Introduction
Louis. He tells me that he hopes he is
100% wrong about what follows, but proven
to be wrong only with good quality evidence. He
also assures me that he did not start out with any
preconceived conclusion. All the information gleaned
from trawling the internet is readily available and has
revealed a great deal of undisclosed fact. The original
source is linked wherever possible so it is clear that all
the information is to be found elsewhere and is not Louis's
own unsupported opinion. Conclusions are drawn from the
facts. I've never before talked with anyone so passionate.
Louis's intention is not to persuade. Everyone is entitled
to their own opinion and Louis respects this absolutely.
Any opinion can only be based on known information.
The presentation below uncovers many facts that
have been kept in the shadows and paradoxically,
it is in the shadows where the light of hope resides.
Any debate must discuss both sides of the
decision. The authorities inform of only that
which they want to be considered and force
people to draw a distorted conclusion.
Millions are possibly exposing themselves
to what Louis considers, by the application
of real science, considerable danger
('vaccine') and he is very worried
that he could be right - DA
Is this where we are going?
Who stands to win? - the 'elite'
In 2020, Bourla pushed for aggressive timelines in Pfizer's
development of a possible vaccine against COVID-19...
He determined production of a potential vaccine would begin, at risk,
while awaiting approval from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA),
although expected as soon as October 2020...
In late July 2020, the company was among top developers of a potential vaccine, in partnership with German company BioNTech, as they entered late-stage trials with mRNA, BNT162b2...
Pfizer... biopharma business...
sales increase... 6% to $9.8 billion
buoyed by heart med Vyndaqel
On 9 November 2020, after the Pfizer vaccine's trial success communication, chief executive Albert Bourla sold $5.6m of his Pfizer shares after the share price had risen by 7% to within a whisker of the company’s all-time high, leading to criticism even if this was legitimate under the 10b5-1 plan.
There are many claims to have isolated
the virus, specifically...
SARS-CoV-2
In your opinion what is the point where science meets with business? How can business affect the world of science?I have never encountered a business person (Chris Whitty + Bill Gates connection 2008) with any true interest in science. Why should he be interested? He had the choice, and he chose business. It is only through good fortune that money ends up in the hands of scientists, who know how to use it for anything other than making more money, and it is a sorry situation indeed, since much scientific research is not cheap. Sometimes very fortunate scientists get rich, like Craig Venter, and then they can let their imagination direct their research, but this is the rare exception.
Most scientists are constrained to do the bidding of businessmen and it can be immensely frustrating for the scientist and unproductive for society in general.
- CEO Pfizer
(net worth = £$22.8 million), see fact no. 9 - DA
- yet to be vaccinated (won't have Pfizer vaccine? - DA)
Most biological research ventures fail because the boss is highly subject to scientific illusions and has no idea how to separate truly good ideas from the highly simplified and often distorted things that filter up to him. He is usually under the influence of even less informed investors, and subject to misinformation from inferior scientists eager to have his favor. It is an unsavory world which I have never enjoyed.
As has been known for millennia “philosopher kings” are hard to come by. Government grants, although offering, in theory, a preferable alternative, have the similar problem of being often administered by scientific incompetents who are after power and personal security, instead of widely useful knowledge. Good scientists don’t like administrative jobs, which leaves us exactly where we are. Science is generally directed by nonscientists.
We stumble on.
Dr. Mullis shared the Nobel Prize for Chemistry (1993)
with Michael Smith for the invention of PCR
A variant has allegedly been 'detected'
A variant has some genetic changes and represents viral evolution. Two variants of a virus mean this is the same coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) strain. Not a new virus. Genetic change does define that the PCR analysis being so widely (ab)used should not specifically be able to detect SARS-CoV-2 since it has been modified. If claims are made that detection of the new variant is successful this becomes evidential proof that only a fragment of coronavirus RNA can be found present. The specific strain cannot be determined using PCR. Earlier claims to have detected SARS-CoV-2 specifically are ALL untrue. Statistics have then been used to show positive test results and consequently a high death rate (COVID-19). This is the justification for house-arrest, lockdowns, and other restrictions to be imposed,
All exposed to be a...
LIE
Outright proof must be obtained in open court
by asking the 'expert' witness
(the 'independent' SAGE member responsible)
under oath
if the PCR test can be used to
prove the existence of
Louis, isn't it odd that this claimed more dangerous - something - has been found just after the multiple vaccines have been 'approved'. How can there be a variant of something that doesn't even exist? If there is no virus, how can a positive result be returned, Louis? Is it the PCR test simply finding that someone has had a cold? Or recovered from an earlier 'mild' infection - DA
A vaccine is proposed to be ready
An inexpensive global experiment
A clinical trial
Does the untested technology
actually work?
Bill Gates - The Messiah (666)
New, Unapproved, and
Untested Experimental 'vaccine'
Indemnity from harm (death)
[ensure poor countries get an un-affordable 'vaccine' (eugenics) - DA]
- Bill Gates -- Ted Talk
- Bill Gates -- Ted Talk
- What appeared to be said... (redacted)
- What was actually said... (original)
- What appeared to be said... (redacted)
- What was actually said... (original)
President Trump Deals Huge Blow
to Bill Gates - Withdraws Support From
'China-centric’ COVAX Vaccine Alliance
- Dr. Fauci confirms US commitment to
- Gates-backed vaccine program
- French Prez warns permanent immunity should not be assumed
- Biden says US cases plateauing, as Biden Admin “liberates”
- EU leaders call for more lockdowns, curfews
- Even Dr. Fauci has agreed that it appears US cases are “plateauing”
- Goldman data shows COVID hospitalisations may be trending lower
- US cases, hospitalisations decline; deaths at highs
- Dr. Fauci confirms US commitment to Gates-backed vaccine program
- Ireland latest in Europe to extend lockdown
- UK suffers deadliest day yet
- annual inoculation
- vaccination 'miraculously' working - cases level out as Biden assumes power
- tighten the screws
- it's in the script
- safer in (In America this
- hospital? means more money)
- immediately reverse the Trump withdrawal from the COVAX vaccine alliance
- another screw is tightened
- UK is 'looking' (expectedly bad - DA)
A new technology... directly into humans with no indication as to the effects. Will it cause harm especially in the long-term (a good reason to 'train' many others to exclude doctors - DA)?
Nobody knows. Just carry on...
regardless
RNA experiments (05.07.2020) leap to the front in the coronavirus vaccine race. Promising. Elegant. Unproven. A new generation of vaccine technologies based on deploying a tiny snip of genetic code called messenger RNA to trigger the immune system. A 'theoretical' mechanism. Will it work? It has never before been approved for use.
The concept of mRNA gene therapy would avoid the need for any clinical trials if the new, unapproved, and untested technology can be shown to work. The COVID-19 'vaccine' is supposed to force a cell to make an antibody that recognises the 'spike' protein of the alleged SARS-CoV-2 virus that enables it to enter a cell. This virus has yet to be proven to exist. If the virus does not exist (and here) what function is there for the 'mRNA' (undefined) to perform (altering DNA to... - DA)? If the most vulnerable elderly can survive the 'inoculation' it would pave the way to revolutionise BIG Pharma. Research and development costs would be dramatically reduced (orders of magnitude, Louis - DA). Industrial manufacture to GMP standard would be avoided as the human body does the 'manufacturing'. Purity concerns are redundant since the body would be reasonably assumed to create antibodies that are 100% pure. Only the antigen needs to be identified for the cell to be forced to make any particular antibody.
Drug molecules are becoming ever more complex and to develop a synthetic route to actually make the molecule, an ever-increasing challenge. The costs involved to bring a drug to market are enormous using conventional chemistry and the existing regulatory hurdles. The new technology (mRNA) would greatly reduce this cost. 'Vaccine' technology is the method described that fights disease and the time taken from 'discovery' to launch of a product could be reduced to months instead of years. Minimal testing (as has happened) could only strengthen support for 'fast-tracking'. A good drug is not one that cures but manages an illness since if a patient was cured then eventually the marketplace would disappear. An annual 'vaccine' is a definition of sustainability.
Investment in 'plant' to manufacture the required mRNA 'vaccine' would not be made just for the COVID-19 pandemic. But future needs. This is very suggestive for a 'Brave New World' - the 'Shape of Things to Come'.
1. Vaccination (update UK)
3. Vaccination
has DELETED (25.11.2020) this video -CENSORSHIP of a possible TRUTH
Well, news for YouTube
Watch the video here
Listen here
What is it that has panicked YouTube? An arbitrary (unexplained, Louis - DA) decision was made to ban a particular video. There is no clear mention in the terms of service that indicates what is so terrible about a video concerning vaccines? What has gotten YouTube so rattled? Why has such a crude attempt been made to shut down any argument that opposes the 'accepted - the science is settled' attitude about vaccines and COVID-19 specifically? Why is it so critically important to convince people that only vaccines can save the human race from annihilation?
The arrogance (that always accompanies a massive ego - DA) enables YouTube to assume that media like YouTube actually have the power to 'persuade' people to adopt the correct way of thinking simply by acting as a self-appointed judge and jury and censoring anything it doesn't agree with?
It is the pathetic stance that YouTube considers itself so important. Barbara Loe Fisher is highly regarded and a very sincere individual. It is the monumental arrogance of the likes of YouTube to imagine that accurate information (truth, Louis - DA) can be silenced - by YouTube.
NOTE: This Video was originally uploaded to YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gycNMf0xAc), but YouTube deleted it under the pretext of some spurious copyright claim over some of the used footage. Suppressing free and open discussion on any subject, however, is as bad as telling lies, and knowingly suppressing the truth is the biggest lie of all, because it is based, not on a mistake or a genuine error, but on a deliberate intention to deceive.
This is the author's dedication:
With great respect for those who have tried—though harassed, punished, fined, imprisoned and otherwise abused—to tell it like it really was: Arthur R. Butz, Robert Faurisson, Jürgen Graf, Gerd Honsik, David Irving, Kevin Käther, Nicholas Kollerstrom, Fred Leuchter, Horst Mahler, Carlo Mattogno, Ingrid Rimland, Germar Rudolf, Bradley Smith, Wilhelm Stäglich, Sylvia Stolz, Fredrick Toben, Ernst Zündel and many others.
Videos are still available (here) and are essential viewing to
restore balance if you are open-minded enough to at least
consider any alternative viewpoints to those that have
already been 'conditioned'. The indoctrination.
The propaganda. (The lies? - DA)
Amazon too (and YouTube)
The Amazon Book Burning
The Day Amazon Murdered History
It’s 1564 for Amazon—and Its Customers
Boy, Is It HARD to Boycott Amazon
Today Amazon, Tomorrow, the World
Does Amazon Censor Book Reviews?
The Many Beds Amazon Shares with the Government
(select read more... to start the video if there is one)
A detailed analysis of these texts and videos forces a review of 'accepted' stories based on hearsay. Are they describing truth, part truth, or total fabrication? The alleged atrocities of the Japanese during WWII - was this only to justify American 'use' (experimentation, Louis? - DA) of the atomic bomb? How much historical information of the last 3000 years and more is truth or fabrication? Is The Bible nothing more than fiction? The seeds of doubt grow. They produce only fields of... information. 'Truth' is simply about persuading someone of the veracity of.. a belief. Facts have always been and always will be distorted into the convenient 'narrative' of the day.
The Legend of 9/11 - 13 years on
4. Technocracy - Science of Social Engineering
5. Plandemic
7. Bill Gates
No medical training.
Why does anyone pay attention?
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
Another $70 million for COVID-19 Vaccine Development
$100 million Coronavirus 'Relief'
$50 billion to Charitable Causes
Chris Whitty - London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine $40 million
and more...
Calling in the favours, Louis.
The financial hooks go deep - DA
Now the most dangerous man on the planet?
How Bill Gates Monopolized Global Health
5G
Bill Gates and WHO
Dr. Joseph Mercola on Bill Gates
8. Dana Ashlie
9. Dr. Devra Davis
The Corbett Report (videos)
The following argument examines the known from the reported unknowable. Most of what has been 'reported' in the media (newspapers and TV) is of 'we say so' statements and is essentially nothing more than unsubstantiated hearsay. Important 'facts' must be verified but they are not. They are ignored.
The evidence points to the introduction of 'a' vaccine. It is impossible to fast-track vaccines or new drugs without cutting (off - DA) safety corners. The use of animals in early experimentation has been mandated by law for decades but in a virtual instant animals are now invalidated as giving reliable information. This is an official admission that billions of animals have been needlessly slaughtered. Any information obtained through such methods has been known for a very long time to be useless and should not be trusted. It can be ignored.
The implication of this is that all medications that have later been tested on healthy humans as a result of experiments on animals and then target patients (as protocol demands) were not justifiable and were potentially at best ineffective and at worst unsafe and very dangerous. They are now all suspect. Any potential vaccine that is alleged to be effective can be tested by direct introduction into humans and does not need the initial test on animals. That is the justification to avoid any corners at all. In a stroke, safety evaluation has been removed. It is simply how effective an agent is claimed to be. If a potential vaccine is 'tested' (tried out, Louis - DA) directly on humans and the result is a few deaths of healthy patients, but most survive then the vaccine should not be used (that doesn't mean that the product will be abandoned, Louis - DA).
This is not a conspiracy theory but deals with facts. That is a problem for those who are in denial and scream 'conspiracy theory' The 'science' is settled. There is no science. Only orchestrated propaganda to convince that there is a problem in the first place.
Excess death (2020)
The internet is awash with articles claiming that the number of excess deaths compared to a 'normal' year is apparently very high. Look a little deeper and a different picture is revealed.
Authoritarian edict: Truth must be hidden.
Must be censored. Reports deleted...
"...deaths due to heart diseases,
respiratory diseases, influenza,
and pneumonia may instead be
RECATEGORISED as being
due to COVID-19."
To paraphrase David Icke:
There is no problem so create it (COVID-19)
and invent the (final) solution (vaccine)
to the non-existent problem
Those who argue against climate change being
caused by human activity are denounced as conspiracy theorists
and MUST be ignored (so go the instructions from the anonymous...)
They are all stupid and only deal with FACTS and not the
'accepted' FICTION that the rest of us believe
This is what is being done with 5G. It is highly-damaging microwave radiation. Those opposed to logic and common sense would have it that 5G gives you COVID-19. That's an absurd claim and it has never been made. Almost identical to calling those opposed to the propaganda about climate change as being in denial. Skeptical, but not in denial - the claim that the human race is the cause of climate change is wrong - there is no evidence. The science is not settled (anybody who really cares about planet Earth and truth should read this book - DA).
An honest report would examine what is actually known about 5G. Irradiation does give symptoms that are almost identical to COVID-19 (radiation sickness) which manifests as upper respiratory tract and breathing difficulty. And a raft of issues as a result of brain damage. The 60GHz microwave frequency disrupts the oxygen molecule so that blood haemoglobin cannot transport molecular (diatomic) oxygen to the brain or any cell that requires oxygen to function. Eventual death will happen. Testing has never been done (don't look so you won't find - DA) and it has been sold as necessary and safe. The effectiveness of 5G has been promulgated. It is absolutely essential for the future so safety can be ignored (just like a vaccine - DA). In the case of a vaccine, it is only a requirement to 'demonstrate' that there is an urgent need and there is nothing else that will 'save the human race from extinction'. The diabolical irony is that the vaccine could actually be the catalyst to cause genocide on a global scale. Imagine a planet with no elderly or sick people.
A world populated by only young and healthy people. (New blood for a dystopian future? - DA). A 'good' drug (economically viable. A blockbuster drug - DA) will only ever treat symptoms - it will not provide a cure.
The market to sell a product would disappear
if people actually got better
The coronavirus 'pandemic' (global) has
the hallmarks of a hoax (pandemic).
The lethal nature of SARS-CoV-2
Where's the evidence that
it actually exists?
The link 'evidence' is just one of many that seriously question the proof of the alleged virus isolation and its actual existence. There is none. Nothing can be produced that supports the LIE that is constantly 'told'.
Is it simply diabolical misdirection to
cover serious 5G issues?
Wuhan is central to everything, Louis - DA
Deaths in China (every day) amount to 25,000 and they are from many, many causes. The alleged spread as a pandemic is in great doubt. One thing has cleared: the muddy water. If you accept the whole concept of hoax, then everything falls neatly into place and reasoned analysis of all the verifiable information leads to the conclusion presented here. The 'official' message is full of inconsistency and confusion.
Specious lies are conspicuous when
objectivity (logic) rises over the
subjective (emotion)
Transmission
The lack of consistency in Government arguments is easily demonstrated by examining the rules for wearing masks and (advice) for using gloves. Washing hands is repeated incessantly but any reminders about wearing (disposable) gloves have been 'forgotten'.
The social distancing rule provides conflict - no closer than 2m. Water droplets that may contain the virus (SARS-CoV-2) are considered dense enough to fall to the ground within 2m. Staying out-of-range is recommended (legally required). A cough will eject water droplets (3000+) a considerable distance and at speed (up to 80kmph). A mask may prevent some particles from being expelled into the surrounding atmosphere. A virus cannot actually 'jump'. It does not have legs. The only way transmission can occur is by touching a contaminated surface or breathing in contaminated air. Nose breathing (strongly advised always for general health reasons anyway) has the advantage of not breathing cold air through the mouth and getting a sore throat. The air is warmed before being taken into the lungs and the hairs in the nostrils can remove particles that are best kept out.
Washing hands can keep both yourself 'clean' (face touching near the nose/mouth) but also prevent you from contaminating any surface. This has been advised for a very long time. Picking up and spreading disease.
It is quite absurd to close bookshops (small/medium-sized businesses) or impose restrictions by forcing the quarantining of any 'touched' book (how else can you browse?) yet allow supermarkets (BIG business) to maintain fully-stocked shelves. People touch books and return them to the shelves without purchasing. It's called... browsing. Any product in a supermarket may have been touched and returned to the shelf. The only way to remain 'safe' is to wear gloves. Cashiers can sometimes offer up the scanner so that only you touch it. How clean is it? Gloves give some protection. Wear gloves - it should be constantly repeated. It isn't. Why is this simple advice not given? But wear your mask even though it is less effective than using disposable gloves. Petrol filling stations - touching public surfaces should always happen only wearing gloves.
When it's drizzling, rain droplets may collide with other airborne particles. How often have you been outside in cold and wet conditions? Does not your expelled breath form clouds (demonstrates water vapour) that pass through the rain? Even in cold and dry conditions clouds of breath form that disappear. Any particles in the breath (water-containing droplets) may be invisible but they are still suspended in the air. Wind ensures they travel some distance. When it's misty, water droplets trap other water droplets (expelled air) and they remain in the air for someone to pass through them.
A simple solution would be to show honesty and explain why hands should be kept properly clean and why gloves should be worn. If masks are to be worn outside (a symbol of compliance? - DA) then they should be worn at all times. Not just indoors in public places. Contaminated breathable air is everywhere. Potentially. But only if the virus is real.
Social distancing offers no real benefit
other than ensuring
Lengthy periods wearing a mask is not advised. Re-breathing exhaled breath that contains large amounts of carbon dioxide should be avoided for obvious (? - DA) reasons. When 5G becomes widely available (maybe it won't, Louis - DA) problems can only get worse. Available oxygen (diatomic) for all mammalian life will be reduced, especially those immersed in the microwave radiation from the hundreds of thousands of antennae (probably on every lamppost).
You will not be able to walk down the street
Great play (encouraging, Louis - DA) is being made about vaccination. Regardless of the absence of adequate safety data. The 'justification' for taking short cuts is that sufficient funding is available to finance the required studies and trials can meld into each other. The truth is that companies like Pfizer are not fazed by this considerable expense and such arguments are absurd. The aim is to complete one phase of clinical trial (4 years minimum to just a few months) to demonstrate the effectiveness and safety of a potential product before commencing the next phase. Pre-clinical studies (no animals) show if a product actually does what it is designed to do. This can then exploit animals (and maybe sacrificing them - DA) to show product safety or otherwise before being to given to healthy humans and finally (if all the lights are green - DA) to the target unwell patient. This ensures that not until a product has been shown to be both effective and safe can it be given to the most vulnerable: - unwell patients.
The principle (in theory only - DA) is to start small and only move to the next stage of testing if there are no outstanding safety concerns. This may be technically true but BEFORE any results can be assessed, human trials are started. So, the following statement that "animals are used" is deliberate misdirection. It is tantamount to a blatant...
LIE
"Due to the urgent need (a critical requirement
for emergency approval - DA) for a vaccine in a surging
pandemic (alleged - DA), Pfizer and Moderna
were given approval to...
simultaneously test
their vaccines on animals while they were
conducting Phase 1 trials on humans.
The vaccines were tested on...
mice and macaques."
Danger Danger Danger
The mass vaccination program has taken every short-cut possible to yield a vaccine that is 'untested' and new technology (mRNA) - Pfizer. This potentially dangerous vaccine is to be given to the most vulnerable - old people who are not infected with SARS-CoV-2 (but they might be at some time in the future - DA). They may have other pre-existing health conditions. Healthy people could be made very unwell by being inoculated.
Those least able to survive the trauma of being seriously unwell. GPs are refusing to be involved with vaccinations due to stretched resources (could it be that the Government is 'asking' that the Hippocratic Oath be broken, Louis? - DA).
DO NO HARM
Even drugs that have undergone lengthy and rigorous testing protocols and clinical trials (4 years minimum to just a few months) can much later manifest unpredictable adverse reactions. A drug could be 'pulled' after dangerous adverse reactions are encountered. This is the risk element for the pharmaceutical companies. Patent coverage can also be severely compromised by the time taken between discovery and launch. But never at the cost of reputation by introducing a potentially very dangerous medication. The damage a company could inflict upon itself is enormous.
Is this why you think the Government offered indemnity to
Pfizer rather than it being asked for, Louis? Pfizer
knows it is an experimental vaccine
and not adequately trialled? - DA
Vaccination does not render anyone immune from being infected. They may just be asymptomatic and not know they are infected. Contact with other healthy people could cause transmission of the virus and unwittingly 'spread of the virus'.
Create an alleged problem (coronavirus pandemic)
as there isn't one and provide the solution
(a vaccine of unknown composition)
enabling the transformation of the
structure of global economies
by their destruction. And
then rebuilding
Result: complete control
Destruction of economies and a...
new system
COVID-19 has created a great disruptive reset of our global social, economic, and political systems. But the power of human beings lies in being foresighted and having the ingenuity, at least to a certain extent, to take their destiny into their hands (and who is that? - DA) and to plan for a better future. This is the purpose of this book: to shake up and to show the deficiencies which were manifest in our global system, even before COVID broke out.
A (very large) smoking barrel - DA
Dishonour and failure
Although speculative discussion appears here it is mostly factual data. No medical advice is offered and any concerns should be addressed by a qualified medical practitioner. This entry was researched and composed over many months (02.06.2020 - 26.12.2020) and it is wise to use extreme caution and acceptance of the potentially dangerous consequences of irresponsible behaviour. Only future events may uncover more detail. Many questions are asked and issues raised.
How vaccines (don't - DA) work
The tried and 'tested' dynamic of vaccination (it still fails with
disastrous results - DA) would be by infection with a small
amount of an inactive form of the strain (SARS-CoV-2)
that causes the disease (COVID-19)
What is an inactive form of
SARS-CoV-2? - DA
As there is (presumably - DA) no 'inactive' form of SARS-CoV-2 then a conventional vaccine could never be found. Is this the reason that an untested theoretical approach has been used to develop an untested and only a claimed-effective vaccine (the alleged urgency has allowed any animal testing (not a bad effect - DA) extensive and lengthy clinical trials (4 years minimum to just a few months) to be avoided) and obtain (a very rapid) approval for human use? Long-term product safety is completely unknown. Direct initial only trials (weeks and not years) have been done on the target human, side-stepping any animal studies. Inoculation with a potentially very unsafe product is to be done straight into the older (more vulnerable) population. As a 'live' trial, this is the...
worst possible choice
Healthy people will potentially be made sick
by inoculation with an alleged
SARS-CoV-2 specific vaccine.
Older people are less physiologically able to survive the trauma of any (known) potential adverse reactions (side-effects). If they do not survive then they will be regarded to have died from old age - if found to be positive (is that 'a' coronavirus or COVID-19, Louis? - DA). They should test negative, of course, as 'evidence' of an 'effective' vaccine. That the vaccine may have been responsible for such a death won't even be considered (the real cause of death can so easily be covered-up by choosing the most vulnerable, can't it, Louis. Presumably, there would be no post-mortem as the aged are expected to die, anyway. Indeed, any underlying health problem would now conveniently be emphasised and recorded as the cause of death. Perfect - DA). The justification for selecting the most vulnerable is invalid and would be a cynically specious argument.
Any mode-of-action is new and therefore
the consequences are unknown. Hence the...
Coronavirus Act 2020 (UK)
to indemnify manufacturers and those
providing 'treatment' against
any legal action
The UK government announced Thursday (03.12.2020) that it had granted Pfizer legal indemnity protecting the American pharmaceutical company from civil lawsuits due to any unforeseen complications arising from problems (there may be many 'unforeseen' problems - it is new and untested technology - DA) with its COVID-19 vaccine. The special legal indemnity was the result of an emergency government consultation in September, when the UK Department of Health & Social Care determined that changes to civil liability were necessary to better facilitate the widespread use of a COVID-19 vaccine (USA) in Britain.
Forcing an untested new technology onto an
unsuspecting public (a nation, Louis - DA)
could only be done if there was a
'Get out of Jail-free Card' to play.
Indemnification is NOT unprecedented in the UK
and this becomes compelling evidence
that serious problems are anticipated
The reason for the pre-prepared
is finally revealed
VERY, VERY DISTURBING
Not just a smoking gun but a
'an engineered pandemic?'
Even more disturbing:
Who controls the British Government
(response to COVID-19)
UK Government Chief Medical Adviser and
Chief Medical Officer for England
Ignore the demonising
'conspiracy theory' overtones
Pay attention to the message - DA
Important:
To have an informed choice
Ask your GP: where is the evidence showing the vaccine is safe? Long-term. Ask: has the vaccine been proven to be effective against COVID-19 (an explicit question requires an explicit answer. Truth - DA)? Ask if he/she has been vaccinated (with the 'flu vaccine for that year specifically or any other year - DA). Ask: what are you being paid to provide a vaccine? And why are so many vaccines given to healthy children? Ask about autism. Ask about ADHD (ADHD and COVID-19). Ask: why do so many children acquire these conditions - after early-childhood vaccination?
Cot death (unexplained) and Shaken Baby Syndrome (assumed physical trauma - DA) can both be explained by vaccination (brain damage caused by a vaccine - DA).
A child has a developing immune system and the elderly can have a compromised one. Both are very susceptible to infection. The eradication of a disease (or the reduction in the numbers suffering from a disease) has always been attributed to a vaccine ('saved millions'). The truth is that improvements to sanitation, clean drinking water, and good quality food had led to the reduction already and any vaccine was unnecessary. In fact, inoculation can be quickly followed by an increase in the number who become infected with the very disease that the vaccine was supposed to deal with.
Does a vaccine weaken the immune system predisposing the individual to infection?
Does the vaccine itself infect healthy people? (The Pfizer mRNA vaccine contains no inactivated virus, but it is new and untested technology - DA) and is reported to be 'uncomfortable'.
A COVID-19 vaccine (highly lucrative - DA): it will almost certainly be approved toward the end 2020 though in the total absence of any data that 'proves' the safety or efficacy (does it work? - DA). It could be mandated (compulsory by law) to force the UK population to be inoculated, though according to Boris Johnson this will NOT happen in the UK (for now maybe, Louis, but don't overlook the silent entry of The Coronavirus Act 2020 - DA).
The number of 'cases' is dropping (the inoculation program will still go ahead and the falling numbers will be used to 'prove' the efficacy of the vaccine. Healthy people who refuse to be inoculated with a product that is untested (animals have not been used. 'Trials' have been straight into humans. It is widely regarded that the nauseating practice of using animals in testing produces unreliable results - DA), and could make them ill, could be blamed for wrecking Christmas 2020 (not the government, then - DA).
Healthy volunteers are being infected with SARS-CoV-2 (allegedly) to determine the efficacy of a vaccine (this must be unethical - DA). If the vaccine fails to work...
Coronavirus Act 2020 (UK)
indemnifies manufacturer (Pfizer)
and those providing
'treatment' against
any legal action
There has been one death (in Brazil - AstraZeneca) in a vaccine trial. The very disturbing (and revealing - DA) result of this is that the trial will continue -
NOTHING'S WRONG
If SARS-CoV-2 was transmitted to humans from
mammals - bats (zoonosis) is the...
vaccine not effective
in mammals?
Why was testing straight into humans
the usual safety route - animals?
In the rush to be first out-of-the-trap to market a highly lucrative alleged 'vaccine' (it is a captured global market, Louis - DA) the use of animals has all of a sudden become non-valid and they are deemed to be completely unnecessary in the safety evaluation of a product destined for human use. This justifies avoiding the requirement for the accepted proof of safety required before approval can be given to any product - regardless of urgency.
'Clinical studies' of a potential vaccine started months ago. The development of a vaccine would normally take between 15 - 20 years. And was then introduced straight into humans, circumventing any pre-clinical animal studies. This is unprecedented for any product that is destined for internal use in humans. The communication is dated 13th March 2020 and precedes the first lockdown (23.03.2020) and the introduction into British Law of The Coronavirus Act 2020 (25.03.20200) by almost 2 weeks. Work had started also on a vaccine even earlier in Oxford (UK) (11.01.2020).
It can only be assumed that there is a legal precedent (declaration of a pandemic - 11.03.2020) to begin such trialling so early. The Great Barrington Declaration. This is more 'evidence' that much was already known before a pandemic had been declared. If any studies did not actually begin until after 25.03.2020 (specifically - DA), then The Coronavirus Act 2020 (25.03.20200) would have indemnified any and all from claims against adverse reactions to a 'vaccine'.
Had those who volunteered for any such trial been
given detailed information (spoken) of the
dangers of inoculation with an
untested (potential) vaccine?
The pandemic was not declared until 11th March 2020 yet a vaccine had already been 'discovered' and was ready for testing. Unless (a very - DA) advanced warning had been given for use against SARS-CoV-2 specifically, a vaccine would not have been discovered so quickly. And it would not have been known that a vaccine would be urgently needed.
Requirements to test directly into humans
could not have been established
EMERGENCY approval
"Currently, several COVID-19 vaccines are in clinical trials (4 years minimum to just a few months). The FDA will review the results of these trials before approving COVID-19 vaccines for use. But because there is an urgent need for COVID-19 vaccines and the FDA's vaccine approval process can take months to years, the FDA will first be giving emergency use authorization to COVID-19 vaccines based on less data than is normally required. The data should show that the vaccines are safe and effective before the FDA can give emergency use authorisation."
Indemnity has been authorised by the UK Government should all go pear-shaped. Government-sanctioned. A clinical trial (on a global scale) should show that the untested methodology actually works. Do those who have a vaccine give their consent? Or do they waive any 'fault' liability?
There are minimal development costs - research into mRNA vaccines is a new technology. The mRNA is claimed to have no effect on the cell. It seems to theoretically work by using the cell to make the alleged 'spike' protein. A virus performs a similar action. It high-jacks the cell 'machinery' to copy itself. An antigen needs only to be identified for a specific vaccine. But are there any common factors that all apply to the technology in a general sense?
Clinical trial costs have been avoided by contracting years to months before the sale of a new product and reaping a profit - almost immediately. Years down the clinical trial path a potential new product could fail due to the adverse reactions that begin to show. The reduction to several months before sale ensures a new product's use before it can show any long-term adverse effects. The product could be unsafe/dangerous but this might not be known for years. The outlay that would be lost (years of investment) is a redundant issue. BIG-Pharma has provided itself with a win-win solution to the high cost-high risk conundrum of maximising the profit of potential vaccines. The 'pandemic' has provided the golden opportunity to trial the technology on a global (clinical trial) and risk-free (indemnity) basis. If successful, the industry (patent landscape) will increase its profits by orders of magnitude.
A new approach to 'managing' illness (not curing it - DA) relies on artificial intelligence and vaccines (the Pfizer/BioNTech method). Development costs are vastly reduced. The risks are being evaluated on a global clinical trial with the COVID-19 'pandemic'. Has this been created or is it simply exploiting the situation? The timing is perfectly convenient. A pandemic and new technology (by definition a theoretical mechanism that might work).
New Initiative Uses Artificial Intelligence
This screams an
engineered 'pandemic'
The global population is nearly 8billion and the number of alleged
'cases' is just over 70,000,000 (0.875%). Unqualified deaths
(no other pre-existing health conditions or age
declared - DA) were 1.6 million (0.02%).
China has 25,000 deaths every day for any reason.
It would take just 2 months to exceed the alleged
number of deaths in China alone
Alarm bells should be ringing
at a deafening volume
This is the total opposite attitude to the alleged coronavirus pandemic (SARS-CoV-2). If a death occurs after a positive test result for COVID-19, then death is absolutely and definitely without any possible alternative caused by COVID-19. There is no need to investigate. When a trial vaccine is involved then death is caused by something else...definitely and without any doubt, it cannot be the vaccine. Absolutely no chance.
Proof of safety is paramount
NOT REQUIRED
Vaccine... 'declared safe'
Case closed
(COVID-19 statistic recorded - DA)
Alarm bells should be
sounding even...
MORE LOUDLY!!!
but
ABSOLUTE SILENCE
Just suppose the 'inoculation' is with something quite innocuous (saline solution?) then the 'vaccine' would be deemed effective. There was never any infection. It's all based on trust (it's so simple to deceive isn't it, Louis. Smoke and mirrors - DA).
DANGER. DANGER. DANGER
The Government link to the Coronavirus Act 2020 states that this page was published 07.05.2020 and suggests that the Act had its Royal Assent (coronavirus) on this date. This comprehensive Act became law 25.03.2020 and was introduced just 2 days after the first lockdown (23.03.2020): clearly prepared well in advance of the 'COVID-19 pandemic'.
The process to enact an Act of Parliament
takes considerable time
COVID-19 declared a pandemic (11.03.2020)
The first lockdown was just 3-days
in advance (16.03.2020) of
The Coronavirus Act 2020 (19.03.2020)
- 2 weeks after the declaration
Dr. Joseph Mercola (qualifications)
Dr. Joseph Mercola - #1Natural Health Website
Quack? Decide for yourself
NOT what you're told to do.
Based on... NOTHING
and only now - after 23 years?
posted by Louis Brothnias @ 4:54 am
<< Home