MASSACRE! People under age 65 who are being injected with Pfizer mRNA are 26000% more likely to die than if they had contracted covid
This report comes from Israel:
“We conclude that the Pfizer vaccines, for the elderly, killed during the 5-week vaccination period about 40 times more people than the disease itself would have killed, and about 260 times more people than the disease among the younger age class. We stress that this is in order to produce a green passport valid at most 6 months, and promote Pfizer sales.”
5 March, 2021
5 March, 2021 update:
Please see our debunking in French below, and in English here.
– this article has been published first in Hebrew here
– we gave an interview in French to francesoir.fr who translated it in french here
– it has been as well reported in russian here in english in Arutz 7 here and in the U.S here
– and reported in several other language including greek here
It is a curious state of being we have arrived at as a nation you may agree? Abroad, as the vaccine is rolled out we have seen literally thousands of adverse reactions reported, over a thousand of those are deaths (and remember only 1% are reported in total), and STILL, the NZ ‘vaccine expert’ Helen Pertousis-Harris tells us there is no demonstration of a causative link. This may be correct technically. Of course I have not noted any sounding of the alarm that the rollout should stop until they have investigated those events, done postmortems etc, to figure out what caused all of the deaths. Instead the rollout continues unabated.
Pause and think for a little. Is there not something very wrong with this picture?
If you are still on the fence and deciding yes or no … at least read this information and educate yourself from the documented info available before proceeding. EWR
So here below we have a CDC download describing many of the reactions, many serious and life threatening, and many deaths. The one cited is from page 2 in the document. See FAQs at the link to learn about the source and to read of many more incidents. (Note DNR is do not resuscitate):
“The resident received is vaccine around 11:00 am and tolerated it without any difficulty or immediate adverse effects. He was at therapy from 12:36 pm until 1:22pm when he stated he was too tired and could not do any more. The therapist took him back to his room at that time and he got into bed himself but stated his legs felt heavy. At 1:50 pm the CNA answered his call light and found he had taken himself to the bathroom.She stated that when he went to get back into the bed it was “”abnormal”” how he was getting into it so she assisted him. At that time he quit breathing and she called a RN into the room immediately. He was found without a pulse, respirations, or blood pressure at 1:54pm. He was a DNR.”
Experts say this alarming spike is being partially driven by women, who often work in industries most affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.
TOKYO — Eriko Kobayashi has tried to kill herself four times.
The first time, she was just 22 years old with a full-time job in publishing that didn’t pay enough to cover her rent and grocery bills in Tokyo. “I was really poor,” said Kobayashi, who spent three days unconscious in hospital after the incident.
Now 43, Kobayashi has written books on her mental health struggles and has a steady job at an NGO. But the coronavirus is bringing back the stress she used to feel.
“My salary was cut, and I cannot see the light at the end of the tunnel,” she said. “I constantly feel a sense of crisis that I might fall back into poverty.”
Experts have warned that the pandemic could lead to a mental health crisis. Mass unemployment, social isolation, and anxiety are taking their toll on people globally.
Coronavirus statistics may be being inflated in a way that boggles the mind. In April Dr. Deboroah Birx of the White House Coronavirus Task Force made clear that primary-cause COVID deaths, and deaths in which COVID was merely present, would be taken as one and the same. Birx said: “to mark it as COVID-19 infection the intent is right now that those if someone dies with COVID-19 we are counting that as a COVID-19.” The key words were “with COVID” and “COVID death.” The very fact that Birx was erasing the distinction showed that she was aware that there was one. The government was true to its word. In making “with COVID” the same as “of COVID,” COVID totals could differ sharply from reality. At present, the COVID totals being announced by mass media, taken from the CDC, are defined as any death “involving” COVID, whether it was the primary cause of death or not.
A new study shows that mask mandates do the opposite of what they are supposed to do, wherein they actually encourage the virus to spread through communities, rather than stop it.
The study looked at an overview of states and areas that implemented mandatory mask wearing, and compared the statistics to reported cases after the mandates went into effect. The reverse correlation was “remarkable,” study authors said.
The authors concluded that mask mandates not only don’t work, but exacerbate the infection rates. For example, when they looked at eight counties in Florida that had the mandates, there were an average of 24 cases per 100,000 people, per day. When their mask mandates were removed, only 17 cases per 100,000 people were reported.
Our Planet 675 subscribers This insightful interview of Dr Simon Thornley of Auckland University again shows that there are good reasons for us in this country to question authority and then furnished with new, rigorous evidence – chart our own course. During the COVID lockdown crises, NZ as a country hunkered down as a “Team of Five Million” as the Prime Minister called us. We essentially did what we thought was in the best interests for the nation as a whole. However, after a short time there came from the academic realm, another voice that said hold on a moment, the statistics coming in seem to be not telling the full story, so let’s take another look at what’s really happening? This voice was Dr Simon Thornley who courageously stated that the facts were indeed not clearly stated. He also noted that Professor John Ioannidis of the Department of Epidemiology from Stanford University in the US was finding the same slanted stats and later on – Prof Carl Heneghan of Oxford University, in the UK also noted this. When Simon looked at the early evidence at the first stages of the lockdown – of who were in hospital or were very unwell the statistics showed people dying who were actually expected to die in a short while anyway – as a result of old age or other comorbidities – such as heart problems, cancer and other ends of life ailments. The statistics that he was able to gather showed by far the majority of people who were dying were in the 80s to 90s. This was supported in a Sky News Broadcast on the 20th of September they said that …. Back in July a statistical anomaly was spotted which changed the way COVID 19 deaths were counted. Previously Public Health England included any death of a person who had previously had Covid 19 as a Corona virus fatality even if they had recovered from the virus and died of another cause – and the person who spotted that was professor Carl Hennigan from the University of Oxford – who has been quite critical of the UK lockdown, going a step further stating that the British PM was surrounded by mediocre advisors! In the interview, Simon lays out the anomalies and says that we in NZ need to be cautious, protect the elderly in particular and open up the country which means schools as well. There are a good number of profound points covered in this ranging interview and the big one is that this Covid is very much like a very severe flu. Saying that this virus is not as deadly as we had initially believed. The Interview: https://www.ourplanet.org/greenplanet…
“Is there a politician with the spine to tell the truth on COVID-19”
Sky News Australia 603K subscribers
Australians are sick and tired of dictatorial politicians promoting a climate of fear and alarmism over the coronavirus says Sky News host Alan Jones. Mr Jones said politicians “never cite the figures, which prove they are either ignorant or duplicitous”. “Today, Daniel Andrews seems unhappy with the decline in numbers, so he has ordered more testing in regional areas where there are no COVID cases”. Mr Jones also said NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian “is the high priestess of alarmism”. Mr Jones reiterated the point made by the World Health Organisation that 99 per cent of coronavirus cases are mild. “In Australia, it has cost us so far, $360 billion, plus, for 361 deaths. “A billion dollars per life. “And in all of Australia, 25 million people, 51 are critical, 43 in Victoria (and) eight in the rest of Australia”. “And this is a pandemic? Is there a politician with the spine to tell the truth”.
A new study from medical researchers at UCLA and Stanford University found the chances of contracting or dying from coronavirus are much lower than previously thought.
One America’s Pearson Sharp has the details.
VIDEO AT THE LINK
On Monday I wrote an article on how we are being fed the big scary numbers, probably in an attempt to keep us all fearful and therefore compliant. I argued that the numbers involved, in New Zealand at least, are very small and that we really don’t need to be in level 2 let alone 3 or 4.
Well, funnily enough, a quick check of the Ministry of Health website on Thursday reveals a change in the way some of the various graphs are presented.
In case you missed this as the last post on topic’s been blocked on FB more than once, please do examine the real statistics from the official horse’s mouth so to speak. NZ’s MOH no less. We are constantly hearing there were 22 deaths but this appears to be not so. We have two more now so officially it’s 19 not 24. Please read again and see the actual response from the MOH. I’m not making this up.
I’ll point you also to this post from an MD quote:
“As an NHS doctor, I’ve seen people die and be listed as a victim of coronavirus without ever being tested for it. But unless we have accurate data, we won’t know which has killed more: the disease or the lockdown?”
This is not the only MD who has blown the whistle. There are many more examples. This is simply not right and just in light of the mental health fall out we’ve observed now.
Typically, this line “debunks” the CDC update by carefully avoiding its key point: that the vast majority of “COVID-19 deaths” were deaths caused by COVID-19 and serious comorbidities, among the very old.
This propaganda blurp from the Miami Herald (and no doubt recycled everywhere) tightly focuses on whether, in those fatal cases, COVID-19 was the decisive factor, “the straw that broke the camel’s back,” so that those dead would still be living if they didn’t have that, too. That is “how infectious diseases work,” the doctor quoted tells the Herald‘s scribe.
Whatever. Whether COVID-19 did or didn’t finish off those people is beside the point, which is that the lockdowns were, and are, unnecessary. As sane epidemiologists have been insisting since this nightmare started, the rational response to “the coronavirus” would have been to quarantine those very vulnerable people—as always has been done during epidemics and pandemics—and let the rest of us lead normal lives.
Instead, our “leaders,” guided by the likes of Dr. Fauci and Bill Gates, locked down America almost entirely—a twisted policy that has killed countless people, well and vulnerable alike, by crashing the economy, thereby murdering millions with no serious illnesses; and, as for those people most at risk, not only separating them from family and friends, which isolation did them in (the cause of that weird “COVID peak” in April, as Denis Rancourt has shown), but also killing tens of thousands more of them by ordering nursing homes to take in COVID-19 patients (a lethal practice carried out not just in the US, but in Canada, too).
In short, they gave us the worst of both worlds, ostensibly to “keep us safe” from a virus that posed little risk to all but just a few of us, as the CDC update has made clear to anyone who still has eyes to see with.
Remember, the CDC is a private corporation & not a government agency. EWR
Originally published on www.childrenshealthdefense.org
By H. Ealy, M. McEvoy, M. Sava, S. Gupta, D. Chong, D. White, J. Nowicki, P. Anderson
Key Findings For Data Through July 12th
- According to the CDC, 101 children age 0 to 14 have died from influenza, while 31 children have died from COVID-19.
- No evidence exists to support the theory that children pose a threat to educational professionals in a school or classroom setting, but there is a great deal of evidence to support the safety of in-person education.
- According to the CDC, 131,332 Americans have died from pneumonia and 121,374 from COVID-19 as of July 11th, 2020.
- Had the CDC used its industry standard, Medical Examiners’ and Coroners’ Handbook on Death Registration and Fetal Death Reporting Revision 2003, as it has for all other causes of death for the last 17 years, the COVID-19 fatality count would be approximately 90.2% lower than it currently is.
The CDC has instructed hospitals, medical examiners, coroners and physicians to collect and report COVID-19 data by significantly different standards than all other infectious diseases and causes of death.
These new and unnecessary guidelines were instituted by the CDC in private, and without open discussion among qualified professionals that are free from conflicts of interest.
These new and unnecessary guidelines were additionally instituted despite the existence of effective rules for data collection and reporting, successfully used by all hospitals, medical examiners, coroners, and physicians for more than 17 years.
As a result, elected officials have enacted many questionable policies that have injured our country’s economy, our country’s educational system, our country’s mental and emotional health, and the American citizen’s personal expression of Constitutionally-protected rights to participate in our own governance.
This paper will present significant evidence to support the position that if the CDC simply employed their 2003 industry standard for data collection and reporting, which has been successfully used nationwide for 17 years; the total fatalities attributed to COVID-19 would be reduced by an estimated 90.2%, and questions would be non-existent regarding schools reopening and whether or not Americans should be allowed to work.
Thanks to Hilary Butler for this link.
The correlation between COVID-19 deaths per million of population and 65+ year olds that have received influenza vaccines is real. Dr. Allan S. Cunningham presented the challenge and here are the results.
One source for vaccine data: OECD (2020), Influenza vaccination rates (indicator) doi:10.1787/e452582-e (Accessed on 21 May 2020). This lists, by country, the % of the population aged 65+ for 2018 or the latest available year. For Covid-19 death rates by country as of 21 May 2020: www.worldometers.info/coronavirus.
% INFLUENZA VACCINATIONS IN THE ELDERLY (x) /COVID-19 DEATH RATES PER MILLION (y)
Czech Republic 20.3/28 Lithuania 13.4/22
Denmark 52.0/97 Luxembourg 37.6/174
Estonia 4.8/48 Netherlands 64.0/337
Finland 48.4/55 Norway 34.4/43
France 49.7/431 Portugal 60.8/125
Germany 34.8/99 Slovak Republic 13.0/5
Hungary 26.8/49 Slovenia 11.8/51
Ireland 57.6/319 Spain 53.7/596
Italy 52.7/535 Sweden 49.4/384
Latvia 7.7/12 United Kingdom 72.6/531
The x and y values shown above were used to determine the Correlation Coefficient (link for calculator below) between the two.
READ MORE AT THE LINK
If there’s anything the observant & thinking person can conclude from the CV plandemic it is that things are not really what they seem. Here we have one of those examples, the doctoring of evidence. We have seen many posts on the doctoring of tests, of death certification, on and on. Anomalies everywhere. Why was this shop required to close and not that one when they are selling similar things. Ask the people who were closed down and how some of them were bullied by local authorities. This phenomenon is also known as ‘smelling a rat’. Watch the video below on the doctoring of visual evidence that you watch for daily information on the state of affairs in your nation. Yes the killavision as I prefer to call it. It kills your sensitivity to truth & feeds you a stream of half truths, omissions and frequently, blatant lies. EWR
174K Views · last Sunday · 7 news Melbourne BUSTED faking news footage! Blatant fear mongering, most are falling for it!
Wake up people you are being scammed!!
The footage used is from Italy and the US media were caught using it too!
FOG CITY MIDGE 21.5K subscribers LOOK AT THIS! 👀 Are Coronavirus / COVID-19 cases spiking more because they have CHANGED the way that they are CALCULATED? It sure seems that way. Where is the mainstream media? 😮 Download the document discussed in the video here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/8jy9hyl6iqj… Join The Conversation! Follow Me On Instagram @fogcitymidge http://www.instagram.com/fogcitymidge Follow Me On Twitter @fogcitymidge http://www.twitter.com/fogcitymidge Like My Facebook Page /fogcitymidge http://www.facebook.com/fogcitymidge Are Coronavirus Case Numbers Being Manipulated? https://youtu.be/_7xzjd583uo#covid19#coronavirus#trump
The HighWire with Del Bigtree 183K subscribers NEW VAXXED VS. UNVAXXED STUDY Environmental Biologist, Brian Hooker PhD, who has published over 60 peer reviewed scientific articles, shares data from his newly published study comparing the health of vaccinated kids to unvaccinated kids.
I’m very aware many folk are not fans of David Icke. If you want to know some truth however see what Youtube is pulling in the great scramble for controlling your perceptions. This is why he is on London Real’s site, not Youtube. YT have pulled his work altogether. As also I believe has Facebook. I personally figure he has the bigger picture, more than most. I do not agree with absolutely 100% of what every single person writes whose work I post, however one has to pick through all of the info & draw one’s own conclusions. Otherwise you are just fodder for control. (If you don’t think for yourself ie). Like many who write on world events today, he takes into account the cabal that controls governments world wide behind the scenes. The string pullers or puppeteers if you like. They of course are behind what I’ve been posting for years now, the new world order, Agenda 21 now 2030 and the intended global government. That’s the plan anyway in my opinion & if you want to know how that pans out, Icke is the person to watch. He has researched it for decades & is watching the fine detail that’s rolling out now. What the whistle blower doctors are saying. And others in strategic positions. What’s really happening in the hospitals right now. The anomalies with the stats on the CV. The truth about WHO and Bill Gates. Feel free to watch. EWR
You can find the interview at this link. You will need to register with London Real however that is easy enough with no strings or costs attached.
The tragedy of the COVID-19 pandemic appears to be entering the containment phase. Tens of thousands of Americans have died, and Americans are now desperate for sensible policymakers who have the courage to ignore the panic and rely on facts. Leaders must examine accumulated data to see what has actually happened, rather than keep emphasizing hypothetical projections; combine that empirical evidence with fundamental principles of biology established for decades; and then thoughtfully restore the country to function.
Five key facts are being ignored by those calling for continuing the near-total lockdown.
Fact 1: The overwhelming majority of people do not have any significant risk of dying from COVID-19.
The recent Stanford University antibody study now estimates that the fatality rate if infected is likely 0.1 to 0.2 percent, a risk far lower than previous World Health Organization estimates that were 20 to 30 times higher and that motivated isolation policies.
In New York City, an epicenter of the pandemic with more than one-third of all U.S. deaths, the rate of death for people 18 to 45 years old is 0.01 percent, or 10 per 100,000 in the population. On the other hand, people aged 75 and over have a death rate 80 times that. For people under 18 years old, the rate of death is zero per 100,000.
We have been given a very clear narrative about the declared coronavirus pandemic. The UK State has passed legislation, in the form of the Coronavirus Act, to compel people to self isolate and practice social distancing in order to delay the spread of SARS-CoV-2 (SC2). We are told this “lockdown”, a common prison term, is essential. We are also told that SC2 has been clearly identified to be the virus which causes the COVID 19 syndrome.
At the time of writing SC2 is said to have infected 60,733 people with 7,097 people supposedly dying of COVID 19 in the UK. This case fatality ration (CFR) of 11.7% is seemingly one of the worst in the world. Furthermore, with just 135 people recovered, the recovery rate in the UK is inexplicably low.
Some reading this may baulk at use of words like “seemingly” and “alleged” in reference to these statistics. The mainstream media (MSM) have been leading the charge to cast anyone who questions the State’s coronavirus narrative as putting lives at risk. The claim being that questioning what we are told by the State, its officials and the MSM undermines the lockdown. The lockdown is, we are told, essential to save lives.
It is possible both to support the precautionary principle and question the lockdown. Questioning the scientific and statistical evidence base, supposedly justifying the complete removal of our civil liberties, does not mean those doing so care nothing for their fellow citizens. On the contrary, many of us are extremely concerned about the impact of the lockdown on everyone. It is desperately sad to see people blindly support their own house arrest while attacking anyone who questions the necessity for it.
The knee jerk reaction, assuming any questioning of the lockdown demonstrates a cavalier, uncaring disregard is puerile. Grown adults shouldn’t simply believe everything they are told like mindless idiots. Critical thinking and asking questions is never “bad” under any circumstances whatsoever.
Only the State, with the unwavering support of its MSM propaganda operation, enforces unanimity of thought. If a system cannot withstand questioning it suggests it is built upon shaky foundations and probably not worth maintaining. Yet perhaps it is what we are not told that is more telling.
Among the many things we are not told is how many lives the lockdown will ruin and end prematurely. Are these lives irrelevant?
We are not told the evidence for the existence of a virus called SARS-CoV-2 is highly questionable and the tests for it unreliable; we are not told that the numbers of deaths reportedly caused by COVID 19 is statistically vague, seemingly deliberately so; we are not told that these deaths are well within the normal range of excess winter mortality and we are not told that in previous years excess winter deaths have been higher than they are now.
We didn’t need to destroy the economy in response to those, far worse, periods of loss so why do we need to do so for this?
We will look at this in more detail in Part 2.
Understanding Mainstream Media Disinformation
Before we address what we are not being told it’s worth looking at how the MSM is spreading disinformation. On February 22nd one rag printed a story which absurdly alleged, without a shred of evidence, that Russia was somehow deliberately spreading disinformation about coronavirus. It reported this uncritically, questioning nothing. Their opening paragraph read:
Thousands of Russian-linked social media accounts have launched a coordinated effort to spread misinformation and alarm about coronavirus, disrupting global efforts to fight the epidemic, US officials have said.”
On March 10th the same rag reported another story about disinformation in which it was noted:
Disinformation experts say, there remains little evidence of concerted efforts to spread falsehoods about the virus, suggesting that the misleading information in circulation is spread primarily through grassroots chatter.”
The irony shouldn’t be overlooked. Directly contradicting their own previous disinformation, this MSM pulp assumes we are all so stupid we won’t notice their perpetual spin and evidence-free claims. The UK’s national broadcaster the BBC is perhaps the worst of all the disinformation propagandists. The sheer volume of disinformation they are pumping out is quite breathtaking.
The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights spells out what freedom of expression means. All human beings are born free with equal dignity and rights. All are afforded these rights without any distinction at all. Article 19 states:
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”
The BBC, who obviously couldn’t care less about human rights, gleefully supported the censorship of so called conspiracy theorist David Icke. They did so by spreading disinformation. Icke raised concerns about the possible link between 5G and the spread of coronavirus. He did not incite violence, as suggested in the BBC’s disinformation. The BBC misled the public utterly when they stated:
“Conspiracy theories linking 5G signals to the coronavirus pandemic continue to spread despite there being no evidence the mobile phone signals pose a health risk.”
While I agree with the BBC that there is no evidence of a link between 5G and the apparent coronavirus, we certainly can’t rule it out. Because the second half of their statement, that there is no evidence that mobile signals pose a health risk, was a mendacious deceit.
There is a wealth of evidence of that risk.
The leading medical journal The Lancet noted these risks in 2018:
…mounting scientific evidence suggests that prolonged exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation has serious biological and health effects.”
Why are the BBC so willing to mislead the public and expose them to unnecessary health harms? Is it deliberate or are they just shoddy journalists?
Either way, quite clearly they are habitual pedlars of disinformation. They appear to no better than the worst clickbait sites that have proliferated over recent years.
The MSM is responsible for the majority of misinformation and disinformation circulating at the moment. We must diligently verify every claim they make and check the evidence ourselves. They are not to be trusted. As the BBC quite rightly points out:
STOP BEFORE YOU SHARE
CHECK YOUR SOURCES
(If it’s the MSM check to see if they offer any evidence at all or if it’s just their opinion. If it’s their opinion ignore it. It’s almost certainly unfounded)
PAUSE IF YOU FEEL EMOTIONAL
(If you do feel emotional you have probably just been manipulated by the MSM)
“Science Led” Means Cherry Picking Science
The UK State has been keen to insist that we all believe their lockdown response is led by the science. However they have cherry picked the science to roll out the lockdown and ignored the considerable scientific evidence which contradicts it. Both the UK and U.S. governments used the computer models of Imperial College London (ICL), predicting millions of deaths, to justify the removal of our civil liberties.
Almost as soon as the lockdown was in place the scientists, having launched their vaccine research fund raiser, downgraded their projections from an estimated 550,000 deaths in the UK to 20,000 or even lower. Neil Furguson, the lead scientist responsible for the initial ICL report stated that they had revised the figures because of the effectiveness of the lockdown safety measures.
Claiming the lockdown would need to last for at least 18 months until a vaccine is found. ICL are grant recipients of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. They have shown no interests at all in researching possible preventative treatments, reducing the need for a vaccine, such as hydroxychloroquine.
The initial ICL computer models were based upon unproven assumptions. They assumed that SC2 would spread like influenza. This was contrary to the findings of the World Health Organisation who stated both that SC2 did not appear to spread as quickly as influenza and was less virulent.
The WHO found up to a 20% infection rate, where people were exposed to SC2 in crowded settings for prolonged periods, and a 1-5% infection rate in the community. This was nothing like the spread of the 1918 H1N1 influenza pandemic.
However, publishing their paper on March 16th, the ICL completely ignored the WHO research which was published a month earlier and stated, without any justification whatsoever:
COVID-19, a virus with comparable lethality to H1N1 influenza in 1918”
Public Health England (PHE) disagreed with ICL’s evidence free assumptions and downgraded COVID 19 from a High Consequence Infectious Disease (HCID), due to relatively low mortality rates.
However, ignoring both the WHO and PHE, the UK and US decided only the ICL knew what they were talking about. Cherry-picking their highly dubious research, they insisted the lockdown was necessary to “flatten the curve” and, in the UK, protect the NHS.
The science the State has chosen to believe is the minority view it seems. Epidemiologists, epidemiological statisticians, microbiologists, mathematicians and many other scientists and academics the world over have repeatedly warned that the lockdown is precisely the wrong thing to do.
COVID 19, the disease supposedly caused by SC2, is experienced as little more than a bad cough or cold by the vast majority of relatively healthy people. Dr Knut M. Wittkowski (Ph.D) is among the growing number of globally renowned scientists who question what we are told by the State and its MSM. In regard to both SC2 and COVID 19.
Dr Wittkowski stated:
“With all respiratory diseases, the only thing that stops the disease is herd immunity. About 80% of the people need to have had contact with the virus. it’s very important to keep the schools open and kids mingling to spread the virus to get herd immunity as fast as possible, and then the elderly people, who should be separated, and the nursing homes should be closed during that time, can come back and meet their children and grandchildren after about 4 weeks when the virus has been exterminated….If we had herd immunity now, there couldn’t be a second wave in autumn.”
Such scientists and academics are all completely ignored by the State. Yet they believe others, such as Professor Neil Ferguson and Professor Karine Lacombe without hesitation. Perhaps it is just a coincidence that the scientists the State chooses to believe overwhelmingly appear to have close links to the globalist foundations and pharmaceutical corporations developing the vaunted coronavirus vaccine.
Are You Sure About The Coronavirus Lockdown?
Those who reject all criticiam of the lockdown, and simply accept whatever the State tells them, presumably believe the State only has our best interests at heart and would never do anything to harm us. Perhaps they believe that to question the claims of the State can only ever be conspiracy theory.
Certainly that’s the message constantly reinforced by the MSM.
However, there is also plenty of evidence that the State frequently deceives the public. We only need look to the WMD lies told to start an illegal Iraq war in 2003 to understand that the State is willing to further the interests of the powerful and cares little about lives lost in the effort.
Therefore, in the UK, it is worth recapping what it is we are consenting to with the Coronavirus Act:
We consent to increased State surveillance of ourselves and our family.
We are happy that we could be detained, without charge, because some state official suspects, or claims they suspect, we may be infected.
It is fine with us that we or our loved ones can be sectioned under the Mental Health Act on the recommendation of a single doctor and neither we nor they need to have the protection of a second opinion before we are locked up.
We accept that the state can retain our biometric data and fingerprints for an extended period.
We consent that jury trials are a bit of an anachronism and Judges can hear more evidence by video or even audio link.
We think its fine that the evidence required, and processes undertaken, to determine and record our or our loved one’s deaths can be eroded to the point where they can be registered by people with no medical or legal expertise at all.
We don’t think the NHS needs to adhere to practice standards or bother with assessing the needs of some patients, especially older people.
We are also fine with the complete suspension of democracy in Britain.
We accept all of this based upon a unique subset of scientific opinion which, contrary to every known scientific principle, can never be questioned.
We agree with the MSM that people who question any aspect of the stories they tell us are dangerous because these people just don’t care if their own loved ones die. Only true believers care about their families.
We also accept the need for the State to invest considerable resources creating counter disinformation units whose purpose is to censor anything and everything which questions our firmly held beliefs. The beliefs informed by the many of the same people doing the censoring.
I don’t know about you, but I remain unconvinced by the evidence I’ve seen so far. I have no doubt that there is a health crisis and excess seasonal deaths, but I have seen no evidence at all that the numbers are unprecedented or unusual in any way. Evidence we will explore in greater detail in Part 2.
I accept that we should exercise the precautionary principle and take steps to limit the risks to the most vulnerable but I do not accept that the lockdown is the best way to go about it. Nor do I see any necessity at all for all the other dictatorial clauses in the Coronavirus Act. I do not consent.
If you think this will all be over soon and won’t get worse I’m afraid you may be disappointing. The UK state have based this lockdown on the scientific rubbish spewed out by ICL. Here’s another one of the ICL’s recommendations:
The major challenge of suppression is that this type of intensive intervention package – or something equivalently effective at reducing transmission – will need to be maintained until a vaccine becomes available (potentially 18 months or more).”
There is nothing to suggest this isn’t the intention of the State. Certainly voices in the U.S. are already indicating their desire for an 18 month lockdown. Apparently taking their cue directly from the discredited ICL report and steadfastly ignoring everything else. Nor should we assume the draconian powers seized by the state won’t get worse.
Most of this response is being driven by globalist policy emanating, on this occasion, from the World Health Organisation. Speaking at the daily WHO press briefing on the March 30th Dr. Michael Ryan, Executive Director of the WHO Health Emergencies Programme, said:
Lockdowns and shutdowns really should just be part of an overall comprehensive strategy…..Most of the transmission that’s actually happening in many countries now is happening in the household at family level….Now we need to go and look in families to find those people who may be sick and remove them and isolate them in a safe and dignified manner.”
Given that we now live in a de facto dictatorship there’s no reason to believe that states across the globe won’t use this as justification to start removing people from their homes. My hope is that sense will prevail and, as it becomes clear the pandemic is waning, public pressure will mount to repeal this dictatorial legislation.
However, given some of the comments I have seen on social media over the last two weeks, the panic buying and attacks upon anyone questioning the State’s narrative, it seems many people are so frightened they desperately need to believe the State is trying to save them.
This fear is based upon apparent ignorance of the economic severity of the lockdown and the monumental health risk it poses. People don’t seem to want to know there is considerable doubt the Coronavirus Act is even legal in international law. There is also doubt that SARS-CoV-2 is an identifiable virus and the statistics we are given may well be based upon tests that can’t identify it anyway. There is evidence that the statistics we have been given have been deliberately manipulated to exaggerate the health risk and there is no evidence these excess deaths are “unprecedented.”
(Note: I have reproduced the entire article given so many now are being taken down, lost forever).
An OIA request reveals that during the period 1-July-2017 to 30-June-208 a sum of $325,221 was paid out in NZ for vaccine injuries. The intent of pointing this out is to draw your attention to the claim that injuries from vaccines are extremely extremely rare. Whilst that my once have been the case, currently the stats in the US are recorded by CDC as 1 in 39. Not by any stretch of the imagination ‘rare’. Having this information is crucial when making the decision to vaccinate. Do ask for the inserts to the vaccine to learn the risks of side effects or risk of injury as frequently these are not pointed out. There is many a testimony online of people who became injured and wish they had asked. This all of course is called informed consent. Very important when using the precautionary approach to all things health. Bear in mind also that many injuries are not reported.
Below is a copy of the OIA request for your perusal:
Pakeha kill just as many children as Maori do, despite Maori being the “face of abuse” Raema Merchant (Lecturer EIT; BSW, MSW)
In 2017, at least 45 babies were taken the day they were born, and more than half of the newborns were removed from young Māori mothers Whanau Ora NZ, 26/6/19
Just a reminder for those I note on forums & social media who say ‘Māori should stop abusing their children’. We are hearing that the higher proportion of children/babies uplifted by NZ authorities have been Māori babies, and going by the mainstream media hype it would be difficult not to think that Maori were the top offenders.
Raema Merchant’s doctorate research in 2011 revealed what mainstream is generally not telling us. They have in my opinion, much to answer for in this skewing of perception, both currently and historically. EWR
From stuff.co.nz (2011)
Pakeha kill just as many children as Maori do, despite Maori being the “face of abuse” in the media, according to a researcher.
Social work lecturer Raema Merchant said focusing on Maori parents diverts attention away from the fact Pakeha can harm children too.
“I’m not denying it’s a problem for Maori, but if we’re just focusing on Maori we’re ignoring the Pakeha side,” she said.
“It’s almost as though Pakeha are putting their heads in the sand and saying there is no Pakeha child abuse.”
Her master’s thesis at Massey University found about half of the children killed in New Zealand died at the hands of a Pakeha abuser.
Almost 9000 children were victims of physical abuse between 2000 and 2008, yet only 21 became “household names”‘ in the media, she said.
Just one-third of child deaths were reported in the press, and they were predominantly Maori cases.
Merchant urged the public and media to focus on real problems of child abuse, rather than making Maori the “face of abuse”.
“The real danger I have seen from a social worker point of view is that there are a lot of children being abused but as far as the public are concerned they only seem to know about the ones that are Maori.
“Child abuse is a problem for all people, not just for Maori.”
Merchant is already planning her next thesis, which will look at a bigger issue: whether focusing on Maori child abuse victims leads to skewed views by health professionals and the public.
This could lead to a lack of awareness of abuse occurring in Pakeha families, she said.
Merchant found physical child abuse was largely related to poverty, poor housing, inter-generational abuse, poor parenting and drugs and alcohol abuse.
Her research comes after a recent poll revealed half of New Zealanders believe child abuse has an ethnic connection.
Research New Zealand conducted the survey on how New Zealanders view the causes of child abuse, asking respondents to rank the factors they believed most contributed to the problem.
Just over half the 503 people polled said child abuse was a cultural issue, while parental experience and economic factors shared equal status at about a third each.
Child Matters chief executive Anthea Simcock said abuse was not just about one culture.
“Child abuse is right across the spectrum.”
On average, one child is killed every five weeks in New Zealand, and most victims are less than a year old.
MINISTER SAYS PARENTS NEED HELP
Mums and dads would get preferential treatment for drug and mental health problems under a radical plan to address the nation’s shocking child abuse rate.
The government is braced for criticisms of suggested changes to the current system, where state assistance is allocated on individual need rather than whether dependent children are involved.
Mandatory reporting, a re-think of the whanau-first policy when children are removed from their parents’ care, and sharing information despite privacy concerns will also be on the table when the government releases its Green Paper next week on improving children’s lives.
Social Development Minister Paula Bennett launched the review in April, saying she was incensed by the number of child abuse cases and wanted a national debate about how the problem should be tackled.
It will be launched in Auckland on Wednesday and there will be eight months of public consultation before a formal White Paper is released and the Children’s Action Plan is adopted next year.
Bennett said she was aware many of the topics in the Green Paper were controversial, but tough choices were needed to reduce child abuse.
She said she does not agree with some of the recommendations, but wants them discussed.
Barnardos boss Murray Edridge, former All Blacks hooker Norm Hewitt and former Families Commissioner Sandra Alofivae have been appointed to help lead public debate on the issues.
The more contentious topics include a legal requirement for professionals – including doctors, teachers and nurses – to report suspected child abuse cases, and monitoring at-risk children from birth in a national database.
Former Children’s Commissioner John Angus has said there are already enough reports of child abuse, and dealing with the cases properly was preferable to encouraging more reporting.
He said mandatory reporting would swamp Child Youth and Family.
Child abuse expert Patrick Kelly said many health professionals were not qualified enough to detect it.
Bennett said suggestions of greater information sharing between government agencies also extended to other family members and non-governmental organisations.
“We want to see children protected and in a safe environment, to do that we need to share information a lot more readily, and that does mean occasionally we’ll be sharing information on children who are not in danger.
“So is middle New Zealand ready for us to step into that area a bit?”
Putting parents ahead of other Kiwis in line for government services will also attract criticism.
“The example you could use is that mental health services be prioritised to mothers and fathers with small children.
“Does that mean other people wait longer?
“Should they be able to jump the queue because they have young children?”
It could also apply to drug and alcohol treatment, welfare, education and the rest of the health sector. Services are currently allocated based on need.
Bennett acknowledged that many people, particularly the elderly, would be put out by that.
“I get daily correspondence [from people] who are appalled and disgusted at those beautiful faces that they see, unfortunately week after week, who have been severely damaged or even killed at the hands of people who should be loving them.
“I suppose I’m saying to those people; what are you willing to give up for me to spend more resources on those very families?”
Three questions asked by the Green Paper: What priority should government give to the families and whanau of those caring for children when allocating services that impact on the children they are caring for? What services do you think should be included in this policy? When should adults who care for children be prioritised for services over others?
From Alan Simmons at alansimmons.co.nz
Alan is President & Co-Leader of the NZ Outdoors Party
“The Department of Conservation continue to repeat the same old story about attacks on staff and how it is affecting their role in protecting our precious wildlife. NZ herald https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12249704
This article repeats the same old same old as if their spin doctors have told them that if you repeat the story enough, people will start to believe it. But the opposite is happening and dislike for the Department continues to grow at an alarming rate.
You would think that wise heads in the Department could be thinking what’s going on? What are we doing that has us becoming the most hated government department when we should be the most loved.
The department of Conservation’s obsession with the aerial spreading 1080 has built a huge dislike of the department as predicted by advisors to the Minister Nick Smith when he rammed through legislation allowing the aerial dropping of 1080 without resource consents. Nick Smith’s advice to cabinet included a statement that “Loss of local decision-making is not an effect of the proposed regulation that could be avoided, but rather its primary purpose.”
In my opinion if you take away the public’s right to be consulted then you will get opposition and resentment as the public have no ability to express their feelings except but by protest.
Using Docs own statistics it has 35 incidents per year where staff are abused or threatened out of a staff of 4000. According to press reports these are having an accumulative effect on staff and diverting them from their work. I would suspect the threats are mostly via social media and some to rangers in the field undertaking enforcement work, so how does this affect the other 3980 staff. Especially when OIA requests to police show few if any of these so called threats are reported.
Rangers trying to enforce whitebait regulations, illegal camping, taking photographs of the landscape and hunting are likely to receive abuse. I would have thought it came with the job or have rangers become so soft and sensitive they report anything that hurts their feelings.? I personally know of one incident reported where a DOC worker objected to a car parked outside their house that displayed a small ban 1080 bumper sticker.
Is it now an offense to criticise or have differing opinions to a government department?
As a result of the “35 incidents” per year the Department has convinced government to give it 11 million dollars to set up a new division of ex spies or police called “Security and Investigations Team” to deal with these threats. 6 staff to do what one might ask. Drive around town and remove bumper stickers, sit all day on computers and monitor facebook.
Part of the job description lists:
- Building a security conscious culture and organisational capability
- Ensuring security and other health and safety incidents are investigated and responded to appropriately
To apply for this job you need to maintain a “SECRET ” security clearance, you should be able to access government security and intelligence groups such as NZ Police, security leaders in other government agencies and the NZ Security Intelligence Service.
All of this because people are feeling frustrated about the lack of consultation or the occasional person gives a DOC ranger an earful!
Again DOC will say they have received and successfully prosecuted two major anti 1080 crimes. Both had nothing to do with the “peoples protest”. The first threatened to put 1080 into milk powder and was subsequently found to be a poison supplier who was miffed his own poison was not being used and the second was a lone wolf hunter threatening by letter to release Sika deer. Both were dealt with by the police.
It would seem to me DOC are building a fortress around themselves rather that trying to understand why they are becoming disliked and subject to a hostile public. To my way of thinking a change of culture and understanding would be a far better way to go.
Involve the public and bring the public along with you makes a far more sensible option but I fear DOC are digging themselves into a huge hole to defend their position.
It will take some courage from within the department to start the process of filling in the trenches.
RELATED FROM EWR:
Jon Barron has maintained for years that cancer is fundamentally a disease of the immune system. New cancer treatments that focus on improving your immune system’s ability to deal with cancer pretty much validate this conclusion. Learn from Jon about:
- What causes cancer?
- The effects of lifestyle changes
- Cancer screening
- Chemotherapy, radiation and surgery
- Alternative cancer remedies and therapies
Instead of waiting for medical science to perfect some exotic gene restructuring therapy, why not make use of the all natural immunomodulators that Jon has been recommending for years. It is much easier to prevent cancer than to reverse it.
Even so, your body is still capable of reversing an established cancer — doctors see it all the time and call it a “spontaneous remission” — but it takes considerable effort. The bottom line is not to be railroaded into anything. Don’t be intimidated by doctors just because they are doctors. Make sure you research the efficacy of the treatment your doctor is recommending. If you don’t like the odds or the side effects, you may want to pursue alternatives.
It is very clear we need better accounting of numbers with this poisoning programme.
As this letter by Ron Eddy in yesterday’s Otago Daily Times points out, in 2014 at the start of it’s ‘Battle for the Birds’ programme, the Dept of Conservation claimed there were only 1000 to 2000 Kea left in the wild.
To summarize the info in this letter:
- DoC recently announce they have “no breed to release programme operating to help increase our declining Kea population”
- DoC further announces on 28 Oct 2017 that “there are ongoing threats to wild Kea” (Bird of the Year)
- DoC’s info reveals that “between 2008 and 2014 the government, DoC and Ospri aerial 1080 operations had poisoned 24 out of 199 monitored Kea”
- We can never know of course how many unmonitored Kea died of 1080 poisoning in the operations (and why aren’t they testing as previously noted with Kiwi deaths to prove that 1080 is actually doing what it purports to?)
- DoC info supporting the start of the Battle for the Birds programme in 2014 “claimed there were 1,000 to 2,000 Kea left in the wild
- Even though the department acknowledges that the Kea population is still declining it is now claiming there are 5000 to 7000 Kea left in the wild!