Consider The Possibility That This Is Already The Dystopia You Fear

Consider the possibility that the Orwellian dystopia you fear is already here and has been in place for many years, you just haven’t noticed because you’re still allowed to watch Netflix or buy a gun or say whatever you want to say within a small impotent online echo chamber.

Consider the possibility that the powerful are already getting everything they want from you, right now, exactly as things are, and that any suspicious action you see them taking isn’t them constructing a cage for you but them tightening the bolts on a cage that was quietly built around you some time ago.

Consider the possibility that while they’ve been training you to watch out for communism and microchips and overt totalitarianism, they’ve been covertly transforming us all into mindless gears in a machine constructed to serve their interests which challenges them in no way, shape or form.

Consider the possibility that tyrants have evolved an understanding that you can exert a lot more control over a population with mass-scale psychological manipulation than you can with overt force, and that they have been developing the science of that mass-scale psychological manipulation for over a century.

Consider the possibility that we’re like a woman who always feared winding up in a physically abusive relationship like the kind depicted on television, and then wound up in a psychologically abusive relationship where her very mind is bent to the will of her abuser in every way.

Consider the possibility that just like in a psychologically abusive relationship, we’re manipulated into believing things are fine and that we give our abuser everything he wants of our own free will and that any problems that arise come from us and not our abuser, and that we are so well-trained at this that we’ve even learned to gaslight ourselves.

Consider the possibility that governments forcefully seizing control of all media and transforming them into official state propaganda outlets would actually be far less efficient at mass brainwashing than our current system in which people believe they are getting accurate information from a free and honest press.

Consider the possibility that if the powerful were able to surgically implant microchips in our brains and control everything we think and do, what they’d make us think and do would not be significantly different from what the overwhelming majority of us already think and do.

Consider the possibility that the dystopia we’ve been worried about has already been ushered in, not from any of the directions we’ve been conditioned to anticipate, but through the simple fact that the human mind is far more hackable than we’ve been conditioned to believe.

Consider the possibility that while we’ve been trained to fear communist authoritarians taking over and forcing us to obey their will, capitalist authoritarians have had us marching to the exact drumbeat they desire for generations. And we only think this is freedom because we’ve been trained to think that.

Consider the possibility that you’ve been trained to believe freedom looks like being able to buy a gun which we all know you’ll never use against the powerful, or choose from 197 kinds of potato chip at the grocery store, when really that mindless consumption is just you turning the gears of your own prison.

Consider the possibility that real freedom isn’t being able to consume whatever advertisers have convinced you to consume, it’s being able to think with a mind that has not been molded by the powerful, to educate yourself in an information ecosystem that is not locked down by those who rule over you, and to speak the truth without having your speech stifled by oppressive dominators.

Consider the possibility that the only thing keeping us from creating heaven on earth is our inability to clearly see what’s going on in our world and thus strategize a truth-based path out of this mess, and that the powerful know this, and that that’s why they work so hard to keep us from seeing clearly.

Consider the possibility that the real obstacle to terrestrial harmony is not so much opposing ideologies as the fact that all attempts to see clearly what’s really going on in our world are being actively obstructed by propaganda, by Silicon Valley manipulation, and by government secrecy.

Consider the possibility that the bastards succeed not by overtly quashing dissent but by covertly quashing all will towards dissent, and that we succeed not by trying to ward off a dystopia that’s already here but by working to awaken the giant within our brothers and sisters from its propaganda-induced coma.

Consider the possibility that real freedom means all of humanity awakening from our dehumanizing role as brainwashed gear-turners for the capitalist machine and uncorking the wild unpredictable brilliance within us that our oppressors have worked so hard to keep bottled up.

Consider the possibility that there is so much more to us than we’ve been permitted to know, and that the only thing keeping us from achieving our true potential as a species at this point in history is a propaganda-induced misunderstanding of what is freedom and what is slavery.

The novel coronavirus’ spike protein plays additional key role in illness

Salk researchers and collaborators show how the protein damages cells, confirming COVID-19 as a primarily vascular disease

LA JOLLA—Scientists have known for a while that SARS-CoV-2’s distinctive “spike” proteins help the virus infect its host by latching on to healthy cells. Now, a major new study shows that the virus spike proteins (which behave very differently than those safely encoded by vaccines) also play a key role in the disease itself.

The paper, published on April 30, 2021, in Circulation Research, also shows conclusively that COVID-19 is a vascular disease, demonstrating exactly how the SARS-CoV-2 virus damages and attacks the vascular system on a cellular level. The findings help explain COVID-19’s wide variety of seemingly unconnected complications, and could open the door for new research into more effective therapies.

A lot of people think of it as a respiratory disease, but it’s really a vascular disease,” says Assistant Research Professor Uri Manor, who is co-senior author of the study. “That could explain why some people have strokes, and why some people have issues in other parts of the body. The commonality between them is that they all have vascular underpinnings.”

Salk researchers collaborated with scientists at the University of California San Diego on the paper, including co-first author Jiao Zhang and co-senior author John Shyy, among others.

While the findings themselves aren’t entirely a surprise, the paper provides clear confirmation and a detailed explanation of the mechanism through which the protein damages vascular cells for the first time. There’s been a growing consensus that SARS-CoV-2 affects the vascular system, but exactly how it did so was not understood. Similarly, scientists studying other coronaviruses have long suspected that the spike protein contributed to damaging vascular endothelial cells, but this is the first time the process has been documented.

In the new study, the researchers created a “pseudovirus” that was surrounded by SARS-CoV-2 classic crown of spike proteins, but did not contain any actual virus. Exposure to this pseudovirus resulted in damage to the lungs and arteries of an animal model—proving that the spike protein alone was enough to cause disease. Tissue samples showed inflammation in endothelial cells lining the pulmonary artery walls.

The team then replicated this process in the lab, exposing healthy endothelial cells (which line arteries) to the spike protein. They showed that the spike protein damaged the cells by binding ACE2. This binding disrupted ACE2’s molecular signaling to mitochondria (organelles that generate energy for cells), causing the mitochondria to become damaged and fragmented.

Previous studies have shown a similar effect when cells were exposed to the SARS-CoV-2 virus, but this is the first study to show that the damage occurs when cells are exposed to the spike protein on its own.

“If you remove the replicating capabilities of the virus, it still has a major damaging effect on the vascular cells, simply by virtue of its ability to bind to this ACE2 receptor, the S protein receptor, now famous thanks to COVID,” Manor explains. “Further studies with mutant spike proteins will also provide new insight towards the infectivity and severity of mutant SARS CoV-2 viruses.”

The researchers next hope to take a closer look at the mechanism by which the disrupted ACE2 protein damages mitochondria and causes them to change shape.

Other authors on the study are Yuyang Lei and Zu-Yi Yuan of Jiaotong University in Xi’an, China; Cara R. Schiavon, Leonardo Andrade, and Gerald S. Shadel of Salk; Ming He, Hui Shen, Yichi Zhang, Yoshitake Cho, Mark Hepokoski, Jason X.-J. Yuan, Atul Malhotra, Jin Zhang of the University of California San Diego; Lili Chen, Qian Yin, Ting Lei, Hongliang Wang and Shengpeng Wang of Xi’an Jiatong University Health Science Center in Xi’an, China.

The research was supported by the National Institutes of Health, the National Natural Science Foundation of China, the Shaanxi Natural Science Fund, the National Key Research and Development Program, the First Affiliated Hospital of Xi’an Jiaotong University; and Xi’an Jiaotong University.

Conservatives Must Now Draw A Line In The Sand And Stop The “Great Reset”

By Brandon Smith

There are many millions of Americans today in the post-election environment that feel uneasy about the fate of the country given the rise of a Biden presidency. And though I understand why this tension exists, I want to offer a possible “silver lining”; a different way of looking at the situation:

With Biden in the White House, there is no longer any ambiguity about what conservatives (and some of the more courageous moderates) need to do and need to accomplish. Now we know where we stand, and now the stakes are clear.

With Trump in office, a lot of liberty minded people became a little too comfortable, to the point that they were inactive. They actually believed the system could be repaired and corruption ended from within, and without much effort on our part beyond our votes. Trump made many conservatives lazy.

Then there was the Q-anon-sense floating around on the web which also misled some freedom activists into thinking that people much higher placed or “smarter” than us were fighting the good fight behind the scenes and that the globalists would be swept up in a grand 4D chess maneuver. This was a fantasy; it was never going to happen. Finally, everyone knows this and we can get on with the business of fighting the real battles ahead.

I think we are reaching a stage in the conflict between freedom advocates and collectivist tyrants when many illusions are going to melt away, and all we will be left with is cold hard reality. Now is the time when we find out who is going to stand their ground and fight for what they believe in, and who is going to cower and submit just to save their own skin. Now is the time when we find out who has balls.

The last four years plus the election of 2020 have revealed that political solutions are out the window. A lot of conservatives should have known better, but maybe it takes a perceived disaster to shock some people out of their waking dreams. Elections, voting, potential third parties; it’s all Kabuki theater. It’s all a facade to keep us docile and under control.

The liberty movement cannot revolve around a single political figure. We cannot bottleneck our efforts into the hands of one man or one political party. The fight is up to us – each of us as individuals. It was ALWAYS up to us.

A different form of organization needs to happen if Americans are going to protect our freedoms; a grassroots approach from the ground up rather than the top down. There will of course be people who stand out as teachers and pioneers, those that lead by example. But overall, the movement will not be acting on orders from on high. Rather, it will be acting according to self motivation. The liberty movement is not driven by personalities, but by shared principles which take on a life of their own.

I’m not worried about Biden. In fact, his presence may be the best thing to happen to conservative unity in well over a decade. The only thing I worry about, as noted, is who is going to stand their ground, and who is going to give in?

Biden may also be a wake up call for any moderate democrats out there who thought that by voting for a hair-sniffing corporate puppet they might put an end to the division and civil unrest in the nation. I think they will discover that Joe will attract even MORE civil unrest. He might trigger more looting and rioting by Antifa and BLM than Trump did, by the simple fact these insane people will assume that Biden will be malleable and easier to exploit.

Biden himself is not all that important; he is nothing more than a foil for bigger events and a proxy for more nefarious people. His presence signals that the “Great Reset” agenda is fully greenlit. This agenda has a pretty obvious set of goals, many of them openly admitted to by the World Economic Forum, and some of them strongly implied by the extreme political left and the media. They include:

1) Perpetual pandemic lockdowns and economic controls until the population submits to medical tyranny.

2) Medical passports and contact tracing as a part of everyday life.

3) The censorship and de-platforming of all voices that oppose the agenda.

4) Greatly reduced economic activity in the name of stopping “climate change”.

5) Greatly increased poverty and the loss of private property.

6) The introduction of “Universal Basic Income” in which the government becomes the all-powerful welfare provider and nursemaid for a generation of dependent and desperate people.

7) A cashless society and digital currency system where privacy in trade is completely erased.

8) The creation of a “shared economy” in which no one will own anything and independent production is outlawed.

9) The deletion of national borders and the end of sovereignty and self-determination.

10) The centralization of global political power into the hands of a select few elitists.

Now, you would think that most sensible people would be opposed to such a dystopian agenda. It would inevitably lead to mass death in economic terms, as well as war. Unless you are a psychopath that gets a vicarious thrill from the brutal oppression of millions of people, or you are a globalist that stands to gain immense power, there is nothing about the Reset that benefits you.

That said, there will still be millions of useful idiots that support totalitarian policies, and they will act to enforce them. Some of them will be convinced that they are serving the “greater good”, and others will think that they can “earn a place at the table” if they lick the boots of tyrants long enough. Bottom line? It’s not just the globalists we need to worry about, it is also the contingent of zombies they have duped or bribed into serving the Reset.

The information war is about to take a backseat and a new fight is about to begin. But how will it start?

I believe the first test for conservatives will be Biden’s pandemic response. The Reset agenda and the pandemic are closely intertwined. Do not be misled by calls from Democrats to reopen the economy; there are strings attached.

When New York Governor Andrew Cuomo said that the state needed to reopen, or there would be “nothing left”, he also consistently hinted that vaccination numbers needed to improve. There are two big lies involved in this narrative – The first is that the vaccination rollout has failed on a technical level.

They want us to believe that only around 60% of the first 2 million vaccine doses have been administered because the state and hospitals failed to get them to citizens fast enough. The truth is, as we’ve seen in numerous polls of Americans and medical staff, millions of people DO NOT WANT to take the vaccine. The situation in New York must be shocking to establishment elites; it’s one of the most leftists states in the US and yet they can’t seem to trick enough people into taking the shot.

The same is true across the country, and it’s not because of bureaucratic failure, it is a propaganda failure.

Second, Cuomo’s statements hint that though lockdowns are destroying the economy, vaccine saturation is paramount. The message is this – “Take the vaccine, or the economy will crash.” The pandemic response is a carrot and stick approach: The lockdowns are the stick, and the reopenings are the carrot.

Of course, even if most people get vaccinated and submit to medical passports and contact tracing like good little slaves, this does not mean life will go back to normal. On the contrary, things will get much worse.

As I have noted in past articles like ‘Waves Of Mutilation: Medical Tyranny And The Cashless Society’, the globalists have admitted that the covid mandates and controls are going to be in place for many years, perhaps forever. Elites at MIT and the Imperial College Of London have written extensively about a strategy I call “Wave Theory”, in which governments constantly batter the public with waves of lockdowns followed by brief windows of partial openings and limited freedom.

The reopenings are a trick, a way to release public tension like a steam valve and make everyone think that the crisis is almost over. Then, the draconian mandates are brought back once again. This will never end. The only way to stop it is to remove the globalists from power and crush the Reset agenda.

A new narrative is already being injected into the mainstream media hinting that even vaccinations will not lead to freedom.

Anthony Fauci and others have argued that those who are vaccinated still need to follow lockdown mandates and wear masks. This policy completely ignores the scientific FACT that the death rate of covid is only 0.26% for anyone outside of a nursing home. It ignores the fact that masks have been consistently proven to do nothing to stop the spread of the virus. It ignores the fact that hospitals across the US have remained mostly empty, with only 15% of capacity in use during Covid . And, it ignores the fact that the vaccines are barely tested experimental cocktails that even the former VP of Pfizer has warned might cause dangerous autoimmune reactions and infertility.

On top of this, more and more stories about “covid mutations” are hitting the news wire. They are supposedly more infectious and more deadly than the original (which runs contrary to the natural evolution of the vast majority of viruses), and the mutation in South Africa is also “possibly” unaffected by existing vaccines. There is no concrete proof to support any of the claims, but I think you see where all of this is headed, right?

My guess is that in about two months the CDC and WHO will announce a new global outbreak of a more deadly strain of Covid. They will say the current vaccines are ineffective, and that lockdowns must continue. Hundreds of millions of people around the world are savvy to the old covid-19 scheme, so the elites are going to introduce covid-20, and covid-21, and covid-22, etc.

Biden will call for Level 4 lockdowns similar to those implemented in Europe and Australia, and this is where conservatives must draw a line in the sand and announce that we are not subject to unconstitutional restrictions, that we are breaking free. This will be our first major test.

It’s not enough to simply say “I won’t submit” when the consequences are minimal. One must be willing to fight back even when the consequences are dire. Being willing to lose everything for what you believe, being willing to possibly die for your values and principles means you are no longer a spectator in history, but an actor that can affect the future. Anything less is not enough to win the war that is coming.

Take the damn Mask off…

https://www.thelocal.dk/20201118/danish-study-finds-no-clear-evidence-face-masks-protect-wearer-from-covid-19-infection

Tyrannical New Bill: Quarantine Camps & Forced Vaccinations – This Must Stop NOW!

Remember all those articles warning about about FEMA Camps, and how everyone said that you were a conspiracy nut job for believing that?

Well, surprise, surprise, turns out you may have been right on the money all along, why do I say that?

Quarantine Camps & Forced Vaccinations Proposed By New Bill (ny Sb416) – This Must Stop Now!

Because right now the New York State Assembly is proposing Bill A416 that would remand people deemed to be “disease carriers”, and put them away in a facility chosen by the Democrat leadership of New York.

People like Governor Andrew Cuomo who’s executive order killed over 11,000 elderly at the start of the COVID crisis.

The Gateway Pundit reports “Bill A416 relates to “the removal of cases, contacts and carriers of communicable diseases that are potentially dangerous to the public health.”

The Governor would have sweeping powers to indefinitely detain American citizens and put them in internment camps.”

This is not an over-estimation of just how scary and just how dangerous this situation is.

Is COVID-19 being used to create an American gulag in the name of fighting a pandemic? It sure look like it.

Remember all those people in Berlin in 1933, all those Jews who watched what was coming and decided to ‘ride it out’? Think you will fare any better than they did?

When we talk about NY Gov. Andrew Cuomo, you will remember that he is the same person who cheered and cried for joy when New York passed their new abortion bill in 2019 that allows abortions at any stage of the third trimester, and prevents protections for babies surviving the abortion procedure.

Cuomo is the same person who in 2020 issued an executive order sending COVID-19 patients into nursing homes where they infected and killed over 11,000 elderly.

[These people need to be tried for crimes against humanity and even genocide!]

Now they want to pass Bill A416 that authorizes the arrest and detention of people with ‘communicable diseases’ and send them to a ‘designated facility’ until the state decides they can go?

Let me say this as strongly as I can, if YOU live in New York….RUN!!….GET OUT NOW!!

Here below is the entire contents of New York State Assembly Bill A416, read it for yourself and decide if what we are telling you is true or not.

But read the parts I have bolded and underlined, read how it takes a court order to have you released after you have been ‘detained at a facility’ of their choosing.

Read how it says you will be kept against your will until they have decided it is ‘safe’ to release you. READ IT!

ANADA: Politician Warns Trudeau Govt Plans To Build COVID ‘Quarantine / Isolation’ Camps Across Canada and Canadian Government Erecting A Network Of Covid Detainment Camps.

New Zealand: COVID-19 Quarantine ‘Camps’ Are The End Of Personal Freedom in NZ.

Yes, They Will Make You Take It

The COVID-19 vaccine is here.

It’s safe, it’s effective. It cannot give you COVID.

When it’s your turn, get vaccinated.#VaccinateNY pic.twitter.com/POPScn5Kk9

— Andrew Cuomo (@NYGovCuomo) December 28, 2020

New York State Assembly Bill A416:

AN ACT to amend the public health law, in relation  to  the  removal  of
cases, contacts and carriers of communicable diseases who are poten-
tially dangerous to the public health

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEM-
BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. The public health law is amended by adding a new section
2120-a to read as follows:
§ 2120-A. REMOVAL AND DETENTION OF CASES, CONTACTS AND CARRIERS WHO
ARE OR MAY BE A DANGER TO PUBLIC HEALTH; OTHER ORDERS. 1. THE PROVISIONS
OF THIS SECTION SHALL BE UTILIZED IN THE EVENT THAT THE GOVERNOR
DECLARES A STATE OF HEALTH EMERGENCY DUE TO AN EPIDEMIC OF ANY COMMUNI-
CABLE DISEASE.
2. UPON DETERMINING BY CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE THAT THE HEALTH
OF OTHERS IS OR MAY BE ENDANGERED BY A CASE, CONTACT OR CARRIER, OR
SUSPECTED CASE, CONTACT OR CARRIER OF A CONTAGIOUS DISEASE THAT, IN THE
OPINION OF THE GOVERNOR, AFTER CONSULTATION WITH THE COMMISSIONER, MAY
POSE AN IMMINENT AND SIGNIFICANT THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH RESULTING
IN SEVERE MORBIDITY OR HIGH MORTALITY, THE GOVERNOR OR HIS OR HER DELE-
GEE, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE COMMISSIONER OR THE HEADS OF
LOCAL HEALTH DEPARTMENTS, MAY ORDER THE REMOVAL AND/OR DETENTION OF SUCH
A PERSON OR OF A GROUP OF SUCH PERSONS BY ISSUING A SINGLE ORDER, IDEN-
TIFYING SUCH PERSONS EITHER BY NAME OR BY A REASONABLY SPECIFIC
DESCRIPTION OF THE INDIVIDUALS OR GROUP BEING DETAINED. SUCH PERSON OR
GROUP OF PERSONS SHALL BE DETAINED IN A MEDICAL FACILITY OR OTHER APPRO-
PRIATE FACILITY OR PREMISES DESIGNATED BY THE GOVERNOR OR HIS OR HER
DELEGEE AND COMPLYING WITH SUBDIVISION FIVE OF THIS SECTION.
3. A PERSON OR GROUP REMOVED OR DETAINED BY ORDER OF THE GOVERNOR OR
HIS OR HER DELEGEE PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION TWO OF THIS SECTION SHALL BE

EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
                       [ ] is old law to be omitted.
LBD04443-01-1

A. 416 2

DETAINED FOR SUCH PERIOD AND IN SUCH MANNER AS THE DEPARTMENT MAY DIRECT
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS SECTION.
4. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY INCONSISTENT PROVISION OF THIS SECTION:
(A) A CONFIRMED CASE OR A CARRIER WHO IS DETAINED PURSUANT TO SUBDIVI-
SION TWO OF THIS SECTION SHALL NOT CONTINUE TO BE DETAINED AFTER THE
DEPARTMENT DETERMINES THAT SUCH PERSON IS NO LONGER CONTAGIOUS.
(B) A SUSPECTED CASE OR SUSPECTED CARRIER WHO IS DETAINED PURSUANT TO
SUBDIVISION TWO OF THIS SECTION SHALL NOT CONTINUE TO BE DETAINED AFTER
THE DEPARTMENT DETERMINES, WITH THE EXERCISE OF DUE DILIGENCE, THAT SUCH
PERSON IS NOT INFECTED WITH OR HAS NOT BEEN EXPOSED TO SUCH A DISEASE,
OR IF INFECTED WITH OR EXPOSED TO SUCH A DISEASE, NO LONGER IS OR WILL
BECOME CONTAGIOUS.
(C) A PERSON WHO IS DETAINED PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION TWO OF THIS
SECTION AS A CONTACT OF A CONFIRMED CASE OR A CARRIER SHALL NOT CONTINUE
TO BE DETAINED AFTER THE DEPARTMENT DETERMINES THAT THE PERSON IS NOT
INFECTED WITH THE DISEASE OR THAT SUCH CONTACT NO LONGER PRESENTS A
POTENTIAL DANGER TO THE HEALTH OF OTHERS.
(D) A PERSON WHO IS DETAINED PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION TWO OF THIS
SECTION AS A CONTACT OF A SUSPECTED CASE SHALL NOT CONTINUE TO BE
DETAINED:
(I) AFTER THE DEPARTMENT DETERMINES, WITH THE EXERCISE OF DUE DILI-
GENCE, THAT THE SUSPECTED CASE WAS NOT INFECTED WITH SUCH A DISEASE, OR
WAS NOT CONTAGIOUS AT THE TIME THE CONTACT WAS EXPOSED TO SUCH INDIVID-
UAL; OR
(II) AFTER THE DEPARTMENT DETERMINES THAT THE CONTACT NO LONGER
PRESENTS A POTENTIAL DANGER TO THE HEALTH OF OTHERS.
5. A PERSON WHO IS DETAINED PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION TWO OF THIS
SECTION SHALL, AS IS APPROPRIATE TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES:
(A) HAVE HIS OR HER MEDICAL CONDITION AND NEEDS ASSESSED AND ADDRESSED
ON A REGULAR BASIS, AND
(B) BE DETAINED IN A MANNER THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH RECOGNIZED
ISOLATION AND INFECTION CONTROL PRINCIPLES IN ORDER TO MINIMIZE THE
LIKELIHOOD OF TRANSMISSION OF INFECTION TO SUCH PERSON AND TO OTHERS.
6. WHEN A PERSON OR GROUP IS ORDERED TO BE DETAINED PURSUANT TO SUBDI-
VISION TWO OF THIS SECTION FOR A PERIOD NOT EXCEEDING THREE BUSINESS
DAYS, SUCH PERSON OR MEMBER OF SUCH GROUP SHALL, UPON REQUEST, BE
AFFORDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD. IF A PERSON OR GROUP DETAINED
PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION TWO OF THIS SECTION NEEDS TO BE DETAINED BEYOND
THREE BUSINESS DAYS, THEY SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH AN ADDITIONAL COMMIS-
SIONER'S ORDER PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISIONS TWO AND EIGHT OF THIS SECTION.
7. WHEN A PERSON OR GROUP IS ORDERED TO BE DETAINED PURSUANT TO SUBDI-
VISION TWO OF THIS SECTION FOR A PERIOD EXCEEDING THREE BUSINESS DAYS,
AND SUCH PERSON OR MEMBER OF SUCH GROUP REQUESTS RELEASE, THE GOVERNOR
OR HIS OR HER DELEGEE SHALL MAKE AN APPLICATION FOR A COURT ORDER
AUTHORIZING SUCH DETENTION WITHIN THREE BUSINESS DAYS AFTER SUCH REQUEST
BY THE END OF THE FIRST BUSINESS DAY FOLLOWING SUCH SATURDAY, SUNDAY, OR
LEGAL HOLIDAY, WHICH APPLICATION SHALL INCLUDE A REQUEST FOR AN EXPE-
DITED HEARING. AFTER ANY SUCH REQUEST FOR RELEASE, DETENTION SHALL NOT
CONTINUE FOR MORE THAN FIVE BUSINESS DAYS IN THE ABSENCE OF A COURT
ORDER AUTHORIZING DETENTION. NOTWITHSTANDING THE FOREGOING PROVISIONS,
IN NO EVENT SHALL ANY PERSON BE DETAINED FOR MORE THAN SIXTY DAYS WITH-
OUT A COURT ORDER AUTHORIZING SUCH DETENTION. THE GOVERNOR OR HIS OR HER
DELEGEE SHALL SEEK FURTHER COURT REVIEW OF SUCH DETENTION WITHIN NINETY
DAYS FOLLOWING THE INITIAL COURT ORDER AUTHORIZING DETENTION AND THERE-
AFTER WITHIN NINETY DAYS OF EACH SUBSEQUENT COURT REVIEW. IN ANY COURT
PROCEEDING TO ENFORCE AN ORDER OF THE GOVERNOR OR HIS OR HER DELEGEE FOR

A. 416 3

THE REMOVAL OR DETENTION OF A PERSON OR GROUP ISSUED PURSUANT TO THIS
SUBDIVISION OR FOR REVIEW OF THE CONTINUED DETENTION OF A PERSON OR
GROUP, THE GOVERNOR OR HIS OR HER DELEGEE SHALL PROVE THE PARTICULARIZED
CIRCUMSTANCES CONSTITUTING THE NECESSITY FOR SUCH DETENTION BY CLEAR AND
CONVINCING EVIDENCE.
8. (A) A COPY OF ANY DETENTION ORDER OF THE GOVERNOR OR HIS OR HER
DELEGEE ISSUED PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION TWO OF THIS SECTION SHALL BE
GIVEN TO EACH DETAINED INDIVIDUAL; HOWEVER, IF THE ORDER APPLIES TO A
GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS AND IT IS IMPRACTICAL TO PROVIDE INDIVIDUAL COPIES,
IT MAY BE POSTED IN A CONSPICUOUS PLACE IN THE DETENTION PREMISES. ANY
DETENTION ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER ISSUED PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION TWO
OF THIS SECTION SHALL SET FORTH:
(I) THE PURPOSE OF THE DETENTION AND THE LEGAL AUTHORITY UNDER WHICH
THE ORDER IS ISSUED, INCLUDING THE PARTICULAR SECTIONS OF THIS ARTICLE
OR OTHER LAW OR REGULATION;
(II) A DESCRIPTION OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND/OR BEHAVIOR OF THE
DETAINED PERSON OR GROUP CONSTITUTING THE BASIS FOR THE ISSUANCE OF THE
ORDER;
(III) THE LESS RESTRICTIVE ALTERNATIVES THAT WERE ATTEMPTED AND WERE
UNSUCCESSFUL AND/OR THE LESS RESTRICTIVE ALTERNATIVES THAT WERE CONSID-
ERED AND REJECTED, AND THE REASONS SUCH ALTERNATIVES WERE REJECTED;
(IV) A NOTICE ADVISING THE PERSON OR GROUP BEING DETAINED THAT THEY
HAVE A RIGHT TO REQUEST RELEASE FROM DETENTION, AND INCLUDING
INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW SUCH REQUEST SHALL BE MADE;
(V) A NOTICE ADVISING THE PERSON OR GROUP BEING DETAINED THAT THEY
HAVE A RIGHT TO BE REPRESENTED BY LEGAL COUNSEL AND THAT UPON REQUEST OF
SUCH PERSON OR GROUP ACCESS TO COUNSEL WILL BE FACILITATED TO THE EXTENT
FEASIBLE UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES; AND
(VI) A NOTICE ADVISING THE PERSON OR GROUP BEING DETAINED THAT THEY
MAY SUPPLY THE ADDRESSES AND/OR TELEPHONE NUMBERS OF FRIENDS AND/OR
RELATIVES TO RECEIVE NOTIFICATION OF THE PERSON'S DETENTION, AND THAT
THE DEPARTMENT SHALL, AT THE DETAINED PERSON'S REQUEST AND TO THE EXTENT
FEASIBLE, PROVIDE NOTICE TO A REASONABLE NUMBER OF SUCH PEOPLE THAT THE
PERSON IS BEING DETAINED.
(B) IN ADDITION, AN ORDER ISSUED PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISIONS TWO AND
SEVEN OF THIS SECTION, REQUIRING THE DETENTION OF A PERSON OR GROUP FOR
A PERIOD EXCEEDING THREE BUSINESS DAYS, SHALL:
(I) ADVISE THE PERSON OR GROUP BEING DETAINED THAT THE DETENTION SHALL
NOT CONTINUE FOR MORE THAN FIVE BUSINESS DAYS AFTER A REQUEST FOR
RELEASE HAS BEEN MADE IN THE ABSENCE OF A COURT ORDER AUTHORIZING SUCH
DETENTION;
(II) ADVISE THE PERSON OR GROUP BEING DETAINED THAT, WHETHER OR NOT
THEY REQUEST RELEASE FROM DETENTION, THE GOVERNOR OR HIS OR HER DELEGEE
MUST OBTAIN A COURT ORDER AUTHORIZING DETENTION WITHIN SIXTY DAYS
FOLLOWING THE COMMENCEMENT OF DETENTION AND THEREAFTER MUST FURTHER SEEK
COURT REVIEW OF THE DETENTION WITHIN NINETY DAYS OF SUCH COURT ORDER AND
WITHIN NINETY DAYS OF EACH SUBSEQUENT COURT REVIEW; AND
(III) ADVISE THE PERSON OR GROUP BEING DETAINED THAT THEY HAVE THE
RIGHT TO REQUEST THAT LEGAL COUNSEL BE PROVIDED, THAT UPON SUCH REQUEST
COUNSEL SHALL BE PROVIDED IF AND TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE UNDER THE
CIRCUMSTANCES, AND THAT IF COUNSEL IS SO PROVIDED, THAT SUCH COUNSEL
WILL BE NOTIFIED THAT THE PERSON OR GROUP HAS REQUESTED LEGAL REPRESEN-
TATION.
9. A PERSON WHO IS DETAINED IN A MEDICAL FACILITY, OR OTHER APPROPRI-
ATE FACILITY OR PREMISES, SHALL NOT CONDUCT HIMSELF OR HERSELF IN A

A. 416 4

DISORDERLY MANNER, AND SHALL NOT LEAVE OR ATTEMPT TO LEAVE SUCH FACILITY
OR PREMISES UNTIL HE OR SHE IS DISCHARGED PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION.
10. WHERE NECESSARY AND FEASIBLE UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, LANGUAGE
INTERPRETERS AND PERSONS SKILLED IN COMMUNICATING WITH VISION AND HEAR-
ING IMPAIRED INDIVIDUALS SHALL BE PROVIDED.
11. THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION SHALL NOT APPLY TO THE ISSUANCE OF
ORDERS PURSUANT TO § 11.21 OF THE NEW YORK CITY HEALTH CODE.
12. IN ADDITION TO THE REMOVAL OR DETENTION ORDERS REFERRED TO IN
SUBDIVISION TWO OF THIS SECTION, AND WITHOUT AFFECTING OR LIMITING ANY
OTHER AUTHORITY THAT THE COMMISSIONER MAY OTHERWISE HAVE, THE GOVERNOR
OR HIS OR HER DELEGEE MAY, IN HIS OR HER DISCRETION, ISSUE AND SEEK
ENFORCEMENT OF ANY OTHER ORDERS THAT HE OR SHE DETERMINES ARE NECESSARY
OR APPROPRIATE TO PREVENT DISSEMINATION OR TRANSMISSION OF CONTAGIOUS
DISEASES OR OTHER ILLNESSES THAT MAY POSE A THREAT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH
INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ORDERS REQUIRING ANY PERSON OR PERSONS
WHO ARE NOT IN THE CUSTODY OF THE DEPARTMENT TO BE EXCLUDED; TO REMAIN
ISOLATED OR QUARANTINED AT HOME OR AT A PREMISES OF SUCH PERSON'S CHOICE
THAT IS ACCEPTABLE TO THE DEPARTMENT AND UNDER SUCH CONDITIONS AND FOR
SUCH PERIOD AS WILL PREVENT TRANSMISSION OF THE CONTAGIOUS DISEASE OR
OTHER ILLNESS; TO REQUIRE THE TESTING OR MEDICAL EXAMINATION OF PERSONS
WHO MAY HAVE BEEN EXPOSED TO OR INFECTED BY A CONTAGIOUS DISEASE OR WHO
MAY HAVE BEEN EXPOSED TO OR CONTAMINATED WITH DANGEROUS AMOUNTS OF
RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS OR TOXIC CHEMICALS; TO REQUIRE AN INDIVIDUAL WHO
HAS BEEN EXPOSED TO OR INFECTED BY A CONTAGIOUS DISEASE TO COMPLETE AN
APPROPRIATE, PRESCRIBED COURSE OF TREATMENT, PREVENTIVE MEDICATION OR
VACCINATION, INCLUDING DIRECTLY OBSERVED THERAPY TO TREAT THE DISEASE
AND FOLLOW INFECTION CONTROL PROVISIONS FOR THE DISEASE; OR TO REQUIRE
AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS BEEN CONTAMINATED WITH DANGEROUS AMOUNTS OF RADIO-
ACTIVE MATERIALS OR TOXIC CHEMICALS SUCH THAT SAID INDIVIDUAL MAY PRES-
ENT A DANGER TO OTHERS, TO UNDERGO DECONTAMINATION PROCEDURES DEEMED
NECESSARY BY THE DEPARTMENT. SUCH PERSON OR PERSONS SHALL, UPON
REQUEST, BE AFFORDED AN OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD, BUT THE PROVISIONS OF
SUBDIVISIONS TWO THROUGH ELEVEN OF THIS SECTION SHALL NOT OTHERWISE
APPLY.
13. THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED TO PERMIT OR
REQUIRE THE FORCIBLE ADMINISTRATION OF ANY MEDICATION WITHOUT A PRIOR
COURT ORDER.
§ 2. This act shall take effect on the thirtieth day after it shall
have become a law. Effective immediately the addition, amendment and/or
repeal of any rule or regulation necessary for the implementation of
this act on its effective date are authorized to be made and completed
on or before such date. READ THIS ON NY SENATE.GOV

New York Senate Bill 416 authorizes quarantine of individuals or groups who “potentially pose a threat to public health,” including forced testing and vaccinations. This must stop now!

Source and reference: Nowtheendbegins.comBitChute.com

12 Times The Lock-downers Were Wrong

This has been a year of astonishing policy failure. We are surrounded by devastation conceived and cheered by intellectuals and their political handmaidens. The errors number in the thousands, so please consider the following little more than a first draft, a mere guide to what will surely be unearthed in the coming months and years.

We trusted these people with our lives and liberties and here is what they did with that trust.

  1. Anthony Fauci says lockdowns are not possible in the United States (January 24):
Anthony Fauci Baphomet

When asked about the mass quarantine containment efforts underway in Wuhan, China back in January, Fauci dismissed the prospect of lockdowns ever coming to the United States:

“That’s something that I don’t think we could possibly do in the United States, I can’t imagine shutting down New York or Los Angeles, but the judgement on the part of the Chinese health authorities is that given the fact that it’s spreading throughout the provinces… it’s their judgement that this is something that in fact is going to help in containing it. Whether or not it does or does not is really open to question because historically when you shut things down it doesn’t have a major effect.”

Less than two months later, 43 of 50 US states were under lockdown – a policy advocated by Fauci himself.

  1. US government and WHO officials advise against mask use (February and March)

When mask sales spiked due to widespread individual adoption in the early weeks of the pandemic, numerous US government and WHO officials took to the airwaves to describe masks as ineffective and discourage their use.

Surgeon General Jerome Adams tweeted against masks on February 29. Anthony Faucipublicly discouraged mask use in a nationally broadcast 60 Minutes interview on March 7. At a March 30 World Health Organization briefing its Director-General supported mask use in medical settings but dissuaded the same in the general public.

By mid-summer, all had reversed course and encouraged mask-wearing in the general public as an essential tool for halting the pandemic. Fauci essentially conceded that he lied to the public in order to prevent a shortage on masks, whereas other health officials did an about-face on the scientific claims around masking.

While mainstream epidemiology literature stressed the ambiguous nature of evidence surrounding masks as recently as 2019, these scientists were suddenly certain that masks were something of a magic bullet for Covid. It turns out that both positions are likely wrong.

Masks appear to have marginal effects at diminishing spread, especially in highly infectious settings and around the vulnerable. But their effectiveness at combating Covid has also been grossly exaggerated, as illustrated by the fact thatmask adoption reached near-universal levels in the US by the summer with little discernible effect on the course of the pandemic.

  1. Anthony Fauci’s decimal error in estimating Covid’s fatality rates (March 11)

Fauci testified before Congress in early March where he was asked to estimate the severity of the disease in comparison to influenza. His testimony that Covid was “10 times more lethal than the seasonal flu” stoked widespread alarm and provided a major impetus for the decision to go into lockdown.

The problem, as Ronald Brown documented in an epidemiology journal article, is that Fauci based his estimates on a conflation of the Infection Fatality Rate (IFR) and Case Fatality Rate (CFR) for influenza, leading him to exaggerate the comparative danger of Covid by an order of magnitude.

Fauci’s error – which he further compounded in a late February article for the New England Journal of Medicine – helped to convince Congress of the need for drastic lockdown measures, while also spreading panic in the media and general public. As of this writing Fauci has not acknowledged the magnitude of his error, nor has the journal corrected his article.

  1. “Two weeks to flatten the curve” (March 16)

The lockdowners settled on a catchy slogan in mid-March to justify their unprecedented shuttering of economic and social life around the globe: two weeks to flatten the curve. The White House Covid task force aggressively promoted this line, as did the news media and much of the epidemiology profession.

The logic behind the slogan came from the ubiquitous graph showing (1) a steep caseload that would overwhelm our hospital system, or (2) a mitigated alternative that would spread the caseload out over several weeks, making it manageable.

To get to graph #2, society would need to buckle up for two weeks of shelter-in-place orders until the capacity issue could be managed. Indeed, we were told that if we did not accept this solution the hospital system would enter into catastrophic failure in only 10 days, as former DHS pandemic adviser Tom Bossert claimed in a widely-circulated interview and Washington Post column on March 11.

Two weeks came and went, then the rationale on which they were sold to the public shifted. Hospitals were no longer on the verge of being overwhelmed – indeed most hospitals nationwide remained well under capacity, with only a tiny number of exceptions in the worst-hit neighborhoods of New York City.

A US Navy hospital ship sent to relieve New York departed a month later after serving only 182 patients, and a pop-up hospital in the city’s Javits Convention Center sat mostly empty. But the lockdowns remained in place, as did the emergency orders justifying them.

Two weeks became a month, which became two months, which became almost a year. We were no longer “flattening the curve” – a strategy premised on saving the hospital system from a threat than never manifested – but instead refocused on using lockdowns as a general suppression strategy against the disease itself. In short, the epidemiology profession sold us a bill of goods.

  1. Neil Ferguson predicts a “best case” US scenario of 1.1 million deaths (March 20)

The name Neil Ferguson, the lead modeler and chief spokesman for Imperial College London’s pandemic response team, has become synonymous with lockdown alarmism for good reason. Ferguson has a long track record of making grossly exaggerated predictions of catastrophic death tolls for almost every single disease that comes along, and urging aggressive policy responses to the same including lockdowns.

Covid was no different, and Ferguson assumed center stage when he released a highly influential model of the virus’s death forecasts for the US and UK. Ferguson appeared with UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson on March 16 to announce the shift toward lockdowns (with no small irony, he was coming down with Covid himself at the time and may have been the patient zero of a super-spreader event that ran through Downing Street and infected Johnson himself).

Across the Atlantic, Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx cited Ferguson’s model as a direct justification for locking down the US. There was a problem though: Ferguson had a bad habit of dramatically hyping his own predictions to political leaders and the press.

The Imperial College paper modeled a broad range of scenarios including death tolls that ranged from tens of thousands to over 2 million, but Ferguson’s public statements only stressed the latter – even though the paper itself conceded that such an extreme “worst case” scenario was highly unrealistic.

A telling example came on March 20thwhen the New York Times’s Nicholas Kristof contacted the Imperial College modeler to ask about the most likely scenario for the United States. As Kristof related to his readers, “I asked Ferguson for his best case. “About 1.1 million deaths,” he said.”

  1. Researchers in Sweden use the Imperial College model to predict 95,000 deaths (April 10)

After Neil Ferguson’s shocking death toll predictions for the US and UK captivated policymaker attention and drove both governments into lockdown, researchers in other countries began adapting the Imperial College model to their own circumstances.

Usually, these models sought to reaffirm the decisions of each country to lock down. The government of Sweden, however, had decided to buck the trend, setting the stage for a natural experiment to test the Imperial model’s performance.

In early April a team of researchers at Uppsala University adapted the Imperial model to Sweden’s population and demographics and ran its projections.

Their result?

If Sweden stayed the course and did not lock down, it could expect a catastrophic 96,000 deaths by early summer. The authors of the study recommended going into immediate lockdown, but since Sweden lagged behind Europe in adopting such measures they also predicted that this “best case” option would reduce deaths to “only” 30,000.

By early June when the 96,000 prediction was supposed to come true, Sweden had recorded 4,600 deaths. Six months later, Sweden has about 8,000 deaths – a severe pandemic to be sure, but an order of magnitude smaller than what the modelers predicted.

Facing embarrassment from these results, Ferguson and Imperial Collegeattempted to distance themselves from the Swedish adaptation of their model in early May. Yet the Uppsala team’s projections closely matched Imperial’s own UK and US predictions when scaled to reflect their population sizes. In short, the Imperial model catastrophically failed one of the few clear natural experiment tests of its predictive ability.

  1. Scientists suggest that ocean spray spreads Covid (April 2)

In the second week of the lockdowns several newspapers in California promoted a bizarre theory: Covid could spread by ocean spray (although the paper later walked back the headline-grabbing claim, it is outlined here in the Los Angeles Times).

According to this theory – initially promoted by a group of biologists who study bacterial infection connected to storm runoff – the Covid virus washed down storm gutters and into the ocean, where the ocean breeze would kick it up into the air and infect people on the nearby beaches.

As silly as this theory now sounds, it helped to inform California’s initially draconian enforcement of lockdowns on its public beaches.

The same week that this modern-day miasmic drift theory appeared, police in Malibueven arrested a lone paddleboarder for going into the ocean during the lockdown – all while citing the possibility that the ocean breeze carried Covid with it.

  1. Neil Ferguson predicts catastrophic death tolls in US states that reopen (May 24)

Fresh off of their exaggerated predictions from March, the Imperial College team led by Neil Ferguson doubled down on alarmist modeling. As several US states started to reopen in late April and May, Ferguson and his colleagues published a new model predicting another catastrophic wave of deaths by the mid-summer.

Their model focused on 5 states with both moderate and severe outbreaks during the first wave. If they reopened, according to the Imperial team’s model, New York could face up to 3,000 deaths per day by July.

Florida could hit as high as 4,000, and California could hit 5,000 daily deaths. Keeping in mind that these projections were for each state alone, they exceed the daily death toll peaks for the entire country in both the fall and spring.

Showing just how bad the Imperial model was, the actual death toll by mid-July in several of the examined states even fell below the lower confidence boundary of its projected count. While Covid remains a threat in all 5 states, the post-reopening explosion of deaths predicted by Imperial College and used to argue for keeping the lockdowns in place never happened.

  1. Anthony Fauci credits lockdowns for beating the virus in Europe (July 31)

In late July Anthony Fauci offered additional testimony to Congress. His message credited Europe’s heavy lockdowns with defeating the virus, whereas he blamed the United States for reopening too early and for insufficient aggressiveness in the initial lockdowns.

As Fauci stated at the time, “If you look at what happened in Europe, when they shut down or locked down or went to shelter in place — however you want to describe it — they really did it to the tune of about 95% plus of the country did that.”

The message was clear: the United States should have followed Europe, but failed to do so and got a summer wave of Covid instead. Fauci’s entire argument however wasbased on a string of falsehoods and errors.

Mobility data from the US clearly showed that most Americans were staying home during the spring outbreak, with a recorded decline that matched Germany, the Netherlands, and several other European countries. Contrary to Fauci’s claim, the US was actually slower than most of Europe to reopen.

Furthermore, his praise of Europe collapsed in the early fall when almost all of the lockdown countries in Europe experienced severe second waves – just like the locked down regions of the United States.

  1. New Zealand and Australia declare themselves Covid-free (August-present)

New Zealand and Australia have thus far weathered the pandemic with extremely low case counts, leading many epidemiologists and journalists to conflate these results with evidence of their successful and replicable mitigation policies.

In reality, New Zealand and Australia opted for the medieval ‘Prince Prospero’ strategy of attempting to wall themselves from the world until the pandemic passes – an approach that is highly dependent on their unique geographies.

As island nations with comparatively lower international travel than North America and Europe, both countries shut down their borders before the as-of-yet undetected virus became widespread and have remained closed ever since. It’s a costly strategy in terms of its economic impact and personal displacement, but it kept the virus out – mostly.

The problem with New Zealand and Australia’s Prince Prospero strategy is that it’s inherently fragile. All it takes to throw it into chaos is for the virus to slip past the border – including by accident or human error. Then heavy-handed lockdowns ensue, imposed with maximum disruption at the spur of the moment in a frantic attempt to contain the breach.

The most famous example happened on August 9 when New Zealand’s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern declared that New Zealand had reached 100 days of being Covid-free. Then just two days later a breach happened, sending Auckland into heavy lockdown. It’s a pattern that has repeated itself every few weeks in both countries.

In early December, we saw a similar flurry of stories from Australia announcing that the country had beaten Covid. Two weeks later, another breach occurred in the suburbs around Sydney, prompting a regional lockdown. There have been embarrassing missteps as well.

In November the entire state of South Australia went into heavy lockdown over a single misreported case of Covid that was mistakenly attributed to a pizza purchase that did not exist. While both countries continue to celebrate their low fatality rates, they’ve also incurred some of the harshest and most disruptive restrictions in the world – all the result of premature declarations of being “Covid-free” followed by an unexpected breach and another frantic lockdown.

  1. “Renewed lockdowns are just a strawman” (October)

In early October a group of scientists met at AIER where they drafted and signed the Great Barrington Declaration, a statement calling attention to the severe social and economic harms of lockdowns and urging the world to adopt alternative strategies for ensuring the protection of the most vulnerable.

Although the statement quickly gathered tens of thousands of co-signers from health science and medical professionals, it also left the lockdown supporters incensed. They responded not by scientific debate over the merits of their policies, but with a vilification campaign.

They answered by flooding the petition with hoax signatures and juvenile name-calling, and by peddling wildly false conspiracy theories about AIER’s funding (the primary instigator of both tactics, ironically, was a UK blogger known for promoting 9/11 Truther conspiracies). But the lockdowners also adopted another narrative: they began to deny that lockdowns were even on the table.

Nobody was considering bringing back the lockdowns from the spring, they insisted. Arguing against the politically unpopular shelter-in-place orders in the fall only served the purpose of undermining public support for narrower and more temperate restrictions. The Great Barrington authors, we were told, were arguing with a “strawman” from the past.

Over the next several weeks in October a dozen or more prominent epidemiologists, public health experts, and journalists peddled the “lockdowns are a strawman” line. The “strawman” claim saw promotion in top outlets including the New York Times, and in an op-ed by two principle co-signers of the John Snow Memorandum, a competing petition that lockdown supporters drafted as a response to the Great Barrington Declaration.

The message was clear: the GBD was sounding a false alarm against policies from the past that the lockdowners “reluctantly” supported in the spring as an emergency measure but had no intention of reviving. By early November, the “strawman” of renewed lockdowns became a reality in dozens of countries across the globe – often cheered on by the very same people who used the “strawman” canard in October.

Several US states followed suit including California, which imposed severe restrictions on private gatherings up to and including meeting your own family for Thanksgiving and Christmas. And a few weeks after that, some of the very same epidemiologists who used the “strawman” line in October revised their own positions after the fact.

They started claiming they had supported a second lockdown all along, and began blaming the GBD for impeding their efforts to impose them at an earlier date. In short, the entire “lockdowns are a strawman” narrative was false. And it now appears that more than a few of the scientists who used it were actively lying about their own intentions in October.

  1. Anthony Fauci touts New York as a model for Covid containment (June-December)

By all indicators, New York state has suffered one of the worst coronavirus outbreaks in the world. Its year-end mortality rate of almost 1,900 deaths per million residents exceeds every single country in the world. The state famously bungled its nursing home response when Governor Andrew Cuomo forced these facilities to readmit Covid-positive patients as a way to relieve strains on hospitals.

The policy backfired as most hospitals never reached capacity, but the readmissions introduced the virus into vulnerable nursing home populations resulting in widespread fatalities (to this day New York intentionally undercounts nursing home fatalities by excluding residents who are moved to a hospital from its reported numbers, further obscuring the true toll of Cuomo’s order).

New York has also fared poorly during the fall “second wave” despite reimposing harsh restrictions and regional lockdown measures. By mid-December, its death rate shot far above the mostly-open state of Florida, which has the closest comparable population size to New York. All things considered, New York’s weathering of the pandemic is an exemplar of what not to do.

Cuomo’s policies not only failed to contain the virus – they likely made it far more deadly to vulnerable populations. Enter Anthony Fauci, who has been asked multiple times in the press what a model Covid response policy would look like. He gave his first answer on July 20th:

“We know that, when you do it properly, you bring down those cases. We have done it. We have done it in New York.”

Fauci was operating under the assumption that New York, despite its bad run in the spring, had successfully brought the pandemic under control through its aggressive lockdowns and slow reopening. One might think that the fall rebound in New York, despite locking down again, would call this conclusion into question.

Not so much for Dr. Fauci, who told the Wall Street Journal on December 8: “New York got hit really badly in the beginning” but they did “a really good job of keeping things down, and still, their level is low compared to the rest of the country.”

AUSTRIAN MP USES CORONAVIRUS TEST ON COCA-COLA (SODA) IN PARLIAMENT….TESTS POSITIVE FOR COVID19 – PLEASE SHARE

An Austrian parliamentary member exposed the defectiveness of the government’s COVID-19 tests by demonstrating in the parliament how a glass of Coca Cola tested positive for COVID-19.

In footage from the meeting in Vienna Friday, FPO General Secretary Michael Schnedlitz brings a glass of Coca Cola to the podium, from which he proceeds to collect drops to use on an antigen rapid test being used on a mass scale.

After going to the lectern and starting his speech, the politician sprinkled few drops of cola on corona rapid test. Three minutes later the test showed a result: Coca Cola was COVID-19 positive.

Coca Cola Tests Positive For Covid 19 In Austrian Parliament

After demonstrating a positive result, Schnedlitz goes on to slam the tests as a waste of taxpayer resources.

Mr. President, we are likely to have a problem now, we have a positive corona test in parliament, namely this cola triggered a positive corona test. I don’t know how to deal with it now!

With things like this you are throwing tens of millions of euros in tax money out of the window instead of providing real protection for old people’s and nursing homes, instead of investing money in our hospitals.

The corona mass tests are worthless! This was also shown by a simple experiment in parliament, in which a cola had a positive result! But this black-green government spends tens of millions in tax money on precisely these tests.”

An Austrian parliamentary member exposed the defectiveness of the government’s #COVID19 tests by demonstrating in the parliament how a glass of #CocaCola tested positive for COVID-19 https://t.co/5uMD08S2Oo pic.twitter.com/rGzsHTuSEt

— GreatGameIndia (@GreatGameIndia) December 12, 2020

Earlier, the Tanzanian President John Magufuli growing suspicious of the World Health Organization (WHO), decided to investigate the claims of the tests himself. He sent the WHO samples of a goat, a papaya and a quail for testing, all of which came COVID-19 positive.

Because of such massive COVID-19 false positive cases scandal, the Australian Government has scrapped a billion dollar coronavirus vaccine agreement with Australian biotech company CSL Limited to supply 51 million doses of a Covid-19 vaccine being developed by the University of Queensland after several trial participants returned false positive HIV test results.

It should be noted that the Portuguese appeals court has ruled that PCR tests are unreliable and that it is unlawful to quarantine people based solely on a PCR test.

70+ Mayors, Elected Officials In France Call For Moratorium On 5G

Officials say the health risks of 5G haven’t been properly evaluated. They also cite concerns about the increase in electromagnetic pollution and the dehumanization of society.

by Dafna Tachover, Esq

More than 70 mayors and elected officials from France this week called for a moratorium on 5G technology, as resistance to 5G in France grows. The mayors’ main concern, they said, is that “the health risks for living organisms have not been evaluated.”

70+ Mayors, Elected Officials In France Call For Moratorium On 5g

Michèle Rivasi, a member of the European Parliament (MEP) who is leading the efforts, said she is ready to go to the European Court of Justice on this issue, according to a report in the French media.

In addition to health concerns, according to an article published in French, the mayors and elected officials raised other issues, including:

  • the increase in electromagnetic pollution
  • the environmental impact of the multiplication of digital flows and additional energy requirements in a period when there is an incentive to save energy
  • the significant increase in the need for rare raw materials for the manufacture of new antennas and new communicating objects
  • the reinforcement of desocialization linked to mobile screens and the risk of dehumanization of society

Rivasi is a strong opponent of 5G. In June 2020, she published a report, “ICNIRP: Conflicts of Interest, Corporate Capture and the Push for 5G.”

The International Commission for the Protection Against Non-Ionizing Radiation (ICNIRP) is a private organization whose recommendations for radio frequency guidelines — which deny any harms of wireless technology — have been followed by the World Health Organization and several countries despite the organization’s clear conflicts of interests and ties to the telecom industry.

Concerns about ICNIRP’s conflicts of interest were confirmed in a 2012 decision by the Italian Supreme Court. The court, which ruled that the plaintiff’s brain tumor was caused by a cell phone, also concluded that experts with ICNIRP affiliations “lacked credibility and authority, and as such, were essentially outside the scientific community.”

In 2020, an Italian Court of Appeals decision made even stronger findings regarding ICNIRP and its members.

Rivasi’s report on ICNIRP was written and published with Dr. Kalus Buchner, an MEP  from Germany. Buchner is a scientist who also conducted studies on how radio frequency affects health. His study on the health effects of cell towers showed adverse effects on stress hormones, including on adrenaline and dopamine. Buchner’s study also observed dose response.

This latest action by the mayors is not surprising. The resistance to 5G in France has become a top agenda item for the French Green Party, Europe Écologie Les Verts. During the local June elections, the party gained more power, and its candidates won in major cities, including Paris, Lyon, Marseille, Montpellier, Bordeaux and Strasbourg.

The party resistance to 5G was based mainly on environmental considerations, as it is estimated that 5G would exponentially increase energy consumption.

The call for a moratorium on 5G, led by Rivasi, is focused on health concerns, though it also references the environmental impacts. The resistance to 5G in France also garnered headlines in September, after employees of Orange, one of the biggest cell phone providers in Europe, wrote a letter calling on the company to not deploy 5G.

Pfizer COVID Jab Warning: No Breastfeeding, Avoid Pregnancy For 2 Months Or It Might Damage The Child

(LifeSiteNews) — Government produced safety instructions for a new coronavirus vaccine indicate that it should not be used by pregnant or breast-feeding mothers and children. In addition, they state that it is unknown what effect the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine will have on fertility.

The ten-page “Reg 174 Information for UK Healthcare Professionals” describes the vaccine, how it is to be stored, diluted, and administered, and the trial studies carried out to test it.

To be effective, the vaccine is supposed to be administered twice.

Pfizer Covid Jab Warning No Breastfeeding, Avoid Pregnancy For 2 Months Or It Might Damage The Child

In a section called “Fertility, pregnancy and lactation,” the guide says there is “no or limited data” on the vaccine.

Therefore, it is not recommending its use for pregnant women.

“Animal reproductive toxicity studies have not been completed. COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 is not recommended during pregnancy,” the guide states in section 4.6.

“For women of childbearing age, pregnancy should be excluded before vaccination.”

The guide also advises that women should avoid becoming pregnant for the first two months after their Covid-19 shots.

“In addition, women of childbearing age should be advised to avoid pregnancy for at least 2 months after their second dose,” it says.

Because it is still unknown whether or not the vaccine can be transmitted to a breast-feeding infant through his or her mother’s milk, the instructions state that “a risk to the newborns/infants cannot be excluded.”

Therefore, the guide specifies that the vaccine “should not be used during breast-feeding.”

But alarmingly the guide has only one thing to say about the vaccine’s impact on fertility: they don’t know if it does or doesn’t.

“It is unknown whether COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 has an impact on fertility,” it states.

The guide notes that the safety of the vaccine was tested in two clinical studies. The first study enrolled 60 people aged 16 to 55, and the second involved “approximately” 44,000 people aged 12 and older.

The most common negative effects of the vaccine in people over the age of 16 have been “pain at the injection site” (a muscle), experienced by over 80%, fatigue (over 60%), headache (over 50%), sore muscles (over 30%), chills (over 30%), joint pain (over 20%), and fever (over 10%).

According to the guide, these side-effects “were usually mild or moderate in intensity” and went away after a few days.

Fertility Fears

Earlier this week, two leading doctors wrote to the European Medicine Agency, which is responsible for the safety of vaccines, in an attempt to stop human trials of all Covid-19 vaccines, especially the Pfizer/BioNtech COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 described above.

Dr. Michael Yeadon, a former head of Pfizer’s respiratory research, and Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, a health policy advisor, think that human testing is still unethical.

Among other concerns, Yeadon and Wodart warn that some of the vaccines may prevent the safe development of placentas in pregnant women, resulting in “vaccinated women essentially becoming infertile.”

“Several vaccine candidates are expected to induce the formation of humoral antibodies against spike proteins of SARS-CoV-2,” the doctors wrote.

“Syncytin-1 […] which is derived from human endogenous retroviruses (HERV) and is responsible for the development of a placenta in mammals and humans and is therefore an essential prerequisite for a successful pregnancy, is also found in homologous form in the spike proteins of SARS viruses,” they continued.

“There is no indication whether antibodies against spike proteins of SARS viruses would also act like anti-Syncytin-1 antibodies.

“However, if this were to be the case this would then also prevent the formation of a placenta which would result in vaccinated women essentially becoming infertile.”

The doctors suggest that because the Pfizer/BioNTech trial protocol says that “women of child-bearing potential” can take part only if they are not pregnant or breastfeeding and are using contraception, it could take “a relatively long time before a noticeable number of cases of post-vaccination infertility could be observed.”

Pfizer Can’t Be Sued For Damages

According to the U.K.’s Independent newspaper, Pfizer, the owner of the COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 has been given indemnity in the United Kingdom, which means that people who suffer damage from the vaccine will not be able to sue the company.

“NHS (National Health Service) staff providing the vaccine, as well as manufactures of the drug, are also protected,” the Independent reported.

The newspaper also reported that the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine was authorised by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency on Tuesday under Section 174 of the Human Medicine Regulations 2012.

The regulation, which was altered by the British government this autumn, currently states that the ordinary “prohibitions” in Britain’s requirements for authorization “do not apply where the sale or supply of a medicinal product is authorized by the licensing authority on a temporary basis in response to the suspected or confirmed spread of — (a) pathogenic agents; (b) toxins; (c ) chemical agents; or (d) nuclear radiation, which may cause harm to human beings.”

The Independent noted that in a press conference on Wednesday, Pfizer’s U.K. managing director refused to explain why the company needed this legal protection.

“We’re not actually disclosing any of the details around any of the aspects of that agreement and specifically around the liability clauses,” said Pfizer’s Ben Osborn.

Curiously, in October the government’s Medicines & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), posted a bid request stating that “For reasons of extreme urgency,” they seek “an Artificial Intelligence (AI) software tool to process the expected high volume of Covid-19 vaccine Adverse Drug Reaction (ADRs).”

The bid goes on to explain that “it is not possible to retrofit the MHRA’s legacy systems to handle the volume of ADRs that will be generated by a Covid-19 vaccine,” and that this “represents a direct threat to patient life and public health.”

Lockdowns Were Never About Health: 22 States Already Locking Down For A Second Time – Middle Class Will Be Devastated, NWO Incoming

Anyone who understands that these lockdowns were never about health, but about control, know that the first lockdowns didn’t quite devastate the middle class to the point that the elitists needed them to.

by Mac Slavo

Now, another round of lockdowns is coming in order for the rulers to usher in the New World Order through chaos and poverty.

New World Order Lockdowns

This is straight up nothing short of economic terrorism and it’s being done by the government.

These lockdowns serve two purposes:

One, they keep up the facade and continue to keep the masses in a panicked state of fear.

And two, they finish off the middle-class impoverishing enough people that they will willingly enslave themselves for the universal basic income pittance in the form of a digital dollar that the elites can track, trace, and control.

But in order to keep the show going and get people to buy into this scam, states are locking down again.

Twenty-two states have issued additional orders that trample people’s basic human rights. Those states are:

1. Minnesota

2. Maryland

3. California

4. Iowa

5. Wisconsin

6. Utah

7.Rhode Island

8. Michigan

9. Connecticut

10. Massachusetts

11. Illinois

12. Colorado

13. Idaho

14. Florida

15. New York

16.New Jersey

17. Pennsylvania

18. Texas

19. Kentucky

20. Mississippi

21. Nebraska

22. New Mexico

The destruction of rights is well underway for a second time. They are really desperate to keep up this scam at all costs. This has never been about health.

The elitists do not care about our health and whether we continue to live on this planet or not.

They only want power. Wake up and stay prepared. If your state is not on the list above, do not assume you will escape this hell.

It is on.

We are being played like a grand piano and most people are too brainwashed to even realize how enslaved they already are.

If we let this happen again, frankly, we don’t deserve the freedom which is our birthright as human beings.

This is all planned. This is a part of their game. The only way to win is to refuse to play. Rise up and live freely.

That’s what terrifies these psychopaths: our realization that we don’t need their permission to be free.