May 2021 

The Political Pandemic: 3

They Lied, People Died

THE EDITOR 

               

"I think there is a lot of political motivation behind the decisions that are being made right now. It seems like people are willing to sacrifice others for an agenda....  because we have some solutions already. That are working. ... I’m having patients recover so quick."

- Dr. Richard Bartlett, Texas Emergency Room veteran, July 2020

"There's some sort of manipulation towards Americans to just wait it out, for a vaccine. ... But who would be telling Americans I'd rather you die, because we want you to wait for a vaccine?"

- Debbie Georgatos, interviewing Dr Bartlett

"We found the solution lay in drugs and early treatment... We have treated more than 6,000 cases. Mortality is practically zero. ... The figures prove us right: early treatment works. Hospital-centred treatment has been a mistaken strategy."

- Dr. Paolo Martino Allegri, Padua, Italy, March 2021

During a 16 May 2020 interview on New Culture Forum, renowned British historian David Starkey shed light on the monumental historical shift in government policy that took place in mid-March 2020, just before the first national lockdown. A fiasco that exemplifies how, paradoxically, national "events" and parochial politics often coalesce to facilitate overarching globalist designs, even while appearing antithetical to transnationalism.

Historic panic button

Dr. Starkey first addressed the absurdity and danger of blowing up a largely harmless disease to smallpox or bubonic plague proportions; which inflation has incited the crippling fear that is now endemic and antithetical both to public health and trust in the guardians of public health. (My transcript; all emphases his.):

We talk about it as the ‘Covid-19 crisis’. It’s not. It’s a specific political crisis... [I]t’s an extraordinary version of The Emperor’s New Clothes. Because... Covid-19 is not actually a very serious disease. [Tens of thousands of British] deaths out of a population of sixty million, is an infinitesimal percentage.If you go back to a real pandemic, if we go back to the Black Death of the middle of the fourteenth century, you’re looking there at a first impact, when it hit England, of about 20 to 25 percent of the population. With repeated returns. So as by the end of the fourteenth century, the population of England is half what it was at the beginning. [...] So you see there, a plague that is vast in scale, and has got dreadful consequences. [Covid-19] is rather small in scale [but] gigantic in consequences, because we have chosen to inflict a form of economic suicide on ourselves. There’s no other way to describe it.

Having pointed out that Covid is effectively a false pandemic since its fatality rate does not even approach those of genuine pandemics throughout history (more recently he has said it doesn't even rank in the top 100), Dr. Starkey argued that the Conservative government's original intention to follow the more relaxed path of Sweden was correct. He went on to provide some workaday reasons for Britain's about-face to join in the creepy lockdown lockstep: the macabre global dance of self-harm and death.

Based on information passed to him by "a journalist friend" he considers "exceedingly well informed," he explained that the sudden dramatic pivot and turn away from the non-lockdown Swedish route was due to a single March weekend beginning, appropriately, on Friday the 13th, on which there was a calamitous confluence of events and decisions, causing the Prime Minister and his government to panic. In particular, on the Sunday evening (15 March), the Northwick Park hospital in north-west London was totally overwhelmed with patients. "I think at that point, the government simply panicked," Starkey said. "And a few days later, you get Neil Ferguson’s absurd report, from Imperial College, suggesting  half a million deaths. And I think the combination of that localised panic, and these gigantic figures suddenly landing on their desks, produces a complete change of approach."

The result — an extreme knee-jerk reaction without any plan or forethought — is now added to the darkest annals of British history. For the lockdown was not about dealing with the epidemic, said Dr. Starkey, but simply "a plan to save the face of the NHS."

In his view, a Tory Government attempting to forge a new British "compact" under Boris Johnson, uniting the south with the north, had to avoid at all costs being held responsible for an overwhelmed NHS. Desperate to prove to the traditional Labour heartland (the "Red Wall") that the Conservative Party really was their natural home, the government prioritised the NHS's capacity to deal with Covid-19 over everything. This included the treatment of terminal conditions such as cancer and heart disease, the suspension of which treatments Starkey considered a bizarre and unprecedented abandonment of the Hippocratic Oath that was peculiar to Britain. He added this further trenchant comment:

The future public enquiry, which one hopes will have some serious historians on it, will need to ask these questions: Was it Public Health England? Was it the NHS Directorate that came up with this? How far were ministers actually involved? I would suggest they just said, ministers said: for God’s sake do something – and then these things would come up.

And again, it raises absolutely fundamental questions. How is it that the Hippocratic Oath can be completely overwhelmed by considerations of saving institutional face? How can an administrator actually instruct a consultant to suspend treatment? These are really, really radical questions. And I’m leaving aside everything my friend [former UK Supreme Court Judge] Johnathon Sumption raised very early on about the, you know, fundamental attack on liberty; the irrationality of it in legal terms, and so on. But even if you look at it in narrowly health terms, it stands up very badly.

So, right from the outset, the virus became a political football to kick around the nuclear issue of the sacrosanct NHS; the protection of which institution, rather than the vulnerable, is always the political priority. "Why were we so casual about care homes?" queried Starkey. "Because they’re not part of the NHS. They’re not covered by that magic label."

At the local level, this certainly explains a lot about the ongoing pursuit of demonstrably unsuccessful, not to say arbitrary and often idiotic policies and measures, and the unwillingness to admit failure and change track (see Part 1).

At the same time:

• the endless bare-faced lies and lack of legislative scrutiny;
• the rank refusal to provide evidence for oppressive measures, especially the unspeakable closure of schools despite zero risk to children and negligible risk to teachers (the "mindset" behind which abominable policy Oxford epidemiologist Sunetra Gupta said she "can't even begin to comprehend");
• the naked global manipulation of testing and death certificates that make a mockery of official tallies of Covid cases and deaths and keep them artificially sky-high(1);
• the hundreds of billions offered by the IMF and World Bank to countries with hardly any Covid fatalities, like Belarus, on condition that they adopt the most extreme lockdown measures
• — all these kinds of bizarre and deeply disturbing goings on speak to the deeper controlling supranational factors and forces we have considered.

Science: perverted and inverted

It is the wholesale politicisation of science itself, however, that speaks loudest of all to those darker underpinnings.

Excluded, censored and demonised for advancing science that counters the official lockdown narrative, two Stanford University specialists have spoken frankly of incalculable damage being done to science and public health policy across the board.

An Associate Professor of Medicine at Stanford University Medical School, and an economist with the Freeman Spogli Institute to boot, the softly spoken Dr. Jay Bhattacharya insists that the facile blame game now played by national leaders (on a near daily basis by Boris Johnson and his health officials) — whereby the failure of Covid strategies and rules are not properly examined but rather attributed to non-compliance by the public, who are variously punished for their alleged fecklessness and rewarded for adherence — "violates basic principles of public health. Which has been shocking to me." During a recent February interview with feminist Naomi Wolf, a renowned commentator of the liberal-left who is alarmed by Covidic events, he said: "We basically threw out a generation of knowledge that we worked so hard to build up about how to deal with something like this. We threw it out the window." The interview continued (my transcript and bold highlights; speakers' emphases in italics):

Naomi Wolf: You've spoken about the silencing of scientists generally. The reporting I've been doing has also been interviewing scientists who are being encouraged to be quiet, about some of these Covid policies. Are you seeing silencing of other scientists, as well?

Dr. Bhattacharya: The vilification of scientists who disagree with the lockdown ideology, I mean, [it's] unprecedented in my life. Very very prominent scientists, brilliant scientists, friends of mine, like John Ioannidis [professor of epidemiology and population health at Stanford], probably one of the most highly cited scientists in the world, more than most Nobel Prize winners. And yet, anytime he writes anything he gets this cadre of people unfairly attacking him, maligning him. Other scientists, young scientists, have been writing to me, telling me how difficult it is to say anything because they're scared that will happen to them. Scientists are human too. So you can understand [that they think], if I say something where I'm just going to get all kinds of things slung at me, I'm going to step back, or maybe stick to something else or be quiet. That's happened a lot. And there's been explicit calls for censorship of science by other prominent scientists. 

It's remarkable. Science can't function without a free interchange of ideas, it's a dialectic, it's a process, where if you and I disagree, we agree on an experiment. If the experiment goes your way and you're right and I'm wrong, then we disagree on the next thing. That's how science works. That's how it ought to work. Instead, it's this sense of, like, if I say something that disagrees with the lockdown ideology then I'm saying something dangerous.

NW: That's dangerous for us.

Dr. B: You're right. It's dangerous for us. The problem is, science in the context of an epidemic is a matter of life and death, no matter what, there's just no other way around it. You have to conduct science the way it should be conducted. Which involves disagreement and discussion and debate. And science decided during this epidemic to stop that. It's like we decided to stop doing science altogether. It's very very strange. The public health side of science, deciding what the right policy is, ok, we've decided only lockdowns, everything else has to support that.

Following political science

Dr. Scott Atlas, another demonised lockdown critic from Stanford, was equally candid during a 23 February address at Hillsdale College, Michigan. A former professor and chief of neuro-radiology at the Stanford University Medical Centre, Dr. Atlas is currently a senior fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution, and a health care policy advisor. He is also uniquely qualified to comment on the politicisation of the pandemic, having spent several months in the lion's den. Despite being despised and publicly derided by the Faustian Fauci (always a sure sign you're on the side of the angels), at Donald Trump's request he served from August to November 2020 as Special Adviser to the President and was a member of the White House Coronavirus Task Force. When a member of the audience asked how much of what Dr. Fauci referred to on TV as "the science" was actually science and "how much was politics," Dr. Atlas did not hold back:

Well, I have no hesitancy in telling the truth. ... What I saw inside the White House, inside what's called "The Situation Room", where the Task Force meets, is incredible. It's shocking. It's outrageous, what was said. And I'm going to have to write about that one, because it's amazing. But it's sort of frightening, the level of knowledge, the lack of knowledge of the current data. And I think the answer really, it can be summed up as this. These are people who are government bureaucrats. These are people who have worked in government jobs for 30, 40 years. These are not people who are challenged intellectually by other people who come in and say, well, what about this?  People like me, and they bring in , a dozen scientific papers, and go through the data. That didn't happen before I got there.  And when you have people who are talking, like they're talking now on TV, about, well, we should pass this bill or something like this, that's not science. That's politics.

His former boss concurs — in spades! In a recent commentary penned for Newsmax (29/3/21), Donald Trump finally let loose with his trademark candour about the insufferable self-serving, incompetence and hypocrisy of Dr. Fauci and his sidekick Dr. Debra Birx.

"Based on their [recent] interviews, I felt it was time to speak up about Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx, two self-promoters trying to reinvent history to cover for their bad instincts and faulty recommendations, which I fortunately almost always overturned,"  wrote the former President. "Dr. Fauci is also the king of “flip-flops” and moving the goalposts to make himself look as good as possible. He fought me so hard because he wanted to keep our country open to countries like China. I closed it against his strong recommendation, which saved many lives. Dr. Fauci also said we didn’t need to wear masks, then a few months later he said we needed to wear masks, and now, two or three of them. Fauci spent U.S. money [several million dollars], on the Wuhan lab in China—and we now know how that worked out." He went on: 

Dr. Birx is a proven liar with very little credibility left. Many of her recommendations were viewed as “pseudo-science,” and Dr. Fauci would always talk negatively about her and, in fact, would ask not to be in the same room with her. The States who followed her lead, like California, had worse outcomes on Covid, and ruined the lives of countless children because they couldn’t go to school, ruined many businesses, and an untold number of Americans who were killed by the lockdowns themselves. Dr. Birx was a terrible medical advisor, which is why I seldom followed her advice. Her motto should be “Do as I say, not as I do.” Who can forget when Dr. Birx gave a huge mandate to the people of our Nation to not travel, and then travelled a great distance to see her family for Thanksgiving—only to have them call the police and turn her in? She then, embarrassingly for her, resigned.

Trump insists that "Dr. Birx’s policies would have led us directly into a COVID caused depression. Time has proven me correct. I only kept Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx on because they worked for the U.S. government for so long—they are like a bad habit!"

While Senator Rand Paul and others echo these damning criticisms, Donald Trump himself cannot escape criticism for personal failures apropos Covid, Trump Derangement Syndrome notwithstanding.

His zealous mobilisation of Operation Warp Speed to fast-track development of experimental Covid vaccines, thereby facilitating the globalist agenda embodied by his nemesis Fauci, will endure as his worst presidential legacy (—far worse even than his recognition of the Golan Heights as part of Israel, who stole it from Syria, in order to satisfy his Zionist backers).

Nonetheless, one can imagine the pressure brought to bear on the President not to dump these two liabilities at the outset in favour of disinterested outside experts like Dr. Atlas. Sadly, although honest and courageous, just like his dishonest and cowardly British counterpart he stuck with serial failures and self-servers who always "follow the science" — the political science.

The war against health

As with Jorge Bergoglio and his Vatican henchmen, Fauci, Birx, Whitty, Vallance et. al. epitomise the trickle-down effect; the dripping rot corroding erstwhile Christian nations like a fish; from the head down. Dr. Atlas laments that medically everything has been corrupted — to deadly effect: 

Even the best journals in the world: New England Journal of Medicine, Lancet, Science, Nature, and Journal of the AMA [American Medical Association], have become overtly contaminated by politics. The drug studies have been perverted. The whole climate has been destroyed by the politics. And it's very sad.  Because, frankly, in my opinion, people were killed because of the politics of stopping the drug data from coming out.

This all-out assault on drug data concerning successful Covid treatments developed by frontline doctors and specialists involved fraudulent studies published by some of those leading medical journals — "Huge studies that used probably fabricated data, with flaws undetected by peer reviewers or editors, [which] were rushed into publication," as Dr. Jane Orient  M.D. informed the U.S. Senate last December. By the time they admitted the fraud and retracted the studies the damage had been done, both to the treatment protocols and the publications themselves. Of course, the lying journals and their lying contributors survived. Not so untold numbers denied the life-saving properties of the treatments they misrepresented
and falsified.    

Doctors and medical specialists around the world have pleaded for the adoption of hugely successful early treatments. These pleas have fallen on deaf governmental ears despite early home treatment constituting both normal medical practice and the second of the four pillars of any strategic response to a pandemic, the first obviously being to stop its spread. Paolo Gulisano's incredulity resounds universally when he writes of "the incredible Italian governmental thesis according to which, in order to treat Covid, one must limit oneself to the use of Paracetamol and remain in “watchful waiting”, and then send the patient to A&E." [New Daily Compass, 17/3/21]

That is the global pattern. In the opening statement of a second U.S. Senate hearing on early Covid treatments, held on 7 December 2020, Senator Ron Johnson, Chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee who braved fierce Democrat attacks against himself and the doctors who testified, noted that unlike doctors on the Covid front line — "the medical practitioners – the heroes – that experts in their ivory towers in media have chosen to ignore, and vilify" — it is these experts who do not treat Covid patients who "have developed and supported the current NIH [National Institutes of Health] guideline of providing no treatment at all, until patients are sick enough to require hospitalisations. As we are all aware, at that point, treatment is often too late," he said. Addressing an American predicament mimicked worldwide, he continued (my transcript; original emphases):

The goal of this hearing is identical to the goal of our first hearing: to discuss early treatment options that attack the disease in the first stage, by limiting viral replication. Doing so would hopefully prevent progression to cytokine storm, microthrombosis, and possibly death. This is how Tamiflu works, in limiting the severity of the flu. It is how we approach every other disease. Early protection allows for early treatment, and better outcomes. 

Seems like a pretty commonsense approach to me.

But this is not how we’ve attacked Covid. Instead, we’ve impoverished millions by shutting down economies, poured billions of dollars into ventilator production, and new drug and vaccine development – but spent virtually nothing  on research and trials using existing drugs and neutraceuticals.

In fact, there’s been a concerted effort to block doctors who actually treat Covid patients, from compassionately using their off-label prescription rights for early treatment protocols.

Why?

[...]

So here we are again, holding a second hearing to obtain and distribute information on what is known about early treatment of Covid. What could possibly be controversial about that? 

If some are calling this hearing “dangerous”, and instead of waiting till after the hearing to trash this information and our witnesses, the New York Times and other publications have already run pre-emptive attacks, implying this hearing is anti-vaccine.

So let me be clear: this hearing like the first hearing is focussed on early treatment of Covid. It is not about vaccines. End of story.

In my opinion, discouraging, and in some cases prohibiting the research and use of drugs that have been safely used for decades has cost  tens, if not hundreds of thousands of people their lives. By the time any vaccine is fully deployed, no matter how successful, how effective, how safe, millions more will become infected. With effective early treatment, fewer people will get seriously ill, and fewer people will die. So why not give early treatment a shot? What have we got to lose?

And finally, why is there such a concerted effort, to silence the voices of courageous health professionals promoting early treatment? It makes no sense.

Again, only the sacrificing of the vulnerable on the altar of lucrative vaccines and all the other dark agendas related to the Great Reset scam can possibly explain this reckless reversal of standard medical and public health methodology.

Why else would early home treatments utilising cheap, safe, off-the-shelf medicines be shunned or banned so abruptly, before a virus shown to be easily treated with such medicines(2), and an inverted, grossly injurious strategy of delayed intervention and late-stage hospital treatment be preferred instead — if not to fuel the panic needed to pin all hopes on injecting the largest possible portion of the population with dangerously rushed experimental vaccines? A conspiratorial drive which Dr. Michael Yeadon, a former Vice President and Chief Science Officer for Pfizer no less, warned America’s Frontline Doctors on 25 March 2021 is "madness," involves "evil," includes "crimes against humanity" and may have the intention of "massive-scale depopulation."(3) 

HCQ

In this veritable war against medicine and human health, the Establishment's campaign to destroy confidence in Hydroxychloroquine [HCQ], which included the fraudulent Lancet and New England Journal of Medicine studies,is perhaps best known. Senator Johnson bemoaned the irrationality:

At the beginning of this epidemic, when I first heard about the potential of hydroxychloroquine, it intrigued me because, to me,  a drug like that, that’s been around for 65 years – shown to be safe, it’s cheap, billions of tablets are produced every year, we could’ve ramped up production – if that could be proven to be effective, wouldn’t that be the dream solution? Why didn’t we pursue that, and Ivermectin.... Why didn’t we look at these drugs that were already there – generic, cheap, mass producable? Again, it makes no sense.

In isolation, perhaps. It assumes coherence, however, when viewed in the round: viz., global and national medical authorities working in tandem either to deny access to HCQ outright, or until hospitalisation when patients are least likely to benefit.

"Health and Human Services is presumably still hoarding more than 50 million doses of HCQ in the Strategic Stockpile," Dr. Jane Orient informed Senator Johnson's enquiry, explaining how "influential officials" conspired in the "unprecedented" call for physicians to stop prescribing HCQ and CQ [chloroquine] for Covid-19. She went on:

Yet, 192 studies (126 peer-reviewed) have been compiled on HCQ, with all showing some benefit when used early. More than 65 years of experience in hundreds of millions of patients have demonstrated safety — HCQ is safer than most over-the-counter drugs. However, organised medicine and academic physicians... have stated that the evidence is insufficiently 'scientific'.

Clearly, this concerted criminal negligence, endangering untold thousands of lives in the U.S. and millions worldwide, is not senseless, as Senator Johnson politely suggests. It is purposeful.

In Italy, Dr. Paolo Martino Allegri of the doctors group IppocrateOrg explained to La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana ("The New Daily Compass," 17/3/21)that the original founder of the group was an Italian who lives in the Mauritius Islands. "There," he said, "the Coronavirus was quickly eradicated at the beginning, using drugs that we have known for decades, such as Azithromycin, Hydroxychloroquine or Cortisone, while in Italy people were dying like flies. How was it possible that in Africa, where health care is certainly not as advanced as in Italy, such brilliant results were obtained, while in Italy they were unable to contain the spread of the disease?"

IppocrateOrg was soon established and since last November its doctors have been assisting patients at home via email. "The results are excellent!" exclaims Dr. Allegri:

I can say this with certainty because I have the data not only from my own patients but also from other colleagues. To date, we have far exceeded 6,000 cases treated. Of these, only a small percentage has required hospital treatment for a short time, but these are the people who came to us late. Our experience shows that early intervention is the winning strategy. The mortality rate of the patients we treat is practically zero: among those we have treated within a week of the onset of symptoms, we have had no deaths.

I firmly believe that it was a huge mistake not to promote home care. Treating COVID at home is much easier than people think, as long as you intervene early, as I already said. I'm a paediatrician and I wouldn't feel comfortable treating an adult with other diseases, but I find it quite easy to treat people with COVID. My oldest patient, who has already recovered, is 95 years old, and yesterday I treated another patient who is 98 years old! With regard to Paracetamol [recommended by the Italian government as part of its failed wait-and-see strategy], it is a fact that its use aggravates the situation for two reasons. The first is that it does not have an anti-inflammatory action, which is essential in the treatment of this disease, but only acts as an antifebrile, giving the patient the illusory feeling of improvement, while the virus continues to spread through the body. The second is that, in order to metabolise Paracetamol, glutathione, an antioxidant substance present in our bodies, is consumed, whereas it is essential to combat the oxidation caused by the virus in the tissues.

I would say that we must courageously admit that hospital-centred treatment of the disease has been a mistaken strategy and that it is time to change course. Many doctors are realising this. The figures prove us right: early home care works. We need to encourage it in order to empty the intensive care units. Politicians must take note everywhere. [My bold emphases]

Ivermectin

Among the many other successful Covid treatment protocols is the anti-parasitic Australian drug known as Ivermectin. A Newsmax report of 8 August 2020 quoted Professor Thomas Borody, medical director of Australia's Centre for Digestive Disease, as stating that Ivermectin studies had shown it to be "amazingly successful" in treating Covid. "We're talking close to 100%. In fact, we haven't seen a result yet under 100%. It looks like corona is very simple to kill. It's available as a prescription medication. You wouldn't use it alone ... but you add two other things to it such as doxycycline and zinc." He went on:

We had a 14-hospital trial in Bangladesh. We got [cured] 100 out of 100. In China, they tried to reproduce it. They got 60 out of 60 cured ... So I am behind the Ivermectin, doxycycline, zinc treatment because it has very few side effects and is a real killer of coronavirus.

The fact that the Ivermectin tablet could cost as little as $2 was likely why Big Pharma hasn't promoted it, said Borody, adding that this easy cure for Covid-19 would do away with the need to hospitalise people, which would also make doctors less money. "There's no huge pharmaceutical company behind it to spend millions of dollars and put people in places to treat," he said.

Together with his wife, Florida medical doctor Jean-Jacques Rajter was among those who "pioneered" the use of Ivermectin on Covid-19 patients, beginning within months of the first outbreak. Based on the remarkable effectiveness of Ivermectin revealed in "individual data" published Dr. Kylie Wagstaff and a team of researchers at Monash University, Australia, Dr Rajter said his team developed and implemented "an Ivermectin-based protocol that showed tremendous success in treating Covid-19."

Speaking at Senator Johnson's December 2020 hearing on early Covid treatments, Dr Rajter said this success "laid the foundation for the peer-reviewed ICON study (Use of Ivermectin is Associated With Lower Mortality in Hospitalized Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019), which was published in CHEST, a major  US-based medical journal. The overrall mortality in that study," he said, "decreased from 25% in the conventional care group, to 15% in the Ivermectin  treatment group. In patients with severe pulmonary disease and onset, the mortality decreased from 81% to 39%. ... This Icon protocol has been optimised since," he said, "and we have learnt a lot from our successes and failures. The success rate of the Ivermectin-based protocol is  now far superior to what it was in its early days."

Dr Rajter's testimony included these further comments and explanations [my transcript; his emphases]:

… Recent individual studies confirmed our clinical experience that the dosing regimen of Ivermectin – 200 mg per kilogram on two consecutive days – was clinically effective. Of the hundreds of outpatients treated by my team, only two – I repeat, two – were admitted to the hospital. One due to heart failure. The other due to symptomatic delay of over a week before seeking medical attention. Neither one of them died. Neither one of them needed intubation [a ventilator]. Both of them have now been discharged to home without complications.

Ivermectin is a widely used medication with excess of 3.7 billion doses administered worldwide. It is currently part of the World Health Organisation model “List of Essential Medications”. The Icon dosing regimen(4) is based on currently accepted dosing regimen for scabies. The dosing regimen has longstanding safety data.

Notwithstanding impending vaccination programmes, vaccines are not 100% effective, and may not be widely available for many months. Many patients may be unable to take the vaccines for healthcare reasons or opt not to do so. Long-term immunity of these vaccines has not yet been documented. Based on these factors, treatment for Covid-19 will need to remain on the forefront, even after vaccination programmes are initiated.

As is the case with any infections, early intervention has been proven time and again to be of critical importance. The same is true for COVD-19.

• Early intervention increases the likelihood of keeping people out of the hospital and hence decreasing the pressure on the Health Care system.

• Early intervention is cost effective as it decreases the overall Health Care expenditure.

• Early intervention and treatment decrease viral shedding and viral transmission in the home setting which is currently believed to me a major site of transmission.

• Early intervention increases survival.

• Early intervention decreases the economic impact.

Clearly, these obvious advantages should guide health strategies everywhere. Yet as Dr. Rajter sorely laments, although the U.S. government "has spent billions of dollars on a multitude of treatment options," it will not provide just "a few hundred thousand dollars" in order to "definitively prove or disprove the effectiveness of Ivermectin for early treatment... [to] address any residual doubt relating to Ivermectin use." He concludes with this heartfelt plea:

Ladies and gentlemen, I implore you, as a frontline provider of Covid-19 to do better. To provide us the answers we need as healthcare providers, to help your constituents to survive this horrible pandemic in great numbers. After personally witnessing the results of Ivermectin-based protocols, I cannot stand by and allow hundreds of thousands of people to go untreated.

Vitamin D "master key"

As with all the other medical and scientific information included in these pages over the past year, it is hoped that the dense and pessimistic canopy of Covid ideology is pierced somewhat by the uplifting testimony of Dr. Rajter, whose praise of Ivermectin was subsequently echoed by Dr. Pierre Kory during an equally powerful presentation (also available online; see footnote 4). Thus enlightened and uplifted by successful strategies, readers will be encouraged to pursue their own research suited to personal and familial circumstances.

It has been especially necessary to play our informative part in this regard because merely dispensing commonsense medical advice is suddenly considered a danger to life and limb.

Several doctors of the Canada Health Alliance, for instance, posted an extremely helpful eleven minute video in which each in turn explains simply and clearly why most people should not to be afraid of Covid. Encouraging the public to lose their fear and engage their brains, they also presented successful preventatives. It was banned by YouTube almost as soon as it appeared, thus depriving truth-seekers important information on vitamins, nutrition and successful preventative treatments.

Flying in the face of the Establishment's mantra to the contrary, after 40 years' experience practicing medicine in Canada, including 30 years as an anaesthesiologist who knows the risk/benefit ratio of drugs, Dr Bill Code reaffirmed that "safe and long experienced use of older drugs can be very useful in combatting a new problem like Covid." After reviewing the medical literature, he has used hydroxychloroquine in various combinations with success. He presents his recommended dosages to the viewer. "In addition," he says, "I have used Ivermectin with post-Covid symptoms with some success. If needed, oxygen supplementation with nasal specs, often based on what your personal oximeter, which I recommend, says for you. In all of the patients I have treated, this regimen has worked for them, and they have not needed hospitalisation. I myself had Covid-19 in November last year," he adds. "Taking these agents as I've listed, was incredibly helpful for me, and I recovered within seven to 10 days."

Another of these doctors, Dr. Dorle Kneifel, offered this advice:

Vitamin D is a critical nutrient for our immune system. When we supplement with Vitamin C, with zinc, with magnesium, our immune system is primed and ready to go. In spite of suboptimal diets and widespread Vitamin D deficiencies, most people who encounter the coronavirus do not require hospitalisation, but are able to manage their symptoms at home. I myself had Covid-19 eleven months ago, and I responded to the early viral symptoms the way I always do. I took Vitamin D - 60,000 international units each day, until the symptoms were gone.  It took two days.

Her colleagues echoed her counsel, as did the founder of one of the largest independent laboratories in Idaho.

Pointing out that "96 percent of people in the ICU are Vitamin D deficient" and so "immune suppressed," Dr. Ryan Cole, founder of Cole Diagnostics, emphasised during a March Capitol Clarity talk hosted by the Idaho Freedom Foundation:

"Vitamin D... is the master key to your immune system. So we don't just have a viral pandemic, we have an international Vitamin D deficiency pandemic – i.e., 70 percent of the world is immune-suppressed." Moreover, "The darker your skin, the further north you live, the harder it is to synthesise Vitamin D." He stated that "Normal D levels decrease your Covid symptom severity risk for hospitalisation by 90 percent. There have been a lot of placebo controlled trials that show this all around the world. It is scientific fact, not just a correlation."

This is good advice for us because like Canada and other sun-deprived northern climes, half the population of Britain are deficient in Vitamin D3, which can greatly reduce the harm of respiratory diseases of all kinds.

Christopher Monckton cites a  major "Spanish clinical trial which established that the hazard ratio — the relative risk of being transferred to ICU if not treated with cholcalciferol [Vitamin D3] compared to those treated with it on admission to hospital — is as high as 25"! [Catholic Voice, 6/11/20].

If just a small fraction of the British taxes spent on advertising/instilling Covid fear had been devoted instead to rectifying this basic vitamin deficiency in the local populace, not only would far less than 52,000 people a year die of respiratory diseases, as was the case in an average year before the pandemic, but Covid patients would have hugely benefited too. Yet they continue to push everything else except cheap-as-chips, safe-as-houses, over-the-counter aids.

It is a further measure of the deadly tunnel-vision afflicting the vaccine-obsessed Establishment that when Mr Monckton raised the Spanish study with an eminent endocrinologist at a London teaching hospital, the doctor had not heard of it. Immediately grasping the importance of the 25-fold reduction in risk of serious illness or death in hospital patients treated with bolus doses of cholcalciferol, he was keen to try and replicate the Spanish study in his hospital's Covid wards. 

Fortunately, the short Canada Health Alliance presentation has been preserved for free viewing on the banned.videowebsite. Exuding positivity and commonsense, the contrast with official Covid fear-porn is dramatic, as illustrated by this timely reminder from Dr. Stephen Malthouse:  

Viruses naturally change over time and new strains emerge. Since a virus cannot live alone but depends on human cells to live, it makes evolutionary sense that it will become less dangerous, not more so, over time. If it becomes more easily spread but less likely to make you really sick then that is a good natural progression towards herd immunity. The Covid virus is no different. Over all the time we have studied viruses that is what they've always done: adapt to humans as humans adapt to them. We can all relax, since viruses always become less likely to cause harm as time goes on.

When you put it all together there are so many reasons not to be afraid of Covid. When we honestly evaluate the Covid evidence and stop being fearful, we can start living life fully and becoming joyful members of our family and community again. Hiding inside your home and avoiding people is not necessary. Humans are social creatures and do not do well in isolation. For one thing, both solitary confinement and fear are harmful to your immune system.

Budesonide

For his part, Dr. Richard Bartlett of Texas found 100% success in treating 500 Covid patients with a common asthma drug: Budesonide. "It's an inhaled steroid that doesn’t have the side effects of total body steroids but it has the benefits," he explained during a 9 July 2020 interview on KWES-TV (preserved for viewing at banned.video).

"I use a nebuliser," he said, "[because] if you use an inhaler, 90 percent of the medicine never gets to where you need it. Research shows that. But a nebuliser works. I'm also giving an antibiotic to cover walking pneumonia and other pneumonias, called clarithromycin. And I also give zinc, because that interferes with virus multiplication. But the silver bullet is inhaled steroids. It’s like putting out a fire at the base of the fire. I’m having patients recover so quick."

An emergency room doctor for 28 years, Dr. Bartlett explained that Covid-19 starts off in the respiratory system but then moves on to cause severe inflammation that leads to organ failure and death. He claims that the steroid stops that inflammation from happening.

He has been successfully treating high-risk Covid-19 patients such as the elderly or those with conditions such as heart disease and cancer. He related how a lady who was already suffering from two cancers and whose body was weak from the chemo therapies, contracted Covid-19 on top of all that. She was dying. He treated her with Budesonide and a few days later she worked eight hour shifts again. "For every patient it's working," he said, pointing out that Japan, Taiwan and Singapore have also stumbled upon this inhaled steroid cure.

Speaking nearly nine months ago, he insisted "We have solutions to this problem already. [And yet] the CDC is telling us, and every authority is saying don't seek help — if you've got mild to moderate symptoms wait till you've got severe symptoms...."

He related that leading politicians had contacted him for details of the treatment. On the other hand, he was exasperated by the fact that a Budesonide study due to start in October 2020 was being "set up for failure" due to inimical and nonsensical parameters. "The National Institutes of Health [NIH] criteria is you have to have pneumonia, be in the ICU, and be on a ventilator before they'll even give you this," he said:

For [the majority] of people who get [Covid-19] and never have symptoms, they don't need medicine. They certainly don't need a vaccine. For those at risk of death if they don't get treated, here's what we need to do: early testing, early treatment. Like every disease. In America we do early detection, for early treatment. For heart disease, cancer, for stoke, for all kinds of infections. But this is crazy, that we're doing what Communist China is doing, and we're parroting that through the World Health Organisation. The World Health Organisation is praising what China did. So Italy follows suit. ... I started treating this in March [2020], and it works.

This allusion to overt politicisation and lethal hidden agendas led to the following exchange, after interviewer Debbie Georgatos first asked Dr. Bartlett the sixty-four thousand dollar question:

DG: Why wouldn't the NIH test it [Budesonide] in the way you have been doing? Early, on first symptoms?

Dr. Bartlett: Why are we doing anything that we're doing right now. What they did in Italy was social distancing, wear a mask, shut down everything — how did that work? Talk about what works. Which is what I'm doing. Which is what they're doing in Japan and Singapore and Taiwan, and that's early detection... We don't say, wait till you've got stage-four cancer to seek help. We don't do that with any other disease. I don't know why this is being forced on us. But it's unAmerican.

DG: It's cruel to people.

Dr. B: People are dying. That's pretty cruel. ... [As is not having] A family member in the room as an advocate, [which] is something you're not allowed to have right now.

If we wanted to go with science, scientific fact by definition is observable and reproducible, so, when I heard people saying I feel better with inhaled Budesonide, that was something I had never heard before. I observed it, and its reproducible. But the decisions that are made, that are being forced on us?

For 20 years we'd see there's an epidemic in China, we'd see them walking the streets in masks. it wasn't working for them then. I don't know why it's being forced on the whole world now, that kind of thinking. Something that's working in Japan and in Singapore, and it's working with my patients.      

We should be focussed on science and facts. Instead of fear.

DG: There's some sort of manipulation towards Americans to just wait it out, for a vaccine. I don't know if it's the pharmaceutical companies. If it's individuals in power invested in the pharmaceutical companies. But who would be telling Americans I'd rather you die, because we want you to wait for a vaccine.

Dr. B: It seems like people are willing to sacrifice others for an agenda. It seems that way to me because we have some solutions already. That are working. There's a track record of success by many doctors in Texas. And Texas is standing out compared to other states, if you look at... the survival rate. I think there is a lot of political motivation behind the decisions that are  being made right now.

DG:  I do too and I'm deeply troubled by them.

Africa

In its way, the success of early treatment in Africa is troubling too. Uplifting and glorious on the one hand — insofar as it puts a spoke in the Imperial wheel of Gates and Big Pharma — on the other, the ease with which it undid the Wuhan virus further delineates the wicked deliberation behind strategies that set up the West for murderous failure.

African countries have not prevented alternative possibilities or early treatment but, rather, have showcased the success of natural remedies in treating Covid. Old proven medicines such as hydroxychloroquine and plants such as artemisia, which was promoted in the island of Madagascar (369 deaths in a total population of 26.26 million), have contributed, along with its young population, to minimal suffering in Africa compared to the more developed countries. As of 23 March, Covid-19 statistics released by the African Centre for Disease Control and Prevention showed a total of 4,123,632 "cases" registered on the continent, and a relatively paltry 110,164 deaths out of a population of 1.216 billion.

LifeSite correspondent Jeanne Smits reported on 26 March that two herbal treatments for the virus developed by Archbishop Samuel Kleda of Douala, Cameroon, and approved for use by a government scientific committee, for example, have recently been offered on the export market after having been given to some 10,000 people locally with good results. The treatments, Elixir Covid and Adsak Covid, are now available for the foreign market, and will be exclusively available at the Bishops’ Conference of Cameroon and at the health coordination of the Archdiocese of Douala. The medicines have been provided totally free of charge within Cameroon and will remain free for anyone who needs them in diocesan centres all over the country. Smits writes that:

Didier Raoult, France’s charismatic infectiologist from Marseille who promoted the use of hydroxychloroquine from the start before recommending the addition of Zithromax and zinc, has repeatedly praised Africa’s pragmatic approach to the epidemic, stressing that Africans not only are prepared to use cheap drugs in new ways – something that goes directly against the interest of the pharmaceutical industry that thrives on new patents – but that they are also way ahead in science about the coronavirus with highly trained specialists and first-rate hospitals.

God bless Africa for daring to write its own narrative; besting the population-controllers before the entire world by putting health and life before filthy lucre and ideology. For it was not this continent renowned for its ruthless regimes but the supposed democratic governments of the West which crushed the poor and vulnerable with their ruthless lockdowns.

The truth about immunity

Like Western doctors who developed their own Covid protocols, the humane African strategy reflects what disinterested, compassionate experts like Drs. Bhattacharya and Atlas saw from the start. "From the pandemic’s outset," writes Robert Kennedy,

clear-headed people familiar with the challenges inherent in the vaccine model have understood that the path out of crisis would require multiple steps. Those steps would need to include the development and/or identification of therapeutic drugs, the sharing of information among doctors to hone improved treatment models that reduce infection mortality rates below those for flu, and the kind of broad-spectrum long-term herd immunity that protects against mutant strains and that only derives from natural infection.

Contrariwise, he says, "Gates and vaccine makers are proposing a lifetime of boosters, supporting insufficient testing to determine safety and failing to address the inadequate monitoring of vaccine injuries."

Apropos this relentless, coercive push for endless "booster" shots and life hereafter to revolve around vaccines, former Pfizer guru Dr. Yeadon is equally insistent that this agenda is senseless and, therefore, "evil." In his considered view it transcends mere money-making. As a former Big Pharma big shot, he would certainly know. So we should heed the urgency of his warning as relayed during his discussion with America's Frontline Doctors on 25 March:

In the U.K., it’s abundantly clear that the authorities are bent on a course which will result in administering ‘vaccines’ to as many of the population as they can. This is madness, because even if these agents ['vaccines'] were legitimate, protection is needed only by those at notably elevated risk of death from the virus. In those people, there might even be an argument that the risks are worth bearing. And there definitely are risks which are what I call ‘mechanistic’: inbuilt in the way they work.

But all the other people, those in good health and younger than 60 years, perhaps a little older, they don’t perish from the virus. In this large group, it’s wholly unethical to administer something novel and for which the potential for unwanted effects after a few months is completely uncharacterised.

In no other era would it be wise to do what is stated as the intention. Since I know this with certainty, and I know those driving it know this too, we have to enquire: What is their motive?

"While I don’t know, I have strong theoretical answers, only one of which relates to money and that motive doesn’t work, because the same quantum can be arrived at by doubling the unit cost and giving the agent to half as many people. Dilemma solved. So it’s something else. Appreciating that, by entire population, it is also intended that minor children and eventually babies are to be included in the net(5), and that’s what I interpret to be an evil act.

There is no medical rationale for it. Knowing as I do that the design of these ‘vaccines’ results, in the expression in the bodies of recipients, expression of the spike protein, which has adverse biological effects of its own which, in some people, are harmful (initiating blood coagulation and activating the immune ‘complement system’), I’m determined to point out that those not at risk from this virus should not be exposed to the risk of unwanted effects from these agents.

At this point in the 25 March discussion, one of the Frontline doctors asked Dr. Yeadon to comment on the following important statement he had made four months earlier, in which he explained that previous exposure to the first SARS — a variant similar to SARS CoV-2 — bestowed SARS CoV-2 immunity:

The most likely duration of immunity to a respiratory virus like SARS CoV-2 is multiple years. Why do I say that? We actually have the data for a virus that swept through parts of the world seventeen years ago called SARS, and remember SARS CoV-2 is 80% similar to SARS, so I think that’s the best comparison that anyone can provide.

The evidence is clear: These very clever cellular immunologists studied all the people they could get hold of who had survived SARS 17 years ago. They took a blood sample, and they tested whether they responded or not to the original SARS and they all did; they all had perfectly normal, robust T cell memory. They were actually also protected against SARS CoV-2, because they’re so similar; it’s cross immunity.

So, I would say the best data that exists is that immunity should be robust for at least 17 years. I think it’s entirely possible that it is lifelong. The style of the responses of these people’s T cells were the same as if you’ve been vaccinated and then you come back years later to see if that immunity has been retained. So I think the evidence is really  strong that the duration of immunity will be multiple years, and possibly lifelong.

Yeadon noted that the study on immunity he cited in the above statement "is from one of the best labs in their field." Clearly beyond reproach, it eviscerates government propaganda to the contrary; pulverising the false pretext of the vaccine obsession. As does the very recent SIREN study published in The Lancet on 9 April 2021.

Described as "A large, multicentre, prospective cohort study" involving "participants recruited from publicly funded hospitals in all regions of England", SIREN confirms what commonsense and over 100 years’ worth of immunology textbooks have predicted all along: "Previous infection with SARS-CoV-2 induces effective immunity to future infections in most individuals," specifically an 84% lower risk of infection by their data.

The truth about mutations

Dr. Yeadon then turned to the question of Covid mutations, currently exploited to the hilt by authorities. Notoriously, the Israeli government is citing new variants to justify lockdowns, flight closures, restrictions, and Green Passport issuance. Again, Yeadon passionately insists on the truth of the matter:

As a general rule, variants form very often, routinely, and tend to become less dangerous and more infectious over time, as it comes into equilibrium with its human host. Variants generally don’t become more dangerous.

No variant differs from the original sequence by more than 0.3%. In other words, all variants are at least 99.7% identical to the Wuhan sequence.

It’s a fiction, and an evil one at that, that variants are likely to “escape immunity”.
Not only is it intrinsically unlikely – because this degree of similarity of variants means zero chance that an immune person (whether from natural infection or from vaccination) will be made ill by a variant – but it’s empirically supported by high-quality research.

The research I refer to shows that people recovering from infection or who have been vaccinated ALL have a wide range of immune cells which recognize ALL the variants.

This paper shows WHY the extensive molecular recognition by the immune system makes the tiny changes in variants irrelevant.

I cannot say strongly enough: The stories around variants and need for top up vaccines are FALSE. I am concerned there is a very malign reason behind all this. It is certainly not backed by the best ways to look at immunity. The claims always lack substance when examined, and utilise various tricks, like manipulating conditions for testing the effectiveness of antibodies. Antibodies are probably rather unimportant in host protection against this virus. There have been a few ‘natural experiments’, people who unfortunately cannot make antibodies, yet are able quite successfully to repel this virus. They definitely are better off with antibodies than without. I mention these rare patients because they show that antibodies are not essential to host immunity, so some contrived test in a lab of antibodies and engineered variant viruses do NOT justify need for top up vaccines.

The only people who might remain vulnerable and need prophylaxis or treatment are those who are elderly and/or ill and do not wish to receive a vaccine (as is their right).

Anchored in Anti-science

Following the technocratic coup perpetrated under cover of Covid and which, overnight, has moralised and subjectivised science and the scientific process, no amount of evidence is allowed to challenge official 'orthodoxy'. Evidence-based objections like those summarised above by Dr. Yeadon are simply waved away.

Dr. Mary Ramsay, the head of immunisation at Public Health England [PHE], appears to have embraced this new dismissive Anti-science — "woke" science — in which there is no falsifiable hypothesis because Establishment technocrats have determined an orthodox consensus view beyond challenge.

Neither Dr. Yeadon's impassioned warnings about the Covid vaccines and mass vaccinations, nor his presentation of supportive immunological facts (now bolstered by the immunity findings of the aforementioned SIREN study, which her own institution co-funded!) has given Dr. Ramsay pause. Faced with such contrary evidence-based advice, and the fact that our Covid-related measures, among the harshest in the world, have seen Britain maintain worse Covid-19 case and death numbers than more lenient neighbours like France, one might reasonably expect her to apply the handbrake to Britain's Clattering Covid Train, if not change track entirely.

Not a chance. Instead, she has signalled that the failed restrictions could clatter onwards and downwards until all nations deploy coronavirus vaccines (with even children and babies in the crosshairs). For his part, Chief Medical Officer Chris Whitty talks about track and trace beyond the summer.

Across the Atlantic, meanwhile, in his Hillsdale College address Dr. Atlas denounced other demented notions and measures held and enforced by the Anti-science Establishment:

Now we hear children must be vaccinated before schools open, when they have extremely low risk from this infection, and are proven not to be significant spreaders to adults. Or the Kafkaesque nonsense that teachers must be vaccinated before they teach in person, when schools are one of the lowest risk environments and the vast majority of teachers are not high risk. Even worse, we hear the same old so-called experts on TV, now warning that social distancing, masks, and other restrictions will still be necessary after the vaccines.

During his stint within the inner sanctum of federal government Dr. Atlas had laid out before U.S. policy-makers the hard data behind his claims. Apropos zero-risk children wickedly tainted by fearful hype about viral "spreaders," policy-makers could also be handed the results of meta-analyses of reviews around the world, including post-lockdown nucleic acid screenings of 10 million Wuhan residents, that show asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic spread of Covid-19 are negligible to non-existent. In a normal Christian universe that finding alone demands a worldwide policy U-turn; one that proclaims in all charity and justice what the evidence dictated from the beginning and the governmental advice it should have elicited:

1. 'If you're vulnerable, be cautious. Public health resources will be focused on your care and protection.’
2. 'If you're sick, stay home and immediately seek early treatment protocols from your doctor. We will ensure they are made available to you, tailored to individual needs.'
3. 'Everybody else, get on with your life!'

Instead ... crickets. As if all these facts and findings of world specialists do not exist. As if the countries and American states that successfully tailored proportionate measures on the basis of such alternative facts, findings and early treatment protocols do not exist. States like South Dakota and Florida, and countries like Sweden, Belarus and many Asian and African nations, all of which ignored the pre-packaged narrative overseen by a corrupt WHO and its equally cowed and compromised national allies.

Tragically, the latter hold sway over the former. Thus, despite battalions of esteemed experts and political leaders armed with impeccable evidence and positive outcomes, any and all of which blow "the narrative" and its facilitating measures and policies to smithereens, the Covid Goose Step continues in Lockstep. Germany personifies the calculated ruination.

The Worldometer states that, currently (taking the massive inflation of official fatality figures at face value), Germany has suffered only 940 deaths per million population. This compares, for example to 2,593 deaths per million in the Czech Republic, 1,864 in the UK, and 1,732 in the U.S. But starting in about mid-March, Germany has seen a renewed "surge" of cases. And so what? As explained in past editions, the meaningless "casedemic" is just a fearmongering phase of the "plandemic." Yet on the basis of the "surge", on 23 March German Chancellor Angela Merkel announced a new and severe three-week lockdown, including the forced closure of most stores from 1-5 April. Further lockdown extensions are under consideration.

To justify this irrational decision, Merkel effectively defers to "woke" science rather than face the hard data that contradicts it. The U.S. provides the most striking data. Strict lockdown states like New York (2642 deaths per million as at mid-April), New Jersey (2800), Illinois (1878) and Michigan (1759) are continually shown up by Covidically wide-open states such as Florida (1584) and Texas (1705).

Like Boris Johnson and his collaborators, Frau Merkel knows perfectly well that the only actual data for the efficacy of lockdowns is their capacity to induce mass misery: as in generating an unemployment rate of 13% in New York City versus 4.8% in Florida.

Texas

 Anyone who dares to stand against the irrationality and apply the actual science with commonsense continues to be skinned alive. Governor Greg Abbott of Texas is the latest to feel the lash after lifting his state's mask mandate at the beginning of March and allowing all businesses of any type to open to full capacity.

"We must now do more to restore livelihoods and normalcy for Texans by opening Texas 100 percent... state mandates are no longer needed," Abbott declared. "Today's announcement does not abandon safe practices... Instead, it is a reminder that each person has a role to play in their own personal safety and the safety of others. With this executive order, we are ensuring that all businesses and families in Texas have the freedom to determine their own destiny."

As far as he could he also closed County loopholes. Texas County Judges were advised that they "may not impose jail time for not following COVID-19 orders nor may any penalties be imposed for failing to wear a face mask. If [Covid] restrictions are imposed at a County level, those restrictions may not include reducing capacity to less than 50% for any type of entity."

Every public health indicator favoured Abbot's sensible, evidence-based relaxation (not least more Texans recovering from Covid-19 than contracting it). Yet histrionic headlines and vicious attacks nationwide instantly branded him homicidal and reckless. Six weeks later, columnist Daniel Flynn noted that:

Despite predictions of an apocalypse (“This will kill Texans,” Texas Democratic Party Chairman Gilberto Hinojosa predicted), both cases and deaths moved noticeably downward, with one short, sharp upward blip, during that month or so since Governor Greg Abbott lifted restrictions. Dr. Fauci called Abbott’s actions “quite risky” and “dangerous” back in March. Now he says “I’m not really quite sure” as to why cases and deaths went down after the masks came off. “I’m not really quite sure” actually finds a better basis in science than assertions of certainty based on guesswork, which, when you think about it, characterise many of the proclamations made by scientific poohbahs and their politician toadies during the last 13 months.  [Spectator A.M., 12/4/21. My emphasis]

South Dakota

Governor Kristi Noem of South Dakota is another who showed up the utter falsity of the Covid narrative and its nuclear collateral damage. Sadly, she recently plummeted from bona fide conservative heroine to so-called "conservative" status after refusing to support a bill seeking to protect female sports in her state from male (transgender) participation. Nonetheless, her steadfast refusal to be bullied into toeing the Covid party line was estimable. A providential stand for truth, justice and the common good, the wholesale success of her anti-narrative strategies comprehensively exposed the 'pandemic' as the scamdemic it so clearly is. The lengthy extracts below are from her powerful address at the Conservative Political Action Conference last February (all italicised emphases hers; bold highlights mine). They constitute the perfect riposte to those who still defend arbitrary and destructive mitigation measures. Among much else, Governor Noem said:

Let me be clear: Covid didn't crush the economy. Government crushed the economy. And then, just as quickly, government turned around and held itself out as the saviour. And frankly, the Treasury Department can't print money fast enough to keep up with Congress's wishlist. But not everyone has followed this path. South Dakota is the only state in America that never ordered a single business or church to close. We never issued a shelter in place order, we never mandated that people wear masks. We never even defined what an 'essential business' is: because I don't believe governors have the authority to tell you your business isn't essential."

[Apropos schools] We approached the pandemic differently. From the earliest days of the pandemic our priority was the students and their wellbeing and their education.  When it was time to go back to school in the fall, we put our kids in the classroom. Teachers, administrators, parents, and the students themselves were of one mind: to make things work for our children. And the best way to do that, was in the classroom.

In South Dakota, I provided all of the information we had to our people. And then I trusted them, to make the best decisions for themselves, for their families, and in turn their communities. We never focussed on the case numbers. Instead, we kept our eye on hospital capacity. Now, Dr Fauci, he told me that on my worst day, I would have 10,000 patients in the hospital. On our worst day, we had a little over 600. I don't know if you agree with me, but Dr. Fauci is wrong a lot [huge cheers].

My administration resisted the call for virus control at the expense of everything else. We looked at the science, the data, and the facts, and then we took a balanced approach.  Truthfully, I never thought that the decisions I was making, were going to be unique. I thought there would be more who would follow basic conservative principles. But I guess I was wrong. Ask yourself this question: how far will people go to enforce mask mandates?  Once you start lockdowns, how long can you sustain them? In South Dakota, we had some cases in March and April, but the virus didn't really hit the mid-West till late fall. Should we have kept people in their homes from March onward? Of course not.

It's important to ask these questions. We have to show people how arbitrary these restrictions are. And the coercion, the force, and the anti-liberty steps that governments take to enforce them. Often, the enforcement isn't based on facts. Justifying these mitigation efforts has been anything but scientific.

Now, many in the media may criticise South Dakota's approach. They labelled me as "ill-informed", that I was "reckless", and even a "denier." Some even claimed that South Dakota was as bad as it gets anywhere in the world, when it comes to Covid-19. That, is a lie. The media did all of this by simultaneously praising Governors who issued lockdowns — who mandated masks and shut down businesses — applauding them as having taken the right steps to mitigate the spread of the virus.

Governor Noem reminded everyone that New York's disgraced Governor, Mario Cuomo, was the media's hero. Cuomo's notorious mismanagement of the Covid response included thousands of needless nursing home deaths, which criminal negligence he then tried to cover up. Yet a TV host had asked Cuomo to give her advice! She continued:

In South Dakota we did things differently. We applied commonsense and conservative governing principles.

We never exceeded our hospital capacity, and our economy is booming. We have the lowest unemployment rate in the nation. We are number one in the nation for keeping jobs, keeping businesses open, keeping money in the pockets of our people. The people of South Dakota kept their hours and their wages at a higher rate than workers anywhere else in the nation. And, our schools were open.

[...] No Governor should ever dictate to their people which activities are officially approved or not approved. And no governor should ever arrest, ticket, or fine people for exercising their freedoms. [...] But Covid is only one piece of a very problematic puzzle. It certainly showed us how deep the divide really is. And how thin the barrier is between freedom and tyranny. But there was a worse movement that was happening in 2020. And it's an ongoing problem.   

[...] This pandemic illustrated that some politicians have a totally different vision of government than what the Founders laid out. It was once said that the Left takes its vision seriously, more seriously than it takes the rights of other people. They want to be our shepherds. But that requires us to be the sheep. Let it be heard, loud and clear, from us, right now: we will not be sheep. [sustained applause and cheers]

[...] I believe South Dakota has been an example to
the nation this past year. People used personal responsibility to protect their family's health, and their way of life, while their government respected their rights, and their freedom.

Treaty for global governance 

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has also faced down the Covid juggernaut with great success. Since most have forgotten what strong, principled leadership looks and sounds like, I highly recommend the Governor's 28 March Roundtable on Public Health(6)— in which he chairs a refreshingly frank discussion on all aspects of the Covid response with Covid 'dissidents' Jay Bhattacharya, Martin Kulldorff, Scott Atlas, and Sunetra Gupta. A rather facile acceptance of the experimental-vaccine push notwithstanding, the honesty, candour, and sheer sanity on display comes as a blessed relief amid the daily propaganda. For there is simply no let-up in the political manipulation, censorship and fear-porn.

"We are entering an era of pandemics," the European Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen recently declared.

Another bogus beat up. Since that era never ended in the first place! Like the poor, viruses and pandemics are always with us.

That they have never disrupted human existence as they do now speaks to the preternatural intelligence informing a pseudo-elite forever casting its envious eye towards the "626 million AI-enhanced surveillance cameras and smartphone scanners" utilised by the Chinese Communist Party to control its people (ACN, 20/4/21). Indeed, a CNN report details how Venice has already created a disturbing monolithic surveillance grid to track and trace everyone who enters and leaves the city, suggesting this could be the "future of tourism" in a "post-COVID world." [14/1/21]

Von der Leyen's spurious soundbite puts us all on notice that the ongoing "risk" of further global disease dictates even greater repression of freedoms, rights, and human dignity.

Evoking an air of urgency as the much touted target year of 2030 looms ever larger on the horizon, national leaders are ramping up their sell out to the Global Sanitary Dictatorship. On 31 March, LifeSiteNews reported that a host of global leaders have issued a call for "a global pandemic treaty, purportedly in order to prevent future pandemics, distribute vaccinations, and implement a unilateral approach to global governance." It goes on:

U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson, French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, the head of the World Health Organisation (WHO), as well as 20 other world leaders, joined forces in penning a joint letter with the apparent intent of winning popular support for the globalist plan.

Writing in U.K. paper The Telegraph, as well as other publications such as Le Monde in France, the leaders declared their intent to “build a more robust international health architecture that will protect future generations.”

Calling COVID-19 the “biggest challenge to the global community since the 1940s,” the 24 leaders predicted that there “will be other pandemics and other major health emergencies.”

“No single government or multilateral agency can address this threat alone,” they declared. “The question is not if, but when. Together, we must be better prepared to predict, prevent, detect, assess and effectively respond to pandemics in a highly co-ordinated fashion. The Covid-19 pandemic has been a stark and painful reminder that nobody is safe until everyone is safe.”

This final phrase could indicate the influence which World Economic Forum (WEF) founder and committed globalist Klaus Schwab enjoys over the 24 leaders. Just weeks ago, Schwab declared, “As long as not everybody is vaccinated, nobody will be safe.”

The sinister Schwab (whose father, Eugen, ran a Nazi-sponsored factory in Ravensburg using hundreds of forced labourers) personifies "the presence of evil" sensed by Dr. Yeadon. That the leadership of the 'free world' is both parroting and acting upon his scientifically baseless, ethically bankrupt, megalomaniacal slogans, is a fearful portent. It recalls the confirmative forewarnings of two journalists in 2014. During long individual research each became acutely aware of — or perhaps were apprised of — dark dealings.

First, investigative journalist Harry Vox predicted a planned global pandemic, explaining why the "ruling class" would do such a thing:

They will stop at nothing to complete their toolkit of control. One of the things that had been missing from their toolkit is quarantines and curfews. The plan is to get hundreds of thousands of people infected with it and create the next phase of control.(7)

The same year, another renowned journalist, Anthony Patch, who for years had investigated the plans to control the world by means of created pandemics and mandatory inoculations, said the exact same thing, while also alluding to mRNA vaccines:

They will create a pandemic with a man-made coronavirus. As a result the people will demand a vaccine to protect them against this virus. This vaccine will contain material that changes the DNA of humans.

At the end of his Hillsdale College address, Dr. Atlas intimated that this agenda is gathering speed and force, insisting that:

There is no intention of those in power to allow Americans to live normally, to live freely again, and don't ever think otherwise.

From his ordeal on the 'inside,' within the Coronavirus Task Force, he would surely know. This malign intent — a melange of the criminal conspiracy and workaday conspiratio we considered in Part 2 — is the reality we face. God willing, we will face it down.

They lied, people died

Meantime, enforcement of the "top down control" mapped out in pandemic wargames from Dark Winter to Event 201 ratchets up in displays of Covid One-upmanship.

Having lied to the electorate about his ID plans, and looking to outdo even ultra-globalists like Joe Biden and the EU, Boris Johnson appears set not only to introduce the two-tier apartheid society guaranteed by the Vaccine Passports he always favoured, but to enhance their use with pervasive facial recognition software to check people’s vaccination status. ["UK Now Considering Digital Face Scanning to Enter Pubs, Stadiums and Other Venues," Infowars, 29/3/21]

For those wondering how pervasive facial and eye scanning might impact daily life, Minority Report (2002), Steven Spielberg's then-futuristic thriller, provides a chilling glimpse. But perhaps a lacklustre Canadian movie released in 2018, starring Nicolas Cage, is closer to the mark.

Set in 2030, The Humanity Bureau depicts an economically depressed America ravaged by global warming (what else). The nation is monitored by the government's not-so-humane Humanity Bureau, whichdeports citizens deemed criminally "unproductive" to New Eden, for a fresh start. At the same time, it is desperate to stop people escaping to Canada. Though fiercely ironic now that Trudeau is driving people from Canada, the Humanity Bureau pursues this goal with force and fear in equal measure, including false claims of intense radiation along the northern border (which was easier than building a wall). As you might expect, it gradually emerges that the lies, intimidation and control are all at the service of a Big Lie — that New Eden is paradise. In fact (spoiler alert), it is "a death factory; a 20 square acre gas chamber containing six crematoriums" serving "state-sanctioned genocide."

Chasing a woman, her child and a rogue agent who are headed for the border, the big boss muses, "If we all ran, who would keep our secrets?"

"Well," his underling replies, "it's possible some are too big to keep, sir."

To which his superior responds wistfully, "I agree. You can't kill seven million people and get away with it. Eventually you'll be found out. We're on the wrong side of history."

Notwithstanding those American murders motivated by huge government subsidies for hospitalised Covid patients (exposed by healthcare whistleblowers), the myriad Humanity Bureaus and their Fauci/Whitty-like bosses and employees directing the Political Pandemic have not generally hidden their Covid handiwork behind New Eden smoke and mirrors. Despite the best efforts of a complicit press to cover over and perfume the lies and carnage on their behalf, their implacable measures against all science and commonsense have done to death or maimed untold numbers of elderly and vulnerable — the "unproductive" — in plain sight. They too are on "the wrong side of history." But will they be "found out"?Will anyone at all be held accountable for the final national tolls of thousands and hundreds of thousands of state-sanctioned deaths?

The lying media on its Covid slagheap

In the U.K. alone the Department of Health itself projects around 100,000 non-virus deaths due to lockdowns, with government scientists suggesting that only 54% of local lives lost during the "crisis" may end up being related to the virus itself. They also alluded to the deathly impact of incessant fearmongering when they cited the skyrocketing rates of mental health issues and missed medical appointments.

In America, "Millions have been ill and more than 500,000 have died without task forces, panels, public presentations, and international collaboration on treatment regimens to manage patients at home in order to reduce spread, hospitalisation, and death," said Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH, vice chief of internal medicine and cardiovascular disease at Baylor University Medical Center. The vast majority of these deaths were "completely avoidable," he told Health Care News:

COVID-19 is the only medical problem that comes into public view every day with no mention of early treatment. Patients are handed their positive SARS-Cov-2 result and given no advice on treatment, no hotline for available research protocols, no prescriptions, and no medical follow-up to adjust regimens.

This American tragedy will undoubtedly become the focus of investigative historians who will reel through days and weeks and months of press briefings, media interviews, and public statements without a single mention of how doctors should and could treat patients.

Blunders or strategies?

Dr. McCullough labels this a "colossal blunder" on the part of Dr. Fauci and his colleagues in the White House Task Force. In his new book Pandemic Blunder, former university professor and ex-government official Joel S. Hirschhorn concurs, lamenting the opportunities and lives lost through the government’s refusal to use readily available medical means to confront the pandemic.

As we've noted along the way, there have been blunders aplenty. It goes without saying. And yet, in light of the information presented throughout this essay, especially the very dark yet very long and public roots of this deadly fruit, it seems less like a blunder and far more like a well-honed strategy. Even Sinéad Murphy, formerly allied with the hard-nosed British Left, concedes this conspiratorial element. While expressing her "total abhorrence at the near-orgasmic enthusiasm for authoritarian control that has come to dominate the Left, and my gratitude for the reason and humanity that have, by contrast, characterised many on the political Right," she cautions that: 

[T]here is a blind spot on the Right, which threatens the reason if not the humanity of its analyses of the Covid-response. It is the insistence that there is no ‘conspiracy’ afoot and that this whole unfortunate affair is attributable to the blunders of those in power.

None of this implies that there are never any subjective intentions in play in the unfolding of events. For example, Mike Yeadon points out how intelligent and successful has been the career of Patrick Vallance, who, he says, cannot possibly be ignorant of the basic facts about respiratory viruses that belie many of Vallance’s pronouncements. Vallance, Yeadon says, is lying. So, here we have subjective (mal)intention that can be identified and analysed and punished. And, for all that there do seem to be some blunderers in Government and elsewhere at present, it cannot be that all others who are pushing the Covid restrictions are unwitting. There are plenty of liars and cheats and aggressors, and even murderers perhaps. Hopefully, they will be held to account. [Lockdown Sceptics, 28/10/20]

Conspiratorial crooks

How else to explain such belligerent mendacity and perversity if not by the machinations and motivations of criminal conspirators? As Joel Hirschborn told Health Care News:

Fauci and the government perversely interpret a lot of good news on the Covid-19 pandemic. One is their sick commitment to the continued use of contagion controls including masking and limits imposed on small businesses. The other is their refusal to acknowledge and use mounting medical evidence that a variety of preventive early home treatments knock out the virus and keep people out of the hospital.

"The latter," says Hirschborn, "is an alternative to taking a vaccine." And there lies a major reason for the Establishment's "sick commitment," its studied "refusal," and the irrationality and perversity that has come to define its Political Pandemic: namely, the unimaginable sums promised by the vaccine pot of gold. Everyone has a conflicted finger in the vaccine pie, not least Dr. Fauci and his cronies. Children's Health Defense reports that:

According to Public Citizen, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) owns a 50% stake in Moderna’s mRNA-1273 vaccine, which it helped develop under the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), run by Dr. Anthony Fauci.

NIH Director Francis Collins confirmed during an Economic Club interview last May, "We do have some particular stake in the intellectual property" behind Moderna's coronavirus vaccine. Moreover, "Little known NIH regulations let agency scientists collect up to $150,000.00 annually in royalties from vaccines upon which they worked," reports Children's Health Defense, noting that "These rules are recipes for regulatory corruption."

Incentives to trample over life and limb, even.

Dr. Atlas is right: science has been thoroughly corrupted. Recently, an international statement issued to 30 governments by United Health Professionals [UHP] underlined that several Members of the European Parliament have alerted the population because they are forbidden to consult the contracts signed with pharmaceutical laboratories. UHP says this opacity is a proof that there are compromising things they want to hide. Michèle Rivasi, a Member of the European Parliament, even lodged a complaint.

An international collective composed of more than 1,500 members (including professors of medicine, intensive care physicians and infectious disease specialists) from different countries of Europe, Africa, America, Asia and Oceania, UHP's 18 February statement calls on the 30 governments to "Exclude your experts and advisers who have links or conflicts of interest with pharmaceutical companies." It added the following several reminders to highlight the kinds of unscrupulous white collar-gangsters behind the Covid criminality:

• In 2009, Pfizer was fined $ 2.3 billion, the largest fine ever imposed by the courts of the United States on a pharmaceutical group. It was found guilty of fraudulent commercial practices.
• In 2010, AstraZeneca was fined 520 million euros for recommending unauthorised use of a drug.
• In 2011, Merck payed a fine of $ 628.36 million to resolve allegations of off-label marketing and false statements about the cardiovascular safety of a drug.
• In 2013, a fine of 1.62 billion euros was imposed on Johnson & Johnson to resolve criminal and civil liability arising from allegations relating to the prescription of three drugs including promotion for uses not approved as safe and effective by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and payment of kickbacks to physicians and to the nation’s largest long-term care pharmacy provider.

These Big Pharma gangsters run with the banksters — the Great Reset mob; a real mafia whose members high and low have variously and shamelessly flagged their pre-planning for the Wuhan virus. And not just by running "predictive programming" via pandemic simulations. As explained in Part 2, they have been busy securing relevant coronavirus patents for many years.

The entire beat up — the pseudo-science, censorship, totalitarian measures, press propaganda, Soviet-like crackdowns on critics(8) of the Covid narrative etc..... all these brutal strategies and responses, and stubborn continuation as misery and death pile up from the measures themselves, should be viewed in light of the five-year plan ("Covid-19 Strategic Preparedness and Response Program")published by the World Bank in April 2020; at which time the lockdown 'cure' was already exposed as hugely disproportionate to the threat, and far worse than the disease itself.

In our November 2020 edition, we also noted how, under the guise of "rapid financing," the World Bank and IMF offered the President Lukashenko of Belarus a $940 million bribe — ten times more than their initial offer — to introduce the extreme Italian version of lockdown to his country. He refused. Yet the IMF persisted, he said, demanding from him "quarantine measures, isolation, a curfew": viz., all the unnecessary, ruinous, failed measures inflicted on the more developed nations. As everywhere else, they were seeking to create a crisis and a panic where non-existed. Even the Covid-complicit British Journal of Medicine published an article entitled: "COVID-19: How does Belarus have one of the lowest death rates in Europe?". [15/9/20]

The Belarus President did not cave in. "We will not dance to anyone's tune," he publicly declared. Say what we might about dictators like Lukashenko, that is leadership: the unyielding political response required to see off a political pandemic. Indeed it recalls President Donald Trump's magnificent lone stand against the Paris Accords. The questions Trump posed about the politicised global warming beat up are essentially those posed by Lukashenko about the politicised Covid beat up:

"Think about these two questions," Lukashenko said. "Is the coronavirus man-made?… Have they tried to use this viral disease or this psychosis for their own ends & interests?"

Western "Phobocracy"

Purely rhetorical, these queries speak to the stable of trillion-dollar pseudo-scientific scams like Carbon and Covid which have produced, in Italian scribe Tommaso Scandroglio's coinage, a veritable "Phobocracy": the latest development in Western governance by which whoever is capable of terrorising the masses is now in charge. At a far deeper level than the obvious financial motives, it is this bedrock principle of fearful coercion that drives the overarching conspiracy pushing fraudulent environmental and pandemic claims, strategies and programmes that enrich the white-collar fraudsters.

Control through fear is the common denominator in the lifelong public love affair between the Rockefeller family (the personification of monopolistic 'capitalism' and eugenic ideology) and China; the latter now feted by corporate-states looking to adopt the homicidal Chinese regime's 'social credit score' system.

The Carbon and Covid bogeymen are vital coercive factors in setting up that system of full-spectrum societal control, as boasted by the World Economic Forum (Davos) in the Great Reset Spinning Wheel graphic of global governance available on its website. Indeed, Naomi Wolf, who is also the CEO of a tech company and thus familiar with technological ramifications, insists that the vaccine passport is the social credit score system.

Put 'em in the dock!

So, will we live to see the day when the overseers of the conspiracy and their accomplices in the command chains of criminal complicity and criminal negligence face their Nuremberg?

Will anyone ever be called to account?

And not just for the national death tolls. What of the global tally of 130 million estimated deaths due to the needless and ineffective Western lockdowns that disrupted global supply chains? Who will be brought to book for that universal "collateral damage"? Or for the World Bank's late 2020 estimation that draconian pandemic measures have caused an increase of about 100 million people living in extreme poverty? Or the mounting numbers killed or debilitated by the Covid vaccines?

Although New York Governor Cuomo at least is under intense scrutiny for 15,000+ nursing home deaths directly attributable to his indefensible policies, it is hard to imagine justice prevailing in the present climate. But that of course is no reason not to hope, pray and work towards it.

Very many upstanding doctors, scientists and lawyers continue to do just that — on a grand scale. Witness the following information extracted from the aforementioned statement of the United Health Professionals; which document labels the Covid measures "a global scientific fraud of unprecedented proportions."

On 1 October 2020, German lawyer Reiner Fuellmich  announced that an international network will argue the biggest ever tort case, The Corona Fraud Scandal:

"The anti-corona measures have caused and continue to cause such devastating damage to the world’s population’s health and economy that the crimes committed by (…) the WHO must be legally qualified as actual crimes against humanity as defined in section 7 of the international criminal code."

He said also that this must be called "a corona scandal and those responsible for it must be criminally prosecuted and sued for civil damages." The investigation must focus, among others, on Bruce Aylward (WHO) and Neil Ferguson (ICL).

On 30 December 2020, Réaction 19 (a French association founded by lawyers with nearly 60,000 members) notified, in a press release, that it has filed a complaint concerning the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna "vaccines" for: deliberately endangering the life of others, aggravated deception, abuse of weakness and aggravated extortion.

On 10 January 2021, a letter relayed by The Sun and written by lawyers, a member of Parliament, human rights activists and a former US Air Force general was addressed to the FBI and MI-5 along with security services in Canada, Germany and Australia. The authors say:

"We are writing this letter to request that a federal investigation be commenced and/or expedited regarding the scientific debate on major policy decisions during the COVID-19 crisis. In the course of our work, we have identified issues of a potentially criminal nature and believe this investigation necessary to ensure the interests of the public have been properly represented by those promoting certain pandemic policies."

Among other leading specialists cited by UHP are the following: 

"[The lockdown] did not save the lives they had announced they could be able to save… It is a weapon of mass destruction and we see its health…social…economic effects…which form the real second wave."

- Prof. Jean-François Toussaint, September 24, 2020.

"This country [France] is making a dramatic mistake…What are we going to suggest? That everyone stay locked up all his life because there are viruses outside?! You’re all crazy, you’ve become all nuts!… we are setting the planet on fire." 

- Prof. Didier Raoult, October 27, 2020.

"It is a big delirium but which is instrumentalised by big pharma and also politicians… It is a fear organised for political and economic reasons."

- Prof. Christian Perronne, August 31, 2020.

"It is just a global scam to make huge profits, bail out the banks and meanwhile ruin the middle classes in the name of an epidemic…made destructive by liberticidal, allegedly health measures."

-  Dr Nicole Delépine, December 18, 2020.

"There is utterly unfounded public hysteria driven by the media and politicians. It’s outrageous. This is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on an unsuspecting public….it should be known as nothing more than a bad flu season. This is not Ebola. It’s not SARS."

- Dr Roger Hodkinson, November 13, 2020.

Uncompromising voices of hope!

We must pray fervently for the protection and success of these and all the brave souls who continue to expose and decry the homicidal hoax. Their uncompromising voices strengthen our resolve and engender hope. For as Dr. Pam Popper reminded us during LifeSite's "Unmasking COVID-19" conference on 19 February, the wicked never win:

This [mandated mask-wearing] just reminds me of Nazi Germany, where, I mean, next they’re going to put a star on my arm right. And because where does it stop? It’s a sign of submission, it has nothing to do with health. [People have been] brainwashed [into thinking] it’s unsafe not to wear a mask. They are turning the population against each other…this is a very common tactic that’s been used by criminals and despots throughout history.

The people who are behind all of this, the people who are controlling us and this whole situation, they are godless, soulless creatures. They are brains inside of functioning bodies, but they have no soul. And people like this, if you look at history, they have never prevailed.

They have never prevailed. They’re evil enough to use their brains to construct something like this and carry you off. But they never, ever win in the end. And so I think we can take our lessons from that and have a lot of hope for the future.

They never prevail because Christ prevailed. Because our Creator went all the way for our sake — even to lingering, tortuous death on a cross! He did so both to vanquish the evil embodied by these soulless sociopaths, and to imprint His victorious image of truth, charity and justice on all those who proclaim Him by word and deed, which includes many now standing up at considerable personal and familial cost. Such as Dr. Bhattacharya.

"I stand behind my comment that the lockdowns are the single worst public health mistake in the last 100 years," he stated in November 2020. "We will be counting the catastrophic health and psychological harms for a generation."

In February 2021 he elaborated on that damning assessment:

The harm to people is catastrophic. Poor people. People who don't have a voice to speak up and complain. I think every poor person on the face of the earth has been harmed by this lockdown. I just feel an obligation to speak up for them. It's one thing if this was the only possible policy. Then I would stay silent. But I think there is an alternative policy that will reduce the total amount of harm both to the poor and to the well off if we follow it. That's what motivated me, personally, to speak up and continue to speak up.

In response, the atheistic Naomi Wolf asked: "As a human being, why did you choose vulnerable populations to focus on? So many people are able to dismiss the marginalised and forget about them. Is there anything from your own background that led you to care about that specifically?" Dr. Bhattacharya replied:

I went to medical school because, this sounds corny, I wanted to help people. I meant it. I'm a Christian, that leads me, there's a call to help the poor. That's very powerful. The very call for my existence, I think. And this policy, it strikes me as the exact wrong thing, for the poor. For the vulnerable.

The "vulnerable" includes all those refused or simply not offered cheap, safe, effective, readily available Covid treatments; those denied vital medical checks and treatments or were too fearful to seek them; and the uninformed cajoled and coerced into taking experimental vaccines (especially the healthy and young in no need of vaccination).

The lives of these innocent souls have been snuffed out or shortened, or their bodies debilitated, en masse, because a largely harmless virus was politicised by "woke" scientists, self-interested governments, and all the faceless bureaucrats, public healthcare workers and doctors who will surely plead the Nuremberg defence: 'just following orders.' May God salve our unspeakable torment before the madness and cruelty of these self-righteous enablers, and heed our righteous cries for justice.

FOOTNOTES:

(1) Apropos UK death certificates, Dr. Malcolm Kendrick for one lamented that the moment Covid-19 appeared, "many of the rules went straight out the window. At one point, it was even suggested that relatives could fill in death certificates, if no-one else was available." ["Calibrating Lockdown," CO, May 2020]. America's equally risible tally of over half-a-million Covid "deaths" exemplifies the worldwide statistical deceit. On 24 March 2020, the Centers for Disease Control suddenly and unilaterally altered the 17-year-old process by which it calculated disease-caused fatalities, creating a special procedure for tabulating COVID-19 deaths. A recent study in the journal Science, Public Health Policy, and the Law, “COVID-19 Data Collection, Comorbidity & the Law,”explains that this enabled the CDC to produce inaccurate data which were widely disseminated by the media and served to justify a host of coercive measures to stem the spread of the disease. Enacted "apparently without public opportunity for comment or peer-review," this "capricious alteration to data collection has compromised the accuracy, quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of their published data, leading to a significant increase in COVID-19 fatalities." In the process of perpetrating this scam, the 25-page peer-reviewed study claims that the CDC "willfully violated several federal statutes." Moreover, on 14 April 2020, the CDC adopted a position paper (involving "potential conflict of interest" and a "general violation of ethical standards") that "dramatically altered what defines a new case exclusively for COVID-19." According to an analysis of the study by the watchdog group All Concerned Citizens, which was provided to National File, the CDC’s actions "resulted in a 1,600% inflation of current COVID-19 fatality totals."

(2) "The good news," says Pfizer's former chief scientist Dr. Mike Yeadon,  "is that there are multiple choices available: hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, budesonide (inhaled steroid used in asthmatics), and of course oral Vitamin D, zinc, azithromycin etc. These reduce the severity to such an extent that this virus did not need to become a public health crisis.” - https://www.americasfrontlinedoctors.com, 25/3/21

(3) Ibid.

(4) Full details of Dr Rajter's dosing regimen for Covid patients can be found in his Senate testimony transcript at: https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/early-outpatient-treatment-an-essential-part-of-a-covid-19-solution-part-ii

(5)"With regard to children, we're doing an age de-escalation study in elementary school children from 12-9, 9-6, 6-2, and six months to two years. We anticipate we'll have enough data to be able to vaccinate these younger children by the first quarter of 2022." - Dr. Anthony Fauci, video interview with the Wall Street Journal, March 2021. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TK5eioMDklo)

(6) https://thefloridachannel.org/videos/3-18-21-roundtable-discussion-on-public-health/  

(7)Interview, 21/10/14: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuOxG-rnj30

(8) Typical of the police response worldwide, Belgium mounted police recently charged and severely injured peaceful lockdown protestors, knocking one unconscious, with barely a peep from mainstream media. Elsewhere, retired university professor Jean-Bernard Fourtillan (France) and attorney Beate Barner (Germany) have been forcibly interned in psychiatric institutions for their 'dissent'. While Dr. Simone Gold, the inspirational founder of American Frontline Doctors, who has been on the forefront of challenging the government and media narrative regarding the actual dangers of Covid-19, its effective treatment, masks, lockdowns, and the current distribution of experimental vaccines, has described the massive SWAT team raid upon her home by the FBI on the pretext of her presence in the U.S. Capitol Building on 6 January. "It was dramatic and what I want to say is that I weep for our country. I'm very mainstream," she explained to social commentator Michelle Malkin, "I'm a mom, I'm a doctor and a lawyer for God's sake. I've spent my entire career helping people. If you can pull in a person like me … [and] have the FBI break down your door with 20 guns, shackle you [in] handcuffs [and] drag you off, I mean it was really terrible.  … I'm telling you America, this can happen to you."

 

Back to Top