Palpable conspiracy of lies, lying, liars fm Big Tech, Big Pharma, Jews-media for covid-"scamdemic," including the poison vaxxes

Apollonian

Guest Columnist

What Did They Get Right?​

BY TYLER DURDEN
FRIDAY, FEB 24, 2023 - 03:40 PM

Link: https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/what-did-they-get-right

Reflecting on the last three years of terror, torment, and totalitarianism, a tweet from Justin Hart got us thinking.
He asked a simple thought-provoking question about COVID: "Did 'they' get a single thing right?"
We must admit we struggled to find a single thing 'they' got right, but here are some of Justin's thoughts:
  • Transmission of the disease - wrong
  • Asymptomatic spread - wrong
  • PCR testing - wrong
  • Fatality rate - wrong
  • Lockdowns - wrong
  • Community triggers - wrong
  • Business closures - wrong
  • School closures - wrong
  • Quarantining healthy people - wrong
  • Impact on youth - wrong
  • Hospital overload - wrong
  • Plexiglass barriers - wrong
  • Social distancing - wrong
  • Outdoor spread - wrong
  • Masks - wrong
  • Variant impact - wrong
  • Natural immunity - wrong
  • Vaccine efficacy - wrong
  • Vaccine injury - wrong
Anything, 'Bueller'?
As Hart so eloquently and succinctly puts it: "To repeat. They. Got. EVERYTHING. Wrong!"

Which is interesting because as we were writing this post, the world's richest man - with access to all the 'dissent'-crushing communications - replied to a timely question...

At his 'Rational Ground' Substack, Hart lays out his views on what actually happened with COVID...
Every year humans endures a “flu season” – a period denoting the high-water mark of that year’s wave of respiratory viral pathogens.
Believe it or not we still have strains of the 1889 Russian flu, the 1918 Spanish flu, the 1957 Asian flu, the 1968 Hong Kong Flu, the 2009 H1N1 virus – all these various strains of nasty bugs rear their head every single year.
In late 2019, a new “novel” pathogen appeared on the scene – a bug from the “Coronavirus” family (“corona” describing the spike-like structure of the particles.)
The official title was SARS-CoV-2. SARS = “severe acute respiratory syndrome”; CoV-2 = “Coronavirus 2.” This particular virus can cause a disease called COVID-19 (“Coronavirus Disease 2019”). The disease is thought to have originated in China and found significant human-to-human transmission. It is thought to be “novel” because prior infections of other pathogens do not seem to creative anti-bodies to tackle this newfound disease within the human body.
Officials raised alarms about the potential mortality witnessed from COVID-19. Governments across the world scrambled to address and protect their populations from what quickly became a pandemic.
Efforts ranged from stringent to downright authoritarian. Results were mixed to say the least. In early 2022, it was thought that SARS-Cov-2 and COVID-19 would join the panoply of viruses and diseases we experience during the annual ebb and flow of life.
That’s the short sterile version of what transpired.
Here’s what actually happened:
  • Global elites had ramped up significant efforts to reshape the world to address a host of inequalities and imagined boogeymen like climate change.
  • These global elites were bolstered by a host of corrupt institutions which included the WHO (“World Health Organization”), big pharmaceutical companies, and world wealth and health players like Bill Gates.
  • With the emergence of a new virus these groups pounced at the vulnerable moment to put their plans into action and retool the world with a host of proposals – this was known as The Great Reset. The Coronavirus response was just the first sortie in this plan.
  • Governments across the world, under the threat of serious mortality (real or imagined), caved to the plan of action which utilized never-before imagined cram downs on individual rights, massive financial expenses, and enhanced authority overhauls to set the stage for a shift of power.
  • Free speech, right to assembly, right to bodily autonomy, representative government all fell within months of the first COVID-19 cases announced in almost every country.
Read more here... [see https://covidreason.substack.com/p/what-actually-happened-with-covid/]
 
Commentary fm FOX News on the BLATANT conspiracy to induce fear and terror AND THEN censorship by gov. Big Pharma, Big Tech, and Jews-media over the covid "scamdemic"

 

10 myths told by COVID experts — and now debunked​

By Marty Makary
February 27, 2023 9:50pm
Updated

Link: https://nypost.com/2023/02/27/10-myths-told-by-covid-experts-now-debunked/

[see vid at site link, above]

MORE ON:CORONAVIRUS

In the past few weeks, a series of analyses published by highly respected researchers have exposed a truth about public health officials during COVID:
Much of the time, they were wrong.
To be clear, public health officials were not wrong for making recommendations based on what was known at the time.
That’s understandable. You go with the data you have.
No, they were wrong because they refused to change their directives in the face of new evidence.
When a study did not support their policies, they dismissed it and censored opposing opinions.
At the same time, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention weaponized research itself by putting out its own flawed studies in its own non-peer-reviewed medical journal, MMWR.
In the final analysis, public health officials actively propagated misinformation that ruined lives and forever damaged public trust in the medical profession.
Here are 10 ways they misled Americans:

Misinformation #1: Natural immunity offers little protection compared to vaccinated immunity

A Lancet study looked at 65 major studies in 19 countries on natural immunity. The researchers concluded that natural immunity was at least as effective as the primary COVID vaccine series.
vaccinePublic health officials downplayed concerns about vaccine-induced myocarditis — or inflammation of the heart muscle.AP/Nathan Papes
In fact, the scientific data was there all along — from 160 studies, despite the findings of these studies violating Facebook’s “misinformation” policy.
Since the Athenian plague of 430 BC, it has been observed that those who recovered after infection were protected against severe disease if reinfected.
That was also the observation of nearly every practicing physician during the first 18 months of the COVID pandemic.
Most Americans who were fired for not having the COVID vaccine already had antibodies that effectively neutralized the virus, but they were antibodies that the government did not recognize.

Misinformation #2: Masks prevent COVID transmission

Cochran Reviews are considered the most authoritative and independent assessment of the evidence in medicine.
And one published last month by a highly respected Oxford research team found that masks had no significant impact on COVID transmission.
When asked about this definitive review, CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky downplayed it, arguing that it was flawed because it focused on randomized controlled studies.
A member of the New York Police Department (NYPD) receives a dose of the Moderna Covid-19 vaccine at Queens Police Academy in the Queens borough of New York, U.S., January 11, 2021.A study recently found that masks didn’t have much of an effect on preventing COVID-19 transmission.Jeenah Moon/Pool via REUTERS
But that was the greatest strength of the review! Randomized studies are considered the gold standard of medical evidence.
If all the energy used by public health officials to mask toddlers could have been channeled to reduce child obesity by encouraging outdoor activities, we would be better off.

Misinformation #3: School closures reduce COVID transmission

The CDC ignored the European experience of keeping schools open, most without mask mandates.
Transmission rates were no different, evidenced by studies conducted in Spain and Sweden.

Misinformation #4: Myocarditis from the vaccine is less common than from the infection

Public health officials downplayed concerns about vaccine-induced myocarditis — or inflammation of the heart muscle.
They cited poorly designed studies that under-captured complication rates.
A flurry of well-designed studies said the opposite.
We now know that myocarditis is six to 28 times more common after the COVID vaccine than after the infection among 16- to 24-year-old males.
Tens of thousands of children likely got myocarditis, mostly subclinical, from a COVID vaccine they did not need because they were entirely healthy or because they already had COVID.

Misinformation #5: Young people benefit from a vaccine booster

Boosters reduced hospitalizations in older, high-risk Americans.
But the evidence was never there that they lower COVID mortality in young, healthy people.
That’s probably why the CDC chose not to publish its data on hospitalization rates among boosted Americans under 50, when it published the same rates for those over 50.
Ultimately, White House pressure to recommend boosters for all was so intense that the FDA’s two top vaccine experts left the agency in protest, writing scathing articles on how the data did not support boosters for young people.
A general view of a face mask required sign in the lobby of a salon in Hawthorne, NJ on February 16, 2022. President Biden pushed extreme policies to attempt to get every American vaccinated.Christopher Sadowski

Misinformation #6: Vaccine mandates increased vaccination rates

President Biden and other officials demanded that unvaccinated workers, regardless of their risk or natural immunity, be fired.
They demanded that soldiers be dishonorably discharged and nurses be laid off in the middle of a staffing crisis.
The mandate was based on the theory that vaccination reduced transmission rates — a notion later proven to be false.
But after the broad recognition that vaccination does not reduce transmission, the mandates persisted, and still do to this day.
A recent study from George Mason University details how vaccine mandates in nine major US cities had no impact on vaccination rates.
They also had no impact on COVID transmission rates.

Misinformation #7: COVID originating from the Wuhan lab is a conspiracy theory

Google admitted to suppressing searches of “lab leak” during the pandemic.
Dr. Francis Collins, head of the National Institutes of Health, claimed (and still does) he didn’t believe the virus came from a lab.
Ultimately, overwhelming circumstantial evidence points to a lab leak origin — the same origin suggested to Dr. Anthony Fauci by two very prominent virologists in a January 2020 meeting he assembled at the beginning of the pandemic.
According to documents obtained by Bret Baier of Fox News, they told Fauci and Collins that the virus may have been manipulated and originated in the lab, but then suddenly changed their tune in public comments days after meeting with the NIH officials.
The virologists were later awarded nearly $9 million from Fauci’s agency.
An aerial view shows the P4 laboratory at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan in China's central Hubei province on April 17, 2020. The theory that COVID-19 originated from a Chinese lab in Wuhan proved to be true.HECTOR RETAMAL/AFP via Getty Images

Misinformation #8: It was important to get the second vaccine dose three or four weeks after the first dose

Data were clear in the spring of 2021, just months after the vaccine rollout, that spacing the vaccine out by three months reduces complication rates and increases immunity.
Spacing out vaccines would have also saved more lives when Americans were rationing a limited vaccine supply at the height of the epidemic.

Misinformation #9: Data on the bivalent vaccine is ‘crystal clear’

Dr. Ashish Jha famously said this, despite the bivalent vaccine being approved using data from eight mice.
To date, there has never been a randomized controlled trial of the bivalent vaccine.
In my opinion, the data are crystal clear that young people should not get the bivalent vaccine.
It would have also spared many children myocarditis.

Misinformation #10: One in five people get long COVID

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention claims that 20% of COVID infections can result in long COVID.
But a UK study found that only 3% of COVID patients had residual symptoms lasting 12 weeks. What explains the disparity?
It’s often normal to experience mild fatigue or weakness for weeks after being sick and inactive and not eating well.
Calling these cases long COVID is the medicalization of ordinary life.
A picture of the covid-19 vaccine.The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention claims that 20% of COVID infections can result in long COVID, but other studies say differently.MediaNews Group via Getty Images
What’s most amazing about all the misinformation conveyed by CDC and public health officials is that there have been no apologies for holding on to their recommendations for so long after the data became apparent that they were dead wrong.
Public health officials said “you must” when the correct answer should have been “we’re not sure.”
Early on, in the absence of good data, public health officials chose a path of stern paternalism.
Today, they are in denial of a mountain of strong studies showing that they were wrong.

At minimum, the CDC should come clean and the FDA should add a warning label to COVID vaccines, clearly stating what is now known.
A mea culpa by those who led us astray would be a first step to rebuilding trust.
 

Cardiac Testing at Washington Public Event Found 53% Myocarditis Rate, Including Two Active Duty US Military Pilots. What Does It Mean?​

By Dr. William Makis
Global Research, February 28, 2023

Link: https://www.globalresearch.ca/cardi...-us-military-pilots-what-does-it-mean/5810311

myocarditis-400x209.jpg

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name (desktop version)
To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.
Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
***
An interesting story was reported on Feb.26, 2023 by News 8 WTNH, New Haven, CT. They took the story down about 24 hours later but it is still available on EIN Presswire (click here).
“Nearly 500 people from Washington, Oregon and Idaho gathered at the Wenatchee Convention Center in Washington State on Saturday, January 28 to hear and share stories of…injuries and deaths from COVID shots and hospital protocols; careers upended and families torn apart by mandates; and numerous harms from closures of schools, businesses and churches.”
Heart screening was available and conducted using multifunction cardiogram technology, or MCG, provided by HeartCARE Corp”
we had the opportunity to perform Multifunction Cardiogram™ screens on a variety of participants…over half of those tested (16 of 30 people) (53%) had positive markers for myocarditis. Two of these were active duty US Military pilots.

Studies on rates of post COVID-19 vaccine myocarditis

The rates of post COVID-19 vaccine myocarditis are much, much higher than what Public Health Authorities have admitted to (most will admit to about 1:5000).
There are two key studies on what the real rates of post COVID-19 vaccine heart damage may actually be:
  1. Prospective Thailand study of 202 boys showed 1:30 (7/202) boys ages 13-17 developed myocarditis or pericarditis within a week after 2nd dose of Pfizer COVID-19 mRNA (click here).
  2. Professor Christian Mueller, University Hospital Basel Switzerland conducted testing on 777 healthcare workers within a week after COVID-19 booster shot, and found increased troponinemia in 22/777 (1:35) that had no other cause other than the COVID-19 booster shot (click here)
    “The actual incidence of post-vaccination myocardial lesions is 2.8% vs 0.0035% of myocarditis in retrospective studies (unvaccinated)”
    “The incidence of myocardial lesions is 2.8% (1:35), or 800 times higher than the usual incidence of myocarditis (in unvaccinated)” the researchers add.

My Take…

I believe myocarditis (heart inflammation) is responsible for vast majority of post COVID-19 sudden deaths that we are seeing now, and health authorities have intentionally downplayed the risk of myocarditis post COVID-19 vaccination.
They don’t want to conduct autopsies on sudden deaths now, because they don’t want us to know that the risk of post-vaccine myocarditis and sudden cardiac death was always much higher than what they admitted to publicly.
Ontario’s Chief Medical Officer of Health admitted to a myocarditis risk of 1 in 5000 and he was lambasted by pharma-captured Ontario doctors who didn’t want any truth to be known (click here)
But both the Thailand study and Swiss study suggest a myocarditis risk of 1:30 or 1:35per vaccine dose. That means 3% of all COVID-19 vaccinated people could be walking around with heart inflammation (myocarditis) they don’t know they have, which puts them at increased risk for sudden cardiac death, during exercise or in the early morning hours (the trigger for sudden cardiac death is a surge of stress hormones).
The Washington event cardiac testing was not scientific and 53% of people walking around with myocarditis seems very unlikely. But it raises a crucial question.
WHAT IF the risk of post COVID vaccine myocarditis actually increases with time?
As reported by Dr.Peter McCullough, we know that spike protein circulates at least 28 days after injection, and gets delivered to the heart during that time (click here).
The Thailand and Swiss studies tested people only within the 1st week after COVID-19 vaccination and 3% had heart inflammation or heart damage.
What if this gets worse as time goes by? What if the risk of myocarditis actually increases from 3% because the spike protein which inflames the heart continues to circulate for 28 days after injection and probably even longer?
That is what this Washington public cardiac testing is suggesting.
I am also concerned about those 2 pilots with inflamed hearts.
 

Evidence Dates To 2011 The mRNA Vax Was A Bioweapon Created By DARPA And The DOD, Who Used COVID To Scare The Masses Into Taking It To Carry Out Depopulation And Genocidal Warfare​

Link: https://www.allnewspipeline.com/Alarming_Evidence_Dates_Back_To_2011.php

[see several vids at site link, above]


By Drew Allen for All News Pipeline

Of all the “conspiracy theories” surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, no “conspiracy theory” has been more obviously true since the very beginning than the Wuhan lab leak theory.

In March of 2020, Tony Fauci was interviewed by National Geographic and completely dismissed the “theory” that the virus originated in the Wuhan lab of virology. In fact, he said there was no evidence to support it. Instead Fauci claimed the body of evidence strongly suggested that the virus simply jumped species; ie, it was natural.

Was Fauci, the so-called face of science itself, stupid? It wouldn’t have been the first time Fauci embraced and promoted an erroneous and idiotic theory. During the AIDS epidemic in May 1983, Fauci promoted the theory that AIDS was transmitted by “routine close contact, as within a family household.”

At the time of Fauci’s dismissal of the lab leak theory, President Trump’s State Department had already put out a statement asserting that the U.S. intelligence community “had evidence that several researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology laboratory were sick with Covid-like symptoms in autumn 2019.”

While Fauci’s 1983 theory that AIDS was spread via close contact can be chalked up to ignorance, stupidity, or both, his denial of the evidence-based lab leak theory and support for the absurd “wet market theory” — somebody ate a bat with the virus and contracted it — cannot. Fauci lied.

We know Fauci lied because in October of 2021, Lawrence Tabak, a top National Institutes of Health official, admitted that U.S. taxpayer money did go to the Wuhan Institute of Virology to fund “gain-of-function research,” the very research Fauci had repeatedly denied funding. Fauci, of course, was the director of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Furthermore, a leading infectious disease expert had sent an email to Fauci in January of 2020, writing that “Some of the features (potentially) look engineered.” Despite this, Fauci dismissed the lab leak theory as baseless.

(ANP EMERGENCY FUNDRAISER: With non-stop censorship, 'big tech' attacks upon independent media, and outside groups spending millions to blacklist conservative news, donations from readers are absolutely critical in keeping All News Pipeline online. So if you like articles like this, please consider donating to ANP.)


Now the U.S. Energy Department has assessed that the COVID-19 virus likely originated from an accidental lab leak in China. What reason would Fauci have to cover up this truth? The only conceivable explanation is that the United States had a role in creating it. The important questions now are: Did the U.S. help create the virus in conjunction with the Chinese? And: What was the intention behind creating the COVID-19 virus?

The explanation, which we can call a “conspiracy theory” for the time being, may be terrifying and condemn the entire U.S. government and the Department of Defense.

Shortly after the virus was recognized as COVID-19 in early 2020, President Trump announced that the United States was “very close to a vaccine.” How could this be?

In July of 2020, the Washington Post ran this headline: “How a secretive Pentagon agency seeded the ground for a rapid coronavirus cure.” Amy Jenkins, the manager of DARPA’s antibody program, said, “We have been thinking about and preparing for this for a long time, and it’s almost a bit surreal.

DARPA is the research arm of the Department of Defense, an acronym for Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. It turned out that DARPA began investing in experimental RNA technology in 2011. ADEPT, DARPA’s Autonomous Diagnostics to Enable Prevention and Therapeutics division, invested $292 million in an array of technologies between 2011 and 2019 in an effort to reduce timelines for vaccines.

By 2019, a project funded by DARPA at Moderna supposedly demonstrated great promise in a clinical trial. That trial provided protection against a mosquito borne virus known as Chikungunya.

By March of 2020, Moderna became the first company in the United States to conduct a clinical trial with the experimental mRNA technology to stop COVID-19. But Moderna wasn’t the only pharmaceutical company conducting such experiments.

Pfizer, the DARPA-funded CureVac, the CCP People’s Liberation Army Academy of Military Sciences in China, and a lab at the Imperial College in London had all also conducted research.


The only way out of the pandemic, as presented by Fauci and countless others, was by injecting ourselves with this experimental mRNA vaccine. Even as anxious Americans waited for its availability, proven and existing treatment options like hydroxychloroquine and zinc, were dismissed as ineffective.

Once available, mandates and other coercive tactics were utilized to compel Americans to get the jab. The media, and even Biden, claimed the experimental vaccines, which hadn’t even been tested for efficacy, would prevent the contraction of COVID. When this was proven untrue, the same needle pushers then claimed it would reduce symptoms.

It is undeniable that the goal was to get this vaccine injected into as many American bodies as possible. What else could explain the campaign? Were the American people knowingly being used as lab rats so that DARPA could finally test its military research?

More sinister “conspiracy theories” aside, was COVID-19 intentionally engineered by the U.S. government with the intent to infect human specimens with the virus so that it could then test its revolutionary mRNA technology?

If you were a scientist developing a revolutionary vaccine technology intended to accelerate vaccine development from years to months, how would you test it? Such technology could not be put to the test without the introduction of a pathogen, or virus, upon which to test it. Such a test would necessitate the infection of a human specimen on which to conduct a trial.

Among other tyrannical uses, was the pandemic unleashed to give DARPA the clinical trial it needed to test its technology?

Was it an accident or was it intentional? Were the Chinese to blame or was the U.S. government? These are questions that must be answered.

Intentionally or not, the American people were used as lab rats for an experimental vaccine — a vaccine, which had been in development for nearly a decade.
 
MTG goes over the time-line on prop. and discussion over the origins of the covid disease--how Fauci lied and instigated others to lie, controlling their funding, etc.

 

NHS Director of End-of-Life “Care” confirms Doctors lied about COVID being Cause of Death to create illusion of a Pandemic​

BY THE EXPOSÉ ON JUNE 22, 2023

Link: https://expose-news.com/2023/06/22/drs-lied-covid-deaths-illusion-pandemic/

Before Covid, four types of pneumonia added together were the highest cause of death in the UK. In a newly implemented Medical Examiner System to certify deaths, the Medical Examiner was certifying all types of pneumonia deaths as covid-19 deaths, a former Director of End-of-Life Care has said.
On Saturday, Sai, a former NHS Director of End-of-Life Care, wrote a Twitter thread which, amongst other things, gave a personal account of the changes to the system of reporting deaths implemented in the NHS:
“When four different diseases [are] grouped and now being called covid-19, you will inevitably see covid-19 with a huge death rate. The mainstream media was reporting on this huge increase in covid-19 deaths due to the Medical Examiner System being in place.
“Patients being admitted and dying with very common conditions such as old age, myocardial infarctions, end-stage kidney failure, haemorrhages, strokes, COPD and cancer etc. were all now being certified as covid-19 via the Medical Examiner System.
“Hospitals were switching to and from the Medical Examiner System and the pre-pandemic system as [and] when they pleased. When covid-19 deaths needed to be increased, the hospital would switch to the Medical Examiner System.”
In addition, “hospitals were incentivised to report covid-19 deaths over normal deaths, as the government was paying hospitals additional money for every covid-19 death that was being reported,” Sai said. “I have no doubt in my mind, that the Government has planned the entire pandemic since 2016 when they first proposed the change to medical death certification.”
image-71.png


Let’s not lose touch…Your Government and Big Tech are actively trying to censor the information reported by The Exposé to serve their own needs. Subscribe now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox…
TYPE YOUR EMAIL…
SUBSCRIBE

You can read Sai’s thread on Twitter HERE or Thread Reader App HERE. In the event it is removed from Twitter we have copied the thread below and attached a pdf copy at the end of this article. In the following, the number at the beginning of a paragraph relates to the number of the tweet within the thread.

1. The truth about the covid-19 pandemic from within the NHS (ex-Director of End-of-Life Care at one of the largest hospital trusts in the UK)

2. In 2016, the British government proposed and piloted a change to the process of how deaths were certified across all hospitals in the UK. I have attached a link to this Department of Health (“DoH”) document below:
Reforming death certification: Introducing scrutiny by Medical Examiners, Department of Health, May 2016
3 & 4. The DoH document proposed a switch to the “Medical Examiner” (“ME”) System and was sent to a number of different audiences for feedback and consultation. The ME System was already being piloted at two hospitals up north. The results of the consultation are below:
Introduction of Medical Examiners and Reforms to Death Certification in England and Wales: Government response to consultation, Department of Health & Social Care, June 2018
5. Prior to the covid-19 pandemic, the death certification process involved treating doctors of a patient to attend Bereavement Services/Patient Affairs to discuss the death and either: a) refer the death to the Coroner or b) write a Medical Certificate of Cause of Death (“MCCD”).
6. The MCCD states the cause of death. Whereby a direct cause (1a) or contributing causes (1b) (1c) (1d) are stated along with co-morbidities (not directly causing the death) being written in (2) on the MCCD. The MCCD is only ever a probable cause of death, it is not definitive.
7. The only definitive way of determining an accurate and plausible cause of death is to refer the deceased patient to HM Coroner (if certain criteria are met), for HM Coroner to accept and take on the case, resulting in a Post Mortem (“PM”) being conducted by a Histopathologist.
8. When a death is seen as natural and there is nothing untoward, the MCCD is written by the treating doctor of a deceased patient. Usually, this is an F1, F2, SHO or Registrar that attends. It is rare for a treating Consultant to attend, but they will finalise the cause of death.
9. A strict hospital hierarchy exists within the NHS for doctors. It is as follows – from lowest to highest rank: Foundation Year 1 (FY1), Foundation Year 2 (FY2), Senior House Officer (SHO), Registrar (Reg), Consultant, Clinical Lead, Medical Director.
10. Junior doctors will very rarely speak up or challenge their seniors. A senior decision is seen as final and it will be carried out and executed without any hesitance or questioning.
11. In my 5.5 years of experience in End-of-Life Care, I have only ever seen one junior doctor disagree with a proposed cause of death and challenge their consultant.
12. With the number of deaths that occur in a hospital, as you can imagine, there is a great deal of variation with regards to causes of death, as we have numerous different doctors writing an MCCD and coming up with various different potential diseases in different orders.
13. The proposed ME system would change this, as the government would now hire and pay one Medical Examiner, to sit in every hospital and write all MCCDs for all deceased patients. This would effectively eliminate any variation in causes of death.
14. In 2016, when I heard of this proposal, I worked as a Bereavement Officer at a hospital in Central London. My mentor/line manager at the time was a former Chief Nurse who managed Bereavement Services and all hospital deaths would be controlled by her and the department.
15. We essentially carried a huge amount of power with regard to decision-making, as we would go through all patient notes following the death of a patient, and essentially guide and advise doctors on what would need to be written with regards to an MCCD or Coroners Referral.
16. In my personal opinion, our role was to sit on the fence and act in the best interests of a deceased patient (and their families), but also protect the hospital and our doctors from any potential negligence.
17. As you can imagine many battles were fought over decisions about a cause of death of a patient or a referral to the coroner with a vast [number] of doctors over the years.
18. F2s and SHOs were particularly the worst with regards to carrying an arrogance of knowing what should be written on an MCCD or stating that a patient didn’t need to be referred to the Coroner (often stating that their Consultant had given them instructions).
19. It is worth noting that Consultants are also only human and can be incorrect at times too. We have to remember that they are succeeded in hierarchy by a Clinical Lead and beyond that a Medical Director. Who have far more experience and knowledge.
20. When I asked my mentor in 2016, how the ME system would change things, I was told that Bereavement Services/Patient Affairs would become purely administrative and that the clinical judgement would fall to the Medical Examiner.
21. The power and decision-making with regards to MCCD/Coroners Referrals was being taken away not only from treating doctors but also from Bereavement Services/Patient Affairs/Bereavement Officers/Bereavement Service Managers/Directors of End-of-Life Care.
22. This decision-making power was being handed solely to the Medical Examiner, who has not been involved in the treatment of a patient during an admission.
I took all this information in at the time and acquired as much knowledge as I could from my mentor/line manager.
23. In 2016, I also happened to make a move and take up an opportunity to manage my own Bereavement Services at one of the largest hospital trusts in the whole of the UK. On average, I would oversee MCCD/Coroner Referrals for approximately 1,750 deaths on an annual basis.
24. I developed a very close working relationship and friendship with one of the Medical Directors (a doctor with the highest ranking in a hospital). This was especially helpful when having to challenge doctors with regard to MCCDs/Coroners Referrals.
25. Progressing to Director of End-of-Life Care, I became involved with the reporting of mortality rates, conducting mortality reviews and writing hospital policies. I had also developed an excellent working relationship with the HM Coroner who oversaw our Trust.
26. HM Coroner holds the power to investigate any hospital or trust with regard to a death or a number of deaths. A slight problem may arise, in that HM Coroner has an allegiance to the Crown and the Government.
27. When a death is reported to the Coroner, this was previously reported via [a] telephone call by the treating doctor. A discussion was had with the Coroner’s Office and a direct outcome and instruction would come from the Coroner’s Office, by way of HM Coroner (via a phone call).
28. There is a fundamental flaw [in] this system, as there is no documentation of the decision and instruction from the Coroner. It comes via word of mouth. There is always room for error without any electronic documentation.
29. Every Hospital/Trust and HM Coroner will have a different system of reporting deaths. I personally made a decision to safeguard my hospital and the Trust, by developing an electronic coroners referral form, which I proposed to our Coroner and developed after their agreement.
30. We now had documentation of every death being reported and every outcome.
When reporting a death, the Coroner will look at a proposed cause of death and accept it, or reject the cause of death and take on the case (death of the patient), leading to an Inquest or a PM.
31. In 2019, our Medical Director, came into my office one morning and stated that the Board of Directors at the Hospital had made a decision to switch to the Medical Examiner System.
Hearing the words “ME System” was a massive case of Déjà vu (conversation with my mentor in 2016)
32. I knew exactly what the ME System was, but I chose instead, to play the fool and enquire what exactly the ME System was and what it meant for our service, my staff and our roles. Everything the Medical Director mentioned to me that day was a carbon copy of what I already knew.
33. I knew that my time in End-of-Life Care had come to an end. I’d reached the top and there was no more progress for me. Losing all power and decision-making to any ME coming into the hospital did not appeal to me. I’d already made up my mind that I needed to leave.
34. Seeking a new challenge and experience, I made a move in 2019 to another major hospital in Central London, this time side-tracking into operational management. I was in charge of the operational management of Nephrology, Rheumatology, Dermatology and Diabetes & Endocrinology.
35. In Jan 2020, I remember hearing about the first case of covid-19 at our hospital, with a patient arriving from China and walking into our A&E. A&E was shut down and steam cleaned that day, I recollect the moment I heard about this.
36. In my mind, I saw the reporting of covid-19 in the media as nothing more than Bird Flu or Ebola, which had caused panic but yet passed. I wasn’t worried in the slightest bit.
Things began to escalate around in Feb 2020, around the time I was going on holiday.
37. Due to the reporting by the media, I bought N95 masks as a precaution for my trip and to give to my parents and younger sister. I was blessed to have had an opportunity to spend a few days in Sri Lanka for a wedding and then nearly a whole month in Australia (March 2020).
38. I watched as the narrative of a deadly infectious disease continued to grow with every day that passed. I made a decision to cut my holiday short by a couple of days so that I could make sure I got back to my family and [did] not end up being stranded in Australia.
39. Upon returning to the UK in late March 2020. One of the immediate things that struck me was the lack of any temperature monitoring or questioning at Heathrow Airport. This seemed odd for a potentially deadly infectious disease that was spreading around the world.
40. This was especially odd, as Sri Lanka and Australia had questioned me/checked temperatures upon arrival, with even Singapore monitoring temperatures during transit.
41. My mother had just recovered from cancer, my father was over 70 and my younger sister was born with Down’s Syndrome alongside having multiple other conditions. I had three high risk individuals to covid-19 in my family and I was scared/fearful of giving them covid-19.
42. I asked my hospital to allow me to work from home. They refused. I wasn’t deemed high risk, although I lived with my parents at the time. I needed to help my mum and my sister. The hospital held no regard for the safety of its employees. They forced me to come into work.
43. I spent two months isolating in my bedroom, I barely came out of my room, for fear of spreading an infectious disease. Never once did I think about the situation or my prior experience or knowledge, I was just reacting to the media frenzy. I was full of panic and stress.
44. The first irregularity I noticed, was the government and media stating that covid-19 was an infectious disease. However just before the first lockdown was implemented, I noted that the government had downgraded the status of covid-19 stating it was no longer infectious.
45. This made no sense to me. Why would we need to isolate if they downgraded the status? My circle of friends contained many medics and dentists. They were all panicking at the time, saying they had inadequate surgical masks and that they needed N95 masks.
46. N95 masks were seen as the only way to prevent medical professionals from becoming infected with covid-19.
The public being asked to wear surgical masks made no sense to me. The virus would be able to go straight through. Something didn’t seem right.
47. I ended up meeting and dating an FY1 doctor (my ex-[girl friend]) around October 2020. We clicked because she was different from every other doctor I had previously spoken to about covid-19. She also had her suspicions and believed it wasn’t as infectious as it was made out to be.
48. We both started to slowly realise that covid-19 was a real disease (as it was showing up on X-rays in patients) but that it wasn’t infectious at all, despite all the reporting in the media.
49. I needed to experience working in a covid-19 hotspot and see all the action for myself. In March 2021, I quit my job at the hospital in Central London and took up an opportunity to manage A&E and AMU (Acute Medical Unit) at a hospital in South London.
50. The 6 months that I spent working in A&E/AMU confirmed all my suspicions and culminated in my decision to end my career in the NHS.
51. [For] the entire 6 months, I was not tested once with a PCR Test, despite walking into wards full of covid-19 positive patients on a daily basis. Yet we were required to test multiple times when visiting another country.
52. The PCR test that the NHS was using to test patients, is known to have false-positive results. This is shown in numerous studies which can be found online, an example of which is: Are you infectious if you have a positive PCR test result for COVID-19? – The Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, The Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, 5 August 2020
53. If a patient tests positive for Covid-19 with a PCR Test, this doesn’t mean they are infected. If tested again, they may well turn out with a negative test. However, in the NHS, patients are only tested once and this stays on their record throughout their admission.
54. Hospital policies were changed alongside the implementation of the Medical Examiner System, to ensure that any patient who died within 30 days of a positive test, would have to have covid-19 as their primary cause of death. This was regulated by the Medical Examiner.
55. The highest cause of death at every hospital per annum pre covid-19 is Pneumonia. Pneumonia is a respiratory disease like covid-19.
56. Pneumonia can be broken down into 4 different causes of death: Bronchopneumonia, Aspiration Pneumonia, Community-Acquired Pneumonia and Hospital Acquired Pneumonia. These four causes when added together kill the largest number of people on an annual basis prior to the pandemic.
57. The Medical Examiner (one individual in each hospital), was certifying all these pneumonia deaths as covid-19 deaths. When four different diseases [are] grouped and now being called covid-19, you will inevitably see covid-19 with a huge death rate.
58. The mainstream media was reporting on this huge increase in covid-19 deaths due to the Medical Examiner System being in place.
59. Patients being admitted and dying with very common conditions such as old age, myocardial infarctions, end-stage kidney failure, haemorrhages, strokes, COPD and cancer etc. were all now being certified as covid-19 via the Medical Examiner System.
60. Hospitals were switching to and from the Medical Examiner System and the pre-pandemic system as [and] when they pleased. When covid-19 deaths needed to be increased, the hospital would switch to the Medical Examiner System.
61. Doctors were one week being told they needed to complete an MCCD, to then be told the following week that they weren’t required to fill out an MCCD, as the Medical Examiner was handling this.
62. Hospitals were incentivised to report covid-19 deaths over normal deaths, as the government was paying hospitals additional money for every covid-19 death that was being reported. The Medical Examiner system ensured that covid-19 was being put down as the cause of death.
63. The government sends out the annual NHS budget to Primary Care Trusts. This is split to fund Hospitals and GP Surgeries. A clinical coding team at each hospital will assign codes to each treatment or death, so that money is paid out to the hospitals.
63. Any doctor who argued against covid-19 as a cause of death was bullied and vilified. The General Medical Council (“GMC”) maintains a register of all doctors within the UK. This ensures that there is a fear of being struck off for speaking out against an agenda.
64. The GMC effectively controls all doctors in the UK.
Even if a doctor realises what is going on and wants to speak out. They will think twice about talking, as they would be risking their entire career and everything that they’ve worked so hard for.
65. Doctors essentially have their hands tied, many have families, kids, mortgages and mouths to feed. If I was in their situation, I would think twice about speaking out, for fear of being struck off by the GMC and losing everything.
66. The NHS Track & Trace App, which was introduced to try and control the spread of the virus, did not apply to medical professionals. We were all asked to turn this off, as Doctors and staff isolating for 14 days disrupted patient flow, beds and the discharge of patients.
67. Any doctor that I spoke to regarding taking the covid-19 vaccine, were insistent that they were going to wait for a period of time, before taking it themselves, to ensure that it was safe.
How is it ethical to give a vaccine to your patients, but not want to take it yourself?
68. In my 12 years of NHS service, never has a doctor pushed or influenced the public to take a vaccine. Yet on social media, I was seeing close friends who were doctors, starting to post on social media that they have taken the vaccine and that the public should.
69. I wouldn’t be surprised if doctors were being forced to promote the vaccine by their superiors or if they were receiving monetary gain in doing so.
70. I have no doubt in my mind, that the Government has planned the entire pandemic since 2016 when they first proposed the change to medical death certification.
71. Stress leads to disease and illness. Panic leads to people following whatever orders and instructions that are given to them by authority, such as prolonged mask use, which leads to an increase in admissions in to the NHS system due to hypoxia and bacterial pneumonia.
72. The NHS treatment pathway involved patients being placed onto ventilators. There is a 50% chance of death from this clinical decision alone. How many innocent people have died from the clinical decision to place them on a ventilator.
73. During board rounds (where every admitted patient is discussed), we were seeing patients on a daily basis being admitted due to suffering from adverse effects of taking the vaccine. Patients were blacking out after taking the vaccine or suffering from clots or strokes.
74. The NHS is all about money and making money. The safety of a patient didn’t seem like the most important thing. It was more about: how do we make more beds available so that another patient can be treated?
75. Patients with no next of kin are discharged to nursing homes with care packages. I can’t comment on what happened to these patients in nursing homes, during the pandemic, as I have no experience of their inner workings.
76. Patients are seen as money, even upon death, hospitals receive money for each death. Is there an actual concern for patient health and safety? I know numerous doctors who are driven primarily by money and monetary gain.

77. The reason why I left the NHS in 2021

56-year-old male, admitted into A&E with end stage kidney failure, has a previous history of regular dialysis treatment for this. No respiratory symptoms on admission and no temperature. However, when tested with a PCR Test…
He, unfortunately, tests positive. This stays on his record throughout his admission. Our hospital is relatively small in comparison to others I have worked at, we have no dialysis machine as a result. We urgently need to transfer this patient to another hospital otherwise this patient will die. Our treating doctor calls up larger hospitals with a dialysis machine to organise his transfer. All doctors pick up the phone and request the covid-19 status of the patient. A transfer is declined due to a covid-19 infection protocol. Our doctors again reiterate the point that this patient will die without dialysis. We are told there is nothing that can be done and that the patient cannot be accepted for transfer.
This gentleman ended up dying without dialysis. Now please tell me what goes on the MCCD … 1a) covid-19 2) End Stage Kidney Failure.
Not written by the treating doctor who disagreed with this cause of death but by a medical examiner, put in place by the government and the hospital.
When innocent people are being killed by a corrupt organisation and system, for pure monetary gain, I can’t stand by and be part of this anymore. My conscious was clear and I no longer wanted to be a part of this anymore.
78. I am very blessed and lucky that I was in a position to walk away. I’ve been able to speak out, because my hands are not tied and I am not regulated by any organisation or governing body. I believe in speaking the truth and in doing so, I am only just an instrument for God.
79. I joined the NHS, 12 years ago because I had the desire to help those in need but the moment I realised that I was not doing this anymore, was the time for me to walk away.
80. I apologise to you all if the above thread is confusing with regard to terminology or if you cannot understand its contents. I’m hoping that at the very least, it can be understood by my fellow medical professionals or by journalists who would like to report the truth.
81. Would be very grateful if you could help spread this truth and raise awareness of what really went on within the NHS by reposting and tagging any relevant individuals who you think may help with spreading the truth of this thread.

Sai is currently the Creative Director at Trillionaire Gents Squad, a streetwear and lifestyle clothing brand established in 2021.
Thread-by-@TheOriginalSai-14-Jan-23Download

Featured image: Call to protect UK doctors from prosecution over life-or-death Covid rationing, The Guardian, 17 November 2020
 

Pandemic Leaders Were Biodefense Puppets and Profiteers​

by Debbie Lerman | Brownstone Institute
June 26th 2023, 2:22 pm

Link: https://www.infowars.com/posts/pandemic-leaders-were-biodefense-puppets-and-profiteers/

It seems like an open-and-shut case: Dumb policies, and dumb people in charge of those policies.

Scandalous incompetence. Profound stupidity. Astounding errors. This is how many analysts – including Dr. Vinay Prasad, Dr. Scott Atlas, and popular Substack commentator eugyppius – explain how leading public health experts could prescribe so many terrible pandemic response policies.

And it’s true: the so-called experts certainly have made themselves look foolish over the last three years: Public health leaders like Rochelle Walensky and Anthony Fauci make false claims, or contradict themselves repeatedly, on subjects related to the pandemic response, while leading scientists, like Peter Hotez in the US and Christian Drosten in Germany, are equally susceptible to such flip-flops and lies. Then there are the internationally renowned medical researchers, like Eric Topol, who repeatedly commit obvious errors in interpreting Covid-related research studies. [ref]


All of these figures publicly and aggressively promoted anti-public health policies, including universal masking, social distancing, mass testing and quarantining of healthy people, lockdowns and vaccine mandates.

It seems like an open-and-shut case: Dumb policies, dumb people in charge of those policies.

This might be true in a few individual cases of public health or medical leaders who really are incapable of understanding even high school level science. However, if we look at leading pandemic public health and medical experts as a group – a group consisting of the most powerful, widely published, and well-paid researchers and scientists in the world – that simple explanation sounds much less convincing.

Even if you believe that most medical researchers are shills for pharmaceutical companies and that scientists rarely break new ground anymore, I think you’d be hard-pressed to claim that they lack basic analytical skills or a solid educational background in the areas they’ve studied. Most doctors and scientists with advanced degrees know how to analyze simple scientific documents and understand basic data.

Additionally, those doctors and public health professionals who were deemed experts during the pandemic were also clever enough to have climbed the academic, scientific, and/or government ladders to the highest levels.

They might be unscrupulous, sycophantic, greedy, or power-mongering. You might think they make bad moral or ethical decisions. But it defies logic to say that every single one of them understands simple scientific data less than, say, someone like me or you. In fact, I find that to be a facile, superficial judgment that does not get to the root cause of their seemingly stupid, incompetent behavior.


Returning to some specific examples, I would argue that it is irrational to conclude, as Dr. Prasad did, that someone like Dr. Topol, Founder and Director of the Scripps Research Translational Institute, who has published over 1,300 peer-reviewed articles and is one of the top 10 most cited researchers in medicine [ref] cannot read research papers “at a high level.” And it is equally unlikely that Anthony Fauci, who managed to ascend and remain atop the highest scientific perch in the federal government for many decades, controlling billions of dollars in research grants [ref], was too dumb to know that masks don’t stop viruses.

There must, therefore, be a different reason why all the top pro-lockdown scientists and public health experts – in perfect lockstep – suddenly started (and continue to this day) to misread studies and advocate policies that they had claimed in the past were unnecessary, making themselves look like fools.

Public health experts were messengers for the biodefense response​

The most crucial single fact to know and remember when trying to understand the craziness of Covid times is this:

The public health experts were not responsible for pandemic response policy. The military-intelligence-biodefense leadership was in charge.

In previous articles, I examined in great detail the government documents that show how standard tenets of public health pandemic management were abruptly and secretly thrown out during Covid. The most startling switch was the replacement of the public health agencies by the National Security Council and Department of Homeland Security at the helm of pandemic policy and planning.

As part of the secret switch, all communications – defined in every previous pandemic planning document as the responsibility of the CDC – were taken over by the National Security Council under the auspices of the White House Task Force. The CDC was not even allowed to hold its own press conferences!

As a Senate report from December 2022 notes:

From March through June 2020, CDC was not permitted to conduct public briefings, despite multiple requests by the agency and CDC media requests were “rarely cleared.” HHS stated that by early April 2020, “after several attempts to get approvals,” its Office of Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs “stopped asking” the White House “for a while.” (p. 8)
When public health and medical experts blanketed the airwaves and Internet with “recommendations” urging universal masking, mass testing and quarantining of asymptomatic people, vaccine mandates, and other anti-public health policies – or when they promoted obviously flawed studies that supported the quarantine-until-vaccine biodefense agenda – they were not doing so because they were dumb, incompetent, or misguided.

They were performing the role that the leaders of the national security/biodefense response gave them: to be the trusted public face that made people believe quarantine-until-vaccine was a legitimate public health response.

Why did public health leaders go along with the biodefense agenda?​

We have to imagine ourselves in the position of public health and medical experts at top government positions when the intelligence-military-biodefense network took over the pandemic response.

What would you do if you were a government employee, or a scientist dependent on government grants, and you were told that the quarantine-until-vaccine policy was actually the only way to deal with this particular engineered potential bioweapon?

How would you behave if an unprecedented event in human history happened on your watch: an engineered virus designed as a potential bioweapon was spreading around the world, and the people who designed it told you that terrifying the entire population into locking down and waiting for a vaccine was the only way to stop it from killing many millions?

More mundanely, if your position and power depended on going along with whatever the powers-that-be in the NSC and DHS told you to do – if your job and livelihood were on the line – would you go against the narrative and risk losing it all?

And, finally, in a more venal vain: what if you stood to gain a lot more money and/or power by advocating for policies that might not be the gold standard of public health, but that you told yourself could bring about major innovations (vaccines/countermeasures) that would save humanity from future pandemics?

We know how the most prominent Covid “experts” answered those questions. Not because they were dumb, but because they had a lot to lose and/or a lot to gain by going along with the biodefense narrative – and they were told millions would die if they failed to do so.

Why understanding the motives of public health leaders during Covid is so important​

Paradoxically, deeming public health experts stupid and incompetent actually reinforces the consensus narrative: that lockdowns and vaccines were part of a public health plan. In this reading, the response may have been terrible, or it may have gone awry, but it was still just a stupid public health plan designed by incompetent public health leaders.

Such a conclusion leads to calls for misguided and necessarily ineffectual solutions: Even if we replaced every single HHS employee or defunded the HHS or even the WHO altogether, we would not solve the problem and would be poised to repeat the entire pandemic fiasco all over again.

The only way to avoid such repetition is to recognize the Covid catastrophe for what it was: an international counterterrorism effort focused myopically on lockdowns and vaccines, to the exclusion of all traditional and time-tested public health protocols.

We need to wake up to the fact that, since the terrorist attacks of 9/11 (if not earlier), we have ceded control of the agencies that are supposed to be in charge of public health to an international military-intelligence-pharmaceutical cartel.

This “public-private partnership” of bioterrorism experts and vaccine developers is not interested in public health at all, except as a cover for their very secret and very lucrative biowarfare research and countermeasure development.

Public health was shunted aside during the Covid pandemic, and the public health leaders were used as trusted “experts” to convey biowarfare edicts to the population. Their cooperation does not reflect stupidity or incompetence. Making such claims contributes to the coverup of the much more sinister and dangerous transfer of power that their seemingly foolish behavior was meant to hide.
 

Was the Covid Response a Coup by the Intelligence Community?​

by Michael Senger | Brownstone Institute
August 3rd 2023, 12:55 pm

Link: https://www.infowars.com/posts/was-the-covid-response-a-coup-by-the-intelligence-community/

How were officials able to implement such destructive, totalitarian policies across the Western world without intelligence authorities stepping in to stop them?

Evidence leads to a chilling answer: The reason the Western intelligence community never stepped in to stop the illiberalism is that virtually all the most illiberal aspects of the response to COVID lead directly back to the Western intelligence community itself.

From an early date, commentators have noted that the response to COVID had all the look and feel of a coup attempt. The masks, the slogans, the symbols, the lies, the sudden inversion of long-cherished norms and values, the mindless acceptance of information from nefarious sources like the World Health Organization and China. Something was seriously off, and it all seemed so obvious.

Thus, one overarching question always lingered over the response to COVID. How were officials able to implement such destructive, totalitarian policies across the Western world without intelligence authorities stepping in to stop them?


A detached review of the evidence leads to a chilling answer—though in hindsight, perhaps the only one that was ever really possible. Quite simply, the reason the Western intelligence community never stepped in to stop the illiberalism is that virtually all the most illiberal aspects of the response to COVID lead directly back to the Western intelligence community itself.

Reviewing the Evidence​

The Western intelligence community was behind the birth of “social distancing” as public health policy via Richard Hatchett and Carter Mecher—operatives with deep ties to the highest levels of the intelligence and biosecurity communities—through their work on biodefense policy during the Bush administration. In what may be the mother of all COVID coverups, Hatchett and Mecher’s story that “social distancing” was based on a 14-year-old’s science project, as told through the New York Times and celebrity author Michael Lewis, appears to be nothing but an elaborate cover story for the fact that the concept was lifted directly from China’s longstanding policy of “lockdown” during SARS in 2003.

The intelligence community either planned or was in attendance at nearly all the pandemic simulations that began being held on a semi-annual basis beginning with Dark Winter in 2001. Current Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines was personally present and sat directly beside China’s CDC Director at the Event 201 simulation of a coronavirus pandemic which took place just weeks before COVID was revealed.
https://www.infowarsstore.com/speci...xtad&utm_medium=Text+Link&utm_content=bfutext
Michael Callahan, the federal government’s chief virus intelligence expert, told National Geographic that he began tracking the novel coronavirus in November 2019, and he was the US government’s only confirmed contact in Wuhan during the initial lockdown in January 2020. Upon returning from Wuhan, Callahan’s testimony was key to throwing the federal government into a state of emergency and the widespread adoption of mechanical ventilators which proved to be deadly. The federal government’s first impressions of COVID thus came from the Western intelligence community via Callahan.

Deputy National Security Advisor Matt Pottinger, one of America’s highest-ranking intelligence officials in 2020, arguably played the most important role of any individual in the initial months of the response to COVID, unilaterally ratcheting up alarm about COVID in the White House beginning in January 2020 and advocating mask mandates, quarantines, and shutdowns all based on his own sources in China, while breaching protocol on several occasions. Pottinger was also behind the appointment of White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator Deborah Birx, and he selected Birx for this role as a “public health security advisor” as early as November 2019, the same time that Callahan began tracking the new coronavirus. Having been installed in the White House, Birx then went on to be the chief force orchestrating lockdowns across the United States.

The origin of the online videos of Wuhan residents falling to their deaths which went viral all over the world in early 2020 is disputed. The videos were carefully edited, suggesting a sophisticated state-sponsored disinformation campaign, and they directly contradicted the reality of what we now know was taking place in China at the time, suggesting the Chinese Communist Party either created or at least approved of them. However, the videos were generally released through Chinese dissident groups that claimed to be hawkish toward the CCP and thus also had the approval of the Western intelligence community. While some of these were most likely CCP-controlled opposition groups, regardless, the Western intelligence community greenlit the dissemination of these videos.


The propaganda story about Li Wenliang, the eye doctor who was supposedly punished for warning his friends about an incidence of pneumonia in Wuhan in December 2019, appears to have in fact been invented by the venerated CCP propaganda outlet Beijing Youth Daily weeks after the events supposedly occurred. However, just days after being invented by the CCP’s propaganda machine, this absurd tale about Li Wenliang was featured in many of the Western world’s most elite media outlets, including the New York Times, the BBC, Foreign Policy, the Financial Times, and countless others, and it continues to be touted as true in elite policy circles to this day. This story, too, thus had the approval of the Western intelligence community.

Prior to the lockdown of Lombardy, Italy, in February 2020, virtually no one in the world was publicly advocating or hoping that China’s lockdowns would come to be adopted as global policy. Yet in his book, Italy’s health minister Roberto Speranza recalls that he was well aware that the concept of lockdown came from China and that the decision to adopt this policy in Lombardy was made based on information from Stefano Merler. A look at Merler’s work reveals that he spent 2020 stamping information from China as “science,” effectively running a propaganda laundering operation on behalf of the CCP. Yet Merler had also been praised by Bill Gates and was part of the Western biodefense network. In 2013, Merler had authored Containing the accidental laboratory escape of potential pandemic influenza viruses; it appears the Western biosecurity community deputized Merler for just this purpose in 2020. This decision for Italy to copy China’s lockdown policy thus appears to have been condoned by the Western intelligence community as well.

Days after the lockdown of Lombardy, the WHO released a report gushing about China’s lockdown measures, telling the world, “China’s uncompromising and rigorous use of nonpharmaceutical measures to contain transmission of the COVID-19 virus in multiple settings provides vital lessons for the global response.” As Assistant Director General Bruce Aylward reported, “What China has demonstrated is, you have to do this.” Apparently the Western intelligence community either failed to notice or tacitly approved of this bizarre act of sycophancy to the CCP as well, rubber-stamping China’s lockdowns into global policy.

In March 2020, hundreds of thousands of social media bots began touting China’s lockdown policy on Twitter using nearly identical language. Given that these bots heaped praise on China while denigrating every other country in the world, including the United States, it’s long been quite clear that this was a CCP disinformation campaign. That said, these bots were permitted to perform their function and, incredibly, their pro-lockdown posts were not deleted from Twitter until well into 2021. Even as far back as 2014, millions of bot posts touted “lockdown”—specifically using the Chinese term instead of the Western term of “social distancing”—in response to Ebola in Sierra Leone, and those bot posts remain intact to this day. These massive disinformation campaigns were allowed to take place and the posts were able to stay up for years despite social media being tightly monitored by the Western intelligence community throughout this period.

As soon as lockdowns began, dissenting opinions were censored, with one prominent example being the censorship of Aaron Ginn for his original anti-lockdown article in March 2020. Worse yet, Twitter under its prior management gave prestigious “blue checks” to ridiculous users like nutritionist Eric Feigl-Ding, who sowed COVID hysteria on an almost daily basis from the earliest possible date.

Even top scientists on the political left who generally supported lockdowns were so troubled by Ding as to jointly call him out as a charlatan. Yet astonishingly, Twitter ignored these bipartisan calls to rein Ding in and instead featured him prominently in its exclusive “COVID-19 experts” section. In light of revelations in the Twitter Files and Missouri v. Biden, we now know that the Western intelligence community was steering these decisions on COVID by major social media platforms.

When the response to COVID began, the public health establishment, in accordance with its longstanding guidance, did not initially recommend masks. Weeks later, this guidance abruptly changed, and masks were mandated across the Western world. Both Pottinger and Birx pushed for masks inside the White House based on their own information and experience from China. Simultaneously, Zeynep Tufekci and Jeremy Howard launched a bewilderingly successful campaign to reverse the CDC’s longstanding mask guidance and push for mask mandates all across America—also based on information from China. The Western intelligence community, through Pottinger and Birx, and perhaps through Tufekci and Howard, thus instigated this shift in masking guidance.

The intelligence community was also heavily involved in the development and push for COVID vaccines, with Michael Callahan and others playing leading roles in “Operation Warp Speed.”

The Western intelligence community may also be behind some of the most prominent controlled opposition to the official response to COVID. Nearly every leading intelligence official in 2020 has endorsed the theory that COVID came from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and Matt Pottinger was instrumental in the initial push for that theory. One of the most prominent public advocates of the “lab-leak theory,” Jamie Metzl, is a former member of the White House National Security Council. Some of the other most prominent public advocates of the lab-leak theory have either now or in the past been directly employed by Sandia National Laboratories; Sandia National Laboratories was instrumental in the birth of “social distancing” as public health policy during the Bush administration.

Most importantly, the Western intelligence community holds the keys to any serious investigation into any of these events. All over the world, across professions, citizens have been depending on the idea that if there was anything corrupt or rotten about the response to COVID, the Western intelligence community would step in. Of course, that won’t happen, because as the above record makes clear, they’re the ones who planned it.

The Missing Link​

The view of the response to COVID as having been driven primarily by the Western intelligence community goes a long way to explaining several key mysteries.

It brings newfound significance to the catastrophe of 2010 to 2012 in which America’s entire spy network in China was systematically executed based on intelligence leaks from the CIA—this is considered one of the CIA’s worst failures in history.

To put the horror of this catastrophe into perspective, dozens of CCP officials had been been selfless enough to place their trust in the United States, hoping that doing so might help bring positive change to their country. For this, some group in the CIA routed this information back to the CCP and had every one of these brave individuals murdered; the fate of their families is unknown. Apparently from such an early date, some elements in the CIA were already doing the bidding of the CCP to such a revolting degree, and were able to get away with it.

It explains why obvious communist assets like Lancet Editor-in-Chief Richard Horton, 40-year British Communist Party Member Susan Michie, the WHO’s Bruce Aylward, and others have been able to operate so openly and even advance their careers despite all the harm their policies have caused.

It may help explain why the intelligence community has been gradually cultivating more and more previously independent media outlets, and how an entire apparatus for censoring the legal speech of Western citizens was able to be set up and operated without the public’s knowledge.

It explains why the propaganda and illiberalism of the official response to COVID has always seemed so transparent, with media outlets across the world suddenly bombarding their own people with coordinated terror messaging featuring lines such as “Flatten the curve,” “We’re all in this together,” “Just stay home,” “Follow the science,” and “Two weeks to slow the spread” without anyone stepping in to stop it, and why the narrative of elite institutions has generally drifted so far from public opinion.

It explains why some leaders like Donald Trump and Boris Johnson who weren’t initially keen on lockdowns have always seemed so confused; it seems the information they were being fed by the intelligence community on COVID may have been deliberately misleading.

It explains why the facts coming from the Western intelligence community keep changing, with several officials initially telling reporters that they first learned about the virus in November 2019—in line with Callahan’s testimony—but then changing their story to insist that no one knew about the virus until December 20, 2019.

It explains why the “resistance” to the official response to COVID always seemed like such a hodgepodge, with a loose-knit network of rather ordinary individuals able to have such an unusually large impact on the public conversation, uncovering damning facts that were going unreported by major media outlets, and why even some very high-level officials like Supreme Court Justices have had to turn to grassroots sources like Brownstone Institute for information on what actually happened.

An Unwitting Coup​

Upon reviewing the evidence, it’s hauntingly clear that the illiberalism of the response to COVID largely emanated from the Western intelligence community. But in part owing to the secrecy of the agencies involved, it’s difficult to determine who exactly within the intelligence community might have orchestrated all this and why.

One important lead is Richard Hatchett, the father of “social distancing,” who spun a book-length cover story about how the concept came from a 14-year-old girl’s science project. Another is Michael Callahan, whose testimony from Wuhan threw the federal government into a state of emergency. Callahan reported to Robert Kadlec, another official with longstanding ties to the biosecurity community.

Another clear lead is former Deputy National Security Advisor Matt Pottinger. Given that Pottinger is central to virtually every official narrative of the initial months of the response to COVID, it’s inexcusable that he’s still never been called to testify about his role.

But so far, the trail ends there. Pottinger reported to National Security Advisor Robert O’Brien and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, and there’s nothing suspicious about either of those men. Another possible lead is Avril Haines, currently Director of National Intelligence, who sat alongside China’s CDC Director George Gao at Event 201—but Haines wasn’t in any position of power when COVID first appeared during the Trump administration in 2020. Perhaps a more likely scenario is that the leaders of our intelligence agencies were overly trusting of their subordinates, and could thus have been rolled by some corrupt mid-level agents.

Further, there’s a degree of truth to the critical notion that, by virtue of their secrecy and their longstanding ethos of realpolitik, the Western intelligence community may have a somewhat totalitarian culture all on their own, notwithstanding the influence of the CCP. This longstanding culture of justifying the use of force and propaganda abroad may have blinded Western intelligence leaders to the illiberalism of the policies their agencies were deploying in response to COVID; thus, what we witnessed during COVID may have been the result of the CIA and its counterparts turning their awesome powers of manipulation against their own people, however unwittingly.

Still, the amount of planning and the reliance on information from China during the response to COVID is too uncanny for there not to have been a significant degree of CCP influence involved. While there’s plenty of corruption to go around in public health, the media, and other branches of government at both the state and federal level, no genuine inquiry into what took place can be possible without the intelligence community looking straight in the mirror.

The response to COVID was one of the greatest peacetime policy catastrophes in history, shredding America’s international credibility, robbing children of years of their youth and education, killing millions, throwing hundreds of millions into poverty, costing billions of life years, and transferring trillions in wealth from workers to billionaires, all for nothing. That this illiberalism emanated directly from the Western intelligence community explains how a catastrophe of such magnitude was able to take place.

Most of all, that the Western intelligence community drove the illiberalism of the response to COVID explains why the corruption and inhumanity of that response have always seemed so obvious, with the most valuable information on the events in question often coming from leading officials’ own books and interviews, despite how much harm they caused. They’re able to operate with such impunity because they know that the only agencies that can hold them accountable are the ones behind the whole spectacle. The propaganda is obvious, and it’s meant to be.

Given the scale of the tragedy and the gravity of the potential crimes, there’s a widespread sentiment that any investigation into the response to COVID should be handled by the proper authorities. On this point, Xi Jinping, a firm believer in the importance of law and order, couldn’t agree more.

At the Mercy of the Big Banks [ck site link, above, top]
 
Back
Top