For over three decades, the United States of America has been chest-thumping about being the world’s “sole remaining superpower“. Some in the US establishment have even claimed that the US has become the world’s first “hyperpower“. And indeed, in the immediate aftermath of the Soviet dismantlement, the US-led political West seemed unbeatable, unilaterally starting wars across the globe, all under various pretexts such as “humanitarianism“ and the much-touted “War on Terror“.
The US and NATO used both of these excuses to invade dozens of other countries, be it former Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya, etc. The US military seemed unstoppable and able to overcome any opponent, oftentimes by using air power only, with minimal ground engagements, at least until it got bogged down, which in itself was very useful for the ever-profit-hungry Military Industrial Complex.
Although many in the US establishment seemed convinced this will be a perpetual state of affairs, luckily for the world, the last decade proved the power of the belligerent thalassocracy is waning. While the Pentagon could count on hundreds of thousands of battle-ready soldiers during most of the 1990s and early 2000s, in recent years, there has been a significant drop in young Americans’ interest to go die or get maimed for life in one of America’s many pointless invasions and general aggression against the world.
Even though the Pentagon found other ways to continue with its imperialist belligerence, primarily through an exponential increase in the use of unmanned combat systems around the globe, indiscriminately targeting civilians under the ever-convenient pretext of the “War on Terror“, most Americans have become aware of the fact that the US power (albeit still significant) is fading away faster than anyone would’ve expected just a decade ago.
A new poll conducted by the YouGov/Economist is the latest proof of this public opinion shift. The project polled Americans about the probability of various “dire political scenarios“ and found that 50% of the US population considers that America will lose its global superpower status within a decade. The poll also found that nearly half (47%) of Americans think that a “total economic collapse“ is inevitable.
“Among 15 potential future scenarios involving instability or political violence, the one that most Americans consider likely in the next decade is that the U.S. ceases to be a global superpower (50% say this), followed by a total collapse of the U.S. economy (47%). Each of the 15 dire scenarios is considered somewhat or very likely in the next decade by at least 20% of Americans. […] 37% of Americans say [a civil war] is at least somewhat likely to occur,“ the YouGov poll found.
The most surprising aspect of the poll must be the staggering nearly 40% of US citizens who consider civil war “at least somewhat likely.“ With a population of approximately 330 million people and being among the world’s most armed nations, such a prospect seems rather terrifying. However, it’s hardly surprising, especially given the sheer level of polarization of the US society, regardless if it’s based on race, religion, sex/gender, identity, ideology or any other parameter which the parties and various interest groups in the US are trying to exploit and use for political, financial and power gain.
“[…] After an end to the U.S.’s global-superpower status and economic collapse, the next scenario is that the U.S. will cease to be a democracy (39%). Democrats believe the U.S. will become a fascist dictatorship (31%), while Republicans think it will be a communist one (21%). Two-thirds of Republicans (65%) believe that total economic collapse is at least somewhat likely, compared to only 38% of Democrats. Around half of Republicans (48%) say it’s likely that the government will confiscate citizens’ firearms; only 17% of Democrats say this. Republicans are also more likely than Democrats to believe there will be a total breakdown of law and order (49% vs. 31%),“ according to the poll.
Although it’s expected to see a larger number of Republicans being more pessimistic about the country’s future under a Democrat president and government, the percentage of Democrats who aren’t particularly optimistic is quite telling. It’s more than clear that many DNC voters themselves are unsatisfied with the policies of the current US government.
“[…] Republicans and Democrats believe the U.S. will cease to be a democracy in the next decade. Democrats are slightly more likely to say the U.S. will be a fascist dictatorship (37% vs. 32%). Republicans, on the other hand, are three times as likely to say it will be a communist dictatorship (31% vs. 13%). In terms of the possibility of a civil war, Republicans are likelier to believe there will be one between members of each party (45% vs. 35%) or between people from red and blue states (36% vs. 30%). Democrats are slightly more likely to believe there will be a war between the poor and rich (37% vs. 25%) or between cities and rural areas (23% vs. 20%). Democrats and Republicans are equally likely (31%) to expect a civil war between racial groups,“ the poll concluded.
Although the opinions vary significantly based on the ideological/party background, the very fact so many Americans think the US is turning into a dictatorship and that a civil war is a likely scenario speaks volumes of the unflattering state of the much-touted “American democracy“ which has often been used as yet another pretext for America’s war against the world.
Propaganda by the redefinition of words is a basic much-used device used by dishonest manipulative bastards since the earliest control cults decided it would be a splendid wheeze to have large numbers of human beings as their cattle or slaves. Its use by the enemies of humanity during the Covid psyop provides fine contemporary examples that illustrate amply how it is done. Understanding how these mind games are played frees you from mind control.
Increased understanding is the antidote to brainwashing and being alert and able to form your own ideas rather than being the effect of those inserted craftily into your brain is safer, more pro survival and more fun than being played by sly knobheads.
The War on Words
What does the word vaccine actually mean? When a president, governor, or prime minister refers to a vaccine, do they mean what you think they mean? Language naturally changes over time, but sometimes these changes aren’t organic, and when that happens it might be considered a war on words.
We’ve seen many things change over the last two years, from the way we interact with each other to how we spend our time. Some of these changes are impossible to ignore while others have been subtle and more difficult to pinpoint, such as a shift in the meaning of words and how those words are being used.
While they may appear subtle, these shifts matter. Unchecked, they can confuse, mislead, and even cause harm. That’s why it’s so crucial to be vigilant, identify these shifts, and take action. Before we explore some of the words and terms that have become weaponized over the last two years, we need to understand and appreciate just why this matters so much.
The latest news is shocking!!!
Experts predict that an EMP strike that wipes out electricity across the nation would ultimately lead to the demise of up to 90% of the population.
Language is one of the unique attributes of being human. No other animal on this planet employs words to convey meaning or even has the physiology with which to do so. Languages themselves evolve, with words building up meaning over time. Words can trigger particular thoughts, emotions, memories, and ideas. This is why language is so powerful. Language shapes the way we think and feel and even how we perceive the world.
Many religious traditions revere language as the driving force behind creation. It’s certainly why governments and political parties seek to manipulate the power of language through propaganda. If they can manipulate the way people use and understand certain words, they can quite literally alter how people perceive reality.
This is why, whenever there is a conscious effort to exploit or manipulate words, it is important to pay attention. And we need to pay attention right now. Over the course of the pandemic, we have seen a new war on words in an effort to control whole populations and ‘nudge’ them into certain actions or behaviors. This has been done in two ways: either by exploiting the powerful connotations of a particular word and ransacking its meaning or by changing the definition of a word altogether.
Words and Phrases Under Attack
Here’s a quick look at a few terms that have been exploited over the last two years:
Safe and effective
In this instance, politicians and public health bodies have co-opted words with a strong, positive connotation for their own ends. Safe and effective quickly became a mantra used to describe the Covid-19 vaccines at a time when the data to back up the use of this term was still not yet available. Even today, in the face of official data demonstrating that the injections are actually risky and ineffective, this mantra is still being used. Just because someone repeatedly says that something is safe and effective, doesn’t mean it is.
Vaccine
Prior to September 2021, the US Center for Disease Control (CDC) defined a vaccine as, “A product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease.”
Most would recognize this as a suitable definition. However, by this definition, the new mRNA jabs technically could not be defined as vaccines. They were never designed to produce immunity to Covid-19, only to reduce the severity of symptoms. Rather than call the mRNA technologies something more accurate, the CDC simply changed the definition of vaccine to, “A preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases.”
In making this change, the CDC argued that this was simply to avoid any suggestion that vaccines offer 100% immunity. When Merriam-Webster chose to alter their own dictionary definition of vaccine, they acknowledged this was in part to incorporate mRNA technology within the meaning. But who decides what vaccine means? There is a strong case for stating that since mRNA technologies do not function in the same way as previous vaccines, they should not be defined as such.
Covid Case
Seeing daily reports on the number of Covid cases within our respective countries has become normal for many of us. But what exactly is a Covid case? The case numbers we see are based on the number of people testing positive for the virus SARS-CoV-2. This is the virus that causes the disease known as Covid-19—it is not Covid-19 itself. A person may carry SARS-CoV-2 and not have Covid-19, just as a person may carry the Varicella-Zoster virus that can lead to shingles, without ever actually getting shingles. The assumption that testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 means you have Covid-19 is simply inaccurate. This inaccuracy also suggests the Covid case figures are wildly inflated.
Fully Vaccinated
This definition has become something of a moving target. Whether you’re considered fully vaccinated or not depends on where you live and when you are asking. In some countries, two jabs are still enough for a person to be considered fully vaccinated against Covid-19. In Austria, the bar has been raised to three jabs, with many countries such as the UK, Croatia, Switzerland, and Greece intending to follow suit. In Israel, where a fourth jab is already available, each booster shot only extends a person’s fully vaccinated status for six months.
In today’s world, governments appear to be dictating what fully vaccinated means—and exploiting their power to change the definition as they please.
Let’s Use Terms The Right Way
The misuse of these terms—and many others—has become commonplace. As a result, many people still believe the mRNA ‘vaccines’ offer lasting immunity simply because they are defined as vaccines and that is what vaccines are supposed to do. People understandably worry about the number of Covid cases, not realizing that in fact, many of these ‘cases’ are not Covid cases at all. Likewise, people see these novel mRNA technologies as safe and effective, even though the latest data suggests otherwise.
This is not, however, a done deal. It’s time for all of us to make the conscious effort to use these terms correctly—and, where appropriate, to gently correct those who misuse them. In doing so, we bring a more accurate picture of how things truly are—and with clarity comes empowerment and understanding.
Important below:
Today I’d like to share with you a “3-second survival hack” you can use to skyrocket your chances of protecting your loved ones during ANY crisis.
Once upon a time there was a pandemic. Terror filled the land as people fell ill to a foreign and insidious malady that attacked young and old, rich and poor, Republican and Democrat, male and . . . whatever floats your boat. The leaders of the land wrung their hands, trying to protect the people. Finally it was agreed upon that the citizens should stay home, wear masks, and take baths.
Gatherings were frowned upon. Even funerals where only the deceased would show up, providing they could find an Uber. Stores were bare, and businesses would shut their doors! Well, all but liquor stores in Texas because you can only take this nonsense so far. And schools were shut down. The eternal baby sitter went away, and parents nationwide had to answer for their sins.
So, home schooling was arrived upon. How hard can it be? Read a few books, fill out a few forms, email it to the schools that were also locked down, too, and call it a day. Right? Wrong! It was discovered that if this were to be continued the end result would be a generation educated by a bunch of day drinkers. Just like Texas in 1880!
Yet, there was no way around it. The pandemic raged on, and every time there was a gathering of any time the city had to spend tax money disposing of the bodies. But, there was a method that just might prevail. Something called Zoom! An application on a phone or computer that enabled gatherings of any size. Totally safe! The only virus was a computer virus.
Zoom had been around for a while. Businesses used it. Groups of all sizes and shapes. Why, you could even go on a date and not have to worry about STDs! So, why not schools? You take an unemployed teacher, print up some stimulus money, gather thirty or so little urchins, I mean they’ve all got iPhones, and rock and roll! Gosh! Why thirty? Three hundred! And have ‘em pay a fee. Or better yet, tap into the school funding. Hell, that money’s just sitting around gathering dust anyway. God Bless ‘Murica!
Pretty soon Zoom was the order of the day! Even after the plague abated Zoom Academy was zooming right along. Gone were the days of stuffy old classrooms with stuffy old teachers. Just fire up your pad or phone, and you too could earn a degree in The Study of 1950s TV Commercials! If the course curriculum was a bit beyond you your kid sister could punch the keys for you. Who’s to know? The vetting had about the same standards as cyber sex with someone from Nigeria. Pretty soon the class included one teacher and three hundred or so Bots! What could possibly go wrong?
Now, heaven forbid someone would take advantage of such a thing. But, wouldn’t you know, someone did! A couple guys got together. One was an actual professor! No, I’m not kidding. From back in the day when they would stand up in class every day and later date the cutest student. A real pillar of academia. (Don’t sit there and act like you didn’t know that!) Anyway he filled the slot for the respectability thing. And, he knew all the ropes. I mean he was a freaking professor for God’s sake. But the old boy didn’t want to get his hands dirty with the teaching or day to day counting of the proceeds. So he had this other guy actually teach the classes. He even had a PHD! In fact he had TWO! But, you know, once you’ve seen one PHD you’ve seen ‘em all.
So the University of Whas a Matta U was up and running! The teacher would dedicate two hours a week on Zoom with the virtual class filled with Bots and two or three actual students working on their doctorates. In class the teacher looked like Sidney Poitier, but on his marathon YouTube rants he came on like the Watts riots, complete with priestly vestments, a huge wig (sans dreadlocks) and a huge belt proclaiming that he was the world champion of gab! He could talk for four hours and not say a single thing. Meanwhile the money rolled in from fees and grants and from just about anybody that was stupid enough to give. God was in his heaven, the professor was in his study, and the teacher was in his garage toking on a big ol’ joint!
And that’s where we find ourselves today. Classroom is filled. Only a few things the dynamic duo missed. In class were some who weren’t cool with this new understanding of education. And, for want of a better word, they were Investigative Journalists. And when they stumbled on this dog and pony show they thought it was their birthday. At the very mention of the mechanics of this situation the teacher’s poo poo went to water and he blamed everyone but himself, ranting about all the money he’d lose should this ever leak out. Well it has leaked out! Those who have eyes let them see. And keep looking because you’re fixing to see a lot!
New UK Government Data Shows The COVID Vaccines Kill More People Than They Save
We’ve been asking everyone: Show me the all-cause mortality data proving the vaccines are safe. I finally got some data. It’s from the UK government and it’s devastating. REALLY devastating.
Overview
New UK government data allows us to analyze the data in a way we couldn’t before. This new analysis shows clearly that the COVID vaccines kill more people than they save for all age groups. In other words, they shouldn’t be used by anyone. The younger you are, the less sense it makes.
Anyone can validate the data and methodology. The results make it clear that the COVID vaccines should be halted immediately.
If the vaccines really work, then why hasn’t any government anywhere in the world produced a proper risk-benefit analysis that shows the opposite result?
If the vaccines work, then why do all the lines in Figure 6 below show that Dose 1 and Dose 2 of the vaccines kill more people than they save?
Not a single public health authority in any country will have a conversation with us on the record to justify their vaccine recommendations by producing an all-cause risk benefit analysis similar to what I computed here. I wonder why?
The latest news is shocking!!!
Experts predict that an EMP strike that wipes out electricity across the nation would ultimately lead to the demise of up to 90% of the population.
Here’s the result of the analysis comparing unvaxxed vs. 2 doses given at least 6 months ago. I believe this analysis is conservative and the actual numbers are worse than this due to the seasonal variation of the all-cause mortality.
Figure 1. Risk/benefit determination from the UK data shows that for all ages, the vaccines kill more people than they save.
A value of 15 means we kill 15 people from the vaccine to save 1 life from COVID. This is from the Exec Summary tab of the spreadsheet.
The data showed that for most age ranges, the vaccine reduced your chance of dying from COVID, but it increased your chances of dying from other causes. The former effect was smaller than the latter effect so the vaccines are nonsensical.
For example, if you are 25 years old, the vaccine kills 15 people for every person it saves from dying from COVID. Below 80, the younger you are, the more nonsensical vaccination is.
The cells in Figure 1 with a * means that the vaccinated had more COVID deaths than the unvaccinated. This is known as “negative vaccine efficacy.” This wasn’t surprising since we’ve been claiming that the vaccines damage your immune system.
Above 80, the UK data was too confounded to be useful. Until we have that data, it’s irresponsible to make a recommendation.
I describe below how you can compute this yourself from the UK data.
Please share this result on all your social media platforms. One user got 10,000 likes in less than 24 hours on Twitter and he had only 2,000 followers. So Twitter permanently suspended his account. So probably not a good idea to share on Twitter. According to Twitter, “health officials consider the COVID-19 vaccines safe for most people” and therefore any UK government data that shows that they are lying is a violation of Twitter Community Standards.
Introduction
One of my friends recently sent me a link to the mortality data from the UK government Office of National Statistics from January 1, 2021 to January 31, 2022. I had not seen this data before so I analyzed it.
What I found when I analyzed the data was absolutely stunning because it was consistent with the VAERS risk-benefit analysis by age that I had done in November, 2021.
The Proper Way To Do A Risk-Benefit Analysis
To show the vaccines are a beneficial intervention, you’d ideally want to do a randomized trial. We did that and the results showed 7 excess deaths for the single life we saved from COVID. More about that later. But the numbers we too small to be confident they weren’t statistical noise.
Since the trials are now all unblinded, we need to see is a retrospective study of matched individuals with 100,000 in each group selected on December 1, 2020 before the vaccines rolled out to the public.
One group goes the full vax route. The other group shuns the vax entirely.
We then look at the number of COVID vs. non-COVID deaths in each group and compute the risk-benefit analysis as we did earlier. Since each group is nearly identically matched except for the intervention, the comparison is fair.
That’s what we want to see.
What we get in the UK ONS data is something completely different (as we will explain below) and there is no clear way to repurpose that data for our study.
Where To Get The UK Government Source Data
The government data is archived here. You want to open the spreadsheet, and look at the spreadsheet tab labeled Table 6.
In either case, you click the green button labeled “xlsx” to get the spreadsheet, then go to tab “Table 6”:
Note: The data is from England only, not all of the UK. On top of that, it is based on people in England who were both a) registered in the 2011 UK census and b) registered with a GP in 2019.
Where To Get My Analysis Of The Data
This makes it easier to see what is going on. You can see all the original data and my formulas for calculating the ACM ratios and risk benefit analysis on the Table 6 tab.
It is all in plain sight for everyone to see. I then copied values to the Summary and Exec Summary tabs from the Table 6 tab.
Interpreting The Data
Here’s what the data looks like in Table 6:
Table 6 example from the ONS table
The definitions of each row is in the Definitions tab of the spreadsheet.
In summary, they track people as they spend time in each row based on their new status. So a triple vaccinated person who was vaccinated more than 21 days ago will spend time in every row except possibly the “Second dose, at least 6 months ago” which they would be able to skip if they got boosted before the 6 month waiting period. So if they waited 7 months before getting boosted, they’d only spend a month in that category. If people decided they weren’t high risk enough to get boosted, they’d accumulate time in the 2nd, 6+ category.
So that means if the vaccines are as deadly as we claim, the benefits of the vaccine against COVID will be minimal in the <21 days ago category and the ACM elevation over the unvaxxed should be the highest there. In short, the <21 days is the category where we should see the strongest risk-benefit signal so if you were an evil anti-vaxxer, this would clearly be the row you’d want to cherry pick to prove your point.
Conversely, if you were cherry picking for data to support your evil anti-vaxxer mission, the very last place you’d expect to find a strong signal is 6 months after the second dose since most of the people killed by the vaccine were killed in the 30 days after the shot as you can see from this graph from openvaers:
Furthermore, the non-COVID ACM in the unvaxxed group is going to be very high (since it peaks in Q1 when most people were contributing time in that group); that’s going to work against you. And as far as effectiveness, we all know these vaccines do wane over time, so there is still going to be a lot of protection left at that point.
So for the 2nd dose, 6m+ group, we have:
Low likelihood of death from the vaccine
ACM for the vaxxed will be naturally lower due to seasonality (lowest in Q3)
High ACM for the unvaxxed (which peaks in Q1)
Degraded, though still impressive protection from the vaccine at that point
In short, all four of these major factors works against you if you are an evil anti-vaxxer. It would be absolutely the worst row to examine to prove your point. It’s much more likely to show the vaccines are effective.
Which means if you can show there is a strong signal against the vaccines on this row, that’s really powerful since this has to be the row with the weakest case against the vaccines.
So this is exactly what we are going to do here: prove using the UK data that there is a very strong danger signal in the hardest place to find it.
Important below:
Today I’d like to share with you a “3-second survival hack” you can use to skyrocket your chances of protecting your loved ones during ANY crisis.
The data quality here is strongly biased in favor of making the vaccine look effective.
They are massively underestimating the proportion who are unvaccinated and they are putting ludicrous faith in the accuracy of the NIMs and GP records. Fenton and his team have written extensively about the problems with miscategorization in the ONS data and missing vaccination deaths.
The other huge problem with the data is that it shows that if you died, the % of COVID related deaths ranged from 10% in the very young to over 40% in the elderly if you were not vaccinated. That’s impossibly high. In 2020 in the US when everyone wasn’t vaccinated, the % of COVID deaths was 15%. The numbers in the ONS database just don’t make sense.
The data is not available for researchers to use freely; you have to tell the ONS up front what your study is about before you are allowed to look at the data and they have to approve any publication you want to make. So if you find something bad, you can’t talk about it. This isn’t government transparency. It is the opposite.
The ONS data and reports are produced by a team led by Vahé Nafilyan and Charlotte Bermingham. They are the lead authors on this March 23, 2022 paper which claims that it was COVID (and not the vaccines) that was causing cardio problems in young people. Here’s what they wrote:
There was a decrease in the risk of all-cause death in the first week after vaccination and no change in each of weeks 2 to 6 after vaccination or whole six-week period after vaccination. Subgroup analyses by sex, age, vaccine type, and last dose also showed no change in the risk of death in the first six weeks after vaccination
There is no way that can be right because it doesn’t match any reality I’ve ever seen. So this is yet another example that the ONS data is HIGHLY skewed to be favorable for the vaccine.
What this means is that it should be nearly impossible to find anything negative in the data, even if you were cherry picking because according to the authors the vaccine is perfectly safe and is massively effective.
You’d normally then look in the place most favorable to support an anti-vaxx hypothesis.
So it is stunning that in the last place anyone expected to find a signal, we find a very strong signal. Here, we found it across every age group under 80 without exception. That cannot happen by chance. We picked the exact same row for each age group and we picked the worst possible row. You cannot explain that away no matter how hard you try. It should have strongly favored the vaccine as safe and effective, yet we found exactly the opposite. That’s stunning.
Does the COVID Jab Kill More People Than It Saves?
Also, the Substack article, All-Cause Mortality by Vaccination Status, is excellent and provides a wide range of charts that are particularly illuminating showing visually that the the vaccines are not as safe as people claim. Just look at the black link here which is the unvaccinated.
Lines above the 1x line are cohorts where the vaccine is nonsensical. In short, over time, it becomes more and more obvious that the vaccines are a disaster.
Figure 6. Only at the start of the data collection period did the numbers look favorable for the vaccine. They all turn negative over time for Doses 1 and 2 over time meaning the vaccines are nonsensical. No cherry picking required. You can see it visually. Source: All-Cause Mortality by Vaccination Status
The article concludes:
This data is all very alarming. A poorly functioning vaccine should still have at least a small positive effect. A non-functioning vaccine should have no effect. Yet we see a negative effect in all age groups for both 1 or 2 doses taken ‘at least 21 days ago’, and it is most cases the negative effect is quite large. The fact that the pattern is consistent and predictable, meaning it moves smoothly from month to month and age bracket to age bracket, gives even more credibility to the pattern.
It’s a great read.
Methodology
I compared the all-cause mortality (ACM) for people who got 2 shots at least 6 months ago with the unvaccinated since this was the row that would be the most difficult to show an anti-vaxx signal.
Our goal in this analysis was not to get definitive numbers. We describe later the proper way to do a risk-benefit analysis. Our goal was to show that the vaccines are dangerous even if you look at a row that is least likely to make your point.
Summary Of The Data
This summary below (which I put on the Summary tab which is to the right of the Table 6 tab) shows the rates of all-cause mortality per 100,000 person-years for each age range and also shows the risk benefit ratio.
Figure 2. A summary of the calculations from the UK data. This is shown in the Summary tab of my spreadsheet.
Here’s the legend for each column:
A: age range for the row
B: ACM rate for unvaxxed
C: ACM rate for vaxxed
D: Risk benefit calculation which is # non-COVID lives lost due to the vaccine / # of COVID lives saved from the vaccine. This is the single best metric for justifying the use of an intervention. The larger this number is, the less sense the intervention makes. A value >1 means the intervention should never be used. The cells with * means that the vaccine actually caused more COVID cases to happen than the unvaccinated. Note: you need to view the full spreadsheet to see the data used to calculate this number. You cannot do it from the summary data on this screen.
E: ACM of vaxxed/ACM unvaxed, i.e., Column C/ Column B. A value >1 means the intervention should never be used since it is costing lives. This is a crude measure of the effectiveness of an intervention as we explain below.
F: % of ACM deaths due to COVID, i.e., the fraction of all the ACM deaths that were caused by COVID.
The data clearly shows that any mortality benefit you get from taking the vaccine and lowering your risk of death from COVID is more than offset by the mortality you lose from the vaccine itself. This isn’t new. It is something I have been saying since May, 2021. But now I finally found direct government data where I could demonstrate this for all ages under 80.
In The Pfizer Phase 3 Trial, There Was A 40% Increase In ACM In The Vaccinated Group. They Killed An Estimated 7 People For Every Person They Saved From COVID!
In the Pfizer Phase 3 trial, there were a total of 21 deaths in the vaccine group and 15 deaths in the placebo group.
This 40% increase in the all-cause mortality in the trial (21/15=1.4) was of course dismissed as not statistically significant. While that is true, that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t pay attention to the number.
But now, based on the UK data, we know that the result in the Phase 3 trial wasn’t a statistical fluke. Not at all.
In fact, if we look at the risk benefit, we see that we saved 1 life from dying from COVID (1 COVID death in the treatment group vs. 2 COVID deaths in the placebo group= 1 life saved), but there were 7 excess non-COVID deaths (20 – 13).
So the Pfizer trial showed that for every person we saved from COVID, we killed 7 people. However the numbers were too small to place a high confidence in this point estimate.
However, I’d argue that Pfizer trial was a best case because:
The trial enrolled abnormally healthy people who died at a 10X lower rate than the population (there is a 1% US average death rate per year, yet there were just 15 deaths in the 22,000 placebo arm in 6 months which is a .1% death rate)
They were able to get rid of anyone who had a reaction to the first dose without counting them
The most important point though is that the Pfizer trial killed: save ratio of 7:1 and the ACM ratio of 1.4 is consistent with the hypothesis that the vaccine kills more people than it saves.
My ACM Risk/Benefit Estimate Using VAERS
This is from a risk/benefit computation I did on November 1, 2021 using the VAERS data to compute the ratio of the # of people killed from the vaccine (V) to the # of people who might be saved from COVID (C) if they took the vaccine and it had 90% effectiveness over 6 months (since we knew it waned over time and variants would change). Of course that was a conservative estimate of the benefit, but that’s because I wanted to make sure I was on solid ground if attacked.
So now we know that my VAERS calculations approximately match the actual UK data in Figure 1. Since my analysis was deliberately conservative, many of the numbers are smaller than the actuals.
This is another example that people who claim (without evidence) that the VAERS data is too “unreliable to use” are wrong. If it is so unreliable, how did it match the real world UK results so well?
Figure 3: Risk-benefit analysis from VAERS
Note how that VAERS showed exactly the same effect back then that we just learned from this UK data: that the younger you are, the more nonsensical getting vaccinated is.
Our V:C column decreases as you get older (from 6:1 down to 1.8:1) just like column E decreases (from 1.9:1 to 1:1 over the same range) in Figure 2.
Isn’t that an interesting “coincidence”? They are within a factor of 3 of each other.
Confirmation From Others
I’m hardly the only person noting that the COVID vaccines kill more people than they save. Other articles show either no benefit at all or a negative benefit.
For example, check out:
99.6% of COVID deaths in Canada were among fully vaccinated people between April 10-17 which can only happen if the vaccinated have a great ACM than the unvaccinated since there is only an 86% vaccination rate in Canada. This is hard for anyone to explain.
Follow-up of trial participants found ‘no effect on overall mortality’
Figure 4. Table from the Denmark paper published as a preprint in the Lancet
Horowitz: The failure of the mRNA shots is on display for all with open eyes
Note that the Denmark paper (pre-published in the Lancet) showed overall zero all-cause mortality benefit based on clinical trial data. That’s certainly more optimistic than the UK numbers, but the problem for the vaccine makers is that the UK numbers showed up to 38% of the deaths were from COVID so if the vaccines actually worked and were safe, you’d see a huge ACM benefit and you saw nothing.
Why are we mandating a vaccine with a zero ACM benefit?? No public health official wants to answer questions about that.
What Makes This Analysis Different Than Previous Work
The UK ONS data is more detailed than in the more frequently cited UK Health Security Agency summaries. It contains both COVID and non-COVID deaths by age. We haven’t had that before February 2022.
This enables me to validate the data as I explain in the next section.
Why I Picked The 2nd Dose, 6 Month Row Only
There are three reasons I picked the 2nd dose, 6 month row for the comparison with the unvaccinated:
It is the hardest row to make a case since most vax deaths happen within 30 days after the vaccine. So if I can prove the vaccine is dangerous for this row, it’s simply stunning. You don’t expect any excess non-COVID ACM deaths from people 6 months from their last dose of the vaccine.
The data in this row consistently met a very simple sanity test which allows for a fair comparison (described below)
The vaccines were still effective in preventing COVID deaths in this row, e.g., for age 50-54 there was still a 50% efficacy in reducing COVID deaths which is in line with assertions by the government about effectiveness (64 COVID deaths rate delta for the vaccinated vs. 127 COVID death rate for the unvaxxed).
So nobody can really accuse me of “cheating.” This is the most difficult row to make a my case.
One commenter speculated anyone in this bucket must be sickly which explains the higher non-COVID ACM. That’s wrong. Anyone sickly wouldn’t have even made it into the bucket. They would have been killed by COVID or the 2 doses long before entering the 6 months from COVID shot bucket. If they made it into this bucket, these people are super healthy.
The Sanity Test
The all-cause mortality (ACM) rates for NON-COVID deaths in the vaxxed cohorts should be the same as the rates for the unvaccinated for a perfectly safe vaccine; it should be higher for sure for this vaccine as we know from VAERS; we have over 10 ways showing that this vaccine significantly INCREASES your non-COVID ACM.
Note that a number of people claim that Professor Christine Stabell Benn has said that vaccine can positively affect your ACM. While this might be true theoretically for a perfect vaccine, nobody I know has pointed me to any real-life vaccine that has this “fountain of youth” property for anything other than the disease the vaccine was designed for. Bobby Kennedy Jr. tried for 20 years to get a debate on this and nobody would challenge him. In particular, all the COVID vaccines share the same problems of increasing ACM. You can see it very clearly yourself in Figure 6 above. All ages, doses 1 and 2. The ACMs are all worse.
Therefore, anytime that non-COVID ACM is lower for the vaccinated than the unvaccinated in a given age cohort, the row is unreliable (either corrupt or seriously confounded, e.g., by season). Others noticed this as well; without being able to adjust the data, we get nonsense results. Adjusting for bias is a huge task and would be subject to “data manipulation” attacks which would open up another level of attack. So we resigned our analysis to using data we didn’t have to normalize. The 2nd dose, 6 month row fit our purposes.
If I ignored the sanity check and include all the data for the vaccinated in the UK report, then the vaccines are marvelous life savers but ONLY if you are 25 years old or older. The vaccine will keep you from dying from cancer, car accidents, etc. especially if you are elderly. It’s like a fountain of youth for the elderly if you do that. Which doesn’t jive at all with reality where funeral home directors like John O’Looney couldn’t believe how many calls he was getting of elderly that had died when the jabs rolled out. The point is simple: Garbage data in, garbage data out.
Here’s a more in-depth explanation of the confounding due to survivor bias which explains why these data sets are not constructed for our purposes.
Could my sanity check be wrong because the vaccine is actually able to keep you from dying from all diseases and also accidents as well? Very unlikely. VAERS would be empty if this drug reduced adverse events and doctors would report elderly people being cured of disease. Instead of adverse event reports, doctors would be filing Beneficial Event Reports (BER) after vaccination.
I’ve written about this supposed “fountain of youth” effect on November 12, 2021.
The bottom line is data analysis is tricky so sanity checks are important if you want credible results.
Should Those Over 80 Get The Shot?
My VAERS analysis said no.
The anecdotal data from nursing homes from whistleblowers all says no (see slides 53 to 59). This includes Abrien Aguirre on Oahu, Sunnycrest nursing home in Canada, and John O’Looney’s experience, and experience from embalmers where most of the bodies being embalmed have telltale blood clots caused by the vaccine.
Based on curve fitting, it doesn’t look good for the elderly, for either.
The UK dataset used in this article was too confounded to use since the non-COVID ACM rate for the vaccinated was lower than the vaccinated so it didn’t meet the sanity check.
All the anecdotal data I hear is strongly negative. The ONS data shows the COVID vaccines are a fountain of youth and will cut your risk of dying from every cause in half.
If I was over 80, I wouldn’t get the shot until I saw reliable, self-consistent data showing a clear benefit from multiple independent sources. Seen any of that lately?
If I Am Vaccinated, Should I Continue To Get My Boosters, Or Not?
Consider that 75% of the people in the radiology department of Marin/UCSF got religious exemptions so they didn’t have to take the booster.
Does that help? They aren’t reading ONS data. They are seeing patients with 1, 2, and 3 doses of the vaccine.
We see over and over that each shot increases your risk of side-effects and death.
It’s like asking the question: “The first bullet I fired into my brain didn’t kill me. Should I try again?”
ACM Ratio Vs. Risk/Benefit Analysis
Now that we have the basics out of the way, I want to explain in greater detail the difference between the ACM ratio and the risk/benefit number and why the latter is what we should be focusing on.
For example, Toby Rogers estimated that we kill 117 kids from the COVID vaccine for every child we might save from dying of COVID in the 5 to 11 age range.
Here, in an even older cohort (10 to 14), we found it is 1600 to 1. The problem with this young age range is that there are so few deaths, that there is a lot of statistical noise since the denominator is so small (close to 0). But the UK data clearly showed that vaccinating kids younger than 20 years old is insane. Arguing whether it is 117 or 1600 is like rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Just say “no.”
Here’s a simple example to illustrate the difference between the ACM ratio and the risk benefit analysis:
Suppose 100 people per 100,000 die per year normally in a particular age group.
We have a vaccine that saves 1 life per person, but kills 10. That’s a lousy intervention because it kills 10 times more people than it saves.
But if we compare the ACM rates of the two groups, we’d have 100 in the unvaccinated group and 109 dead people in the vaccinated group. So the ACM ratio would only be 1.1, a 10% increase. But the risk/benefit is 10:1 more risk than benefit.
So that’s why the risk-benefit ratio is the number to look at, not the ratio of the ACMs of each group.
Attempts To Debunk This
Daniel Wilson, aka “Debunk the Funk,” cited Morris’s article (UK death data artifacts: “Stragglers” who delay vaccine doses a select group with higher death risk) when I asked him to debunk this article. No other explanation provided.
Morris claims that people who vaccinate late have higher death rates.
First of all, I wasn’t impressed with Morris’ analysis, but even I believed it, it’s completely irrelevant because the category I chose weren’t “stragglers” (since the biggest contributors got their second dose long long ago) and as I noted earlier, it is the single hardest row to see a signal. These people survived COVID and survived two shots so their ACM should be way lower than the average unvaccinated person. Basically, people in this category got shot early with two bullets and are still alive.
So much for the hand-waving debunk attempt.
My result is very consistent with other reliable independent data points that I know. If you want to debunk me, show us how, using exactly the same dataset, you can get a more accurate estimate of the “true” value. I’m skeptical anyone can do that, but I’m open to being shown a better way.
It turns out Table 6 wasn’t the best table to have used.
Take a look at Figure 6 above. After a startup period, the data all settles out and all dose 1 and dose 2 curves show higher ACM than the unvaccinated. No cherry picking or sanity test needed. A raw, untouched data.
So that’s an independent look at the data showing very visually that “whoops, these vaccines are killing more people than they save.”
You Can Do Worse Than This Analysis; That’s Easy
For example, this table from Morris’ article is from the UK dataset as well, and it indicates you are way better off if you got the vax.
Figure 5. Table from Morris article
The problem is death rates that are as low as 20% of the unvaxed death rate (as noted in this table) doesn’t match reality such as the up to 21X increase athlete deaths (Jan 2021 vs Jan 2022) that we can see in plain sight. Nobody has been able to explain away the athlete data, not even Professor Glen Pyle. While government data can be manipulated, athlete deaths cannot be manipulated because they are public. Which do you trust more? Clearly, the data that is in full public view.
Also, in Table 3 of the UK data, it says if you’ve been vaccinated with COVID, you have close to half of the non-COVID ACM death rate as the unvaccinated (compare E23 with E31).
In other words, according to UK government data, the vaccine is a fountain of youth because it will reduce your non-COVID ACM by a factor of 2. It’s just not believable. There is no mechanism of action that can do that and you’d expect the VAERS reports (and individual doctor reports) would all be lower than previous vaccines in all categories rather than off the charts.
Furthermore, if the COVID vaccines reduced non-COVID ACM by 2X, the government would be shouting this from the rooftops as a miracle cure for all diseases. They aren’t. They are silent. What does that tell you? It tells you the UK government is smart enough to realize the data is confounded and you can’t make such assessments: you can’t say it is safe, and you can’t say it is dangerous.
Figure 5 above is also inconsistent with Canada’s high rate of fully vaccinated deaths, the huge number of VAERS reports, reports by individual doctors of 100X or more increase in adverse events after vaccination, Facebook groups with hundred of thousands of vaccine victims, the huge spike in athlete deaths, the 75% of radiologists at UCSF/Marin who refused the booster, etc.
Limitations
Here are some limitations of using the UK data courtesy of Martin Kulldorff, the most important one being the first one.
Does this cause me to doubt the results? No. I specifically chose the row I did to minimize these confounders. These limitations mean my results are conservative (because the seasonality skew of the vaccinated increases their non-COVID ACM). We also have way too many real-world confirmation points that could not be explained if the vaccine were beneficial.
Seasonality: In England, all-cause mortality is highly seasonal, as is COVID mortality as well as COVID vaccinations. This creates a bias in the analysis. There is much more unvaccinated person time during the early part of 2021, while there is much more D2 6+ month person time in the later parts of 2021 and January 2022. To adjust for this bias, in whichever direction it goes, it is necessary to adjust for calendar time. Depending on the data, that can be done in different ways. Note that this bias affects the results differently for different age groups, both because the rollout of the vaccine varied by age group and because the seasonal mortality patterns may differ by age.
Negative efficacy on COVID: The negative efficacy on COVID mortality in the 30-34 and 40-44 age groups (the * rows) may seem counter intuitive, but there is a likely explanation. The same phenomena was seen an a recent New York State analysis of COVID vaccines in children. In that study, the vaccine was effective at preventing symptomatic COVID during the first few weeks after vaccination, but for 5-11 year old children, the efficacy we negative after seven weeks, so that there were more COVID in the vaccinated than the unvaccinated. The likely explanation for this is that the vaccine provides temporary protection during the first few weeks, so after 7 weeks we are comparing unvaccinated children with a high proportion of natural immunity from having had COVID with vaccinated children with a lower proportion with natural immunity. This phenomenon will be seen with any vaccine that only gives short-term protection, and it could potentially also affect COVID mortality statistics. Suppose that the vaccine does not prevent COVID deaths, but just postpone them until a later date. Then there may be a vaccine benefit seen 0-6 months after vaccination, but a vaccine harm 6-12 months after vaccination. When Pfizer and Moderna only evaluated the vaccines for a few months, that give incomplete and potentially misleading information about the efficacy of the vaccines. The same is true if we only look at a subsequent tie interval of e.g. 6-12 month after the vaccination. There are ways to overcome this issue, but I am not sufficiently familiar with the English data to know if it can be extracted from that.
Prior COVID infection: The unvaccinated group consists of two sub-groups,(i) those who have recovered from COVID and who hence have natural immunity to COVID, which is superior to vaccine induced immunity, and (ii) those who have never had COVID. People with natural immunity have minuscule if any benefit from the vaccine on COVID disease and should not be vaccinated. To determine whether those without a prior COVID infection benefit from vaccination, it is necessary to compare the vaccinated without a prior COVID infection with the unvaccinated without a prior COVID infection.
Risk metrics: Although both are worth calculating, I agree that risk/benefit is a more relevant number of vaccine efficacy than vax/unvax ACM rates. The best metrics to evaluate the vaccines is not a risk ratio though, but attributable risk. That is, for every 1,000 people who get the vaccine, or for every 1,000,000, how many deaths are prevented by the vaccine or how many deaths are caused by the vaccine.
Could The Underlying UK Data Be Wrong?
There are always going to be studies that contradict other studies.
There are always going to be compromised data sources, the DMED data being another recent example.
There are always going to be seemingly credible sources of data that are not as credible as they seem at first glance.
So yeah, as I noted in the section above, the ONS data provided was less than ideal.
Our job is to sort out the reliable data from the unreliable data. We do that by using multiple pieces of independent evidence from credible sources and doing sanity checks on the data we use.
My results agreed with other data I’m aware of so I’m reasonably happy with the quality of the data, e.g., the risk/benefit went down with increasing age in a way that matched my expectations.
“Show Me The DATA”
All my analysis here serves one purpose which is to highlight the point that you can make a very legitimate case that these vaccines do nothing and at worse, make things worse. I’m hardly alone in this belief. Showing us different rows in the ONS data shows a different result, but doesn’t cause the red flag to disappear.
The only way you can trump the red flag I pointed out is to do a PROPER analysis.
Remember the movie Jerry Maguire where Rod Tidwell advises Jerry that to keep him as a client all Jerry has to do is “Show me the money!”?
We should all be asking the same thing of the CDC but instead of money, we should be asking them to “Show me the DATA!”
Why isn’t the CDC showing us the ACM study that we need? Namely:
We want to see two matched groups, one who took the intervention, the other that didn’t, and see who is standing at the end of the 1 year period.
Where is that study? The data exists.
There is a reason the proper study does not exist. Because it would make it clear to everyone that nobody should get jabbed.
Without seeing that study and the underlying data, nobody of any age should get the jab or recommend it.
I’ll go even further and say:
It is irresponsible for the CDC to keep that data hidden from public view.
It’s irresponsible for the medical community to not demand to see this data.
It’s irresponsible for the medical community to encourage anyone to get vaccinated without seeing this data especially in light of the alarming data in VAERS and other sources.
Summary
Based on this new UK government data, we can estimate a true risk-benefit ratio for each age group. For all groups, it’s negative. The younger you are, the less sense it makes to take the vaccine. Figure 6 is a visual way to see this. All the dose 1 and 2 curves are above the unvaccinated line.
It shows clearly that our governments have been publicly killing us with these vaccines and vaccine mandates.
The data was used is fully reported data right from the UK government and the math is straightforward. The row I used was not normalized or manipulated. It was the hardest row to prove my point. The only way to explain the results is that the vaccines kill more people than they save. But you can also look at Figure 6 too.
At a minimum, this result should cast serious doubt about the safe and effective narrative. I took a dataset that was clearly biased to show a positive vaccine result and found a hugely negative signal hidden inside by selecting data that should have shown the opposite. No tricks were used. That shouldn’t have been possible if the vaccine was really safe.
We need to see a proper analysis on the data and we need to see it now.
The medical community has never demanded to see a proper risk-benefit study before recommending the vaccines. To this day, they continue to this day to keep their head in the sand and not demand to see the ACM data. It’s deplorable.
Until we see the data and the study and validate both showing the vaccines are safe and effective, the vaccines should not be used.
When will Covid reporting start to tell the truth?
TWO and a half years into the Covid saga, the public is still faced with an information blackout. The data is very concerning indeed, but no one in parliament or the MSM wants to get in front of it. Instead many are still stuck stoking the fear factor. As Professor Vinay Prasad, an American haematologist-oncologist and health researcher, wrote a few days ago: ‘Legitimising irrational anxiety is bad medicine’.
Early on in our efforts to publicise the dangers of biotechnology medicine, I had an email exchange with Jesse Mulligan, a popular commentator with RNZ Afternoons. His perspective on Covid vaccination was as follows.
December 6, 2021: ‘I feel like anybody aiming to critique such an obviously positive public health measure should begin and end their messaging reminding people that any risks/flaws in the vaccine are minor compared to the horrific impacts of getting Covid . . . I don’t have the time to correspond with you on this at length but, for what it’s worth, if you’re putting people off getting a largely safe vaccine by what you’re writing about it, I think you need to review how you approach writing these messages.’
Mulligan quoted from Ministry of Health directives and had also read some questioning scientific articles, but he could not get past the conclusion that vaccination was an obvious public good and for this reason he declined to have me on his show.
The ‘obvious public good’ narrative has come in for some recent criticism. The BMJ printed an opinion piece in July entitled Time to assume that health research is fraudulent until proven otherwise? Or try this referenced substack article which reports that the negative harm/benefit ratio in the Moderna and Pfizer vaccine trials has been acknowledged in a scientific journal article. In other words there is more harm than benefit.
For me, the central early point of pandemic misinformation has been the underlying assumption that biotech medicine interventions could be safe. There really was little or no evidence to justify such an attitude, in fact, as I have discussed, there was a great deal of published pre-pandemic evidence to justify caution.
Given the central role of DNA in human physiology, altering its function was from the outset potentially catastrophic. We are now facing Covid vaccine outcomes which not only involve serious individual adverse effects, but also potentially affect whole populations into the longer term. These outcomes include:
· Elevated excess all-cause death rates and lowered longevity
· Lowered birth rates and fertility
The evidence for these is patchy because governments are not rushing to publish data, but it is still very convincing. So concerning in fact, that the Israeli government has covered up key data and scientific conclusions.
The latest comprehensive evidence for Covid vaccine-induced excess all-cause mortality can be found in this analysis: Excess mortality in Germany 2020-2022.
It is extraordinary that this perilous new normal has found its way into advertising messages, but not into serious commentary. Today I watched a TV ad for a funeral home which arranges alternative and appropriate funerals for those dying young, whilst a British Heart Foundation appeal featured a young woman collapsing on the football field. It did so to encourage donations.
Sudden deaths among all ages are being normalised in the public’s mind because they really are happening at a rate that dwarfs the past, as insurance data confirms. However here in New Zealand we are still being subjected to puerile government advertising devoid of scientific caution. Like this Ministry of Health promotion which turned up this morning:
GET YOUR SECOND BOOSTER – I’ve had three shots, do I really need another booster? Current evidence shows your protection against severe infection slowly decreases over time – GET YOUR SECOND BOOSTER
No mention of safety, no mention of efficacy, and the term ‘current evidence’ used as if this advert is scientifically up to date and reliable. It isn’t.
Why is it so unfashionable to be concerned about rising death rates and lowered birth rates? You might find a clue in this frightening pre-pandemic article from the government-owned Canadian Broadcasting Corporation Medically assisted deaths could save millions in health care spending: Report. Are higher death rates good news for people with this kind of perspective? We hope not.
We are clearly on a learning curve here. The poor vaccination outcomes were not anticipated, the adverse effects were initially disbelieved on principle and blamed on misinformation.
It is understandable that in the uncertain early days of Covid, people the official MoH narrative, but continuing to do so now doesn’t fit the published scientific narrative or the public data. Caution was and is a very scientific strategy, it never deserved bad press.
Those offering advice to the public need to be more discerning if they wish to contribute to the well being and longevity of our society. MSM language has become extreme, and it is increasingly polarising without foundation in science.
There is still a chance for journalists to cover the pandemic with an open mind. It is happening elsewhere. GB News for example has gained one of the largest prime-time news audiences in the UK. Why not initiate a more open public debate? Cooling rhetoric and decreasing polarisation can only lead to better outcomes. Fresh air never harms anyone – it can save lives.
The following featured article it gives you a useful insight into the monetary shenanigans behind the Covid psyop.
The basic on all this the underlying banking fraud, hidden by a smokescreen of complexity, whereby our means of exchange is created by the banking cartels as interest-bearing debt, a fraud that underpins the globalist power and and the removal of which would finish their crime syndicate utterly.
This article looks at how the covid psyop was engineered to further bolster the international money-lending cartels who made massive profits from the orgy of government borrowing, the door to which the”pandemic” psyop was launched to kick open.
The article is also interesting for the predictions in its closing paragraph concerning the creation by us of our new civilisation at the grass roots. This theme is appearing in the writings and postings of an increasing number of free-thinking groups and starting to happen in reality – hardly surprising as it is the way forward.
How we can all fight the Covid money-launderers
‘IF WE can face it we can fix it,’ said American investment banker and former Washington official Catherine Austin Fitts when she participated in the first Doctors 4 Covid Ethics symposium in July 2021 to assert that Covid-19 is a monetary event.
Fitts explained that in recent decades trillions of dollars had been ‘disappeared’ from the US Treasury’s funds, and it was essentially bankrupt, along with the treasuries of Western governments. She provided an insight into how one illusion, that of a staged pandemic, was part of the cover-up strategy of another illusion, that of an international financial system now on very thin ice.
The aim of creating a pandemic was to corral populations and render them powerless, because the international banking clearing system pegged to the US dollar was in free fall in 2019. She said that a new system was in preparation, to be slid in under the radar, but ‘if people knew what it was, no one would want it’. In the face of this situation, the public needed to be ‘disabled’ politically, judicially, financially and practically.
In 2008 we got a glimpse of this murky world of finance following the collapse of Northern Rock, the Tyneside building society which turned itself into a bank in 1997, when it was revealed that it had been issuing mortgages of up to 110 per cent. We further learned that the practice of lending to borrowers with little or no chance of servicing, let alone repaying a loan (sub-prime lending), was not only widespread, but that lenders packaged their bad debts into bundles with a few serviceable debts in the mix to disguise the toxic nature of the financial product, and sold them on the financial markets as ‘assets’. Terms such as ‘derivatives’ and ‘credit default swaps’ were beyond the average understanding, but what we knew was that the financial institutions with their Ponzi schemes had played the tables with our savings, our pensions, and our future, and lost. So come 2019 the public had to be rendered senseless.
So what are Fitts’s recommendations? She is confident that the nefarious system designed to strip out individual assets and control humanity can be thwarted. She suggests we need radically to increase our cash transactions. Draw as much cash as you can, she urges. Support local retailers, and avoid restaurants and shops which refuse cash. You can ask your bank for a card that is not contactless. Don’t buy from Amazon, don’t purchase smart gadgets, get old ones repaired, nurture local relationships with small businesses. All this has been said before, but the cash aspect is vital. Convenience has been the bait to entrap society into tapping a card, a wrist-watch, and then the wrist itself into total surveillance and tyranny. We can and must obstruct its onslaught on our privacy and freedoms.
Also worth reading are two well-written posts on this subject by a writer calling himself Allen on Celia Farber’s The Truth Barrier: Covid Is Not An Epidemiological Story; Covid Is A Crime Story (substack.com) ‘If you view this whole “pandemic” situation through the lens of health, safety, science and saving lives, then most of it makes little sense. If you view it through the lens of money, power, control, and wealth transfer, then all of it makes perfect sense. Covid is not an epidemiological story. Covid is a crime story. Covid-19 is the biggest money-laundering scheme in the history of the world . . . governments know full well that “Covid” is being used as a cover for crashing the economies in the Western world. There is not now and never has been a “pandemic” – that is all Kabuki theatre to disguise the reality of the rapid economic decline brought on by the Ponzi schemes of financial institutions over the past few decades.’
As the months progress, and despite at times a sense of weariness, it is hugely encouraging to observe just how many valuable voices are contributing to blowing up the fraud. The tapestry of lies is clearly unravelling in the US and this cannot but fan out across the world. The regeneration and creation of new structures of commerce, education, healthcare, justice, and governance will spring from grass roots up, at first in parallel, then as replacement to the old crumbling systems, because as Einstein said: ‘No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it.’
It’s one or two years after an EMP attack and you are safely tucked away in your retreat somewhere in the middle of nowhere. Your storage foods have mostly been used and your high tech electronics is useless. The really bad stuff is mostly past. Now it’s try to stay fed and alive and pray that civilization as you know it is coming back. You’re going to have to work your environment to live. Ever wonder what life might be like? What would it really be like to have no running water, electricity, sewer, newspaper or Internet? No supermarket or fire department close at hand?
I have a good imagination but I decided to talk to someone who would know first hand what it was like: my mother. She grew up on a homestead in the middle of Montana during the 1920s and 1930s. It was a two room Cottonwood cabin with the nearest neighbor three miles away. She was oldest at 9, so she was in charge of her brother and sister. This was her reality; I feel there are lessons here for the rest of us.
There was a Majestic stove that used wood and coal. The first person up at four thirty A.M., usually her father, would start the fire for breakfast. It was a comforting start to the day but your feet would get cold when you got out of bed.
A crosscut saw and axe was used to cut wood for the stove and after that experience, you got pretty stingy with the firewood because you know what it takes to replace it. The old timers say that it warms you when you cut it, when you split it, and again when you burn it. The homes that were typical on homesteads and ranches of the era were smaller with lower ceilings than modern houses just so they could be heated easier. The saw and axe were not tools to try hurrying with. You set a steady pace and maintained it. A man in a hurry with an axe may loose some toes or worse. One side effect of the saw and axe use is that you are continuously hungry and will consume a huge amount of food. Lights in the cabin were old fashioned kerosene lamps. It was the kid’s job to trim the wicks, clean the chimneys and refill the reservoirs.
The privy was downhill from the house next to the corral and there was no toilet paper. Old newspaper, catalogs or magazines were used and in the summer a pan of barely warm water was there for hygiene. During a dark night, blizzard, or brown out from a dust storm, you followed the corral poles-no flashlights.
There were two springs close to the house that ran clear, clean, and cold water. The one right next to it was a “soft” water spring. It was great for washing clothes and felt smooth, almost slick, on your skin. If you drank from it, it would clean you out just as effectively as it cleaned clothes. Not all clean water is equal.
The second spring was a half mile from the cabin and it was cold, clear, and tasted wonderful. The spring itself was deep – an eight foot corral pole never hit bottom- and flowed through the year. It was from here that the kids would fill two barrels on a heavy duty sled with water for the house and the animals. They would lead the old white horse that was hitched to the sledge back to the buildings and distribute the water for people and animals. In the summer, they made two trips in the morning and maybe a third in the evening. In the winter, one trip in the morning and one in the evening. They did this alone.
Breakfast was a big meal because they’re going to be working hard. Usually there would be homemade sausage, eggs and either cornmeal mush or oatmeal. More food was prepared than what was going to be eaten right then. The extra food was left on the table under a dish towel and eaten as wanted during the day. When evening meal was cooked, any leftovers were reheated. The oatmeal or the mush was sliced and fried for supper. It was served with butter, syrup, honey or molasses.
The homemade sausage was from a quarter or half a hog. The grinder was a small kitchen grinder that clamped on the edge of a table and everybody took turns cranking. When all the hog had been ground, the sausage mix was added and kneaded in by hand. Then it was immediately fried into patties. The patties were placed, layer by layer, into a stone crock and covered with the rendered sausage grease. The patties were reheated as needed. The grease was used for gravies as well as re-cooking the patties. Occasionally a fresh slice of bread would be slathered with a layer of sausage grease and a large slice of fresh onion would top it off for quick sandwich. Nothing was wasted.
Some of their protein came from dried fish or beef. Usually this had to be soaked to remove the excess salt or lye. Then it was boiled. Leftovers would go into hash, fish patties, or potato cakes.
The kitchen garden ran mostly to root crops. Onion, turnip, rutabaga, potato and radishes grew under chicken wire. Rhubarb was canned for use as a winter tonic to stave off scurvy. Lettuce, corn, and other above ground crops suffered from deer, rats, and gumbo clay soil. Surprisingly, cabbage did well. The winter squash didn’t do much, only 2 or 3 gourds. Grasshoppers were controlled by the chickens and turkeys. There was endless hoeing.
Washing clothes required heating water on the stove, pouring it into three galvanized wash tubs-one for the homemade lye soap and scrub board, the other two for rinsing. Clothes were rinsed and wrung out by hand, then hung on a wire to dry in the air. Your hands became red and raw, your arms and shoulders sore beyond belief by the end of the wash. Wet clothing, especially wool, is heavy and the gray scum from the soap was hard to get out of the clothes.
Personal baths were in a galvanized wash tub screened by a sheet. In the winter it was difficult to haul, heat and handle the water so baths weren’t done often. Most people would do sponge baths.Everybody worked including the kids. There were always more chores to be done than time in the day. It wasn’t just this one family; it was the neighbors as well. You were judged first and foremost by your work ethic and then your honesty. This was critical because if you were found wanting in either department, the extra jobs that might pay cash money, a quarter of beef, hog or mutton would not be available. Further, the cooperation with your neighbors was the only assurance that if you needed help, you would get help. Nobody in the community could get by strictly on their own. A few tried. When they left, nobody missed them. You didn’t have to like someone to cooperate and work with him or her.
Several times a year people would get together for organized activities: barn raising, butcher bee, harvest, roofing, dance, or picnics. There were lots of picnics, usually in a creek bottom with cottonwoods for shade or sometimes at the church. Always, the women would have tables groaning with food, full coffee pots and, if they were lucky, maybe some lemonade. (Lemons were expensive and scarce) After the work (even for picnics, there was usually a project to be done first) came the socializing. Many times people would bring bedding and sleep out overnight, returning home the next day.
A half dozen families would get together for a butcher bee in the cold days of late fall. Cows were slaughtered first, then pigs, mutton, and finally chickens. Blood from some of the animals was collected in milk pails, kept warm on a stove to halt coagulation and salt added. Then it was canned for later use in blood dumplings, sausage or pudding. The hides were salted for later tanning; the feathers from the fowl were held for cleaning and used in pillows or mattresses. The skinned quarters of the animals would be dipped into cold salt brine and hung to finish cooling out so they could be taken home safely for processing. Nothing went to waste.
The most feared occurrence in the area was fire. If it got started, it wasn’t going out until it burned itself out. People could and did loose everything. The most used weapon was the .22 single shot Winchester with .22 shorts. It was used to take the heads off pheasant, quail, rabbit and ducks. If you held low, the low powered round didn’t tear up the meat. The shooters, usually the kids, quickly learned sight picture and trigger control although they never heard those terms. If you took five rounds of ammunition, you better bring back the ammunition or a critter for the pot for each round expended. It was also a lot quieter and less expensive [in those days] than the .22 Long Rifle cartridges.
If you are trying to maintain a low profile, the odor of freshly baked bread can be detected in excess of three miles on a calm day. Especially by kids.
Twice a year the cabin was emptied of everything. The walls, floors, and ceilings were scrubbed with lye soap and a bristle brush. All the belongings were also cleaned before they came back into the house. This was pest control and it was needed until DDT became available. Bedbugs, lice, ticks and other creepy crawlies were a fact of life and were controlled by brute force. Failure to do so left you in misery and maybe ill.
Foods were stored in bug proof containers. The most popular was fifteen pound metal coffee cans with tight lids. These were for day to day use in the kitchen. (I still have one. It’s a family heirloom.) The next were barrels to hold the bulk foods like flour, sugar, corn meal, and rice. Everything was sealed or the vermin would get to it. There was always at least one, preferably two, months of food on hand. If the fall cash allowed, they would stock up for the entire winter before the first snowfall.
The closest thing to a cooler was a metal box in the kitchen floor. It had a very tight lid and was used to store milk, eggs and butter for a day or two. Butter was heavily salted on the outside to keep it from going rancid or melting. Buttermilk, cottage cheese and regular cheese was made from raw milk after collecting for a day or two. The box was relatively cool in the summer and did not freeze in the winter.
Mice and rats love humanity because we keep our environment warm and tend to be sloppy with food they like. Snakes love rats and mice so they were always around. If the kids were going to play outside, they would police the area with a hoe and a shovel. After killing and disposing of the rattlesnakes- there was always at least one-then they could play for a while in reasonable safety.
The mice and rats were controlled by traps, rocks from sling shots, cats and coyotes. The cats had a hard and usually short life because of the coyotes. The coyotes were barely controlled and seemed to be able to smell firearms at a distance. There were people who hunted the never-ending numbers for the bounty.
After chores were done, kid’s active imagination was used in their play. They didn’t have a lot of toys. There were a couple of dolls for the girls, a pocket knife and some marbles for the boy, and a whole lot of empty to fill. Their father’s beef calves were pretty gentle by the time they were sold at market – the kids rode them regularly. (Not a much fat on those calves but a lot of muscle.) They would look for arrow heads, lizards, and wild flowers. Chokecherry, buffalo berry, gooseberry and currants were picked for jelly and syrups. Sometimes the kids made chokecherry wine.
On a hot summer day in the afternoon, the shade on the east side of the house was treasured and the east wind, if it came, even more so. Adults hated hailstorms because of the destruction, kids loved them because they could collect the hail and make ice cream.
Childbirth was usually handled at a neighbor’s house with a midwife if you were lucky. If you got sick you were treated with ginger tea, honey, chicken soup or sulphur and molasses. Castor oil was used regularly as well. Wounds were cleaned with soap and disinfected with whisky. Mustard based poultices were often used for a variety of ills. Turpentine, mustard and lard was one that was applied to the chest for pneumonia or a hacking cough.
Contact with the outside world was an occasional trip to town for supplies using a wagon and team. A battery operated radio was used very sparingly in the evenings. A rechargeable car battery was used for power. School was a six mile walk one way and you brought your own lunch. One school teacher regularly put potatoes on the stove to bake and shared them with the kids. She was very well thought of by the kids and the parents.
These people were used to a limited amount of social interaction. They were used to no television, radio, or outside entertainment. They were used to having only three or four books. A fiddler or guitar player for a picnic or a dance was a wonderful thing to be enjoyed. Church was a social occasion as well as religious. The church ladies and their butter and egg money allowed most rural churches to be built and to prosper.
The men were required to do the heavy work but the ladies made it come together. The civilizing of the west sprang from these roots. Some of those ladies had spines of steel. They needed it. That’s a partial story of the homestead years. People were very independent, stubborn and strong but still needed the community and access to the technology of the outside world for salt, sugar, flour, spices, chicken feed, cloth, kerosene for the lights and of course, coffee. There are many more things I could list. Could they have found an alternative if something was unavailable? Maybe. How would you get salt or nitrates in Montana without importing? Does anyone know how to make kerosene? Coffee would be valued like gold. Roasted grain or chicory just didn’t cut it.
I don’t want to discourage people trying to prepare but rather to point out that generalized and practical knowledge along with a cooperative community is still needed for long term survival. Whatever shortcomings you may have, if you are part of a community, it is much more likely to be covered. The described community in this article was at least twenty to thirty miles across and included many farms and ranches as well as the town. Who your neighbors are, what type of people they are, and your relationship to them is one of the more important things to consider.
Were there fights, disagreements and other unpleasantness? Absolutely. Some of it was handled by neighbors, a minister or the sheriff. Some bad feelings lasted a lifetime. There were some people that were really bad by any standard and they were either the sheriff’s problem or they got sorted out by one of their prospective victims. These homesteaders had a rough life but they felt they had a great life and their way of life was shared by everyone they knew. They never went hungry, had great daylong picnics with the neighbors, and knew everyone personally within twenty miles. Every bit of pleasure or joy was treasured like a jewel since it was usually found in a sea of hard work. They worked hard, played hard and loved well. In our cushy life, we have many more “things” and “conveniences” than they ever did, but we lack the connection they had with their environment and community.
The biggest concern for our future: What happens if an event such as a solar flare, EMP, or a plague takes our society farther back than the early 1900s by wiping out our technology base. Consider the relatively bucolic scene just described and then add in some true post-apocalyptic hard cases. Some of the science fiction stories suddenly get much more realistic and scary. A comment out of a Star Trek scene comes to mind “In the fight between good and evil, good must be very, very good.”
Consider what kind of supplies might not be available at any cost just because there is no longer a manufacturing base or because there is no supply chain. In the 1900s they had the railroads as a lifeline from the industrial east.
One of the greatest advantages we have is access to a huge amount of information about our world, how things work and everything in our lives. We need to be smart enough to learn/understand as much as possible and store references for all the rest. Some of us don’t sleep well at night as we are well aware of how fragile our society and technological infrastructure is. Trying to live the homesteader’s life would be very painful for most of us. I would prefer not to. I hope and pray it doesn’t ever come to that.How long would it take us to rebuild the tools for recovery to the early 1900 levels? Beans? There was almost always a pot of beans on the stove in the winter time. Chickens and a couple of milk cows provided needed food to balance the larder. They could not have supported a growing family without these two resources.
It sounds like something out of a Cold War era movie. Boxes of medical supplies stacked high in government warehouses to help citizens in the event of a public health emergency.
However, this huge stockpile is very real. It is called the Strategic National Stockpile, and “Once Federal and local authorities agree that the SNS is needed, medicines will be delivered to any state in the U.S. in time for them to be effective. Each state has plans to receive and distribute SNS medicine and medical supplies to local communities as quickly as possible.”
For security reasons, the location and the number of warehouses that comprise the SNS are classified information – as is much of what is in them. “If everybody knows exactly what we have, then you know exactly what you can do to us that we can’t fix,” Greg Burel, director of the program told National Public Radio in a recent interview. “And we just don’t want that to happen.”
The SNS started in 1999 with an approximate $50 million budget. Since then, it has built an inventory in multiple warehouses that is valued at just over $7 billion. “If you envision, say, a Super Walmart and stick two of those side by side and take out all the drop ceiling, that’s about the same kind of space that we would occupy in one of these storage locations,” Burel said.
Watch this video below to find out the great secrets hidden by the government.
The SNS extensive inventory includes massive amounts of small pox vaccines, antivirals in case of deadly flu pandemic, medicines to treat radiation burns and sickness, chemical agent antidotes, wound care supplies, antibiotics and IV fluids.
NPR science writer Nell Greenfieldboyce recently visited an SNS. She was told she was the first reporter ever to visit the secret warehouses, and she had to sign a confidentiality agreement not to describe the location or the exterior of the facility.
A locked section of the warehouse stocks painkillers than can be addictive. A giant freezer is filled with medicines that need to be kept frozen. Greenfieldboyce described a humming sound that comes from the rows of ventilators that are charged once a month and sent out for maintenance once a year.
With an annual budget of more than half a billion dollars, the SNS is charged with deciding what to purchase for the stockpile. In order to do so, officials must determine which threats are realistic and which are not.
“That’s where we have a huge, complex bureaucracy trying to sort through that,” Irwin Redlener, director of the National Center for Disaster Preparedness at Columbia University, told Greenfieldboyce.
The government recently hired a firm called Gryphon Scientific to analyze how well the stockpile could respond to a range of health disaster scenarios.
Although he said he could not be specific on results of the study, Gryphon Scientific’s Rocco Casagrande told the NPR reporter, “One thing we can say is that across the variety of threats that we examined, the Strategic National Stockpile has the adequate amount of materials in it and by and large the right type of thing.”
However, he pointed out that the studies were based upon a single type of attack at a time or a single type of weapon.
The brief shelf life of some of the newer medicines is a problem for the SNS. “These are often very powerful, very exciting and useful new medicines, but they are also very expensive and they expire after a couple years,” explained Dr. Tara O’Toole, a former Homeland Security official who is now at In-Q-Tel, a nonprofit that helps bring technological innovation to the U. S. intelligence community.
Another problem is the time it would take to get the medicines from the warehouses to the people who need them in the event of real emergency. “It is not going to be easy or simple to put medicines in the hand of everybody who wants it,” O’Toole told NPR.
The warehouse Greenfieldboyce visited contains 130 shipping containers, but who will be on the receiving end of these shipping containers during an actual emergency?
“While they do have plans for emergencies, and lists of volunteers, they’re volunteers,” said Paul Petersen, director of emergency preparedness for Tennessee. “And they’re not guaranteed to show up in the time of need.”
Local public health officials have had severe budget cuts and are underfunded, Petersen told NPR. “Over and over, I heard worries about this part of the stockpile system.”
O’Toole said, “We have drastically decreased the level of state public health resources in the last decade. We’ve lost 50,000 state and local health officials. That’s a huge hit.” She commented that emergency drills would be helpful, adding, “The notion that this is all going to be top down, that the feds are in charge and the feds will deliver, is wrong.”
Meanwhile, the secret warehouses continue to stockpile supplies. “We have the capability, if something bad happens, that we can intervene in a positive way, but then we don’t ever want to have to do that. So it’s kind of a strange place,” Burel told NPR.
“But we would be foolish not to prepare for those events that we could predict might happen.”
At some point, the governing criminals will come after all those not willing to be injected, and will make living very difficult for all of us… This could become a very dangerous country in a short amount of time for people demanding freedom.
The Worst Is Yet To Come as Death and False Flag Threats Are Planned by the State
Our whole practical government is grounded in mob psychology and the Boobus Americanus will follow any command that promises to make him safer.”
The final push toward a totalitarian state is upon us, and an all-out assault on society seems imminent.
With most of the population still going along with these scams, still obeying every order, and still unable to muster any courage…, what are those of us that are informed and willing to defy ‘authority’ to do?
What is coming will be a combination of extreme propaganda, fear-mongering, false flag attacks, fake ‘virus’ attacks, a deadly flu season due to ‘vaccination,’ more ‘vaccine’ mandates, and power and water grid shutdowns, creating an environment to allow for full or partial martial law.
This will set the stage to reinstate lockdowns, quarantines, and isolation, to advance bogus ‘climate change’ agendas, and to create a regulatory climate so restrictive as to mirror that of a total dictatorial state.
First and foremost, the ‘variant’ threat will be easily advanced because many more will likely die this fall and winter… due to widespread immune system failures because of…millions of poisonous injections…
Deaths… will still be blamed on a ‘virus’ or ‘variant’ that does not exist, and this tactic will allow the purposeful spreading of extreme fear.
This government… will then go after the children by planned injection of the toxic ‘Covid vaccine throughout the … indoctrination centers called ‘public’ schools. This will begin with children 12 and older, and… will be targeting every child down to babies and infants with this deadly concoction.
With more death and sickness, new and more severe lockdowns will be attempted…
This plot will be enhanced due to planned cyber attacks that are ‘expected’ to shut down power and water grids across the nation. These so-called attacks will certainly be false flag terror against the masses, and could easily cause civil unrest, violence, and extreme aggression by the state in response to any dissent.
Simulations have been greatly intensified this year.
As the year progresses, more division will occur in an us-versus-them situation, pitting ‘vaccinated’ against those unvaccinated. …
At some point, the governing criminals will come after all those not willing to be injected, and will make living very difficult for all of us…
Don’t forget about the fictitious manmade ‘climate change’ agenda, as it looks like the drive toward radical policy decisions based on climate are already in the works.
This is very troubling, as it adds another dangerous level of tyranny to a society already consumed by dictatorial madness. It could easily be used to force more quarantines, travel bans, and allocation of utility services, that are all virtually controlled by this government and its partners.
What comes with this agenda is mass restriction of life-giving water and power, the decimation of food production and distribution, supply line shutdowns, and unstoppable runaway inflation, especially concerning the most vital needs of this citizenry. When food becomes so scarce that many are starving, total chaos will ensue.
Economically speaking, any or all of these things happening will disrupt all economic activity for the masses, but will be used by the claimed ‘elite’ ruling class to continue to steal the wealth from all of you, just as has happened over the past year and a half.
This has been the biggest wealth transfer in history, and it is not over yet. The powerful that are destroying the lives of billions, are continuing to live like kings while claiming ownership of all money and property. The goal of course, is for you to own nothing and be happy about it.
CONCLUSION
…The more that refuse to accept this totalitarian domination, the better, as time has run out, but if a very large number of excess deaths occur this fall and winter as I expect, the wheels of tyranny will turn faster and faster in an attempt to finish this long-planned coup to capture and control the bodies and minds of humanity.
At that point, we will have already lost, especially those living in the highest population areas such as cities.
I realize all this sounds far-fetched to most, but then most have no idea of what is coming. We are not in Kansas anymore.
At some point, the governing criminals will come after all those not willing to be injected, and will make living very difficult for all of us… This could become a very dangerous country in a short amount of time for people demanding freedom.
The Worst Is Yet To Come as Death and False Flag Threats Are Planned by the State
Our whole practical government is grounded in mob psychology and the Boobus Americanus will follow any command that promises to make him safer.”
The final push toward a totalitarian state is upon us, and an all-out assault on society seems imminent.
With most of the population still going along with these scams, still obeying every order, and still unable to muster any courage…, what are those of us that are informed and willing to defy ‘authority’ to do?
What is coming will be a combination of extreme propaganda, fear-mongering, false flag attacks, fake ‘virus’ attacks, a deadly flu season due to ‘vaccination,’ more ‘vaccine’ mandates, and power and water grid shutdowns, creating an environment to allow for full or partial martial law.
Watch this video below to find out the great secrets hidden by the government.
This will set the stage to reinstate lockdowns, quarantines, and isolation, to advance bogus ‘climate change’ agendas, and to create a regulatory climate so restrictive as to mirror that of a total dictatorial state.
First and foremost, the ‘variant’ threat will be easily advanced because many more will likely die this fall and winter… due to widespread immune system failures because of…millions of poisonous injections…
Deaths… will still be blamed on a ‘virus’ or ‘variant’ that does not exist, and this tactic will allow the purposeful spreading of extreme fear.
This government… will then go after the children by planned injection of the toxic ‘Covid vaccine throughout the … indoctrination centers called ‘public’ schools. This will begin with children 12 and older, and… will be targeting every child down to babies and infants with this deadly concoction.
With more death and sickness, new and more severe lockdowns will be attempted…
This plot will be enhanced due to planned cyber attacks that are ‘expected’ to shut down power and water grids across the nation. These so-called attacks will certainly be false flag terror against the masses, and could easily cause civil unrest, violence, and extreme aggression by the state in response to any dissent.
Simulations have been greatly intensified this year.
As the year progresses, more division will occur in an us-versus-them situation, pitting ‘vaccinated’ against those unvaccinated. …
At some point, the governing criminals will come after all those not willing to be injected, and will make living very difficult for all of us…
Don’t forget about the fictitious manmade ‘climate change’ agenda, as it looks like the drive toward radical policy decisions based on climate are already in the works.
This is very troubling, as it adds another dangerous level of tyranny to a society already consumed by dictatorial madness. It could easily be used to force more quarantines, travel bans, and allocation of utility services, that are all virtually controlled by this government and its partners.
What comes with this agenda is mass restriction of life-giving water and power, the decimation of food production and distribution, supply line shutdowns, and unstoppable runaway inflation, especially concerning the most vital needs of this citizenry. When food becomes so scarce that many are starving, total chaos will ensue.
Economically speaking, any or all of these things happening will disrupt all economic activity for the masses, but will be used by the claimed ‘elite’ ruling class to continue to steal the wealth from all of you, just as has happened over the past year and a half.
This has been the biggest wealth transfer in history, and it is not over yet. The powerful that are destroying the lives of billions, are continuing to live like kings while claiming ownership of all money and property. The goal of course, is for you to own nothing and be happy about it.
CONCLUSION
…The more that refuse to accept this totalitarian domination, the better, as time has run out, but if a very large number of excess deaths occur this fall and winter as I expect, the wheels of tyranny will turn faster and faster in an attempt to finish this long-planned coup to capture and control the bodies and minds of humanity.
At that point, we will have already lost, especially those living in the highest population areas such as cities.
I realize all this sounds far-fetched to most, but then most have no idea of what is coming. We are not in Kansas anymore.
Important below:
Today I’d like to share with you a “3-second survival hack” you can use to skyrocket your chances of protecting your loved ones during ANY crisis.
Ultimate-Survival 