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.
As Russia actually do launch an invasion or “special operation” in Ukraine, I thought now was a good time to recap on how we got here.
The historical, political and ethnic divisions in Ukraine go back decades, if not centuries, but we don’t have the space for that kind of deep-dive. For now, I’ll be keeping it to three simple parts: The fall of Viktor Yanukovych, the Crimean referendum, and the ensuing civil war which puts the region in a direct path to the events of today.
This piece is intended as a quick reference guide to help get friends and family up to speed on the recent history of Ukraine, a handy index of contemporary sources, or a refresher course for those who’ve forgotten the details.
Anyway, here we go.
1990
Following the fall of the Berlin Wall and the reunification of Germany, multiple Western leaders give both written and spoken assurances to then-Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, that NATO does not plan to increase its territory eastwards.
To quote US Secretary of State James Baker:
not only for the Soviet Union but for other European countries as well it is important to have guarantees that if the United States keeps its presence in Germany within the framework of NATO, not an inch of NATO’s present military jurisdiction will spread in an eastern direction.”
1997
The Charter on a Distinctive Partnership is signed by representatives of both NATO and Ukraine. This document is a long-term agreement that Ukraine will move gradually into cooperation with NATO and eventually become a member. This is in direct violation of the assurances given above.
2002
NATO publishes their NATO-Ukraine Action Plan, re-affirming their commitment to “closer ties” with Ukraine, and outlining a long term plan for “reforms” in Ukraine that will make it suitable for “full Euro-Atlantic integration”.
2008
US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice and Ukrainian Foreign Minister Volodymyr Ohryzko sign the US-Ukraine Charter on Strategic Partnership, the charter “emphasizes the continued commitment of the United States to support enhanced engagement between NATO and Ukraine”.
Condoleeza Rice,Volodymyr Ohryzko
February
Viktor Yanukovych, leader of Ukraine’s Party of Regions, wins the presidential election and is named Ukraine’s fourth President. Yanukovych is the former governor of Donetsk, the region of his birth, and wins office with a huge percentage of the vote from ethnically Russian east Ukraine.
May
As one of his first acts as President, Yanukovych signs an agreement with Russia, extending their lease on the Black Sea naval base in Crimea until at least 2042. This extension is met with consternation and rebuke in the Western press, with one paper asking:
The End of Ukraine’s EU Integration?”
Writing in the Guardian, Luke Harding called it:
the most concrete sign yet that Ukraine is now back under Russia’s influence following Yanukovych’s victory in February’s presidential elections.
Also noting that “the lease extension is likely to increase opposition to Yanukovych in Ukraine’s western provinces.”
Ukraine’s parliament votes through a new bill barring the country from joining any military bloc. This, as the BBC noted at the time, effectively ends any prospect of Ukraine joining NATO, killing a plan that the West had worked on for 13 years.
However, the elections also mark the first time Ukraine elected a far-right MP to its parliament, with Oleh Tyahnybok’sSvoboda party winning 37 seats and over 10% of the vote (entirely from the ethnically Ukrainian west of the country).
Contemporary press reports, as well as think-tanks such as OpenDemocracy, note the “concerning” rise of “far-right politics” in Ukraine.
September
The Ukrainian cabinet unanimously approves the draft of the long-awaited Ukraine-EU Association Agreement. Yanokuych is expected to officially sign the agreement at the EU’s “Eastern Partnership Summit” in Vilnius on November 28th and 29th.
Russia – Ukraine’s major creditor and biggest trade partner – warns that this treaty would “cause chaos”, break the terms of an existing treaty between Ukraine and Russia, and lead to Ukraine’s economy collapsing. As a counteroffer, they suggest Ukraine sign a new deal with the Eurasian Economic Union.
November
The Ukrainian government issues a decree suspending preparations for the association agreement (AA). Deputy Prime Minister Yuriy Boyko warns the current terms of the agreement would “seriously damage the economy”.
“Pro European” demonstrations begin in Maidan square within days of the decree being issued. A poll run by the Kyiv Post finds an even split on joining the EU vs the Eurasian customs union: 39% for, 37% against.
Yanukovych attends the Eastern Partnership Summit on the 28th, but does not sign the Association Agreement, instead suggesting a new tri-lateral agreement between Ukraine, Russia and the EU. Russia is open to negotiating such a deal, but EU rejects this offer completely.
Despite not signing the AA, Yanukovych tells the press that Ukraine still intends to work for closer ties with the EU: “an alternative for reforms in Ukraine and an alternative for European integration do not exist…We are walking along this path and are not changing direction”.
Prime Minister Mykola Azarov echoed this: “I affirm with full authority that the negotiating process over the Association Agreement is continuing, and the work on moving our country closer to European standards is not stopping for a single day”.
Nevertheless, this is ubiquitously covered in the Western media as Yanukoych “refusing to sign the association agreement in favour of closer ties with Russia”.
Thousands more gather in Maidan Square and others begin occupying Kiev City Hall. Protests intensify as opposition politicians speak of Yanukovych “committing treason”, they call for a re-run of the Presidential election, despite new elections being only 18 months away.
On November 29th the protesters make their first “official” demands, including the immediate resignation of Viktor Yanukovych.
In a press conference, far-right MP Oleh Tyanybohk officially calls it a “revolution”, and asks that police and members of the military defect to their side.
When the police came, unlike the Muscovites, they didn’t leave. They swung chains and threw Molotov cocktails and built barricades in the streets. They took over municipal buildings. They nearly toppled the city’s main statue of Lenin. They sang the national anthem and chanted “Revolution!”
8/12/2013 – Protesters topple a statue of Lenin. Grafitti reading “Yanukovych you’re next” is scrawled on walls. An effigy of Gadaffi’s severed head is carried around the square to chants of “Yanukovych the game is over!”. Kyiv Post reports preparation of Molotov cocktails.
10/12/2013 – Berkut riot police attempt to break down the barricades and clear the square. Tear gas is deployed. They are beaten back.
11/12/2013 – US Deputy Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and US Ambassador Geoffrey Pyattvisit the protests and talk to opposition leaders. They are photographed shaking hands and distributing food:
That same day Foreign Affairs, the official publication of the Council on Foreign Relations, runs an article headlined: “Yanukovych Must Go”
Also that same day, former President Leonid Kravchuk hosts a “roundtable” political discussion with members of all parties and all of Ukraine’s past presidents, the aim is to diffuse the crisis. The talks have Yanukovych’s blessing, the opposition refuses to attend.
13/12/2013 – US Senator John McCain visits Kiev where he gives a speech telling the crowd“We are here to support your just cause”.
Later he is photographed shaking hands with Oleh Tyahnybok, leader of the far-right Svoboda party:
The UK’s Channel 4 news reported [emphasis added]: “Far-right group at heart of Ukraine protests meet US senator”.
This includes 180 million dollars on “development programs” for “judges, members of parliament [and] political parties”.
16/1/2014 – After weeks of stalemate, the Ukrainian parliament passes ten new bills into law. Known collectively as the “Anti Protest Laws”, these laws allow a strict crackdown on protest activity, including removal of parliamentary immunity from MPs promoting violence and stripping of drivers license from those that used vehicles to obstruct public roads.
19/1/2014 – Clashes between riot police and protesters on Hrushevskoho Street, many of the protesters are from far-right groups such as Svoboda and Right Sector, and are seen wearing neo-nazi symbols and slogans.
25/1/2014 – President Yanukovych reaches out to opposition leaders, offering them a power-sharing agreement that would install Yatseniyuk as Prime Minister and Vitaliy Klitschko as his deputy. The opposition refuses the offer.
28/1/2014 – In a gesture of compromise, the parliament repeals 9 of the ten protest laws, passing a new law granting amnesty to all those involved in the protests, providing they cease occupying government buildings. The oppostion refuses these terms.
February
7/2/2014 – A recorded phone call between Nuland and Pyatt is leaked to the press, famously dubbed the “fuck the EU” call.
In the conversation, dated January 28th, Nuland and Pyatt discuss at length the structure of the Ukrainian cabinet once Yanukovych is gone. This is still 25 days before Yanukovych was removed from power
A poll published that same day by the Kyiv Post found more Ukrainians opposed the Maidan protests than supported them.
19/2/2014 – President Yanukovych declares a “truce” in a joint statement signed by the three main opposition leaders. The statement committed to negotiation for a lasting peace.
20/2/2014 – Snipers open fire on the crowd in Maidan Square, resulting in at least sixty deaths. Both protesters and police officers are killed in the gunfire. EuroNews reports that the “truce is shattered” mere hours after it was signed.
The agreement required the creation of a temporary “National Unity Government”, to be replaced following new Presidential Elections by the end of 2014. It also called for a full investigation into the shootings on the Maidan the previous day.
Yanukovych pledged that the government would not declare a state of emergency or call in the military, and would pull all police back from the site of the protests, in return for protesters surrendering all public buildings and illegal weapons.
Leaders of the militant protesters – including Dmitryo Yarosh of the neo-Nazi Right Sector – rejected the agreement, and threatened to storm the Parliament and Presidental Residence if Yanukoyvch did not resign immediately.
22/2/2014 – Rather than abiding by the terms of the agreement, once the police pulled back the protesters stormed government buildings and seized control of Kiev. Yanukovych flees to the city of Kharkiv in eastern Ukraine.
A contemporary Time article reported:
Ukraine’s beleaguered President Viktor Yanukovych fled Kiev Saturday as protestors took full control of Ukraine’s capital, signaling a dramatic turn in the three-month crisis just hours after the signing of an European Union-sponsored peace deal […] As police abandoned their posts across the capital, the opposition established control over key intersections and captured the presidential palace, setting up a perimeter around Yanukovych’s former residence
Within hours of the storming of the city, the Ukrainian parliament votes to strip Yanukovych of his office by 328 votes to 0, with over 120 MPs absent from the vote. This vote was unconstitional and not a legally binding form of impeachment, in any way.
From the eastern city of Kharkiv, Yanukovych gives a televised speech, declaring he was still the “legitimate elected President of Ukraine“, and that he had no intention of fleeing the country.
25/2/2014 – Yanukovych’s own Party of the Regions disavows him in parliament, and he flies to Russia, claiming his life is in danger.
27/2/2014 – Arseniy Yatsenyuk is sworn in as Ukraine’s interim Prime Minister, a post he would hold onto following elections in May 2014.
Vitaly Klitschko is relegated to the somewhat lower office of Mayor of Kiev, and Oleh Tyahnybok resumed his office as a simple MP.
Ukraine’s new government takes shape exactly as predicted by Nuland in her phone call of January 28th.
The same day Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Secretary General of NATO, tells the press that“the door is still open” for Ukraine to join the military bloc.
28/2/2014 – UK current events show Newsnight runs this segment, titled “The Neo-Nazi Threat in New Ukraine”:
March
Evidence emerges that the snipers shooting at the crowds were not employed by the Ukrainian government, but were shooting at both sides in an effort to stoke chaos.
This evidence is presented to the EU’s Foreign Policy Chief Catherine Ashton by Estonia Foreign Minister Urmas Paet in a phone call that is later leaked to the press, and confirmed to be genuine by the Estonian government.
Neither the EU, nor the new government of Ukraine, makes any effort to investigate this evidence or bring the killers to justice.
Following the 2014 parliamentary elections, the 5-party coalition government officially makes joining NATO a “national priority”.
So, there it is, a timeline of the key events leading to the fall of Viktor Yanukovych. Genuine grassroots revolution, or NATO backed coup? You decide.
Mismanagement of the COVID-19 crisis has initiated a socioeconomic chain reaction that has only begun to play out. Nevertheless, this story has a silver lining: the chance to make the world a better place.
But it has to start with an honest assessment of how we got here, and point to a positive course of action…
Imagine ten years ago if someone described to you what the world would look like as we entered the 2020’s. Would you have believed them?
Interesting times eh? It’s about to get a lot more interesting.
History will remember this decade as a critical turning point. The end of an era.
2020 was the year that ideas like this went mainstream. Headlines that used to be relegated to the lunatic fringe were now being promoted by the corporate media.
Then of course we had the COVID-19 debacle. Though the ‘authorities’ would blame the disease itself, it was their ill-conceived response that actually served as the catalyst.
Their short sighted policies initiated a chain reaction. Some consequences of this chain reaction are inevitable (like a bullet that has left the barrel of a gun). Others hang in the balance. There will not, however, be any going back to normal.
This story has a silver lining; a chance to make the world a better place. But it has to start with an honest assessment of how we got here, and point to a positive course of action.
In the winter of 2020 as COVID-19 went exponential a panic was spreading even faster.
Those who hatched this plan had made no provision for a pandemic that would linger on for months or years. They didn’t even account for the socioeconomic chain reaction that the first round of lock downs would set in motion.
By the summer of 2020 flash points of violence and social unrest were flaring up in cities around the world. Pent up frustrations were building, for obvious reasons. Billions of people had just spent months locked in their houses.
Most stress relieving activities had been banned: social gatherings, sports, time with friends at restaurants or bars… even places of worship were restricted. This was a powder keg waiting for a match.
Politicians obviously saw the danger in this equation. When millions of people are suddenly left hungry and homeless that’s a recipe for revolution. Something had to be done, and quickly. So they did something. Boy did they do something.
When all you have is a hammer every problem looks like a nail, and the governments around the world were looking at a very, very large nail. The fiscal stimulus programs of 2020 were epic; absolutely off the charts. By June over 18 trillion had been disbursed globally.
Then there were the forgivable loans – via the paycheck protection program and similar schemes around the world – which were supposed to help prop up small businesses. Some of these loans ended up being extended to some rather strange small businesses.
If you’ve never heard of Quantitative Easing (or QE) you might want to look that up. The short version is that when central banks purchase assets new money is created.
The money that is transferred to the asset holders account is literally typed into existence. These asset holders typically reinvest this new money, causing asset prices (including the stocks) to rise. Poor people don’t typically own these kinds of assets so it’s basically welfare for the rich.
And while it’s wonderful that we can provide a such a nice safety net for the upper crust of society it does have one little side effect: inflating markets with liquidity creates asset bubbles. It’s like filling up a water balloon more and more… till its so big you can see through it. Sooner or later it always pops.
The first round of QE started in 2009 after the housing bubble collapsed. Cutting interest rates to zero just wasn’t enough. 2020 brought us round four (affectionately referred to by some as QE Infinity).
In this round the Fed would take their liquidity experiment to a whole new level; buying financial assets never touched during QE1, 2, or 3 including corporate debt and etfs.
In one month they purchased more assets than they had during the entire first year following the 2009 crisis.
With unemployment numbers still hovering at great depression levels and hopes of a quick, V-shaped recovery evaporating, all eyes were on governments and central banks. The question was not if there would be more stimulus and money printing, the real question was how big it would be this time.
Would it be enough? No one seemed to be asking what would happen if they went too far.
Our fearless leaders had painted themselves into a corner at this point. If unemployment benefits, mortgage forbearance and eviction moratoriums weren’t extended, those in power would soon be facing millions of homeless, hungry and angry people.
With violence and unrest already smoldering in many major cities, this would be like throwing gasoline on a fire. Extending these protections however, would not be without a price.
Eviction moratoriums and mortgage forbearance programs had temporarily prevented millions from being suddenly made homeless. But with no rent coming in, landlords would soon be defaulting on mortgages en masse, as would many homeowners and businesses.
Russia by launching an alternative to the SWIFT payment system which allowed countries to bypass U.S. sanctions and China by introducing the PetroYuanwhich would compete directly with the petrodollar.
China was also in the process developing a digital currency (aka the e-Yuan) that bypassed the need for banks all together. Transfers relied only on an app on your phone.
By imposing sanctions on any individual, company or bank which did business with Chinese officials enforcing the new security law, this legislation set the stage for Washington to cut China’s access to the dollar; a move which would ultimately divide the world into Yuan and Dollar based currency blocs.
Spoiler alert: it doesn’t end well for Uncle Sam.
These economic provocations were accompanied by multiple rounds of good old fashion saber rattling.
It’s worth noting that by this time these islands were fully militarized and operational; complete with ports, runways and other facilities that gave the Chinese a clear strategic advantage.
At this stage the rest of the world was beginning to suspect that Uncle Sam was experiencing some form of cognitive decline. He wasn’t playing four dimensional chess here. He didn’t even seem to be playing with a full deck.
This was like a drunk guy poking a tiger with a stick (probably not going to end well).
The provocations would continue on multiple fronts: embassies ordered to close, Chinese companies sanctioned or banned from operating in the U.S. Anything and everything connected to China was open game.
China condemned each of these provocations but they didn’t take the bait. Their response would come when was in their strategic interests. They would choose their own timing. If direct conflict could be averted long enough, the U.S. was likely to collapse on its own. The war could be won without firing a shot.
Thucydides Trap:
The high probability of war when an emerging power threatens the dominance of an international hegemon.
Meanwhile back in the U.S. of A. the violence and mayhem in the streets was intensifying. Businesses, government buildings and vehicles had been burning virtually every night for months on end. Protesters and counter protesters were now bringing semiautomatic weapons to the scene.
By September there were multiple fatalities on each side.
Perception of these events was increasingly polarized. The left and the right were no long behaving like political factions of a nation. They had devolved into hostile tribes fighting for control of a territory.
A radicalized strain of thought that directly endorsed violence as a political tool was metastasizing among a new generation of activists. A growing contingent had convinced themselves that they could win in an armed conflict. This was a serious miscalculation.
(If you try to outgun the police and the military you’re going to have a bad time).
Here humanity approached a crossroad. Probabilities were coalescing as the crisis progressed.
Those who saw the stakes would feel an urgency. With every moment of inaction the likelihood of a tragic ending increased. Something had to be done.
But what?
What could an ordinary individual do to improve the outcome? Could the trajectory of history really be altered?
Some questions are best answered with a riddle.
Rather than predicting what comes next, let’s tell a story. This story has multiple endings and you get to choose.
Story Time
It’s been said that every nation is three meals away from a revolution.
Never before had this principle been tested in so many countries simultaneously as it was in the 2020’s.
At first many held onto the hope that everything would soon go back to normal, but as the long term realities of the decade set in, more and more people would come to the same startling conclusion: the ‘authorities’ were out of their depth.
There was no exit strategy. The situation was not ‘under control’…
In the early stages of the crisis, when the first few governments were collapsing, very few realized how the conflux of economic, geopolitical and social variables were coalescing in a perfect storm.
But when G20 nations started dropping like flies the phenomenon it became impossible to ignore. Like dominoes falling, the collapse of one major economy destabilized every country connected to it. In the age of globalization very few would be spared.
What began as a trickle suddenly accelerated as the downfall of the U.S. dollar precipitated an unprecedented shock to global supply chains.
Imports ground to a halt all around the world. In countries dependent on outsourced food production and manufacturing this translated into widespread shortages and social unrest. In this environment extremist movements of all stripes flourished.
A small handful of nations would weather this storm peacefully. Rather than tearing themselves apart from within or transforming into totalitarian dictatorships, they would unify and adapt.
As economic and monetary shocks disrupted global supply chains and trade, these countries would quickly reorganize their economies to replace imports with local production – starting with food and essentials. Reducing dependence on fossil fuels was an important element of this transition.
To accomplish this feat every aspect of modern life was re-imagined.
Lawns were replaced by gardens; golf courses converted to orchards. Waste streams were recuperated to minimize losses. It wasn’t easy, but these countries pulled through, and before the decade was over, they were building regional trade networks that hadn’t existed before the crisis.
A lot of wealthy countries didn’t do so well in the second phase of the crisis; the part where real hardship kicked in. Populations accustomed to easy living and constant entertainment had a very short fuse.
As shortages and rationing became the new normal and homeless encampments grew, protests would morph into riots, armed uprisings and civil wars.
Governments that were ill prepared for these challenges crumbled quickly; some into the hands of populist movements, others to military juntas. In most cases the replacement was more brutal and repressive that the old system.
The underlying paradigm was rarely questioned at all.
Many regimes would extend their lifespan by totalitarian means. Emergency powers established under lockdown would prove invaluable here.
Policies previously justified by public health would now be implemented in the name of national security; control mechanisms adapted and repurposed to crack down on dissidents.
It was every petty dictator’s wet dream: granular control over every aspect of human behavior and interaction. No one allowed to gather in public without permission. Every contact tracked and traced. If you’re outside you better be prepared to show your papers.
This approach was most effective when the latent fears and hatreds of the population could be rallied against an enemy.
Convince a people that they are under attack and it’s easy to unify them under a flag.
Rather than rioting in the streets, impoverished youth can be conscripted into the military.
Their identities shattered and remolded; conditioned to obey; trained to kill on command.
Send them abroad to steal land and resources.
Use them at home to crush dissent.
War is – after all – the health of the state.
Regardless of which axis prevailed in these conflicts the result would be the same.
A new totalitarian order was the universal prescription; the only cure for the chaos.
The world’s first truly global currency would replace the dollar. This currency would be completely digital; coins and bank notes phased out. Every single transaction conducted using this currency would be recorded on a block blockchain.
Unlike the original cryptocurrencies this blockchain was controlled by a central authority and monitored with AI. Economic privacy a thing of the past.
It was the holy grail of ruling elite, the precursor for global governance with teeth, but before they even had time to properly congratulate themselves, their house of cards was already catching wind.
As living conditions deteriorate, and fear and uncertainty prevail, certain psychological forces are always unleashed. These forces are like the incoming waves of a tsunami.
Once they gather momentum there can be no stopping them.
Throughout history there have been individuals and movements who rode these waves; channeling the tides of human sentiment towards a course of action. Though the science of crowd psychology is complex and nuanced, the application of its principles is mind bogglingly simple.
So simple in fact, that intellectuals typically recoil from them, while bonafide idiots wield them easily (and to great effect).
Like riding a tsunami on a surfboard, attempting to redirect the momentum of a society is highly dangerous.
The crowd can lift a leader to great heights, but one mistake can leave them hanging from a lamp post. Those who manage to navigate these forces usually guard the formula carefully. Failure to do so would threaten the foundations of their power.
This time around however, humanity flipped the script.
In the age of the internet the science of crowd psychology and color revolutions had been available to the public for some time now, but very few saw the utility in studying it.
However as the 2020’s progressed, and it became more and it became more clear that that those in power were pushing civilization toward a dystopian nightmare, a contingent of activists would reverse engineer the tools being used against them.
The work of Gustave Le Bon and Edward Bernays would be modernized and tempered with a cultural code:
the positive application of human instinct.
The instinctual psychology of species can be harnessed for good or for evil. In the modern era it has been weaponized by the military industrial complex for regime change, and by corporations for marketing and public relations.
The same principles however can applied to create rather than destroy. Visions and values can spread like viruses from mind to mind, and from place to place.
The contagion of a single idea can inspire generations towards a new paradigm.
To topple a government is surprisingly easy when conditions are right. Silver spoon politicians who’ve never served or worked a day in their life can easily lose the respect and obedience of military and law enforcement. When that happens, it’s game over.
The question that always comes up in such events (usually as an afterthought) is what will you replace the old system with?
There is nothing more dangerous than armed men with utopian dreams. Sometimes the cure can be worse than the disease.
History provides many cautionary tales. To avoid the trap of oppressed rising up to become the oppressor the paradigm that facilitates this dynamic has to be questioned.
The vast majority of modern governments, businesses and organizations utilize a social structure called vertical collectivism. Vertical collectivism is top down system of organizing human groups which amplifies power by stacking layers of authority in pyramids.
The result is a highly stratified society where those on the bottom have little or no say, and are left to fight over scraps from above.
Vertical collectivism is apolitical. Capitalists companies and Communist regimes both use it without contradiction, as do republics that call themselves democracies.
The vertical model was born of military strategy. A general or warlord alone can only control a small army, but by using subordinate officers in layers of rank, a single individual, or a small ruling class can dominate millions of people and vast territories.
This is why a state is often defined as the monopoly on violence within a region.
Vertical collectivism didn’t spread to every corner of the globe because it improved peoples lives.
Vertical collectivism spread like a cancer because it is brutally effective in the in the context of war.
Every culture that it encountered was either crushed on the battlefield or forced to copy the model to survive. The dawn of civilization – as many euphemistically refer to it – is a story of conquest and colonialization that began approximately 10,000 years ago and continues to this day.
This was not however, the beginning of the human story.
For over 300,000 years – long before the first empires of Asia and Europe began to absorb surrounding tribes – humans organized themselves using a very different model.
Rather than building top down, stratified societies that concentrated wealth and power in the hands of an upper class, these cultures organized horizontally.
Organizing horizontally didn’t mean that there were no leaders.
The authority and instincts are far older than humanity.
Like all social animals, our species is hardwired to follow those who demonstrate courage and intelligence.
However in horizontal societies disparities of wealth and power were significantly smaller.
The leaders and councils responsible for group decisions were not insulated by armies and law enforcement conditioned to obey without question.
Defense and order were maintained by an armed citizenry, bound by a code of conduct. This dynamic forced leaders to be directly accountable to the population.
Their power was rooted in their ability to communicate with the people, build consensus and chart a course of action to the benefit of all.
The fact that horizontal societies required leaders to work with the public in such a personal way had one obvious disadvantage: it limited the size of the group. After all, why would someone voluntarily follow someone far away that they never met?
There is however, a way around this limitation. By forming federations horizontal societies can expand their sphere influence significantly.
An example of this adaptation can be found in the Iroquois confederacy which unified 5 tribes for hundreds of years in the region that came to be called New York.
Each member tribe in the confederacy had their own culture and and internal governance, but a set of shared values enabled them to cooperate economically and militarily. If one tribe was attacked they quickly mounted a common defense.
Many historians believe that United States federal system was based on the Iroquois model. One significant difference however, was that the Iroquois had no central government. There was a central council comprised of representatives from each tribe, but this council had no power to enforce its will.
Each representative was tasked with building a consensus that would resonate with their people.
A modernized adaptation of this Iroquois model gained traction in the mid 2020s as the gears of globalization ground to a halt. While governments proved incapable of solving the most basic problems, decentralized networks were replacing the system from the ground up.
They would start by organizing local food production in their communities and gradually expand cooperation to other sectors.
Their revolution was driven by an idea worth spreading. Not only was it possible to live on this planet without destroying it, this way of life was more abundant and fulfilling than the alternative. There was no need to wait for governments to act. Humans are perfectly capable of organizing themselves.
Those that succeeded became epicenters of a new renaissance; attracting skilled workers and artists from all around the world.
Some of these travelers would put down permanent roots.
Others would return to their homeland to plant seeds of their own.
From the fragments of fallen empires new nations would be born.
From the ashes of dying cultures new cultures would rise.
The great collapse of the 2020’s was not the end of the world.
It was the end of an era, and the dawn of a new one…
Time To Flip The Script
Remember how we said this story has multiple endings?
We’re going take one of them to a literal extreme; and we’re going to do it in the real world.
Now if you’re living in a crowded city center, maybe pushing the boundaries starts by planting a garden in your front yard, organizing a community compost, or speaking out against a war.
However it’s important to understand that in the era we have entered the stakes are rising, and the trajectory we’re on needs to be altered significantly.
This implies fundamental changes in the way we livRemember how we said this story has multiple endings? We’re going take one of them to a literal extreme; and we’re going to do it in the real world.
(Those who piece together the clues, get through the filters, and pass quarantine will at some point find themselves standing here. GPS COORDINATES FLASH)
Now if you’re living in a crowded city center, maybe pushing the boundaries starts by planting a garden in your front yard, organizing a community compost, or speaking out against a war.
However it’s important to understand that in the era we have entered the stakes are rising, and the trajectory we’re on needs to be altered significantly. This implies fundamental changes in the way we live, not just gestures in right direction.
You have to decide what kind of story you and your family want to be a part of. In some cases this might involve immigrating to another country. Others will be more inclined to stay, and fight to change the outcome at home. One way or the other you’ll want to be in a place where you can grow food, and you’ll want to be set up to do this without agrochemical inputs or fossil fuels.
You also don’t want to be reliant on the grid. Utilities can and will go down. Some will be shocked by how long they can stay down.
These aren’t the kind of lifestyle changes you want to make at the last moment, or put off until you can do something large scale. Far better to start transitioning to a new way of life right now. Do what you can with what you have. Join forces with others to amplify.
The learning curve for this kind of transition can be steep. There are a lot of practical skills that we should be taught in school but aren’t. Most kids when they graduate… don’t know how to build a house, or grow a garden, or even how to make bread.
The best way to learn this stuff isn’t really in a classroom anyway. People learn best by example, anchored with hands on experience.
That’s why we built this place. You could think of it as an experiential learning center / maker space. This whole landscape is a laboratory.
Here we can put ideas to an extreme test.
Rather that just reading about this stuff or watching a presentation, volunteers and travelers from all over the world come here to do it themselves. They get their hands dirty in the field: planting plants, working with animals, building crazy structures like these.
They also get to experience first hand what it takes to self organize and live in a different way.
The experience is extreme, because the challenges we face are real. We’re completely off-grid here. Our electricity comes from the sun. We have running water by pumping from the spring up to a tank on the hill.
It’s also up to us to us to maintain the road and drainage. Up here when there’s a problem we have to put our heads together and find a way to solve it.
To put this in perspective, our first long term volunteer was here when we sustained a direct hit from hurricane Maria. He also assisted in the recovery and became part of the story.
Talk is cheap. If you really want to change the world you have to be able to show people how.
We’re doing this here in the Commonwealth of Dominica cause these people are moving in the right direction, and their culture holds some of the keys to the solution.
But where ever you decide to make your stand now is the time to get serious about food security.
Our challenge in the next phase is to grow more and develop local production systems to replace imports.
So much research has been done, we essentially know the majority of the background details. The SARS-CoV-2 virus commonly known as COVID-19 was made in a lab by scientists.
The virus then went from a lab to the global population in late 2019/early 2020. The epicenter of the outbreak appears to be one of the labs working on the virus in Wuhan, China. Those essential big picture items are no longer debated; although the Chinese government does not agree for obvious reasons.
With the ‘where’, ‘when’ and ‘how’ essentially agreed, the question of ‘who’ and ‘why’ remains.
The Chinese have blamed the U.S. Intelligence agencies for releasing the virus. The U.S. Intelligence agencies have said they don’t know who released it or from where. [LINK] The U.S. Intelligence position is weird and obtuse, then again, the Intelligence Community specializes in being weird and obtuse.
The cornerstone of the CTH hypothesis, regarding the ‘who’ and ‘why’ of the COVID-19 virus, is built upon the intelligence communitie’s odd position and one very key circumstantial point that stands out loudly. The U.S. Pentagon was funding the creation of SARS as a biological weapon in Wuhan, China, under the auspices of national security. “Grants from the Pentagon included $6,491,025 from the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) from 2017 to 2020” (link).
♦ Central Point – The Defense Department would not be spending money to develop a biological weapon in Wuhan, China unless they already had developed that weapon in the United States. The Pentagon would not give a biological weapon to the communist Chinese unless the U.S. already developed it; and unless they already had a countermeasure to the consequences of it.
In the original pdf guidance for the 2014 research pause of into weaponization of SARS viruses there was an important footnote [LINK]:
[FN¹ SOURCE – U.S. Government Gain-of-Function Deliberative Process and Research Funding Pause on Selected Gain-of-Function Research Involving Influenza, MERS, and SARS Viruses – pdf, page 2 – October 17, 2014].
Timeline:
♦ October 17, 2014 – U.S. funding of SARS to create a biological weapon was paused due to the extreme risk of a pandemic. However, the pause allowed agencies within the U.S. government to continue funding if they determined “the research is urgently necessary to protect the public health or national security.” [LINK]
♦ 2014 through 2020 the Pentagon continued funding research in Wuhan, China. Fear of discovery would explain why many top officials in the U.S. Defense Department were against the Trump administration [with increased severity after the COVID pandemic began]. [LINK]
♦ May 2016 – [An Election Year] – “after thorough deliberation and extensive input from domestic and international stakeholders, the NSABB [National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity] issued its recommendations. NSABB’s central finding was that studies that are expected to enhance Potential Pandemic Pathogen (PPP) have potential benefits to public health but also entail significant risks. NSABB recommended that such studies warranted additional scrutiny prior to being funded.” Anthony Fauci is on the NSABB.
♦ January 9, 2017 – [Four Days after the Susan Rice Oval Office meeting with Obama, Biden, Comey, et al] – The Obama Administration re-authorizes funding for the creation of SARS biological weapons. “Adoption of these recommendations will satisfy the requirements for lifting the current moratorium on certain life sciences research that could enhance a pathogen’s virulence and/or transmissibility to produce a potential pandemic pathogen (an enhanced PPP).“ [LINK]
Given the workarounds, exceptions and plausible deniability for the consequences, built into the original moratorium guidance in 2014, the defense department was operationally permitted to keep funding the biological weapons research in Wuhan, China. The 2014 ban was a funding moratorium in name only; however, it appears the funding for U.S. research in North Carolina was stopped.
What was reauthorized in 2017, just before President Trump took office, was the need to use “national security” as an excuse to continue the research. It also appears funding of SARS as a biological weapon inside the U.S. (North Carolina) was now permitted again.
If you accept that the Pentagon would never spend to develop a biological weapon in China (Wuhan Lab) unless they already had developed that weapon on their own (North Carolina Lab), then the question about the release of that weapon starts to take shape.
Remember, the State Department was looking into the origin until Joe Biden shut them down and redirected the goal to the Intelligence Community. In essence, Biden handed the mission to the Fourth Branch of Government. Not surprisingly, after a few months the IC said their results were “inconclusive.”
♦ [Excerpt] – […] In one State Department meeting, officials seeking to demand transparency from the Chinese government say they were explicitly told by colleagues not to explore the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s gain-of-function research, because it would bring unwelcome attention to U.S. government funding of it.
In an internal memo obtained by Vanity Fair, Thomas DiNanno, former acting assistant secretary of the State Department’s Bureau of Arms Control, Verification, and Compliance, wrote that staff from two bureaus, his own and the Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation, “warned” leaders within his bureau “not to pursue an investigation into the origin of COVID-19” because it would “‘open a can of worms’ if it continued.”
[…] In late March, former Centers for Disease Control director Robert Redfield received death threats from fellow scientists after telling CNN that he believed COVID-19 had originated in a lab. “I was threatened and ostracized because I proposed another hypothesis,” Redfield told Vanity Fair. “I expected it from politicians. I didn’t expect it from science.” (read more)
♦ Washington (CNN) – “President Joe Biden’s team shut down a closely-held State Department effort launched late in the Trump administration to prove the coronavirus originated in a Chinese lab over concerns about the quality of its work, according to three sources familiar with the decision.
The existence of the State Department inquiry and its termination this spring by the Biden administration — neither of which has been previously reported — comes to light amid renewed interest in whether the virus could have leaked out of a Wuhan lab with links to the Chinese military. The Biden administration is also facing scrutiny of its own efforts to determine if the Chinese government was responsible for the virus.
♦ “On Wednesday, Biden issued a statement that he has directed the US intelligence community to redouble its efforts in investigating the origins of the Covid-19 pandemic and report back to him in 90 days.” (LINK)
♦ [WASHINGTON DC] – The intelligence community failed to conclusively identify the origin of the coronavirus following a 90-day investigation ordered by President Biden, but experts are divided on why.
A report by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) found that officials were unable to rule whether the virus escaped from a lab or spread to humans through an infected animal. But the ultimate conclusion reached by the $85 billion-a-year community was that it would be unable to pinpoint the origin of the virus if China didn’t fully cooperate. (LINK)
If you have followed how the U.S. Intelligence Community operates, you can see a pretty clear picture emerge of a strong likelihood surrounding what took place.
The U.S. Defense Dept developed SARS-CoV-2 in North Carolina. The 4th Branch (Intelligence Community) wanted to use it. The Pentagon restarts funding for development of SARS-CoV-2 in partnership with Wuhan, China – setting up the cover story. The 4th Branch (Intelligence Community) then uses the virus by releasing it in/around Wuhan. Everything after that is simply part of the 4th Branch covering their tracks. Wuhan, China becomes the patsy.
The IC release of COVID-19 would have two transparent motives for the 4th Branch:
(1) Get rid of Trump via mail-in ballots, and intelligence assistance toward the 2020 election result; and (2) Expand their influence and control operations as the most powerful force in U.S. government.
One of the central players, who likely knows the details behind who exactly executed the release, is former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who has been blaming the Chinese almost exclusively. [Methinks he doth protest too much.] Former DNI John Ratcliffe is also a staunch figure pointing at Wuhan, China. Keep in mind DNI Ratcliffe was the recipient of the 4th Branch Intelligence Community products that pointed to Wuhan, China.
If it sounds like this thesis is too far ‘out there‘, then you may not fully understand how the Fourth Branch of Government operates.
There is a sequence of outright lies and fabrications used to justify far-reaching policy decisions which in the course of the last 18 months are literally destroying people’s lives Worldwide.
“Fake science” is used to justify confinement, social distancing, the face mask, the prohibition of social gatherings, cultural and sports events, the closure of economic activity, all of which are upheld as a means to repealing the “killer virus”.
Who is this “Killer Virus” which has been personified by both the media and our governments, held responsible for triggering economic and social chaos Worldwide?
You might recall that at the height of the February 2020 financial collapse, “V the Virus” was held responsible for the largest stock market crash since 1929.
Has the “Killer Virus” been Identified. Has SARS-CoV-2 been Isolated?
This article will review this contentious issue starting at the outset of the crisis in January 2020. Part of this analysis is based on research conducted in early 2020.
The central question raised in this review is the following: is there reliable evidence provided by the WHO and national health authorities that the alleged SARS-CoV-2 virus has been isolated/purified from an “unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient”?
While the alleged virus was initially defined as the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) in January 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) stated in January 2020 that it did not have in its possession details regarding the isolation/purification and identity of 2019-nCoV.
And because details concerning isolation / purification were not available, the WHO decided to “customize” The Real Time Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (rRT-PCR) Test using the alleged “similar” 2003 SARS virus (subsequently renamed SARS-1) as “a point of reference” for detecting genetic fragments of the novel 2019-nCoV.
What this decision entails is that novel 2019-CoV-2 is NOT a novel virus. It was categorized by the Chinese authorities and the WHO as “similar” to the 2003 SARS-CoV as well as to MERS.
2003 SARS-CoV was subsequently renamed SARS-CoV-1.
History: Isolation of the Virus
Chinese Health Authorities
The Chinese authorities announced on January 7, 2020 that “a new type of virus” had been identified “similar to the one associated with SARS and MERS” (related report , not original Chinese government source). The underlying method is described below:
We prospectively collected and analysed data on patients with laboratory-confirmed 2019-nCoV infection by real-time RT-PCR and next-generation sequencing.
Data were obtained with standardised data collection forms shared by WHO and the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium from electronic medical records. (emphasis added)
The following article entitled “A new coronavirus associated with human respiratory disease in China, (Nature, February 3, 2021) was among the first to report on the China’s novel coronavirus:…[We] collected bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) and performed deep meta-transcriptomic sequencing. The clinical specimen was handled in a biosafety level 3 laboratory at Shanghai Public Health Clinical Center. Total RNA was extracted from 200 μl of BALF and a meta-transcriptomic library was constructed for pair-end (150-bp reads) sequencing using an Illumina MiniSeq as previously described 4,6,7,8. .In total, we generated 56,565,928 sequence reads that were de novo-assembled and screened for potential aetiological agents. ….The genome sequence of this virus, as well as its termini, were determined and confirmed by reverse-transcription PCR (RT–PCR)10 and 5′/3′ rapid amplification of cDNA ends (RACE), respectively. This virus strain was designated as WH-Human 1 coronavirus (WHCV) (and has also been referred to as ‘2019-nCoV’) and its whole genome sequence (29,903 nt) has been assigned GenBank accession number MN908947. .The viral genome organization of WHCV was determined by sequence alignment to two representative members of the genus Betacoronavirus: a coronavirus associated with humans (SARS-CoV Tor2, GenBank accession number AY274119) [2003] and a coronavirus associated with bats (bat SL-CoVZC45, GenBank accession number MG772933) . (Nature, February 3, 2020) .
It is unclear from the above quotations as well as from the documents consulted, whether the Chinese health authorities undertook an isolation / purification of a patient’s specimen.
US Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
Following the Chinese announcement on the 28th of January 2020, the US Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stated that the novela corona virus had been isolated.The CDC statement dated January 28th, 2020 (updated December 2020) is unequivocal:
SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, was isolated in the laboratory and is available for research by the scientific and medical community.
….
Timeline:
On January 20, 2020, CDC received a clinical specimen collected from the first reported U.S. patient infected with SARS-CoV-2. CDC immediately placed the specimen into cell culture to grow a sufficient amount of virus for study.
On February 2, 2020, CDC generated enough SARS-CoV-2 grown in cell culture to distribute to medical and scientific researchers.
On February 4, 2020, CDC shipped SARS-CoV-2 to the BEI Resources Repository.
An article discussing the isolation and characterization of this virus specimen is available in Emerging Infectious Diseases.
…
One important way that CDC has supported global efforts to study and learn about SARS-CoV-2 in the laboratory was by growing the virus in cell culture and ensuring that it was widely available. Researchers in the scientific and medical community can use virus obtained from this work in their studies.
SARS-CoV-2 strains supplied by CDC and other researchers can be requested, free, from the Biodefense and Emerging Infections Research (BEI) Resources Repositoryexternal icon by established institutions that meet BEI requirements. These requirements include maintaining appropriate facilities and safety programs, as well as having the appropriate expertise. BEI supplies organisms and reagents to the broader community of microbiology and infectious disease researchers. (Emphasis added).
See also related study which was posted on the CDC website.
The CDC Acknowledges that SARS-CoV-2 has not been Isolated.
The official CDC document, (dated July 21, 2021) entitled “CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel reads as follows:
Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV were available for CDC use at the time the test was developed [January 2020] and this study conducted, assays designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA (N gene; GenBank accession: MN908947.2) of known titer (RNA copies/µL) spiked into a diluent consisting of a suspension of human A549 cells and viral transport medium (VTM) to mimic clinical specimen. (emphasis added, page 40)
Compare the above statement to the CDC January 28th, 2020 advisory confirming the isolation of SARS-CoV-2:
On January 20, 2020, CDC received a clinical specimen collected from the first reported U.S. patient infected with SARS-CoV-2. CDC immediately placed the specimen into cell culture to grow a sufficient amount of virus for study.
***
See the analysis of CDC responses in the section below on Freedom of Information Requests.
The World Health Organization (WHO) Did Not Undertake The Isolation / Purification of a Specimen
From the documents quoted below, the Chinese authorities did not provide the WHO with a specimen ofisolated / purified SARS-CoV-2.
And because details concerning isolation were not available, the WHO decided to “customize” its Real Time Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (rRT-PCR) test using a so-called isolate of the “similar” 2003 SARS corona virus (subsequently renamed SARS-CoV-1) as “a point of reference” (or proxy) for detecting genetic fragments of the 2019 SARS-CoV-2.
While Drosten et al’s study confirmed that “several viral genome sequences had been released”, in the case of 2019-nCoV, “virus isolates or samples from infected patients were not available … ”
The recommendations to the WHO were as follows:
“The genome sequences suggest presence of a virus closely related to the members of a viral species termed severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-related CoV,a species defined by the agent of the 2002/03 outbreak of SARS in humans [3,4].
We report on the the establishment and validation of a diagnostic workflow for 2019-nCoV screening and specific confirmation [using the RT-PCR test], designed in absence of available virus isolates or original patient specimens. Design and validation were enabled by the close genetic relatedness to the 2003 SARS-CoV, and aided by the use of synthetic nucleic acid technology.” (Eurosurveillance, January 23, 2020, emphasis added).
What this bold statement suggests is that the isolation / purification of 2019-nCoV was not required and that “validation” would be enabled by “the close genetic relatedness to the 2003-SARS-CoV.”
The investigative report provides detailed documentation based on Freedom of Information (FOI) requests addressed to ninety Health /Science institutions in a large number of countries.
The responses to these requests confirm that there is no record of isolation / purification of SARS-CoV-2 “having been performed by anyone, anywhere, ever.”
“The 90 Health /Science institutions that have responded thus far have provided and/or cited, in total, zero such records:
Our requests [under “freedom of information”] have not been limited to records of isolation performed by the respective institution, or limited to records authored by the respective institution, rather they were open to any records describing “COVID-19 virus” (aka “SARS-COV-2”) isolation/purification performed by anyone, ever, anywhere on the planet.”
The Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
The CDC was contacted by the author of this report in the form of four separate requests: November 2, 2020, March 1, 2021, March 3, 2021, which are reviewed below:
March 1, 2021:The CDC again made clear that they still have no records of “SARS-COV-2” isolation performed by anyone, anywhere on the planet, ever… just not in so many words. Instead, the CDC absurdly implied that isolation/purification of “SARS-COV-2” would require the replication of a “virus” without host cells and thus is impossible. (The request had nothing to do with replication.)
CDC again failed to provide/cite any records describing “SARS-COV-2” isolation/purification by anyone anywhere ever… but would no longer simply say so (as they did on November 2nd); instead they gave song and dance citing the study by Harcourt et al. which is the same one posted on CDC’s website:
CDC admitted they have no record of “SARS-COV-2” purification from a patient sample via maceration, filtration and use of an ultracentrifuge, by anyone, anywhere, ever:
Here are 5 compilation pdfs containing FOI responses from 79 institutions in 22 countries/jurisdictions, re the isolation/purification/existence of “SARS-COV-2”, as well as emails from authors of studies that claimed to have “isolated the virus” and an email from the Head of the Consultant Laboratory for Diagnostic Electron Microscopy of Infectious Pathogens at Germany’s Robert Koch Institut, last updated July 13, 2021
Screenshot of a selected responses are provided below : New Zealand, Canada, UK.
Consult the full archive of letters and responses. This work was undertaken over a period of more than 12 months.
Response Public Health England
It follows from the above detailed study that there is no evidence that the SARS-CoV-2 virus has been isolated/purified from a patient’s sample, as evidenced by the responses “under freedom of information” (FOI) from some 90 health / science institutions Worldwide.
“Gemma O’Doherty is an Investigative Journalist in Ireland.
“This Irish Investigation into Covid shows that The Department of Health refuses to confirm the existence of a “virus” in writing. Confirmation that the virus was never isolated.”
“As part of our legal action we had been demanding the evidence that this virus actually exists [as well as] evidence that lock downs actually have any impact on the spread of viruses; that face-masks are safe, and do deter the spread of viruses – They don’t. No such studies exist; that social distancing is based in science – It isn’t. it’s made up; that contact tracing has any bearing on the spread of a virus – of course it doesn’t. This organization here – is making it up as they go along.” – Gemma O’Doherty
Isolation of the Virus. The Legal Battle in Alberta. Patrick King
Patrick King. The Virus Has Not Been Isolated! “No I Did Not Win The Court Case”. “They Do Not Have the Evidence”.
The following video features Patrick King in his legal Battle against the Alberta Government. There are a lot of people in Alberta and around the World who are Fighting against the Big Lie.
lbry://@PressForTruth#4/Pat-King-Interview#6
Concluding Remarks: “Biggest Medical Fraud in World History”
SARS-CoV-2 has not been isolated. Does the virus Exist?
Neither the Chinese authorities nor the CDC, the WHO, national governments, scientific / health authorities have provided evidence that SARS-CoV-2 has been isolated /purified.
Based on the investigative research of Christine Malley we have access to the responses of numerous governments and health authorities, including that provided by the Republic of Ireland to journalist Gemma O’Doherty.
What this means is that the entire covid narrative falls flat.
We have been systematically misled.
Everything you have been told by your governments is a lie, a complexity of lies and falsehoods.
There is no pandemic. The isolation / purification of the virus has not been undertaken.
All the policies adopted by governments worldwide allegedly to “save lives” are illegal, socially destructive and in violation of fundamental human rights.
These policies have been instrumental in “destroying people’s lives”.
Dr. Stephen Frost refers to the alleged “Covid pandemic” as“The Biggest Medical Fraud in World History”.
From the outset in January 2020, the flawed and invalid RT-PCR test was used to “detect” the alleged 2019 SARS-CoV-2 virus, despite the fact that details regarding the isolation/purification of the original virus were not available.
Curbing the alleged SARS-CoV-2 pandemic through the imposition of face masks, social distancing, closing down of national economies are of a criminal nature, they have absolutely no validity,
The original strain of SARS-CoV-2 has not be isolated /purified: How does that affect the process of so-called “detection” of the “deadly variants” of the original virus?
Mortality and Morbidity: While there is “No Killer Virus”, there is a “Killer Vaccine”.
While the SARS-CoV-2 virus is presented by the media and the governments as a “killer virus” (when in fact the WHO and CDC describe it as “similar to seasonal influenza”, a totally invalid and dysfunctional Covid -19 vaccine is currently being imposed on the entire population of Planet Earth: 7.9 billion people.
It’s a multibillion dollar endeavour with Pfizer in the lead, establishing a near Worldwide monopoly for the sale and distribution of the mRNA killer vaccine.
Important Question:
How did Big Pharma manage to develop a vaccine (sponsored by the WHO, GAVI, the Gates Foundation, et al) with a mandate “to protect people” against a virus which has not been isolated/ purified?
Moreover, 2019SARS-CoV-2 has been categorized as similar to the 2003 SARS-CoV which means that the 2019 SARS-CoV-2 is not a novel virus.
The legitimacy of the Covid vaccine project hinges upon the hundreds of thousands of RT-PCR fake positive cases Worldwide combined with fake Covid related mortality data.
Big Pharma’s mRNA vaccine has resulted in countless deaths and injuries Worldwide which are barely reported by the mainstream media.
While we do not have figures for the entire Planet, the latest official figures for the European Union and the U.S are revealing. Bear in mind they vastly underestimate the real trends in vaccin related mortality and morbidity:EU/EEA/Switzerland to 31 July 2021 – 20,595 Covid-19 injection related deaths and over 1.94 million injuries, per EudraVigilance Database.
UK to 21 July 2021 – 1,517 Covid-19 injection related deaths and over 1.1 million injuries, per MHRA Yellow Card Scheme.
USA to 23 July 2021 – 11,940 Covid-19 injection related deaths and over 2.4 million injuries, per VAERS database.
TOTAL for EU/UK/USA – 34,052 Covid-19 injection related deaths and over 5.46 million injuries reported as at 1 August 2021
Nota Bene: It is important to be aware that the official figures above (reported to the health authorities) are but a small percentage of the actual figures. Furthermore, people continue to die (and suffer injury) from the injections with every day which passes. (D4CE
So why are governments pressuring people to get vaccinated?
Heads of State and heads of government Worldwide are being pressured, bribed, coopted and/or threatened by powerful financial interests into accepting the Covid vaccine consensus. The vaccine passport is the endgame, which constitutes a transition towards digital tyranny.
The study and reports analyzed in this article should be used to confront politicians.
Does the virus Exist?
The governments and the WHO do not have a Leg to Stand On. And neither does Bill Gates.
What we must seek is to confront a very fragile consensus, which is based on fraud and deceit.
PS: I remain indebted to Christine Massey for her extensive research and investigation on the issue of isolation /purification.
An emergency stockpile can greatly increase your chance of survival if Shit Hit The Fan. But creating a stockpile can easily drain your grocery budget if you’re not careful.
Luckily, some of the best foods for stockpiling are extremely cheap, so you can buy them in quantities enough to last you several months. Here are some examples of cheap foods to stockpile:
Rice – Rice is a staple food worldwide. It is also a versatile ingredient as it can be paired with various foods or cooked with various ingredients. When stored in an airtight container, rice keeps for six months. Rice is also cheap when bought in bulk.
Pinto beans – Pinto beans can be cooked in bulk and used in soups and salads. Pinto beans are a cheap way to keep bellies full, too, since they are rich in carbohydrates, fiber and protein. Like rice, they will also keep for several months if stored in an airtight container in a cool, dry pantry. Buy pinto beans in bulk to save money.
Lentils – Lentils are another legume that should be part of your emergency stockpile. They give you lots of calories, carbohydrates, protein and dietary fiber. Lentils are typically used in soups. But they also make great additions in potato salads, roasted vegetable salads, curries, and other savory dishes.
Oil – Don’t forget to stock up on oil since you’ll need it to cook. Having oil on hand will also give you more variety since you can use it to make marinades, sauces and salad dressings. Choose healthy oils, such as coconut, sesame and olive oils.
Flour – Bread is a staple in various diets worldwide. But bread can quickly go bad and moldy. So instead of buying ready-made bread, stock up on bags of flour. Flour is the single most important baking ingredient. If you have flour, you can make whatever bread or pastry you want.
Cornmeal – Cornmeal is the main ingredient in cornbread, a staple in Native American diets. Cornbread will sustain you in a pinch. You can also use cornmeal to bread fish and chicken. (Related: Have a taste of frontier survival cooking with cornmeal pancakes.)
Chickpeas – Chickpeas or garbanzo beans are a staple in the Mediterranean diet. Like other beans, chickpeas are also high in protein and dietary fiber. Buy chickpeas in bulk and store them in airtight containers for long-term storage.
Pasta – Pasta is a good source of carbohydrates. Pasta also makes a great vehicle for hearty sauces, meat and dehydrated vegetables, among other ingredients. Because pasta is dried, it can keep up to two years past the expiration date printed on the packaging. Opened dry pasta will keep for one year.
Oats – Old-fashioned rolled oats are a pantry staple. You can buy them in large bags and store them in a cool, dry place for long-term storage. Oats are also a versatile ingredient. You can use them to make overnight oats, no-bake granola bars and muffins, to name a few.
Powdered milk – Forget about stocking up on cow’s milk, which will inevitably go bad even when unopened. Stock up on powdered milk instead. You can use powdered milk to make all sorts of ingredients, such as evaporated milk, coffee creamer, yogurt, hot chocolate and cottage cheese.
Meat – Meat can still be part of an emergency stockpile. For long-term storage, you can either cure meat with salt or portion it into airtight containers and place them in the freezer. You can also dry meat to make your own jerky. Check with your local grocery store or butcher for money-saving deals and promos.
Dried foods – Don’t forget to add dried fruits, vegetables and herbs to your emergency stockpile. These foods ensure you still get to eat healthy foods when Shit Hit The Fan. The best part is, you can dehydrate foods yourself. Stalky and starchy foods, such as potatoes, carrots and unripe bananas, are great for dehydrating. Follow this guide to dehydrate your own foods.
The American people are not being told the truth about Covid, masks, social distancing, lockdowns, mortality or vaccines. In fact, the only thing of which we can be 100 percent certain, is that the government, the public health officials and the media have been lying relentlessly and remorselessly on virtually every topic for the better part of the last year. As far as I can see, lying has become the official state policy. Am I wrong?
For example, we are now being told that the sudden uptick in deaths in various parts the country, are the sign of a “4th Wave”. Naturally, these fatalities are being blamed on the “variant” which is the current ‘hobgoblin du jour.’ What the media and the pundits fail to mention is that the unexpected rise in cases and deaths is only taking place in areas that are engaged in mass vaccination campaigns, a fact that can be easily extrapolated from the chart below.
I don’t know why this is happening, and I certainly don’t think the drug companies have laced their injections with Covid-19. But it certainly deserves to be investigated, don’t you think? And the people deserve to know what’s going on instead of being hoodwinked with some far-fetched fiction about a respiratory infection that persists into the summer months. That’s not what’s happening at all. Here’s how talk show host and author, Steve Deace, summed it up in an article at The Epoch Times:
“The two main objectives of our health care system—informed consent and second opinions—were denied to us at COVID… If the average American knew that almost half of the deaths in America with COVID occurred in nursing homes where less than one percent of Americans live, we would have never ever gone along with this level of subjugation. These are the sorts of data points that have been kept from the American people, so they have not been given the right to informed consent.” (“Steve Deace on ‘Faucian Bargain’: Second Opinions About COVID-19 Denied to Americans” The Epoch Times)
What we need to know now, is whether the Covid vaccines are safe or not? It’s a simple question, but getting answers is like pulling teeth. As everyone knows, any information that doesn’t support the ‘pro-vaccine agenda’ is scrapped by the media and promptly removed from both FB and Twitter. How does that serve the public interest? How is “informed consent” possible without a thorough airing of contrary views in public forums and the media?
It’s not possible, and that seems to be the point. The managers of this campaign seem to prefer brainwashing and mass coercion over dialogue and debate. And their method appears to be working too. Just look at the way that pregnant women and children are being lured into vaccinations that pose significant risks to their health but provide no tangible benefit. The people in these age groups have a better chance of being struck by lightning than killed by Covid, so why take the risk? Why roll the dice on dizziness, nausea, migraines, Bell’s Palsy, myocarditis, blood clots or death, when there’s nothing to be gained? Check out this article in the UK Daily Mail titled “Pregnant women should be fast-tracked for Covid vaccines”:
“Pregnant women should be fast-tracked for Covid jabs because the disease greatly increases the risk of health problems for mums-to-be, a leading medic has said. A study led by a top Oxford expert found that the virus raises the risk of serious maternal complications by more than 50 per cent, including a fivefold risk of mothers needing intensive care.
It doubles the risk of premature birth and newborn illness and also significantly raises the chance of the mother dying, according to a study of more than 2,000 expectant women…..
Is this true? Are pregnant mothers better off getting vaccinated? Dr. Joseph Mercola doesn’t think so. Here’s what he said:
“By injecting pregnant women with novel COVID-19 mRNA gene technologies, the medical establishment has thrown away one of the most fundamental safety edicts of medicine, which is that you do not experiment on pregnant women.
None of the COVID-19 vaccines on the market are licensed. They’ve only received emergency use authorization, as basic efficacy and safety studies are still ongoing. Yet pregnant women are urged to get vaccinated, and are lining up to get the shot…
This experimentation is doubly unforgivable seeing how women of childbearing age have virtually no risk of dying from COVID-19, their fatality risk being a mere 0.01%.
…it’s important to realize that this is a time during which experimentation can be the most hazardous of all, as you’re not only dealing with potential repercussions for the mother but also for the child. Any number of things can go wrong when you introduce drugs, chemicals or foreign substances during fetal development…
On the whole, injecting pregnant women with novel gene therapy technology that can trigger systemic inflammation, cardiac effects and bleeding disorders (among other things)…” (“Pregnant Women Should Not Get a COVID Vaccine“, Mercola.com)
While I agree with Mercola in principle, the clinical trials are ongoing so we really don’t have sufficient data to make the determination one way or the other. That’s the problem of putting a vaccine into service before long-term Phase 3 clinical trials are concluded; you’re essentially “Flying blind.” The regulatory agencies seem to be ‘okay’ with that situation, but for pregnant women, it should be a matter of gravest concern especially when you read posts like this on author, Alex Berenson’s Twitter account:
Reports of medium- and-late-term pregnancy crises after the mRNA vaccines keep arriving in VAERS. Including case 1168104-1, a 38-year-old Virginia woman who suffered an apparent case of disseminated intravascular coagulation 16 days after vaccination. She and her fetus both died.
Yes, the fatalities are rare, but there is a common thread, isn’t there? Once again, we’re talking about a “clotting disorder” that could be triggered by– you guessed it– the Covid vaccine. And that is the central theme of this article, the vascular problems that one might experience after getting vaccinated. The connections of course are not always clear, but we suspect that scientists will eventually connect the dots. Consider, for a minute, this disturbing piece titled: “Thousands of reports of menstrual irregularities, reproductive dysfunction following COVID vaccines”. Here’s an excerpt from the piece:
“Thousands of women around the world are reporting disrupted menstrual cycles after receiving injections of COVID-19 vaccines. The U.K.’s government vaccine adverse event system has collected more 2,200 reports of reproductive disorders after coronavirus injections,including excessive or absent menstrual bleeding, delayed menstruation, vaginal hemorrhaging, miscarriages, and stillbirths.
In the U.K., the Yellow Card adverse event reporting system includes 2,233 reports of “reproductive and breast disorders” after reception of AstraZeneca and Pfizer vaccines.
The U.K. Yellow Card program reports 1,465 reactions involving reproductive systems as well as 19 “spontaneous abortions” (miscarriages), five premature labors, and two stillbirths in association with the AstraZeneca vaccine as of April 5. (Note–according to the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) “462 pregnant women reported adverse events related to COVID vaccines, including 132 reports of misscarriage or premature birth.”)
The reports include:
255 cases of abnormal uterine bleeding
175 cases of heavy menstrual bleeding
165 cases of vaginal hemorrhaging
55 reports of genital swelling, lesions, rashes or ulcerations
There was another article on this same topic in The Chicago Tribune just this week. Here’s an excerpt:
“Some people are reporting abnormal periods after a COVID-19 vaccine. U. of I. professor is looking for answers…. Clancy outlined her personal menstruation experience in a February tweet, after receiving her first dose of the Moderna vaccine. Hundreds of women and people who menstruate replied in the comments with their own experiences.
One Twitter user wrote, “I haven’t had a period in years and I’m about 3 weeks out of my second shot and I’m gushing blood I freaked out but now I see I’m not the only one. This is crazy.”
Another responded, “Two weeks exactly after shot number 2, my cycle started 12 days earlier and heavier than it’s been for the last three years.”
“I ended up finding a lot of people with similar experiences,” Clancy said…. “If you are a post-menopausal person who has experienced bleeding, you should really talk to your doctor,” Clancy said. “And if you have any significant or concerning symptoms alongside your changes to your menstrual cycle, you should also see a doctor.”…
Why is this happening? Why are so many women reporting “delayed menstruation”, “heavy vaginal bleeding” and miscarriages? Is there a link between the unusual menstrual bleeding and the clotting issues? Why didn’t any of these conditions show up in the clinical trials which were praised for their thoroughness? What does it all mean?
We don’t know, do we, because the Phase 3 trials are ongoing and we don’t have the results yet. But we do know that the CDC advisory board thinks these issues are trivial enough to ignore and to allow the failing vaccines to be put back into service. We know that for certain. Here’s the story:
“The CDC’s independent advisory panel Friday voted 10 – 4 to recommend the continued use of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine after the single-dose shot was paused over blood clotting concerns. The panel did not recommend adding any extra warning about the risk of rare blood clotting disorders.” (Children’s Health Defense)
No “extra warning” about blood clots? Really?
People died, isn’t that worth mentioning to the people who are weighing the risks-benefits of getting vaccinated?
And how rare are these blood clots? According to the media they are “rare, rare and REALLY RARE.” But, are they? According to an article in The Atlantic:
“Last Friday, (Andreas) Greinacher and his team published a paper on their findings in the New England Journal of Medicine. In a press briefing, he said they’d analyzed blood from several dozen people who had experienced blood abnormalities after exposure to the AstraZeneca vaccine, and that every single person tested positive for antibodies against platelet factor 4, and against platelet factor 4 joined with another molecule.
On the same day, a separate group in Norway published similar findings from five patients there who had received the AstraZeneca vaccine. Then, in a meeting this week of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, which helps the CDC make vaccine recommendations, it was reported that five of the six American patients who developed this same blood condition after receiving the Johnson & Johnson shot had been tested for antibodies to platelet factor 4—and all were positive. “It is, in my opinion, absolutely clear that there’s a causal relationship” between the presence of these antibodies and the abnormal clotting, Greinacher had said at last Friday’s briefing. “There’s no doubt about this.” (“The Blood-Clot Problem Is Multiplying”,The Atlantic)
So, while it’s easy to dismiss the clotting deaths as “just a handful of people”, the reality is that a much larger number of people have been impacted, which means that something in the vaccine is triggering vascular problems that remain undiagnosed but could cause serious complications in the future. We don’t know for sure, because the long-term trials were never completed. So, it’s all a big crapshoot.
“So, why are they doing this?. Why are they rushing this vaccine back into service when the clotting fatalities might just be the tip of the iceberg”? Doesn’t that strike you as a bit reckless?
If I’d been vaccinated, I’d be mighty worried right now. The regulators, the government, the public health officials and the media, are all being extremely cavalier about people’s safety while–at the same time– they are vastly expanding their list of potential candidates. Did you notice that they’ve started Covid vaccine trials on children? Keep in mind, that children are at no risk of death if they contract Covid, but can experience severe adverse side effects from the vaccine. Simply put: The risks far outweigh the benefits. This is from the Daily Mail:
“‘Core planning’ documents have been leaked showing schoolchildren will be given one dose when they go back to class after the summer…A source told the Sun: ‘Plans are in place to vaccinate children aged 12 upwards, and senior government officials have been briefed...
This is utter insanity and, yet, the same scenario is unfolding in the United States. Here’s the story from the San Jose Mercury:
“Last month, Pfizer announced that its vaccine was safe and effective in adolescents as young as 12. So the vaccine is now being tested in much younger children.
Pfizer’s nationwide trial of 144 children will unfold in phases. It is testing three different doses — 10, 20 and 30 micrograms — in bundles of three different age groups: children ages 5 through 11; ages 2 to 5, and ages 6 months to 2 years. After safety and dosage studies, research will expand into more children and seek signs of efficacy.
Pfizer has already requested an amendment from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration of its Emergency Use Authorization to expand the use of its vaccine to adolescents 12 to 15 years of age, about 2.5 million Californians.” (“Stanford begins testing Pfizer vaccine in babies and young children”, Mercury News)
This goes way beyond “unethical”, and medical professionals have admitted as much. Here’s what Professor Sucharit Bhakdi, M.D said on the matter:
“You are endangered when you take the vaccine. Your family is endangered when they take the vaccine. Your children are going to be endangered (if they take the vaccine.). I am horrified that children are now being vaccinated in clinical trials. This is criminal. I hope you realize that this is criminal, that you are endangering your own children. How can you do this?” (“Perspectives on the Pandemic– “Blood Clots and Beyond”, You Tube)
There’s no reason to vaccinate children for Covid-19. It is entirely unnecessary and deeply suspicious. Why are they doing this? What is their objective?
Here’s how the former Vice President of Respiratory Research for Pfizer, Mike Yeadon, summed it up. He said:
“Can you think of a benign explanation for why you would want to give an experimental-use, gene-based vaccine to tens of millions of people who will not die if they contract this virus? And, I say “no” you can’t, can you? And if you can’t think of a benign explanation then can you think of a malign explanation?”
Great question, but what’s the answer?
I don’t know, but I find it extremely unnerving.
Clearly, a great many people feel that the vaccine has given them their lives back. They can see their friends again, go out to dinner and hug their grandchildren. Unfortunately, the substance they have injected into their arms has already spread to their bloodstreams where it is trapped and gathering in the tissue surrounding the blood vessels. This is no small matter because this genetic material is “biologically active” and can potentially change the body’s immune response. This is the immune response that has preserved the species from the beginning of our collective existence on earth. These gene-based vaccines can alter that response, in fact, that was the intention. The scientists who created these vaccines did not want to simply insert live or dead virus into the body like a traditional vaccine does. They wanted to teach the cells “what to do”, thus, changing the immune system into a vaccine factory. The downside risk, of course, is that this tweaking will confuse the immune system causing it to attack vital organs in the body. That’s commonly referred to as an autoimmune disease “which is a condition in which your immune system mistakenly attacks your body. The immune system normally guards against germs like bacteria and viruses. When it senses these foreign invaders, it sends out an army of fighter cells to attack them.” Robert F Kennedy Jr. had this to say on the topic:
“What we know about coronavirus from 30 years of experience is that a coronavirus vaccine has a unique peculiarity, which is any attempt at making the vaccine has resulted in the creation of a class of antibodies that actually make vaccinated people sicker when they ultimately suffer exposure to the wild virus.” Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Could this happen? Could this new regime of vaccines create an immune system that is so hyper-vigilant that it wages a war against its own body?
Indeed, it could, in fact, this condition already has a name. It is called Antibody Dependent Enhancement (ADE) which means that your immune system has been “primed” to unleash its defensive arsenal against its own organs, blood vessels etc. We expect that ADE will become a household name in the years ahead as medical problems linked to this misguided mass vaccination campaign begin to pile up and the public outcry touches off a political firestorm. (Maybe then we’ll see some accountability, but don’t hold your breath.)
As for what happens next, well, we can’t say for sure but an “Open Letter” sent to the European Medicines Agency (EMA) by a number of doctors and scientists, points us in the right direction. Here’s part of what they said:
Dear Sirs/Mesdames,
“As physicians and scientists, we are supportive in principle of the use of new medical interventions which are appropriately developed and deployed, having obtained informed consent from the patient. This stance encompasses vaccines in the same way as therapeutics….
(but) we are concerned that there has been and there continues to be inadequate scrutiny of the possible causes of illness or death under these circumstances, and especially so in the absence of post-mortems examinations.”….
The letter then veers into the “meat and potatoes” of their complaint: Safety. Are the vaccines safe or not. Here’s what they say:
“Following intramuscular injection, it must be expected that the gene-based vaccines will reach the bloodstream and disseminate throughout the body…”
This is a critical point: The vaccine might be injected into a muscle in the arm, but it eventually gets into the bloodstream where it is “entrapped in circulation” and spread throughout the body including the brain. It is then taken up by the layer of cells (endothelial cells) that coat the blood vessels. Where the blood-flow is slower– like in the abdomen– more of the vaccine substance is taken up. This could be a very big problem in the future, but there’s no indication that the vaccine manufactures even thought about it. Here’s what happens next:
“…. during expression of the vaccines’ nucleic acids, peptides derived from the spike protein will be presented via the … pathway at the luminal surface of the cells. Many healthy individuals have …lymphocytes that recognize such peptides, which may be due to prior COVID infection, but also to cross-reactions with other types of Coronavirus…. these lymphocytes will mount an attack on the respective cells….It must be expected that endothelial damage with subsequent triggering of blood coagulation via platelet activation will ensue at countless sites throughout the body.”
So now your lymphocytes– which are the white blood cells that help to fight infectious diseases— are attacking the cells that are thought to be foreign invaders. (Sounds alot like ADE, doesn’t it?) This, in turn, leads to damage to the blood vessels and organs or the creation of blood clots which result in stroke, heart attack or other serious medical conditions. Here’s more:
“… this will lead to a drop in platelet counts, (Platelets are the smallest of our blood cells that are literally shaped like small plates) appearance of D-dimers in the blood, and to myriad ischaemic lesions ( ischaemia is a restriction in blood supply to tissues…..Ischemia is generally caused by problems with blood vessels, with resultant damage to or dysfunction of tissue) throughout the body including in the brain, spinal cord and heart. Bleeding disorders might occur in the wake of this novel type of DIC-syndrome including, amongst other possibilities, profuse bleedings and haemorrhagic stroke.”
Okay, so none of this is good, right? You don’t want blood-clots, you don’t want to have a stroke and you sure don’t want to die. So, why is this the first time you’ve read about this? This isn’t fiction and I’m sure as hell not making it up. These conditions have happened and will happen in the future as long as this gene-based gunk remains “entrapped in circulation” in a closed system wreaking “endothelial damage” (Endothelium is a single layer of squamous endothelial cells that line the interior surface of blood vessels, and lymphatic vessels)and forming blood clots. This is going to be the new reality for alot of people who took these experimental vaccines thinking they were fighting a deadly virus. Here’s more:
“The SARS-CoV-2 spike protein binds to the ACE2 receptor on platelets, which results in their activation. Thrombocytopenia has been reported in severe cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Thrombocytopenia has also been reported in vaccinated individuals. We request evidence that the potential danger of platelet activation that would also lead to disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) was excluded with all three vaccines prior to their approval for use in humans by the EMA.”
What does that mean in plain English?
Well, Thrombocytopenia is a condition in which you have a low blood platelet count. Platelets (thrombocytes) are blood cells that help blood to clot. Platelets stop bleeding by clumping and forming plugs in blood vessel injuries. The term “disseminated intravascular coagulation” is the same as saying ‘widespread blood-clotting in the circulatory system’. In other words, the scientists want assurances that the vaccines were tested to prevent the kind of fatalities we’ve already seen with various vaccines that are still in service today. Here’s more:
“Should all such evidence not be available, we demand that approval for use of the gene-based vaccines be withdrawn until all the above issues have been properly addressed by the exercise of due diligence by the EMA. (The European Medicines Agency) There are serious concerns, including but not confined to those outlined above, that the approval of the COVID-19 vaccines by the EMA was premature and reckless, and that the administration of the vaccines constituted and still does constitute “human experimentation”, which was and still is in violation of the Nuremberg Code.” (“Urgent Open Letter from Doctors and Scientists to the European Medicines Agency regarding COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Concerns”,Doctors for Covid Ethics)
Keep in mind, this letter was posted weeks before the first blood clotting event took place, which means the problem could have been anticipated by anyone who understood the science. Even so, the EMA breezily ignored the letter and has done everything in its power to downplay the fatalities.
What are we to make of this? How can we trust our regulatory agencies when they cynically brush aside the legitimate concerns of respected professionals? And when have medical professionals ever put their names and reputations on the line to oppose the distribution of a vaccine?
Never. It’s never happened before, but growing numbers of professionals are stepping forward now because they think the consequences from allowing this campaign to continue unopposed, are just too horrific to ignore. 84 million Americans have now been fully inoculated. Imagine if–in two- or three-years’ time– the longer-incubating diseases emerge with a bang, that is, imagine if we’re hit with a tidal wave of vascular, heart and neuro degenerative diseases unlike anything we have ever experienced before. Imagine how that will impact our threadbare public health system leaving millions to fend for themselves.
And what if our efforts to defeat Covid have actually made matters worse? Here’s another clip from Berenson’s Twitter site:
“A reader points to a VERY worrisome finding in the @cdcgov Chicago nursing home report: patients L19, a 49-year-old staffer, and M20, a 77-year-old resident – both had very low PCR threshold counts (the nurse’s was under 17) and NO symptoms. Why does this matter?
Lower PCR counts mean a person has a heavier viral load – and is thus both more likely to be very sick and more infectious…. These two should have been extremely symptomatic. Instead, the vaccine seems to have protected them from feeling sick – but not from being thoroughly infected and potentially spreading the virus. THIS IS EVIDENCE FOR A POSSIBLE MAREK’S DISEASE OUTCOME, where vaccinated people spread the virus aggressively to the unvaccinated.” Alex Berenson
An article on PBS explains Marek’s Disease. Here’s an excerpt:
“The deadliest strains of viruses often take care of themselves — they flare up and then die out. This is because they are so good at destroying cells and causing illness that they ultimately kill their host before they have time to spread. But a chicken virus that represents one of the deadliest germs in history breaks from this conventional wisdom, thanks to an inadvertent effect from a vaccine. Chickens vaccinated against Marek’s disease rarely get sick. But the vaccine does not prevent them from spreading Marek’s to unvaccinated birds. “With the hottest strains, every unvaccinated bird dies within 10 days. …
In fact, rather than stop fowl from spreading the virus, the vaccine allows the disease to spread faster and longer than it normally would, a new study finds. The scientists now believe that this vaccine has helped this chicken virus become uniquely virulent….over the last half century, symptoms for Marek’s worsened. Paralysis was more permanent; brains more quickly turned to mush….
vaccination extended the lifespan of birds exposed to the hottest strains, with 80 percent living longer than two months. But the vaccinated chickens were transmitting the virus, shedding 10,000 times more virus than an unvaccinated bird.
“Previously, a hot strain was so nasty, it wiped itself out. Now, you keep its host alive with a vaccine, then it can transmit and spread in the world,” Read said. “So, it’s got an evolutionary future, which it didn’t have before.” (“This chicken vaccine makes its virus more dangerous”, PBS)
Are the vaccines allowing sick people –who are carrying a heavy viral load and shedding like crazy– to get on like they are not sick?
Nobody knows, just like no one seems to understand the correlation between mass vaccination and the short-term uptick in fatalities. (See Here)
On so many critical questions, we have no answers and, yet, the response of the public health czars, like Dr Fauci, seems to be that we should simply stop thinking altogether, roll up our sleeves and take the jab. But what if he’s wrong? What if we are paving the way for a disaster the likes of which were outlined by pediatric rheumatologist, Dr. J. Patrick Whelan, who said the following in a letter to the FDA:
“I am concerned about the possibility that the new vaccines aimed at creating immunity against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein have the potential to cause microvascular injury to the brain, heart, liver and kidneys in a way that does not currently appear to be assessed in safety trials of these potential drugs….
“Before any of these vaccines are approved for widespread use in humans, it is important to assess in vaccinated subjects the effects of vaccination on the heart. As important as it is to quickly arrest the spread of the virus by immunizing the population, it would be vastly worse if hundreds of millions of people were to suffer long-lasting or even permanent damage to their brain or heart microvasculature as a result of failing to appreciate in the short-term an unintended effect of full-length spike protein-based vaccines on these other organs.” (“Scientists Challenge Health Officials on Vaccinating People Who Already Had COVID”, Global Research)
Whelan’s logic is unassailable, and he is joined by so many others all of who are saying the same thing: ‘The virus is showing signs of easing, so take your foot off the gas and let’s complete the vaccine trials before rushing ahead.’ Isn’t that the more rational approach? Here’s more:
“In his public submission, Whelan sought to alert the FDA about the potential for vaccines … spike protein to cause injuries.
Specifically, Whelan was concerned that the new mRNA vaccine technology utilized by Pfizer and Moderna has “the potential to cause microvascular injury (inflammation and small blood clots called microthrombi) to the brain, heart, liver and kidneys in ways that were not assessed in the safety trials.”(“Could Spike Protein in Moderna, Pfizer Vaccines Cause Blood Clots, Brain Inflammation and Heart Attacks?“, Global Research)
Once again, the same menacing buzzwords continue to pop up: “microvascular injury”, “blood-clots” and “spike protein-based vaccines”. Forget about the messenger RNA, that dissipates quickly. The central problem is the spike protein’s effect on the vascular and immune systems. That’s what we need to worry about.
The gene-based vaccines release a spike protein that spreads throughout the body, gets trapped in the bloodstream and collects in the layer of cells (endothelial cells) that coat the blood vessels.
Then–according to Dr. Hyung Chun, a Yale cardiologist– the cells “release inflammatory cytokines that further exacerbate the body’s inflammatory response and lead to the formation of blood clots. Chun has stated: “The ‘inflamed’ endothelium likely contributes not only to worsening outcome in COVID-19, but also is considered to be an important factor contributing to risk of heart attacks and strokes.”
This seems to suggest that the spike protein from the vaccine can have the same effect as the spike protein from the infection. Here’s more:
“Individuals with COVID-19 experience a vast number of neurological symptoms, such as headaches, ataxia, impaired consciousness, hallucinations, stroke and cerebral hemorrhage. But autopsy studies have yet to find clear evidence of destructive viral invasion into patients’ brains, pushing researchers to consider alternative explanations of how SARS-CoV-2 causes neurological symptoms….
If not viral infection, what else could be causing injury to distant organs associated with COVID-19?
The most likely culprit that has been identified is the COVID-19 spike protein released from the outer shell of the virus into circulation. Research cited below has documented that the viral spike protein is able to initiate a cascade of events that triggers damage to distant organs in COVID-19 patients.
Worryingly, several studies have found that the spike proteins alone have the capacity to cause widespread injury throughout the body, without any evidence of virus.
Can this possibly be true? In other words, if Covid-19 is a bioweapon –as some have suggested– then the instigators of the plan may have concocted a cure that is so similar to the virus itself, that no forensic investigation will ever conclusively identify the real perpetrators. This goes way beyond “plausible deniability”. In effect, the perpetrators –if there are perpetrators(?)– have wiped the fingerprints off the smoking gun before the crime has even been committed. Could anyone be that clever?
I have no idea, but it doesn’t change the task before us which is to extricate ourselves from this public health nightmare and piece-together what’s left of our fractured society. That starts with terminating the mass vaccination campaign until Phase 3 trials are completed and product safety can be assured. Better to be safe than sorry.
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
There are four pieces of solid evidence that heliocentric theory is wrong (that I know of). The first one requires a bit of visualization but is very difficult to explain otherwise. Three others are 99.99% certain bordering on the ridiculous. You would literally have to make stuff up to try and counter them (and they have!). So without further ado, let’s begin.
The density of the Earth has been calculated at 5,515 kg/m3 (whether accurate or not is unknown). The density of air is 1.204 kg/m3 at room temperature, 4580 times less dense than the Earth.
A denser solid object does not carry a less dense gas along with it when it moves. This is self-evident as it is the basis of aerodynamics as shown in the video below.
A moving solid object (100km/h car) leaves a gas (air) behind, creating a 100km/h wind in the perceived opposite direction of the moving car.
When the solid planes are more perpendicular, it will push gas (such as air) away from the solid object, such as a fan. The Earth, although a spinning squashed globe, would push a little air out into space due to its slight undulations but by and large it would be very aerodynamic, as this man spinning a basketball shows.
A very aerodynamic globe.
Heliocentric theory states that the Earth rotates at 1675km/h at the equator, 1049km/h in London, and 231km/h in Alert, northern Canada. This rotation would cause winds of almost equal speeds on the Earth’s surface… constantly.
The fastest wind speed known to man is a F5 Incredible tornado with wind speeds of 420-511 km/h. The tornado in Oklamohma in 1999 which killed 38 people and destroyed 8000 homes traveled at 486km/h; the devastation of which we can see below.
If 486km/h winds did this, what would 1675km/h do?
There is nowhere on Earth that has a constant wind speed of between 1675km/h and 231km/h. If there were, nobody living below Greenland could venture outside. We would be all living underground in caves.
Sometimes there are days of no wind, sometimes a mild breeze. The wind travels in all kinds of directions, sometimes changing by the second. Clouds move with the wind and can travel in any direction, but mostly go from West to East. This contradicts heliocentric theory as the Earth is supposed to rotate West to East, which would create winds going in the opposite direction East to West. Oops!
Another piece of self-evident incredulity. There’s more.
Even more obvious is the fact that the Earth does not rotate under hovering objects. A helicopter which hovers above the ground at ANY height from 1 meter all the way to its upper limit of around 8000 meters NEVER experiences the ground traveling 231km/h to 1675km/h West to East, or in any direction in fact.
Nope, the Earth is not moving.
Still not moving. Who’d a thunk it.
The same applies to those machines which traverse the sky, such as airplanes. The only differential between a one-way and return flight is changes in wind speed and direction.
the rotation of the Earth has no effect on the travel time of an aircraft… it is the headwinds and tailwinds that cause the change in travel times… a mere 65 mph wind is more than enough to cause a difference in travel time of five hours when you are traveling long distances!
Let’s check a flight along the equator just to be sure. Maldives to Singapore and back fits the bill. Singapore Airlines has two flights come up. Maldives to Singapore (West to East) takes 4 hours 45 minutes for both flights and Singapore to Maldives (East to West) takes 4 hours 30 minutes and 4 hours 25 minutes respectively.
The Earth is supposed to rotate at 1675km/h West to East at these locations which are 3388km apart. A Boeing 777 travels at 885km/h at 10,675m. Do I really need to do the math?
Flying from Singapore to the Maldives would take about an hour (including take off and landing) if the Earth were rotating under the plane. Going the other way, it is worse as the plane can only fly half as fast as a rotating 1675km/h Earth and so you would have to continue flying all the way around the globe East to West just to get back to Singapore. This is an obvious fallacy.
Singapore to Maldives is a one-way trip with a rotating Earth.
So, we have gone from 8000m to 10,675m altitude and still the Earth does not move under our feet. If we go any higher there won’t be many air molecules left to be magically Velcroed to the solid Earth’s surface by a mystical and yet unknown force which there must be for heliocentric theory to exist. But let’s go higher anyway.
As mentioned in my first post on the mysterious disappearing stars at high altitude, amateurs can now send weather balloons up into the stratosphere as high as 36,000m. At these heights only about 1% of the air is left, but these few air molecules must also magically stick to the solid surface of the Earth. All these different densities and all somehow staying with the Earth.
Look at the time these balloons are in the air and the difference in distance between landing and take-off. Here’s the first one: Launched at 13:07:38, hit the ground at 16:04:40, highest altitude 29.78Km, distance from launch 108.4 Km! Launched in Maine, USA would give a rotating Earth speed of 1181km/h (45° latitude). That means the Earth should have moved 3500km under the balloon making it land in the middle of USA, but it did not. (The second example on that website page is even worse!)
Let’s go higher. Felix Baumgartner on his world record free-fall jump reached 38,969m altitude and spent 2 and a half hours ascending, 4:19 minutes falling to the ground, and 7 minutes parachuting the rest of the way down. His distance from launch:
So, the 1% of surface air density and all the other air densities on the way to the ground and Felix himself being obviously heavier than air all moved with the rotating Earth in tandem, by some magical mystical force unknown to man. At what height would Felix have experienced the Earth rotating below him? 50km? 70km? 100km? The heliocentric advocates will have to make up a magic number. Why not, it is all fantasy after all.
The stars revolve 360° in 24 hours in an anti-clockwise fashion around the north polar star in the northern hemisphere, and clockwise around the southern star in the southern hemisphere. Photographers take photos with very long shutter speeds to show this effect.
Rotating stars in the sky at night.
This, you may think, is a good case for a rotating Earth; but on it’s own it is also a good case for a geocentric one, as it demonstrates that either the Earth is moving or the heavens.
However, after 6 months, those EXACT same stars are at the EXACT same location, as can be seen with the naked eye, at which they had been 6 months previously. The annual change in the position of stars in the sky is called stellar parallax. You can demonstrate this lack of parallax by following this experiment devised by Samuel Rowbotham of Zetetic Astronomy.
Take two carefully-bored metallic tubes, not less than six feet in length, and place them one yard asunder, on the opposite sides of a wooden frame, or a solid block of wood or stone: so adjust them that their centres or axes of vision shall be perfectly parallel to each other. Now, direct them to the plane of some notable fixed star, a few seconds previous to its meridian time. Let an observer be stationed at each tube and the moment the star appears in the first tube let a loud knock or other signal be given, to be repeated by the observer at the second tube when he first sees the same star. A distinct period of time will elapse between the signals given. The signals will follow each other in very rapid succession, but still, the time between is sufficient to show that the same star is not visible at the same moment by two parallel lines of sight when only one yard asunder. A slight inclination of the second tube towards the first tube would be required for the star to be seen through both tubes at the same instant. Let the tubes remain in their position for six months; at the end of which time the same observation or experiment will produce the same results–the star will be visible at the same meridian time, without the slightest alteration being required in the direction of the tubes: from which it is concluded that if the Earth had moved one single yard in an orbit through space, there would at least be observed the slight inclination of the tube which the difference in position of one yard had previously required. But as no such difference in the direction of the tube is required, the conclusion is unavoidable, that in six months a given meridian upon the Earth’s surface does not move a single yard, and therefore, that the Earth has not the slightest degree of orbital motion.
Traditionally, stellar parallax has been notoriously difficult to measure with even the best of modern equipment.
The angles involved in these calculations are very small and thus difficult to measure. The nearest star to the Sun (and thus the star with the largest parallax), Proxima Centauri, has a parallax of 0.7687 ± 0.0003 arcsec.
There are 3,600 arcseconds in 1 degree, 180 of which cover the sky at night. No wonder we can’t see any movement with the naked eye. Even so, movement for only a tiny fraction of the stars can be measured at all even by modern equipment!
In 1989, the satellite Hipparcos was launched primarily for obtaining parallaxes and proper motions of nearby stars, increasing the reach of the method tenfold. Even so, Hipparcos is only able to measure parallax angles for stars up to about 1,600 light-years away, a little more than one percent of the diameter of the Milky Way Galaxy. The European Space Agency’s Gaia mission, due to launch in 2013, will be able to measure parallax angles to an accuracy of 10 microarcseconds, thus mapping nearby stars (and potentially planets) up to a distance of tens of thousands of light-years from Earth.
This is a big problem for heliocentric theory which states that every 24 hours the Earth rotates on its axis at 1675km/h, revolving around the Sun at 107,000km/h, which in turn moves around the center of the galaxy at 900,000km/h, which moves in the universe at 2,160,000km/h!
Apart from the atmosphere disappearing at these speeds, how is there no stellar parallax, especially considering that all the other stars and galaxies are revolving around each other and the Earth as well. The sky must be a right mess! Each new day must bring a brand new unique constellation in the sky at night with some new stars getting nearer so they can be seen with the naked eye and some traveling further away and disappearing never to return for thousands or millions of years.
Before we move on, this lack of stellar parallax is the reason why advocates of heliocentric theory give the unbelievably enormous distances the heavenly bodies must be from Earth. They can’t measure it! The stars must be thousands and millions of light years away (with the Milky Way 100,000 light years across, 1 light year being 9.46 trillion kilometers!) because there is no (or little) detectable stellar parallax; otherwise heliocentric theory would be definitely wrong.
It is clear from Euclid’s geometry that the effect would be undetectable if the stars were far enough away, but for various reasons such gigantic distances involved seemed entirely implausible: it was one of Tycho Brahe’s principal objections to Copernican heliocentrism that in order for it to be compatible with the lack of observable stellar parallax, there would have to be an enormous and unlikely void between the orbit of Saturn and the eighth sphere (the fixed stars).
Not only is there no evidence for such astronomical distances, but we have now proven that the stars are approximately 4000 miles away!
Does making stuff up to support a theory lacking any observational or experimental evidence sound like science to you?
How do we know it is not the heavens or “space” which moves above us, instead of the Earth, which causes both the rotation of the stars and any of their hard-to-detect parallax. We now know it is the former, thanks to an experiment in 1871 by Astronomer Royal, George Airy; which is this:
If stellar parallax is too small to see with the naked eye, then why not artificially increase it. If the Earth rotates at the same speed constantly, then by slowing the light down (by filling the telescope with water), the angle of star movement would increase. If stellar parallax increased then the telescope would have to be tilted more to see the same star and prove a rotating Earth once and for all.
And guess what? As confirmed by others, the most careful measurements gave the same angle for a telescope with water as for one filled with air. This is called “Airy’s failure”. It proved the rotation of the heavens, not Earth, which moves stars.
The angle stayed the same, proving that the Earth does not rotate.
The heliocentric advocates were now desperate. What was needed was another observable experiment to still offer the possibility of a rotating Earth. Enter Foucault’s pendulum in 1885. This pendulum swings back and forth, each swing moving slightly to the right in the northern hemisphere and to the left in the southern hemisphere until, at the poles, one full circle is achieved in 24 hours. It doesn’t move left or right at all at the equator.
Foucault Pendulum in California
Not to scale, but illustrating the movement.
As you have noticed, this is the same phenomenon as the stars rotating every 24 hours around the polar star, which was proved not to be caused by a rotating Earth thanks to George Airy. Unfortunately for the heliocentric supporters, Foucault’s pendulum also had a problem. In 1954 and 1959, Maurice Allais noticed that during a solar eclipse, which lasted 2 and a half hours, the angle of the pendulum changed dramatically by 13.5°. This has been repeatedly observed with positive results on most of the subsequent eclipses, which obviously means that the pendulum isn’t registering the Earth’s rotation, but the motion of something else instead.
With Airy’s failure proving that the Earth does not rotate, the heliocentric theorists needed to quickly show with no further doubt that the Earth rotated. Enter two staunch supporters of heliocentricity, Albert Michelson and Edward Morley, who in 1887 set up a device which split up light: one beam in the direction of the Earth’s rotation, and one at right angles. The two light beams then recombined and hit a photographic plate. The difference is speed of the two beams would create an interference pattern. They expected to measure a speed of 30 km/s as that was the speed of the Earth’s supposed rotation, but instead registered a variable difference of between 1 and 10 km/s each time the experiment was repeated. They called this a “null” result. This proves that the Earth is not rotating and at the same time proved the existence of the ether.
Gosh, the traveling light wasn’t rotating with the Earth. Who’d a thunk it?
It didn’t stop there, Georges Sagnac, and Henry Gale conducted similar experiments, but on a rotating platform, which again demonstrated the existence of the ether, already proved by default in 1871 and 1885 by combining the results from George Airy and Foucault’s pendulum, and also in 1887 by the Michelson-Morley experiment.
How do you think the advocates of heliocentric theory responded? Why, they made something up of course! What else could they do but invent another wild theory to play down these experimental results and lead us further into the cesspit of fallacy. Enter showbiz academic of the 20th century, Einstein and the special theory of relativity.
Enter the clowns.
Special relativity was invented to make sure all these experiments still gave heliocentric theory a chance of being correct. It needed objects to shrink to a specific size in direct proportion to its speed. These objects weren’t measured! The concept had never been observed at all. It was metaphysical only. But it had to be correct, otherwise the unthinkable would be true.
The rescue operation was performed by means of a purely metaphysical concept lifted directly from Professors Fitzgerald and Lorentz, who had also been trying to explain the results of the Michelson-Morley experiment, and renamed by him the Special Theory of Relativity. What was suggested was that if the dimensions of an object in motion were assumed to shrink exactly in proportion to the speed at which it was traveling by exactly the necessary amount, mathematical calculations could be made to show that the Earth was in motion after all. No one has ever seen an object shrink as a result of being in motion, and indeed one of the world’s leading authorities on relativity, Dr. Herbert Dingle, was later to dismiss the theory of relativity as metaphysical nonsense with no basis on what could be observed.
Making up a new branch of mathematics to explain the results of experiments that disagrees with your worldview does not a proof make! As a J.J. Thomson once said:
We have Einstein’s space, de Sitter’s space, expanding universes, contracting universes, vibrating universes, mysterious universes. In fact the pure mathematician may create universes just by writing down an equation, and indeed if he is an individualist he can have a universe of his own.
However, when you make stuff up not based on anything in the real world, it is bound to run into trouble.
Ironically, when Special Relativity failed due to its internal contradictions, Einstein had to invent General Relativity to shore up the façade, and in the process he had to take back the very two foundations he had discarded in Special Relativity, namely, (a) that nothing can exceed the speed of light and (b) the existence of ether. In the end, Einstein’s theories were a mass of contradictions which are covered over by obtuse mathematical equations.
Despite this nonsense, the heliocentric “authorities” pushed it through with all their media power and academic might so that once this new mathematics was firmly established, they had carte blanche to sneak in other bad “science” when experimental observations went against them, like black holes, dark matter, wormholes and other such unobservable and unverifiable nonsense. The worst offence though was trying to tie in the Coriolis effect of a rotating Earth with observable atmospheric phenomena. The Coriolis effect is an optical illusion whereby an object traveling in a straight line is seen to be moving in a curved one instead because the observer is on a rotating platform.
The Coriolis optical illusion. You are the red dot. Below is what you observe. Above is what actually happens.
This is the complete pattern and scale of ANY Coriolis effect on the Earth. If something in the real world doesn’t match this, it can NOT be the Coriolis effect!
They say it is this effect which causes moving objects to be deflected in a clockwise direction in the northern hemisphere and anti-clockwise in the southern hemisphere; an example of which are large cyclones. This is obviously false. The Coriolis effect is NOT a force, it is an optical illusion. It cannot cause objects to be deflected; their trajectories remain the same, which is straight. Cyclones do not “travel in straight lines, but just appear to be curved because we are on the surface of a rotating sphere”. Their size ranges from under 222km to over 888km making their curves far too tight and localized. Plus there are very high altitude images looking down on cyclones from above. Is the camera rotating with the Earth to get this curved perspective?
Is the camera rotating with the Earth? How can a cyclone twisting on itself be a straight line? Is this image even real?
A tropical cyclone in Australia twisting down to Earth is not a straight line.
And what about smaller vortex phenomena like Tornadoes which average only 150m across. Where is the Coriolis effect now?
A 150m wide tornado is really a straight line!
If you wish to study further the fallacy of linking the Coriolis effect with atmospheric phenomena then Miles Mathis‘ work is a must. Otherwise, those inclined to understand cyclones and tornadoes would do well to study the relationship between gravity and electromagnetism, and vortex dynamics instead, as even physicists admit that the Coriolis “effect” and electromagnetism is eerily similar. (What a surprise!)
Light up the lone candle on the saddest birthday cake in the world! The most destructive public policy of the century is growing up and doesn’t look like slowing down.
And so we come to March 23rd, and lockdown’s first birthday. Or, as we call it here, the longest two weeks in history.
It’s a long time since “2 weeks to flatten the curve”, became an obvious lie. Sometime in July it turned into a sick joke. The curve was flattened, the NHS protected and the clapping was hearty and meaningful.
…and none of it made any difference.
This was not a sacrifice for the “greater good”. It was not a hard decision with arguments on both sides. It was not a risk-benefit scenario. The “risks” were in fact certainties, and the “benefits” entirely fictional.
Because Lockdowns don’t work. It’s really important to remember that.
Even if you subscribe to the belief that “Sars-Cov-2” is a unique discrete entity (which is far from proven), or that it is incredibly dangerous (which is demonstrably untrue), the lockdown has not worked to, in any way, limit this supposed threat.
Lockdowns. Don’t. Work.
They don’t make any difference, the curves don’t flatten and the R0 number doesn’t drop and the lives aren’t saved (quite the opposite, as we’ve all seen).
Just look at the graphs.
This one, comparing “Covid deaths” in the UK (lockdown) and Sweden (no lockdown):
Or this one, comparing “Covid deaths” in California (lockdown) and Florida (no lockdown):
From Belarus to Sweden to Florida to Nicaragua to Tanzania, the evidence is clear. “Covid”, whatever that means in real terms, is not impacted by lockdowns.
Putting the entire population under house arrest doesn’t benefit public health. In fact, it’s (rather predictably) incredibly counter-productive.
Dr David Nabarro, World Health Organization special envoy for Covid-19, said this of lockdowns back in October:
We in the World Health Organization do not advocate lockdowns as the primary means of control of the virus[…]just look at what’s happened to the tourism industry…look what’s happening to small-holding farmers[…]it seems we may have a doubling of world poverty by next year. We may well have at least a doubling of child malnutrition […] This is a terrible, ghastly global catastrophe.”
A terrible, global catastrophe. A doubling of childhood malnutrition.
The “pandemic” didn’t do that, lockdowns did that. They were never going to achieve their stated aims. And what’s more, they were never intended to achieve those aims.
Too often soft language in the media talks about “misjudgments” or “mistakes” or “incompetence”. Supposed critics claim the government “panicked” or “over-reacted”. That is nonsense. The easiest, cheesiest excuse that has ever existed.
“Whoops”, they say, with an emphatic shrug and shit-eating grin “I guess we done messed up!”. Unflattering, but better than the truth.
Because the truth is that the government isn’t mistaken or scared or stupid…they are malign. And dishonest. And cruel.
All the suffering of lockdown was entirely predictable and deliberately imposed. For reasons that have nothing to do with helping people and everything to do controlling them.
It’s been more than apparent for most of the last fifty-two weeks that the agenda of lockdown was not public health, but laying the groundwork for the “new normal” and “the great reset”.
A series of programmes designed to completely undercut civil liberties all across the world, reversing decades (if not centuries) of social progress. A re-feudalisation of society, with the 99% cheerfully taking up their peasant smocks “to protect the vulnerable”, whilst the elite proselytise about the worth of rules they happily admit do not apply to them.
And we’ve all had lives ruined and a year of precious time wasted. For nothing. You’ve been locked up for two weeks that lasted 365 days. For nothing.
…or rather, for everything. Because that’s what they are trying to take from us. Everything. And the only way to stop them is not to let them. To simply refuse consent.
Conspiracies have been around since the world began. How else are wars, murders, thefts, and other types of crimes initiated except that people conspired to commit them?
One dictionary definition of a conspiracy is, “an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot.”
Another definition reads, “an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act.”
Some synonyms for conspiracy include plot, scheme, treason, connivance, and treachery.
Based on these definitions, it shouldn’t take much convincing to realize that conspiracies are taking place every day, in every part of the globe, by people of all walks of life. However, one of the greatest tools in the arsenal of those involved in a conspiracy is convincing people that it doesn’t exist (think Keyser Söze in the film The Usual Suspects).
The purpose of this article is to illustrate how major, even global conspiracies can exist without most people knowing. It will provide the ingredients typically included in every conspiratorial recipe to help people recognize them more easily both before and as they occur in real time.
Before Conspiracies Occur
Here are the steps involved in the initial phases of a conspiracy:
Benefit/Motive
Every conspiracy begins with a motive and something to be gained by the conspirators. The Latin phrase “cui bono,” meaning “who benefits,” should always be asked when investigating a conspiracy. Power and money are usually the main reasons, with revenge or spite also closely linked.
Goals/Outcome
Everyone involved in a conspiracy must agree to a set of goals and desired outcomes. Where unity is fragile, conspiracies rarely succeed. But when there is agreement amongst the schemers, and all are satisfied with the proposed outcome, the devious plots have a great chance to flourish.
Planning
All conspiracies, no matter how small or large, involve planning to achieve the stated goals. On a national or global level, these plans are often documented well ahead of time. Sometimes they remain hidden and other times they are available for public viewing. The reason the exposed plans go unnoticed is because most people don’t bother to read them, don’t comprehend what’s being stated, or dismiss them because they can’t believe people would do such things.
Secretive
Conspirators must be careful not to disclose their plans in order to have any chance of succeeding. Meetings are often held at clandestine locations, and participants may be encouraged or required to take oaths and be sworn to secrecy. Oftentimes those leading the conspiracy do not divulge the entirety of their plot to everyone involved. People furthest from the inner circle frequently carry out orders without being fully aware of all the details. They may be outright deceived about the true intent of the plot and march on as foot soldiers believing they are doing something good for humanity.
Data Gathering
An important step in any conspiracy involves gathering data on those being plotted against. This can cover many ways of spying including hacking, cyber-attacks, surveillance, planting informants, social media monitoring, and other extreme types of espionage.
Behavioral Analysis
Once enough data is gathered, it can then be utilized to predict behavior. These predictions may be made for individuals, ethnic groups, and sometimes entire populations. If correct, behavioral predictions can help fortify conspiratorial plans to ensure success.
Simulations
Depending on the complexity of the scheme, the conspirators may conduct simulations or “dry runs” of the key steps required to pull off their plot. The simulation gives them advanced knowledge and helps them perfect their plan before fully executing it. Simulations often play out in real life almost exactly as they were gamed ahead of time.
As Conspiracies Unfold
Once the plot begins to unfold, look for the following activities to take place:
Lies, Propaganda and Mind Control
Deception is a favorite tool of conspirators, and no plot could ever be accomplished without telling lies and promoting propaganda. Attempts at outright mind control are also often established by controlling the narrative so that people never hear or see alternative points of view. Many conspiracies are hidden in plain sight in various forms of entertainment. Conspirators also use “trusted voices” to get the unaware to believe propaganda, misinformation, and disinformation. Mainstream media sources are often the primary means by which people are deceived.
Distractions
Daily living provides a plethora of distractions for the average person. They occur at almost every level through one form or another. As conspiratorial plans are being executed, a major distraction that focuses attention on a specific event may take place. This “wag the dog” trick serves to keep people in the dark about a more serious event taking place simultaneously behind the scenes.
Hegelian Dialectic
After behavioral predictions are formulated, conspirators often employ the Hegelian Dialectic. In its simplest form, the Hegelian Dialectic is most often known as Problem-Reaction-Solution, where a problem is manufactured to garner a certain reaction leading to a pre-planned solution. Conspirators use this mind control method to hide their involvement in events that take place seemingly out of nowhere. Schemers can then get the public to demand a solution that they have already planned to implement to increase their power.
False Flags
Conspirators love to execute a plan and then blame it on others. False flag charades quickly serve up a “guilty” party to deceive the public while enabling the true subversives to go unnoticed. These events are well-coordinated efforts that may be very hard to detect by the general public.
Once Conspiracies are Exposed
These are the signs to watch for once a conspiracy starts to unravel:
Plausible Deniability
When awareness of a conspiracy begins to gather steam, those involved in the plot will almost always deny it exists. This “plausible deniability” allows the guilty to pretend they had no awareness of a secret plot or that any malfeasance was taking place. Conspiracies are usually layered so that those on the outer layers do most of the dirty work. This enables those on the inner layers to deny they knew anything about it and easily dismiss accusations.
Marginalize, Silence and/or Remove Opponents
The most frequently used method to silence people who attempt to expose conspiracies is to label them as conspiracy theorists. This negative characterization causes most people to doubt the information and question the reputation of those providing an alternative to the controlled narrative. As challenges continue to arise, more severe methods of quelling opposition are used such as libel and slander, ostracizing, harassment, spying, physical intimidation, bribes, loss of employment, criminal accusations and charges, murder, and faked suicide.
Coverups and Destruction of Evidence
As proof of any conspiracy takes root, always expect the schemers to cover their tracks by any means necessary. They will resort to destroying evidence, intimidating witnesses, redacting documents, hiding behind “need to know” security policies, coopting investigative commissions, corrupting legal trials, and other unscrupulous tactics to help the plotters evade prosecution and accountability for their crimes.
Open Admission
When the truth about a conspiracy becomes too weighty to deny, there will often be an open admission of guilt typically outing those on the lower rungs of the plot. Oftentimes the tricks work as those demanding accountability get their sacrificial lamb(s) while the insiders behind the plot go unrecognized and unpunished.
Setting Up the Next Conspiracy
The players involved in many of the greatest conspiracies are often intertwined through familial ties, business and political relationships, and ideological agreements. Therefore, the conspiracies they concoct can be carried out over a long period of time and aren’t dependent on one or a small group of individuals. Here are the two most powerful ways conspiracies are perpetuated:
Enacting and Amending Laws
The most powerful tool governments, corporations, and other major entities employ is the passage and changing of laws to make their conspiratorial crimes legal. When the power to legally spy on, detain, and imprison those they deem “enemy combatants” or traitors is embedded in our laws, it gives immense power to the perpetrators of conspiracies against the people.
The Two-Party System Sham
Warning: this section may offend if you believe in two-party systems of government.
Whether governed by a Republican or Democratic president, the march to globalization has continued pretty much unabated in the U.S. The current COVID-19 conspiracy arrived in this country under President Trump, and the new normal has been in place since March 16. Democracy has been overrun by oligarchs. Fortune 500 corporations in the technology, pharmaceutical, and banking industries now rule the U.S. Every four years, the powers that be love to put on a show to keep the people thinking they have a say in government by voting for their representatives. But elections are nothing more than “selections.” In other words, the new boss is the same as the old boss; they just have different personalities to cater to different types of people. The truth is that most elected officials are co-opted to do the bidding of those who really pull the strings. The two-party political façade helps propel the next conspiracy to consolidate more power and control in the march to a new global order!
Share This Article and Help Awaken Others
Conspiracies are often successful because people remain ignorant of how they are conceived and executed. However, once an understanding of all of these elements has been grasped, it makes recognizing true conspiracies relatively easy. My hope is that many more will be awakened to the fact that a global conspiracy is in play to reengineer society as a whole and shift more power to the 1% who desire nothing but total control over humanity. Whether you call it the Great Reset, New World Order, Agenda 2030, or Illuminati Conspiracy doesn’t matter. The ingredients are the same as those listed above. The more we expose and resist them, the better the chances it does not succeed!
The World We Live In 
