Au milieu des années 2000, quelques années après mes premiers pas sur Internet avec le site Résistancenet.org en 1999, je me suis proposé de poursuivre l’expérience du commentaire occasionnel de l’actualité mondiale à travers ce petit blog, et je continue aujourd’hui, dans le respect du IXe commandement du Décalogue qui interdit le faux témoignage (un commandement que tant de publicistes négligent). Ce blog vous donnera peut-être envie aussi de lire mes livres sur la Serbie, le Béarn, la Transnistrie, l’Abkhazie, les régimes populistes… (et pour une présentation plus vivante des contenus de ce blog n’hésitez pas à vous abonner gratuitement à TV Delorca sur You Tube !)
Comme je n’ai cessé de vous l’indiquer au cours des dernières semaines, les marionnettes du satanisme qui dirigent ce monde n’ont aucunement l’intention de lâcher leur proie. Et leur proie, c’est vous, toute l’humanité. Ceux qui se font vacciner et qui devront subir toujours plus de piqûres de rappel, toujours plus de traçage, de flicage, jusqu’à ce que ce qu’on injecte dans leur corps puisse même être activé et manipulé à distance, dans leurs cerveaux, dans leurs membres. Et ceux qui ne seront pas vaccinés seront traqués comme des animaux, soumis à de plus en plus de contraintes (même si en réalité ils vivront dans une meilleure intégrité physique et morale que ceux qui auront capitulé devant Big Brother). Y a-t-il une raison que cette folie collective (qui reçoit quand même, dans les pays riches, le soutient de plus du tiers de la population, ce qui est suffisant pour diviser et marginaliser les autres) va ralentir à un certain moment (ne serait-ce que parce que les fous au pouvoir n’auront pas forcément les infrastructures matérielles pour vacciner tout le monde aussi vite qu’ils le veulent) ? Nous n’en savons rien. Faut-il résister et comment ?
Personnellement, je me garderai bien de donner des conseils à quiconque. Je ne suis pas, comme le professeur Raoult (ou divers politiciens qui se réclament de son autorité) à oser pronostiquer comme il l’a fait ile 7 décembre 2020 sur Cnews (la chaîne maçonnique du groupe Canal+) : « «Si on s’amusait à faire ce vaccin obligatoire, vous auriez une révolution ». Ceux qui promettent des révolutions ou des résistances alors qu’ils n’ont pas l’ombre d’une stratégie à proposer ne sont en réalité bons qu’à envoyer les gens au casse-pipe comme on l’a fait avec les Gilets jaunes qui y ont perdu des yeux, des mâchoires, des mains, et provoquer au bout du compte toujours plus de désespoir.
Si quelqu’un a une stratégie en tête qu’il la propose, mais pour ma part j’estime que telle n’est pas ma fonction aujourd’hui. Tout ce que je peux vous suggérer à tous en tout cas c’est de garder votre force intérieure et votre calme. Ce dispositif dément peut subsister longtemps (pendant des lustres) ou s’effondrer comme un château de cartes comme avant lui d’autres totalitarismes. Car nul ne sait quand interviendra ce qu’on appelle la « fin des temps ». Ce qui importe le plus c’est de tenir le coup, et pour ce faire, il faut du détachement. Détachement à l’égard de l’avenir (ne rien planifier, ou, à la rigueur faire des petites planifications en pointillé, toujours réversibles), en s’en remettant avec confiance à Dieu qui pourvoira à tout. Détachement à l’égard des choses matérielles, et même des gens, et d’une partie de soi-même (de ce qui, en nous-mêmes, a jusqu’ici trop cru, trop adhéré à ce système culturel dans lequel nous sommes nés et dont le totalitarisme sanitaire est aujourd’hui l’aboutissement). Se détacher des choses matérielles est difficile. Se détacher des préoccupations matérielles des gens qui nous entourent, et du statut social qu’ils ont confectionné pour nous (nos parents avec l’éducation qu’ils nous ont donnée, nos conjoints, nos enfants, nos amis, avec les attentes qu’ils associent à ce qu’ils croient que nous sommes). « Voici ce que je dis, frères, c’est que le temps est court; que désormais ceux qui ont des femmes soient comme n’en ayant pas, ceux qui pleurent comme ne pleurant pas, ceux qui se réjouissent comme ne se réjouissant pas, ceux qui achètent comme ne possédant pas, et ceux qui usent du monde comme n’en usant pas, car la figure de ce monde passe.… » (1 Corinthiens 7:29-30) Ca ne veut pas dire opter pour le survalisme et s’enfuir dans une forêt. Comme me le faisait remarquer un lecteur il y a peu, ça arrangerait beaucoup les mondialistes qu’on soit tous en mode « survie », aussi bien les vaccinés que les non vaccinés, aussi bien les adversaires du système que ses partisans. Alors que Dieu veut pour nous une vie en abondance. Ca veut dire seulement ce que veut dire le verset : user des choses de ce monde sans nous sentir personnellement investi en elles.
Ca ne signifie pas non plus se couper des autres. « Si je n’ai pas l’amour, je ne suis rien » (1 Corinthiens 13 :2). Seulement se positionner différemment par rapport à leurs idées, leurs émotions. Lorsqu’ils glissent vers l’erreur, vers le précipice de la folie mondiale actuelle, leur faire comprendre qu’on ne les y suivra pas. Et, s’ils s’obstinent, sans les juger, accepter cela en reconnaissant humblement qu’on ne peut pas soi-même sauver quelqu’un qui veut sa propre perte. Et ne pas se vanter d’être nous-mêmes dans le vrai. Car notre vantardise se retournera toujours contre celui qui s’y abandonne. Ce dosage délicat n’est possible qu’en partenariat avec notre Créateur évidemment. Et sans trop se poser de question, « Ne vous inquiétez de rien » (Philippiens 4:6). Laisser venir les choses tout en tenant votre position fermement.
C’est avec cet aplomb venu d’en haut que l’on pourra faire face à tout, et que tout servira à notre propre renversement. Les fous au pouvoir nous préparent des choses graves. Si vous voyiez les mesures de confinement à l’oeuvre en Australie en ce moment (où c’est l’hiver), vous seriez effrayés de ce qui nous attend dans quelques mois. Et cela n’a rien à voir avec ce « variant delta » qui touche peu de mondes et est dix fois moins mortel que le virus l’an dernier (lequel l’était déjà statistiquement fort peu). Le plan est plus vaste, plus systématique, plus implacable que la majorité ne le pense. On comprend que les gens aient peur de se défaire de leur foi en Macron, aux médias, aux médecins, ou même en Philippot, en Asselineau (je n’ai rien contre ces deux dernières personnalités, mais il faut voir au delà des personnes au cas où leurs stratégies échouent, voilà le point de ce billet). Ce n’est qu’en revenant à leurs racines spirituelles, celles qui ont fait la France et l’Europe, celles auxquelles ils doivent leur naissance, qu’ils y parviendront.
J’insiste, pour finir cet article (parce que cela correspond à un des axes majeurs de ce blog), sur l’importance de se détacher de ce que l’on a aimé dans son enfance ou encore il y a seulement quelques années. Tout ce conditionnement subliminal. Un journaliste avec qui je déjeunais en juin et qui était pourtant communiste donc en principe anti-système me disait : « J’avais 14 ans pendant la guerre du Kosovo. Sans même avoir rien lu sur le sujet, ni même regardé longuement les informations, j’avais été intimement convaincu que les Serbes étaient les méchants et que c’était bien de les bombarder. Et tous mes copains du collège étaient d’accord avec ça ». Le mensonge, la folie meurtrière, s’instille passivement dans les esprits comme par magie. Un autre journaliste, plus âgé, qui avait travaillé pour le Figaro, me disait : « En ce temps là à chaque fois que j’expliquais à mes collègues en quoi ils déliraient sur la Russie, ils me disaient qu’ils étaient d’accord avec moi. Puis dès qu’ils retrouvaient leur ordinateur ils se remettaient à écrire des absurdités contre ce pays. » C’est de l’ordre du conditionnement spirituel, cela participe d’une magie réelle (tous ceux qui ont touché à l’occultisme le savent), de mauvais sorts, au delà de l’argumentation rationnelle. Le mécanisme est exactement le même pour la dictature sanitaire (c’est d’ailleurs pourquoi il est inutile de s’épuiser à débattre de façon argumentée avec un partisan du système de l’utilité des masques ou des effets secondaires des vaccins). Et ces sorts passent par des images, par des symboles.
Il y a peu, je regardais le clip d’une (assez mauvaise) chanson de 1987. J’y voyais les images suivantes (cf ci-dessous). Le chanteur s’allonge sur un damier maçonnique et nous montre l’oeil d’Horus sous différentes formes. Et ce genre de « détail », on peut le retrouver à tour de bras dans des tas de clips des années 1980, 1990, 2000, 2010 ou de cette année. Ca crève les yeux quand on a compris que cela existait, et cependant jamais un journaliste n’ira demander à un artiste « pourquoi vous avez caché votre oeil ? », « pourquoi vous chantez devant deux piliers de temple qui rappellent un temple maçonnique ? », « pourquoi vous avez pris la parole devant une pyramide ? ». Comme personne n’a demandé au réalisateur du film « La Cité des enfants perdus », « pourquoi est-ce que l’oeil dans la pyramide revient tout le temps dans votre film ? » (pas besoin de regarder les films hollywoodiens pour trouver ça, on a ça chez nous aussi). Quand on questionne le fossé qu’il y a entre cette omniprésence des symboles et le silence assourdissant de ceux qui seraient censés les pointer du doigt, on commence à faire un pas en dehors du contrôle mental. Puis, quand on commence à se rendre compte que ce sont les gens qui sont dans les « trips » de ces symboles (Céline Dion, Bono, Madonna, Lana del Rey, et des centaines d’autres dans le domaine de la musique, il y en a aussi dans le domaine de l’image, de l’ écriture, de la mode vestimentaire, de la nourriture – comme la bière Heineken dont la principale brasserie aux Pays-Bas a une architecture maçonnique et qui vient de lancer une pub pro-vaccination etc) qui sont aussi les premiers à nous vendre la « soupe » médiatique de la panique sanitaire, du confinement, de la vaccination obligatoire etc, on franchit un autre pas. Laisser de moins en moins de place à toute cette pollution mensongère dans nos têtes, à toutes les traces qu’elle y a laissées au fil des années, pour s’ouvrir au monde d’en haut, dans un esprit de charité et de compassion pour les gens qui sont mis sur notre chemin, c’est la meilleure voie, je crois, pour se blinder contre les assauts. « Tenez donc ferme: ayez à vos reins la vérité pour ceinture; revêtez la cuirasse de la justice; mettez pour chaussure à vos pieds le zèle que donne l’Evangile de paix; prenez par-dessus tout cela le bouclier de la foi, avec lequel vous pourrez éteindre tous les traits enflammés du malin » (Ephésiens 6:14-16)
Big Tech could ruin US elections, huge majority believes
A poll found that 78% of voters ‘believe tech companies like Twitter, Facebook, and Google could swing the results of the election to benefit their preferred candidate.’ Mon Jul 12, 2021 – 11:45 am EST
July 12, 2021 (WND News Center) – President Trump, based on sworn statements from witnesses and other direct evidence, has charged that the 2020 presidential race results were influenced by outside factors – something other than the actual voters.
Big Tech immediately insisted that those claims were “false,” and they announced a permanent censorship of his comments on the subject.
Whether there was misbehavior in the election or not may never be accurately revealed, but it may not matter anymore.
That’s because a new poll by Scott Rasmussen has revealed that 78% of voters “believe tech companies like Twitter, Facebook, and Google could swing the results of the election to benefit their preferred candidate.” SUBSCRIBE to LifeSite’s daily headlines U.S. Canada World Catholic
Only 10% found that unlikely.
Which means voters already believe the Big Tech behemoths could, in fact, ruin a national election if they so chose.
“The totals include 47% who say it’s Very Likely they could swing an election and just 3% who say it’s Not at All Likely,” the poll revealed. “Eighty-two percent (82%) of Republicans believe the tech companies could swing an election. So do 82% of Democrats.”
It also reported, “The survey also found that 62% believe technology companies have too much influence on our politics and political campaigns. Just 6% say they have too little influence. Nineteen percent (19%) believe the level of influence is about right.”
Those links between Hunter, Joe and China were suppressed by the Big Tech industry in the U.S.
The online survey of 1,000 Registered Voters was conducted by Scott Rasmussen on June 24-27, 2021. Field work for the survey was conducted by RMG Research, Inc.”
PJMedia explained, “What’s really interesting is that there isn’t a partisan divide on this. Eighty-two percent of Republicans and eight-two percent of Democrats say big-tech companies could swing an election.” — Article continues below Petition — PETITION: Support Texas Dad risking everything to save his son from being « transitioned » into a girl
2,113 have signed the petition.Let’s get to 2,500! Add your signature: Show Petition Text Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
The report said, “When Republicans and Democrats barely agree on anything these days, it’s significant that the perception of Big Tech’s influence on politics transcends the partisan divide — and that’s what makes the issue so important. People are getting their news from social media, and big social media giants are all owned by liberals. They’re the ones writing the algorithms that determine the articles we see. They’re the ones censoring content deemed misinformation. Heck, they’re the ones deciding who gets banned if they become too influential.”
It continued, “Consider this. Last year, after Trump noted that hydroxychloroquine showed promise in treating COVID-19, the media trashed him, and social media did all it could to prevent you from talking about the drug’s potential as a therapeutic for COVID-19. It turned out Trump was right. Multiple studies have shown hydroxychloroquine can reduce the fatality rate for COVID-19 significantly. But if you shared an article suggesting the drug worked, you risked being banned on social media.”
And, “After the election, when reports of election irregularities surfaced, social media suppressed those stories. Facebook even banned the phrase ‘stop the steal’ from their platform.”
LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.
July 12, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – A remarkable 58 percent of the public agrees with former President Donald Trump’s infamous declaration that the mainstream media is the “enemy of the people,” according to a new poll from Rasmussen Reports.
On numerous occasions throughout his presidency, Trump referred to purveyors of “fake news” as “enemies of the American people.” According to Rasmussen’s July 7-8 poll, 58 percent of likely voters at least somewhat agreed with the statement that “The media are ‘truly the enemy of the people,’” with 34 percent “strongly” agreeing. Just 36 percent disagreed. Notably, 61 percent of independents and even 37 percent of Democrats agreed with the statement.
Even larger margins agreed that “fake news” is a serious problem: 83 percent overall, with 82 percent of independents and 74 percent of Democrats. This finding is more open to interpretation, however, as Left and Right intensely disagree on what constitutes “fake news.”
Regardless, the results are consistent with various surveys over the years finding the news media to be one of the least trusted institutions in the United States, as well as that Americans trust their media far less than citizens of dozens of other countries trust theirs. — Article continues below Petition — PETITION: Dump Facebook and Big Tech for threatening our democracy and freedom of speech!
80,176 have signed the petition.Let’s get to 90,000! Add your signature: Show Petition Text Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
In March, D.C. Circuit Senior Judge Laurence Silberman actually took a dissenting opinion in a defamation case as an opportunity to argue that the press’ near-unanimous support of one party over another presents a “threat to a viable democracy.”
“It would be one thing if this were a two-sided phenomenon, (but) the increased power of the press is so dangerous today because we are very close to one-party control of these institutions,” he wrote. “Ideological homogeneity in the media — or in the channels of information distribution — risks repressing certain ideas from the public consciousness just as surely as if access were restricted by the government.”
Le bras de fer est engagé entre l’Union européenne et la Hongrie
10 Juillet, 2021 Provenance: FSSPX Spirituality
Les temps ont bien changé…
En visite à Belgrade, le 8 juillet, le Premier ministre hongrois Viktor Orban a insisté sur le fait que l’esprit de sa loi décriée par de nombreux pays de l’Union européenne (UE), spécifie que les parents ont le droit de décider de l’éducation de leurs enfants. Ce qui est un principe inviolable du droit naturel.
Viktor Orban ne s’est pas laissé intimider par les attaques contre la souveraineté hongroise qui ont été déclenchées dans l’UE par la loi destinée à protéger les enfants, qui interdit aux mineurs l’accès de la propagande sur l’homosexualité et le transgenre, y compris dans les écoles.
« Le Parlement européen et la Commission européenne veulent que les militants LGBT aient librement accès à nos écoles et à nos jardins d’enfants, mais cela n’arrivera pas parce que ce n’est pas ce que veut la Hongrie », a déclaré le premier ministre hongrois.
Il a ensuite ajouté : « Quoi qu’ils fassent, nous n’autoriserons pas la propagande LGBT dans nos écoles », dans un message direct à la présidente de la Commission européenne, Ursula von der Leyen, qui a menacé Orban de couper les fonds européens pour la reconstruction économique, s’il ne retirait pas la loi, qu’elle a qualifiée de « honteuse ».
La pression de l’UE
Dans un échange entre les 27 chefs d’Etat, le 24 juin dernier, Viktor Orban a dû subir un feu nourri de critiques. La première salve a été tirée par le premier ministre du Luxembourg, Xavier Bettel, qui a asséné : « L’homosexualité, ce n’est pas un choix, tu nais comme cela » – Xavier Bettel est un homosexuel déclaré.
« Etre homosexuel n’est pas un choix, être homophobe l’est », a renchéri le premier ministre Belge, Alexander De Croo. Quant au premier ministre néerlandais, Mark Rutte, il a suggéré au chef du gouvernement hongrois d’activer l’article 50 du traité pour sortir de l’UE.
Emmanuel Macron s’est contenté d’un pathétique : « Tu étais un libéral, Viktor. Qu’est-ce qui s’est passé ? ». Répétant ensuite plusieurs fois comme une litanie : « Rien n’est plus important que la dignité humaine. »
Le premier ministre suédois s’est fait menaçant : « Les contribuables suédois ne vous donneront pas d’argent si vous ne respectez pas nos valeurs », a jeté Stefan Löfven.
Enfin, David Sassoli, président du Parlement, a invité la Commission à « ne pas s’abstenir » d’avoir recours au dispositif de conditionnalité du versement des fonds européens au respect de l’Etat de droit, adopté l’été dernier.
Cependant, la loi hongroise sur les LGBT n’ayant aucune influence sur le budget communautaire, le dispositif en question ne peut s’appliquer, comme l’ont souligné plusieurs diplomates.
Le 8 juillet, les eurodéputés ont appelé la Commission européenne à lancer une procédure d’infraction accélérée contre la Hongrie. Dans une résolution adoptée par 459 voix pour, 147 contre et 58 abstentions, les eurodéputés déclarent que la loi hongroise viole clairement la Charte des droits fondamentaux, les traités et la législation de l’UE sur le marché intérieur.
Cela n’a pas empêché le Premier ministre hongrois de réaffirmer le jour même, contre ceux qu’il appelle les « apôtres de la démocratie libérale » que le gouvernement hongrois était prêt à défendre cette loi par tous les moyens légaux. Les premiers ministres de Pologne, de République tchèque, de Slovaquie et de Slovénie ont serré les rangs avec la Hongrie.
Un “risque accru” de développer une maladie neurologique avec le vaccin Johnson & Johnson L’Agence américaine du médicament a mis en garde lundi contre un « risque accru » de développer le syndrome de Guillain-Barré, une rare atteinte neurologique, associé avec le vaccin contre le Covid-19 de Johnson & Johnson.
Un “risque accru” de développer une maladie neurologique avec le vaccin Johnson & Johnson L’Agence américaine du médicament a mis en garde lundi contre un « risque accru » de développer le syndrome de Guillain-Barré, une rare atteinte neurologique, associé avec le vaccin contre le Covid-19 de Johnson & Johnson.
COVID jabs, prohibition of Ivermectin are part of ‘global collusion’ to ‘cause as much harm and death as conceivable’
The COVID vaccination campaign ‘will go down in history as the biggest medical biological product safety catastrophe in human history, by far. There’s nothing close … You can imagine how many heads are going to roll when this thing ultimately comes to its finality,’ ~ Dr. Peter McCullough. Mon Jul 12, 2021 – 2:50 pm EST
Dr. Peter McCullough speaking to Dr. Joseph Mercola Mercola/Screenshot
LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.
STORY AT-A-GLANCE
Perhaps one of the greatest crimes in this whole pandemic is the refusal by reigning heath authorities to issue early treatment guidance. Instead, they’ve done everything possible to suppress remedies shown to work, whether it be corticosteroids, hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) with zinc, ivermectin, vitamin D or NAC
According to Dr. Peter McCullough, 85% of COVID deaths could have been prevented had early treatment protocols been widely implemented rather than censored
It appears the intense censoring and suppression of early treatments was a strategy to promote as much fear, suffering, hospitalization and death as possible in order to prepare the population to accept a new genre of gene transfer technologies on a mass scale
The overwhelming drive to get a “needle in every arm” is such that health authorities are not even acknowledging the fact that those who have recovered from COVID-19 and many groups have no possibility of benefiting from the vaccine, including younger individuals, pregnant women, women of childbearing potential, and those with immunodeficiencies
Despite FDA warnings for myocarditis with Pfizer and Moderna and cavernous venous thrombosis with Johnson & Johnson, the vaccine cabal keeps propaganda on full blast
July 12, 2021 (Mercola) – In this interview, Dr. Peter McCullough discusses the importance of early treatment for COVID-19, and the potential motivations behind the suppression of safe and effective treatments.
McCullough has impeccable academic credentials. He’s an internist, cardiologist, epidemiologist, a full professor of medicine at Texas A&M College of Medicine in Dallas. He also has a master’s degree in public health and is known for being one of the top five most-published medical researchers in the United States and is the editor of two medical journals.
Early outpatient treatment is key for positive outcomes
SUBSCRIBE to LifeSite’s daily headlines U.S. Canada World Catholic
McCullough has been an outspoken advocate for early treatment for COVID. In August 2020, McCullough’s landmark paper “Pathophysiological Basis and Rationale for Early Outpatient Treatment of SARS-CoV-2 Infection” (1) was published online in the American Journal of Medicine.
The follow-up paper is titled “Multifaceted Highly Targeted Sequential Multidrug Treatment of Early Ambulatory High-Risk SARS-CoV-2 Infection (COVID-19)” (2) and was published in Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine in December 2020.
Perhaps one of the greatest crimes in this whole pandemic is the refusal by reigning heath authorities to issue early treatment guidance. Instead, they’ve done everything possible to suppress remedies shown to work, whether it be corticosteroids, hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), with zinc, ivermectin, vitamin D or NAC.
Patients were simply told to stay home and do nothing. Once the infection had worsened to the point of near-death, patients were told to go to the hospital where most were routinely placed on mechanical ventilation — a practice that was quickly discovered to be lethal. Many doctors also seemingly panicked and refused to see patients with COVID symptoms.
“I’m glad that I personally always treated all my patients,” he says. “I wasn’t going to have the virus slaughter one of my senior citizens. And it is, I think, terrible that none of our major academic institutions innovated with a single protocol. To my knowledge, not a single major academic medical center, as an institution, attempted even to treat patients with COVID-19.
But I did use my publication power, and my editorial authority, and my position in internal medicine and some specialty medicine to publish the breakthrough paper called ‘The Pathophysiological Basis and Rationale for Early Ambulatory Treatment of COVID-19’ in the American Journal of Medicine.
It was an international effort, both community physicians and academic physicians. And to this day, that is the most frequently downloaded paper in the American Journal of Medicine.
Early treatment guidelines have saved millions of lives
In December 2020, McCullough published an updated protocol, co-written with 56 other authors who also had extensive experience with treating COVID-19 outpatients. The article, “Multifaceted Highly Targeted Sequential Multidrug Treatment of Early Ambulatory High-Risk SARS-CoV-2 Infection,” (3) was published in the journal Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine, of which McCullough is the editor-in-chief.
“That paper, today … is the most frequently downloaded paper from BET Journal,” McCullough says. “It also is the basis for the American Association of Physician and Surgeons COVID early treatment guide.” (4)
We have evidence that the treatment guide has been downloaded and utilized millions of times. And it was part of the early huge kick that we had in ambulatory treatment at home towards the end of December into January, which basically crushed the U.S. curve.
We were on schedule to have 1.7 to 2.1 million fatalities in the United States, as estimated by the CDC and others. We cut it off at about 600,000. That still is a tragedy. I’ve testified that 85% of that 600,000 could have been saved if we would have had … the protocols in place from the start.
But suffice it to say, the early treatment heroes, and you’re part of that team Dr. Mercola, has really made the biggest impact. We have saved millions of lives, spared millions and millions of hospitalizations, and in a sense, have brought the pandemic now to a winnowing close.
While the World Health Organization and national health agencies have all rejected treatments suggested by doctors for lack of large-scale randomized controlled studies, McCullough and other doctors working the frontlines took an empiric approach. They looked for signals of benefit in the literature. — Article continues below Petition — PETITION: No to mandatory vaccination for the coronavirus
1,046,459 have signed the petition.Let’s get to 1,050,000! Add your signature: Show Petition Text Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
“We didn’t demand large randomized trials because we knew they weren’t going to be available for years in the future,” McCullough says. “We didn’t wait for a guidelines body to tell us what to do or some medical society, because we know they work in slow motion. We knew we had to take care of patients now.”
A global collusion to harm patients
When you look at how comprehensive and intense the censoring and suppression of early treatments were, it’s hard to come to any other conclusion than this was a strategy aimed at securing emergency use authorization (EUA) for COVID gene therapies.
To get an EUA, there cannot be any safe and effective alternatives, and since the COVID shots are using a brand-new, never before used technology, making sure there were no effective treatments available was crucial for the success of the roll-out of these shots. Prestigious medical journals like The Lancet were even caught colluding with the drug industry, publishing a completely fabricated study on HCQ, showing it was dangerous. As noted by McCullough:
“What’s so interesting is how airtight the collusion was. It was extraordinary. Look at The Lancet paper [on HCQ]. You had a doctor from Harvard, a company called Surgisphere that had data, you had the reviewers at Lancet, the associate editor and the editor at Lancet. How could they all collude together to publish a falsified paper?
When that paper came out, we looked at it. I was checking the literature very carefully. [As editor-in-chief of two medical journals] I’ve reviewed more papers and analyzed more data, I think, than anybody in the game. And I can tell you, I looked at that paper and in two seconds, I knew it was fake. I mean, I do this every day.
I’m also the senior associate editor for the American Journal of Cardiology. That’s the most venerated journal in our entire field. And I can tell you that a paper like that would never get past my editorial desk because it was so obviously fake. It was a huge sample size that we knew was not possible at that time. And it was people in their 40s hospitalized with astronomical mortality rates.
It was just no way that was legit. And The Lancet let that hang up there for two weeks, scaring the entire world against hydroxychloroquine — which turns out to be one of the safest and most effective widely utilized in people with COVID-19. And when they took it down, it was unapologetic.
My interpretation of this is that was very intentional. What happened with ivermectin’s use in the ICU was also very intentional and a collusion … Dr. J.J Rashtak had used it in hundreds and hundreds of patients in Florida and published in CHEST, one of the best pulmonary journals, that ivermectin reduced mortality.
Yet to this day, hospitals across the United States flat out refuse to use ivermectin. Desperate patients and families have to get court orders to order these doctors to use ivermectin. So, there’s a mass mentality of almost intentionally harming patients.
There’s absolutely no grounds for doctors and administrators … to deny patients ivermectin. There is a global collusion, specifically in U.S. hospitals, to cause as much harm and death as conceivable. It’s beyond belief … These cases where the families had to get court orders to force the doctors and administrators to administer a simple generic drug, these are going to be case studies in medical ethics for decades to come.”
The goal = mass vaccination
As for why patient harm was a desirable thing, McCullough believes the end goal was to secure the rollout of a mass vaccination campaign. All the propaganda we’ve been fed over this past year and a half points in that direction.
“Propaganda is the dissemination of false or misleading information by people of authority in a collusional manner. And that’s exactly what’s going on. We have a propagandized campaign for mass vaccination. There’s no doubt about it. It’s actually very overt … And believe me, there are hundreds of millions of people under the propagandized spell that the COVID-19 vaccine is going to deliver us from this crisis.”
What we do not know for sure is why the World Health Organization and governments around the world want a needle in every arm. Why are they so eager, so relentless in their push to inject everyone with this novel gene therapy that turns your body into a toxic spike protein factory?
The intent to vaccinate everyone is such that health authorities are not even acknowledging the fact that staggering numbers of injuries and deaths are occurring shortly after these injections. They’re even letting children die from these shots without any hint of slowing down the rate of injections. Why?
Our next task: Dispelling vaccine propaganda
While we’ve made great strides in circumventing censorship and getting the information out about early treatment, we still face a tremendous challenge, and that is dispelling the misinformation and confusion that surrounds the COVID shots.
Very clearly, there’s massive collusion to suppress the truth about these gene therapies as well. Dr. Robert Malone, the inventor of mRNA vaccines, recently spoke out about his concerns, and not only did YouTube ban the interview, but Wikipedia also erased his name from the historical section of the mRNA vaccine.
They clearly want everyone to believe that these shots are similar to, and even superior to, conventional vaccines. They absolutely do not want you to think of them as gene therapy, which is what they are. Even Malone himself has made this distinction.
Malone is more than a little concerned about the coercion going on to get people to take these injections. He’s also pointed out that there’s no comprehensive system in place to prospectively capture side effects, despite the fact that the manufacturers bypassed at least 10 to 15 years’ worth of safety studies, including toxicological studies. This too appears entirely intentional. Again, the question is why?
“They had no system to catch the complications, but even worse, they had no plans for safety. They had none of the traditional mechanisms for risk mitigation … [such as] critical event committees, Data and Safety Monitoring Boards, IRBs or Human Ethics Committees.
The public should know these are the structures that we have in place in biomedical research. I’ve led two dozen Data Safety Monitoring Boards. The co-sponsors of the U.S. vaccine program are the FDA and the CDC.
It’s their obligation to have in place, from the very beginning, a Clinical Event Committee, Data Safety Monitoring Board, and a Human Ethics Committee [and provide] regular updates, because these committees are supposed to be identifying signals of harm, and then make recommendations to the sponsors about how to make the program safer.
This was the fiduciary responsibility of the FDA and the NIH. Again, this is going to go down in regulatory history as one of the most colossal blunders of all time. How can you do the largest clinical investigation in the history of medicine and have no safeguards? You have no mechanisms to protect Americans from what could happen with the vaccine program?”
Why were standardized safety protocols omitted?
As for the motivation or reason for ignoring virtually all standardized safety measures, McCullough says:
“There has been such a suppression of early treatment … and a complete propagandized campaign for social distancing, wearing masks, promoting fear, suffering, hospitalization and death. And to prepare the population for mass vaccination, the last thing they wanted to do is have anything that could potentially restrict the population that would be taking the vaccine.
And so, I don’t think they actually wanted any safety safeguards. I thought their goal, from the very beginning, was to try to railroad every single individual with two legs [into getting the shot]. The most important moniker was a needle in every arm.
When those billboards went up in every city in the United States, the stakeholders — which are the CDC, the NIH, the FDA, and then Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson outside the United States, and AstraZeneca — they meant business.
When they say needle in every arm, that’s not a joke. It’s not a needle in every arm for whom it’s appropriate, or a needle in every arm for medically indicated. No, it’s a needle in every arm of every human being. They mean it, and I think Americans should be frightened.”
A crime against humanity
What we’re experiencing is really a crime against humanity, and hopefully the responsible individuals will ultimately be held accountable and found guilty of such a charge. As noted by McCullough:
How could one possibly have a large clinical investigation, ask individuals to sign consent, and then provide no safety mechanisms, really provide nothing with respect to safety of individuals? Everything about the vaccine is about safety. The reports that have accrued are so voluminous that if the stakeholders wanted to make the case that the vaccines are safe, they should make it with data.
They don’t, they simply say the vaccines are safe. And the medical societies are just as complicit. If you go to the American Medical Association, the American College of Physicians, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, they say the same thing, ‘The vaccine is safe.’ Within those organizations also, there’s a large swathe of individuals who are going to have to answer [for their actions].
The spike protein is not a cure; It’s a disease agent
As of June 18, 2021, we have 387,087 adverse event reports filed with the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), including 6,113 deaths, a large portion of which occurred within days of injection, and 6,435 life threatening reactions. (5)
We also have very good evidence to suggest this is a gross undercount, in part due to general underreporting, and in part due to VAERS refusing to accept reports — particularly those involving deaths — and scrubbing reports that have already been filed. So, these already alarming numbers likely only represent the tip of the iceberg.
“We have red hot problems, like children and young adults developing myocarditis, inflammation of the heart. I just saw such a patient yesterday,” McCullough says. “These are proven cases. This is not make believe. This is for real.”
So, you may ask the question, how in the world could this happen? Well, the first element of this happening is the vaccines as they exist today, either messenger RNA, or adenoviral DNA, the mechanism of action is not safe. The mechanism of action poses a biologic danger.
These vaccines all trick the body into making the spike protein of the virus. The spike protein itself is pathogenic. It’s actually what makes the virus dangerous. It was the object of gain-of-function research. So, it has a dangerous mechanism of action. Why? Because the spike protein is produced in an uncontrolled fashion. It’s not like a tetanus shot where there’s only a certain amount of protein that’s injected.
This is an uncontrolled quantity of spike protein. Probably each person is different, so may have [lower] production of it. They have very little symptoms after the vaccine, they’re fine.
Hopefully that’s the majority of individuals, but there are unfortunate individuals that must have massive amount of spike protein, and that spike protein ravages the body wherever the spike protein is locally made, and we do know the messenger RNA and the adenoviral DNA gets distributed in all the organs.
So if messenger RNA is up in the brain and we start producing spike protein in the brain, we cause local brain injury. There are now well-described neurologic injury cases with the vaccine. Many of them. In the heart, it causes myocarditis and cardiac injury. In the liver, it causes liver injury, in the lung, lung injury, in the kidney, kidney injury.
And very importantly, the spike protein damages endothelial cells and causes blood clotting. So, blood clotting, the dreaded complication of the infection itself, is now caused by the vaccine. Everything we’ve found out about the vaccine since its release has been bad.’
What can we expect to happen in the future?
Beyond the acute injury phase, there’s the very real possibility of long term health hazards. If you make it past the first couple of months without significant problems, you’re still not out of the woods. My main concern is the possibility of paradoxical immune enhancement (PIE), also known as pathogenic priming, or antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE), which essentially results in a cascade of immunological overreactions that wind up killing you.
[The COVID vaccination campaign] will go down in history as the biggest medical biological product safety catastrophe in human history, by far. There’s nothing close … You can imagine how many heads are going to roll when this thing ultimately comes to its finality. ~ Dr. Peter McCullough
The autumn and winter of 2021 will be our first “trial by fire.” We’ll just have to wait and see how many fully “vaccinated” people end up succumbing to the seasonal flu and other infections. That’ll give us a benchmark for how prevalent PIE might be. When asked what he predicts for the future, McCullough says:
“We’re so busy with the acute toxicity to the vaccine. We’re just absolutely overwhelmed, so, it’s hard to imagine in three to six months where we will be … There are hints right now that the messenger RNA doesn’t break down in a few days, that the natural disposal systems that we have for the messenger RNA doesn’t work [for the synthetic mRNA].
Now, we don’t know about the adenoviral DNA. I have a more favorable view of the adenoviral DNA products in the sense that maybe the body … can fight that off and dispose of it. The Johnson & Johnson, per number of injections, has the fewest complications. And most Americans think just the opposite because of that misdirection activity.
I think the vaccine stakeholders intentionally picked on Johnson & Johnson in order to distract attention away from the terrible safety events we’ve seen with Pfizer and Moderna. The vast majority of all the devastation we’ve seen is with Pfizer and Moderna …
When you generate a really strong antibody response, it’s actually more pathogenic. The belief is it’s more pathogenic than the natural infection, because we’re seeing syndromes in vaccine victims that are way worse than getting COVID-19 itself. I mean, the syndromes are actually horrendous.
I have seen neurologic blindness, cervical myelitis, cerebellar syndrome. It’s absolutely awful. It depends where the messenger RNA goes … and everything I can put together biologically, and what I see clinically, is that vaccines aren’t going to work but for a few months …
After the first shot of mRNA, one is actually more susceptible to COVID-19. This has been shown time and time again. My first rash of patients with post-vaccination COVID-19 in my practice was always after the first injection. The theory here is that the body has been hit with the messenger RNA, the spike protein is generated, it’s damaging some endothelial cells, and there’s an immature library of antibodies that are being formed.
And those antibodies, instead of protecting against the next exposure to COVID-19, they actually facilitate entry. That’s called antibody-dependent enhancement, and I think there is evidence for that … As for what we can expect long-term, that’s anyone’s guess.”
Long term risks are unknown
Before COVID came along, the FDA required vaccine makers to provide 24 months’ worth of data before they’d allow it. This was truncated down to two months for the COVID shots. So, anyone who says the shots are safe long term is lying because no such data exists to prove this.
“The consent form says, ‘We don’t know if this is going to work, we don’t know if it’s going to last, and we don’t know if it’s going to be safe.’ They say that. So, anybody who takes the vaccine is going to have to think about this and understand that we don’t know anything beyond two months.
Given all the short-term risks, if there are any long-term risks, it is absolutely compounding this unknown. What I know based on the literature right now is there could be a risk given the narrow spectrum of immunologic coverage … There could be such a narrow immunity that more virulent strain could overwhelm it …
The most recent variant is the Delta variant. That’s the weakest of all the variants and the most easily treatable. But if someone, let’s say a nefarious entity created a more virulent virus, it could easily be designed to scoot past a very narrow immunity that hundreds of millions, if not billions of people, will be keyed to with narrow immunity.”
DNA changes, cancer and chronic illness are possible effects
McCullough also discusses the risk that these mRNA injections might become permanently incorporated into your DNA by way of reverse transcriptase.
“There now have been enough studies to suggest there is some reverse transcription — that in fact the RNA creates DNA and then DNA gets permanently put into the human genome,” he explains.
“We know this from the natural infection. The T-Detect test actually checks the T-cells when it tracks the DNA. This is a commercial test you can get if you had COVID-19, and it looks for minor chromosomal re-arrangements that code for cell surface receptors on T-cells.”
The question is, if the synthetic mRNA or adenoviral DNAs in fact create permanent changes to the genome, what effects will that have? Could it promote cancer, for example? McCullough cites a recent paper indicating the spike protein might in fact affect two important cancer suppressor genes.
“This is disturbing because we’re using novel genetic material and it’s possible that they’re oncogenic. We know some other viruses are oncogenic, including Epstein-Barr virus. So, when that paper hit, we said, ‘Oh no, are we setting up people for cancer risk of solid organ cancers, like breast cancer, colon cancer, lung cancer, et cetera.’
It is a sick feeling what we’ve learned there. We do understand now that there must be cell damage that’s occurring with this spike protein inside cells. And that if it’s not turned off, that that spike protein generation could end up with some type of chronic disease.
There are elements of the spike protein that are similar to prions that occur in neurologic disease, for instance. There may be intracellular changes as the body keeps cranking the spike protein which you’re not supposed to crank, that causes other problems in cells …
Future development of heart failure comes to mind, gastrointestinal illnesses, pulmonary fibrosis, neurodegenerative diseases. We could be on to the start of a whole new genre of chronic disease in America due to this mass experimentation of genetic products in the human body.”
Impossible for vaccination program to improve disease curve
In a sane and rational world not laboring under some hidden agenda to kill off a portion of the population, these shots would have only been rolled out to the highest-risk individuals. The rest of the population would have been excluded from the experiment.
Remember the COVID injection trials conflated absolute and relative risk. Pfizer claimed its mRNA shot was 95% effective, but that was the relative risk reduction — the absolute risk reduction was actually less than 1%. (6) As noted by McCullough, healthy adults under 50, teens and children have a less than 1% chance of hospitalization and death from COVID-19, so they don’t have a medical need for it.
“You can’t make less than 1% smaller and have it be clinically meaningful. That’s the reason why the vaccine program will never have an impact on the epidemiologic curves. Dr. [Ronald] Brown from Canada has done the analysis. It’s impossible.
Someone sent me an email the other day [saying], ‘Dr. McCullough, don’t you think that the pandemic is being favorably impacted by the vaccination program?’ The answer is no. We look at the clinical trials. There’s less than 1% absolute risk reduction. It means that, mathematically, it’s impossible for mass vaccination to have a favorable impact on the population.”
COVID shot may raise your risk of COVID death
What’s worse, McCullough cites data showing that those who have gotten the shot and end up with COVID-19 anyway have far higher rates of hospitalization and death.
“The CDC was so overwhelmed [with adverse reports], they gave up. God knows how many tens or hundreds of thousands of Americans got vaccinated and got COVID-19 anyway. It looks just like regular COVID. In the data they had, it was a 9% risk of hospitalization and then a 3% risk of death.”
What this means is that, by taking the injection, you trade in a 0.26% (7) risk of death, should you contract COVID-19, for a 3% risk of death if you get infected. If you’re younger than 40, you’re trading a 0.01% (8) risk of death for a 3% risk.
The way forward demands we just say no
If you want to hear more of what McCullough has to say, you can find his podcast, The McCullough Report, on America Out Loud. Every week, he talks to medical experts from different countries to get a range of perspectives and innovative approaches. In closing, he notes:
“My personal view is that I think the vaccine program has been a disaster. We should have just treated COVID-19 as an illness. We should never have shut down the schools or anything else. None of this wearing masks. We should have just treated the acute problem, and we would have gotten ourselves out of the pandemic.”
As for how we move forward, first of all, we need to stop the acute injury, and that means we need to stop taking these COVID shots. Beyond that, we’ll need to experiment to determine the best ways to block the damage done by the spike protein, for however long that is produced and stays in circulation.
“If there’s any mother who’s concerned about their child developing myocarditis, the way to avoid it is just don’t bring your child to a vaccination center,” McCullough says.
“Everyone is just going to have to learn to say no. We cannot be harmed by the vaccine if we just decline it. And the vaccine is completely elective. The CDC, the NIH, FDA, they’ve all said it’s elective. You don’t have to take it. Those agencies, by the way, they’re not taking it.
So, nobody has to take it. And everyone who is in a school or a university, or a workplace where they’re saying you have to take it, or say you have to take it for travel, the answer is no you don’t. You do not have to take it for travel. And yes, you can show up to work without the vaccine. And yes, you can show up to school without the vaccine.
These are forms of intimidation and almost every one of these institutions actually hasn’t written a policy. And if they don’t have a policy that’s been vetted with fair exemptions, that’s just intimidation. That’s like saying you can’t show up to work with a blue tie. If I want to wear a blue tie, I’m going to show up to work in a blue tie.
I think Americans are going to have to have that type of backbone in order to break this wave of propaganda, [this] ill intent that’s levered on the American people. I know so many people who are cowering … The fear is extraordinary …
If we had a Data Safety Monitoring Report in place, they would have been having emergency meetings at the end of January 2021, and said, ‘You know what? What we’re seeing is not good.’ We can actually calculate what’s called the competence interval.
When we exceed a competence interval for risks above a certain risk limit, we call it, and that [competence interval was exceeded] on January 22, 2021. Yet here we are, five months later. This will go down in history as the biggest medical biological product safety catastrophe in human history, by far. There’s nothing close … You can imagine how many heads are going to roll when this thing ultimately comes to its finality.”
From Pfizer’s former VP calling them ‘irrelevant propaganda’ to evidence that natural immunity slaughters a host of COVID-19 variants, there’s good reason to ignore the media’s fear-mongering. Mon Jul 12, 2021 – 4:12 pm EST
LifeSiteNews has produced an extensive COVID-19 vaccines resources page. View it here.
July 12, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – It was predictable that soon after the mass COVID-19 vaccine campaign rolled out, if the shots began failing, the media would turn into scapegoats people who didn’t rush into line-ups for the fast-tracked, experimental pharmaceutical injections.
The latest COVID narrative is well underway. Thousands of fully vaccinated people are testing positive for the disease – so many, the government has stopped counting cases of “breakthrough COVID,” a blatant attempt to hide the problem of vaccine failure.
Rather, governments have directed attention to a Greek alphabet of new “variants” – supposedly deadlier and even more “contagious” mutations of the original Wuhan virus that causes the disease.
The media are dutifully providing an endless barrage of doomsday reportage, warning people that they are “more at risk than ever before” and that a “dangerous fall” lies ahead amidst clouds of inescapable Delta, Lambda, or Epsilon virus mutations. They have already begun further dividing the population already riven by division between those who see injecting children with experimental drugs and smothering their respiratory passages with masks as criminal and the millions who do not want lockdown ever to end. Medical Apartheid media have begun dehumanizing children and half of America’s “unvaccinated” adult population, calling them “variant factories” and “incubators” of disease.
Unvaccinated people, including children, according to the latest COVID chapter, are harbors of infection that give birth to mutations. It is these virus mutants – not public health officials and vaccine investors – who impose masking, threaten whole countries with devastating lockdowns and continuous quarantines, and prevent the “return to normal.” If only everyone would get vaccinated – and receive booster shots perhaps twice a year or as necessary – to combat new variants, then there would finally be no COVID anywhere. Ever. Here are the top 5 reasons this narrative is a lie. SUBSCRIBE to LifeSite’s daily headlines U.S. Canada World Catholic
1. Virus variants of no concern
Michael Yeadon, former Vice President and Chief Scientist for Allergy & Respiratory research for COVID vaccine maker Pfizer, spent more than three decades in the vaccine industry before he retired from “the most senior research position” in his field. Variants, he says, are “irrelevant and being used as propaganda.”
In comments sent to LifeSiteNews, Yeadon said that while it’s true that small mutations occur in viruses routinely, these are tiny and insignificant changes that the immune system is fabulously equipped to combat.
“It’s true that when this virus, SARS-CoV-2, replicates inside our cells, it occasionally makes a ‘molecular typo’ error. Instead of a letter A, for example, we might see a letter U. These letters are instructions for what the next infected cell is instructed to manufacture,” Yeadon said. ‘Quite commonly there are several errors made.”
“But it’s very important to realize that there are a LOT of letters making up the genetic code for this virus, almost 30,000 letters. In turn this translates into almost 10,000 amino acids, the building blocks of all proteins. If a particular altered code is found often enough, it might get noticed as “a variant of interest”.
“The question is, ‘Does it matter?’”
“So far, the answer is categorically NO.”
No variant is more than 0.3% changed from the original Wuhan sequence, said Yeadon. “That’s right, no variant is less than 99.7% identical to the original virus.”
To give an idea as to how much (or how little, really) a change of 0.3% is, Yeadon suggested considering that the area of one palm of your hand is about 1% of your body surface area – so a visual of about one-third of one palm is the difference to consider.
“That’s less than the visual change brought about by turning a baseball cap around, or changing the shape of the lenses in your sunglasses, and expecting not to be recognized by your partner,” Yeadon said. “They won’t be fooled.”
“Please allow me to demonstrate that a difference of this minute amount definitely won’t fool your immune system either, into thinking ‘this is a new virus, not sure how I’ll cope’.”
Back in 2003, there was a previous Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome coronavirus, or SARS. This new coronavirus is called SARS-CoV2 (or SARS coronavirus 2). SARS was never as widely spread out as the current virus, but plenty of people were infected, Yeadon explained. Several of these were followed up and invited to volunteer for a test on the immune cells in their blood.
“The main findings were that all volunteers retained solid immunity to SARS, 17 years after being infected. That’s great & is what to expect with the present virus: robust & durable immunity,” Yeadon said.
“But the second finding was astonishing to those who are unfamiliar with immunology. Every survivor of infection by SARS all those years ago also had cross-immunity to SARS-CoV-2. How could this possibly be? They’d never seen the new virus.”
“The answer is in the similarity of the two viruses: they’re around 78% identical, or 22% different. The way our immune systems recognize & remember respiratory viruses is to chop it into pieces & examine all the pieces.
“With a similarity as much as 78%, many of the pieces of the SARS virus which were recognized in 2003 are the same as the pieces recognized in SARS-CoV-2 now.
If our immune systems have absolutely no difficulty recognizing two viruses which are 22% different, it’s literally impossible & absurd to pretend to the British people that a mere 0.3% mutation is a problem. It’s not a problem.”
2. Immunity crushes variants
Anyone immune to the current virus, whether by natural infection or from vaccination, is also immune to all the variants, according to Yeadon. “It’s not just me saying so.” He cites a study in which clinical immunologists tested the blood T-cells from volunteers and showed them all the variants which they had available, and they easily recognized and responded to them all.
“These mutations in SARS-CoV-2 are very common but they produce a lot of hot air. None of these variants differ enough to represent the slightest threat to immunity already hard won. That’s the big idea, but you’re not falling for it. So you definitely do not need a booster or variant vaccine. Don’t let anyone come near you with a syringe of such a thing. They’re not honest & they’re not your friend.
But might a variant be more infectious?
“Sure, that’s possible – and expected. How have we ended up with around 40 different viruses able to infect human respiratory tract? We think they each had nastier origins but over time, they’ve become more infectious but LESS dangerous,” commented Yeadon.
“Don’t let them take away your liberty on a set of immunological lies.”
3. Vaccine failure
Variants are a convenient cover for the shortcomings of Pfizer and the other fast-tracked COVID vaccines. And an easy way to scapegoat the unvaccinated. The reality is that 59% of the recent coronavirus deaths with the Delta “variant of concern” in the United Kingdom, for example, were among the vaccinated. The U.K. government reported June 25 that there were 7,235 cases of “breakthrough COVID” – that’s COVID-19 infection in people who had already received two doses of coronavirus vaccine.
Nearly 20,000 people (19,957) who had received one dose of vaccine tested positive for COVID-19 with the Delta variant. Among the fully vaccinated there were 50 deaths and 20 among the partially vaccinated.
Among the 53,822 unvaccinated people who tested positive for COVID, just 44 died.
In America, the government stopped counting “breakthrough COVID” cases when the numbers exceeded 10,000 and the deaths among the fully vaccinated from COVID-19 hit 535. How can public health say it is the unvaccinated spreading disease when it refuses to even count tens of thousands of fully and partially vaccinated people who are testing positive? Perhaps the tests are faulty?
The fact that there are more deaths among the fully vaccinated than the unvaccinated – and more than eight times greater rate of death among the fully vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated – is hardly a sign of the unvaccinated being risky or the variant being more dangerous. In both groups, the coronavirus mortality is exceedingly low (less than 1%). But it is a sign of vaccine failure.
Perhaps it’s a sign of the vaccine itself being dangerous, too. More than 9,000 deaths following vaccination have been reported by the U.S. government Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) as of Friday.
The higher death rate in the vaccinated may be because there are inherent dangers to vaccinating people who have already been infected with the coronavirus. Or it may be due to Antibody-Dependent Enhancement – a well-documented phenomenon of previous failed attempts at coronavirus vaccines in which vaccinated lab animals became sick and died when they encountered the virus in the wild, because their immune system hyper-reacted – just the sort of severe COVID-19 reaction people fear.
If a “dangerous fall” lies ahead, as the media are warning, it may be for vaccinated people, since the vaccines they took are still in clinical trials and no one knows how their immune systems will respond when they meet wild flu and coronaviruses.
Will the government and media tell us how many cases of the coronavirus in the fall are among the vaccinated? Of course not. They conveniently stopped counting COVID-19 cases in the vaccinated because if they pretend they don’t know there is a problem, they don’t have to tell us about it. And “variants” – invisible and elusive and ever-changing – make a nice cover for inherent vaccine dangers.
4. More variants equals more money
No one seemed more delighted to announce the prospect of new virus variants than Pfizer Chief Financial Officer Frank D’Amelio speaking to the company’s investors this spring. During a virtual meeting hosted by Barclay’s multinational bank in March, D’Amelio told investors that the reports of emerging new virulent strains of the SARS coronavirus that had been reported across the globe this spring were a “significant opportunity” for the company.
“We’ve got the U.K. variant, the South Africa variant, the Brazilian variant. And so is there the possibility for more variants to emerge? I think the answer is clearly, there is,” he announced rather buoyantly.
A month earlier Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla told the 2021 Davos World Economic Forum that his company was already working on booster shots. Later he told shareholders that with variants he expected the company to “move from a pandemic into more of a normal type of vaccination business.”
More normal vaccination business is an endless revenue stream, not just a one (or two) and done deal. It’s the kind of business that creates billionaires and lets Bourla give himself a 17% raise and take home $21 million, in salary, bonuses, and stock in 2020.
Pfizer reported a “crazy good” first quarter this year, saying it expects to haul in $26 billion in sales for its COVID-19 vaccine this year, way above its earlier projection of just $15 billion. But why stop there?
Just as the media began buzzing about variants, Pfizer announced Friday that the time for its third booster shot has arrived. Immunity from its vaccine is already waning in the face of the variants it said (more on this later).
Of course it would be time for a new shot if you are a company whose real priority is profits as new COVID cases have stagnated and the number of people rolling up their sleeves has flat lined, too. Those who wanted both shots have had them. Time to offer your most trusting customers – and your income stream – a top-up.
5. Big Tech fearmongering
It is unnerving that Twitter bot campaigns are now pretending grassroots support for draconian government measures like lockdowns and masking. Automated campaigns drumming up fear about the variants – in the same way the media are doing – to promote severe COVID measures for meagre threats is clear sign the variant scare campaign is not to be trusted.
La Revue de Presse de « l’inestimable » Nicolas Bonnal : la liberté est le fait d’une élite courageuse (aristo, « le meilleur »), pas de la masse dopée au code QR et au hamburger, qui se vautre depuis les tyrans grecs et romains devant le cirque, la télé et la subvention !
Eric Clapton took the vaccine and now can no longer perform. He said: “The vaccine destroyed me – I now live with pills due to neuropathy.” The sad part of this is that they are pushing vaccines like a cocaine dealer and nobody has does anything to research why someone people suffered side effects or die and others do not. This is like simply going to the casino and rolling the dice to see if you win or lose. According to Leslie Parent, vice dean for research and graduate studies in the Penn State College of Medicine, one of the most respected in the nation, bluntly said: “Scientists do not fully understand why this is the case, but the differences could be due to a combination of a person’s age, genetics and past exposure to other viruses, including common-cold coronaviruses.” Yet nobody knows anything and they still demand everyone be vaccinated.
You cannot sue the vaccine companies and the government will not pay any damages either. They demand you get the jab, but have not done any research to ensure it is safe. However, if an employer insists that you get vaccinated, this is really quite foolish for they are NOT under the immunity blanket. If an employee missed work due to any side effects from receipt of the vaccine, the employer has a problem. Such an illness could be considered a compensable injury under workers’ compensation laws. If the employee dies because of a manadatory vaccine, the family may line up to sue the employer. Businesses better watch what they are doing. They can end up being responsible in many ways. Nobody asks if you got the flu shot or the Polio vaccine when you were a kid. Why is COVID so different when it is on par with the Flu insofar as being lethal. At the very least, this will become a Workman’s Comp claim which could seriously jeopardize the company long-term.
Un petit exercice de pensée sur les véhicules électriques
Les véhicules électriques sont l’équivalent des CBDC (NDLR : Monnaie Numérique) pour le transport. Vous bénéficiez du « service » tant que vous êtes autorisé à recharger votre véhicule.
Et le tarif des services publics sera décidé par une entité centrale, qui est votre entreprise de services publics. La rareté organisée de l’énergie électrique via le passage aux énergies renouvelables et l’état détérioré du réseau suivent les mêmes schémas que les manipulations de marché dont nous avons tous été témoins au cours des dernières décennies. Les limites de portée intrinsèques des véhicules électriques permettent un contrôle plus poussé du mouvement que le pétrole. Le pétrole offre une autonomie virtuellement infinie, est intraçable, plus difficile à arrêter immédiatement, peut être stocké pendant de longues périodes (lorsque c’est fait correctement) et peut donc être assimilé à de l’argent liquide.
Les banques centrales espèrent un jour éliminer l’argent liquide et leurs cousins globalistes rêvent d’éliminer la liberté de mouvement, et ce pour les mêmes raisons, tout en utilisant les mêmes tactiques. Au début, toutes les incitations possibles seront mises en place pour gagner une certaine masse critique, après quoi les citoyens non conformes seront contraints de suivre le mouvement général en utilisant des limitations techniques comme l’indisponibilité de la banque de détail et des stations-service.
Indépendamment des détails techniques, encore une fois, tout est une question de contrôle.
/fdata%2F0467561%2Favatar-blog-6315077-tmpphpjLCKfF.jpeg){kind=avatar}
/image%2F1562800%2F20210713%2Fob_e87a7c_snake2.jpg)
By Calvin Freiburger
naufrage/sauvetage 