. Many cite 28-year old guidelines by the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers which claimed that “Research on the effects of chronic exposure and speculations on the biological significance of non-thermal interactions have not yet resulted in any meaningful basis for alteration of the standard”
It’s one of many that call for safety testing before the rollout of 5G testing, because all we have right now from those who claim that it’s safe are ‘reviews of literature’ that are determining it’s safe.
This particular study emphasizes:
The Telecom industry’s fifth generation (5G) wireless service will require the placement of many times more small antennae/cell towers close to all recipients of the service, because solid structures, rain and foliage block the associated millimeter wave RFR (72).
Frequency bands for 5G are separated into two different frequency ranges. Frequency Range 1 (FR1) includes sub-6 GHz frequency bands, some of which are bands traditionally used by previous standards, but has been extended to cover potential new spectrum offerings from 410 to 7,125 MHz. Frequency Range 2 (FR2) includes higher frequency bands from 24.25 to 52.6 GHz.
Bands in FR2 are largely of millimeter wave length, these have a shorter range but a higher available bandwidth than bands in the FR1. 5G technology is being developed as it is also being deployed, with large arrays of directional, steerable, beam-forming antennae, operating at higher power than previous technologies.
5G is not stand-alone—it will operate and interface with other (including 3G and 4G) frequencies and modulations to enable diverse devices under continual development for the “internet of things,” driverless vehicles and more (72).
Novel 5G technology is being rolled out in several densely populated cities, although potential chronic health or environmental impacts have not been evaluated and are not being followed.
Higher frequency (shorter wavelength) radiation associated with 5G does not penetrate the body as deeply as frequencies from older technologies although its effects may be systemic (73, 74).
The range and magnitude of potential impacts of 5G technologies are under-researched, although important biological outcomes have been reported with millimeter wavelength exposure. These include oxidative stress and altered gene expression, effects on skin and systemic effects such as on immune function (74).
In vivo studies reporting resonance with human sweat ducts (73), acceleration of bacterial and viral replication, and other endpoints indicate the potential for novel as well as more commonly recognized biological impacts from this range of frequencies, and highlight the need for research before population-wide continuous exposures.
One major theme of the study is the absence of science proving that this technology is safe.
With this absence of human evidence, governments must require large-scale animal studies (or other appropriate studies of indicators of carcinogenicity and other adverse health effects) to determine whether the newest modulation technologies incur risks, prior to release into the marketplace.
Governments should also investigate short-term impacts such as insomnia, memory, reaction time, hearing and vision, especially those that can occur in children and adolescents, whose use of wireless devices has grown exponentially within the past few years.
How can science like this be deemed a conspiracy theory? If it is, why are scientists allowed to publish it after going through a rigorous peer-reviewed process in an esteemed scientific journal?
At the end of the day, many doctors and scientists are concerned about the rollout of 5G technology, and the already existing levels of unnatural radiation that humanity is exposed to.
Clearly, there are biological effects, but some studies point out that conclusions can’t be made.
For example, a study published in The International Journal of Environmental Health titled “5G Wireless Communication and Health Effects—A Pragmatic Review Based on Available Studies Regarding 6 to 100 GHz” pointed out that,
The majority of studies with MMW exposures show biological responses. From this observation, however, no in-depth conclusions can be drawn regarding the biological and health effects of MMW exposures in the 6–100 GHz frequency range.
The studies are very different and the total number of studies is surprisingly low. The reactions occur both in vivo and in vitro and affect all biological endpoints studied.
This particular study was even funded by Deutsche Telekom Technik GmbH, and again, it emphasizes that “no -in-depth” conclusions can be drawn.
If this is true, as some studies argue it’s not and certain conclusions can be drawn, then shouldn’t we wait until “in-depth” conclusions can be drawn that guarantee our safety? Something to think about.
A list of Annual Reports by telecommunication companies clearly shows how companies warn their shareholders but not residents living near cell antennas. Read more here. They are already facing numerous lawsuits.
At the end of the day, this begs the question, do we really live in a democracy? If 5G came down to a vote from the people within that country, it’s hard to believe the vote would pass.
Today, we seem to be living in a time where governments and big corporations can enforce measures upon us that we do not desire, or in this case, impose measures upon us that have not yet been proved to be safe.
This is one of many examples of why people continue to lose trust in governments as well as federal health regulatory agencies. Furthermore, there seems to be a large bias within the mainstream media, almost ridiculing the idea.
Prime Minister of Iceland Katrin Jakobsdottir is now urging governments to prioritize sustainability and family time over obsessing about economic growth — as most developed nations seem to do.
Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeion and New Zealand’s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern have teamed up with Iceland’s PM to promote an agenda focused on “well-being.”
Jakobsdottir has called for “an alternative future based on well-being and inclusive growth.”
She feels that new social indicators are needed outside of the traditional Gross Domestic Product (GDP) data.
It’s About Time
You’d think that the overall well-being of a nation, extreme regard to protecting the environment, and working towards global sustainability would be the top priorities for all nations of the Earth.
However, for the most part, it is all about the economy: how can we support the economy, how can we grow the economy, how can we protect the economy?
I love the following Cree Indian proverb, it fits nicely here:
“When the last tree has been cut down, the last fish caught, the last river poisoned, only then will we realize that one cannot eat money.”
It’s about time someone started standing up for the people and the planet, and this stance is sure to turn some heads.
Prioritizing Mental Health
Back In August, Nicola Sturgeon of Scotland made a plea during a TED Talk for modern economies to consider mental health, childcare, parental leave and green energy.
“Iceland uses more antidepressants than neighboring countries,” she said. “We need to strengthen prevention [of depression], through sports and the arts.”
This is an amazing initiative put forth by leaders of these nations to do whatever it takes to support the citizens who are struggling with mental health disorders, particularly depression. They are able to see that the most important thing is not economic growth, because what difference does that make if so many people are unhappy?