So far, little has been revealed by the UK’s COVID Inquiry other than how far the ruling class has gone to manipulate the perception of public opinion, and how vast the communist conspiracy may be.
The deception continues worldwide with the fiercest proponents of the worst draconian measures now proudly telling us how successful they were in minimising the effects of the pandemic. All with no real evidence, and assisted by the MSM and compliant social media sites.
If there is no other message in this, we should all understand clearly: “They’ll be back.”
They view their primary failure as being unable to convince us all of the veracity of their “experts” who said simply: “be afraid, trust us, and comply” while they dismantled all that is/was good in our respective societies. Never forget.
Ah, lock downs. They are still not asking the correct questions. Talking of lives “saved”—even though all these numbers are at best gross estimates and the result of bad modeling—is not really the question. The question is what is a “life saved” worth economically. Yes, and that translates into dollars, or for you in the UK, pounds. Coming from the USA, I’ll talk in terms of dollars.
Every benefit has a cost. We make sound economic decisions by weighing costs against benefits. Here in the USA we spent *trillions* on the Covid scamdemic. The bulk of the populace that died were old (>65) and co-morbid. The typical oldster who perished, as the result of Covid (much mischief in counting Covid cases here as the hospitals received a bounty from the government for each case reported) has been estimated to have had a smallish remaining life span. So the benefit of a saved life is—especially in the case of nursing home deaths—estimated as short as a few months.
Much is touted of the 1 million or so deaths here from Covid (again a completely bogus number), but we as a large and aging country have an annual death rate in excess of 3M. Now that the worse of Covid has passed, we seem to be realizing—not a death decrease, but an unexpected *increase* in our “all cause death rate” for the country. Estimated anywhere from 13 to 20 percent! Again I repeat this increase is not explainable as directly from Covid. Some argue vaccinations, others delayed critical non-Covid health care, others depression and loneliness from lockdowns, and so forth. But the result is that this increasing death rate may indeed total *more* than the official total Covid deaths in the years to come!
A million times a million is a trillion (American numbers). We could have paid (compensation of) a $1M for each death and still came out ahead in economic terms. Until we stop thinking emotionally and come to terms with diseases like Covid rationally, the next pandemic will cause a total bankruptcy of the nation and economic ruin—if that has not already happened this time.
Not all life is of infinite value and not all lives are of equal worth.
There is just no way anyone in any power center or any aspiring commissar or credentialed petty tyrant is ever going to willingly cede the enormous power they've accrued in the past 3ish years...to be able to control entire populations at the push of a button, to tell people where and when they can leave their homes (and for how long), not to mention to force them into receiving a pharmaceutical product while threatening them with social death if they refuse or even just ask uncomfortable questions.
Imagine the electric thrill all this power gives to the constantly striving, status-obsessed, brainless and soul-less bureaucrat...this to them is like a wet dream come true.
The root cause here is how passive and demoralized all the citizens of the Anglosphere have become...veal calves and zoo animals herded by the algorithms, happy to agree to anything as long as the WiFi is strong and the drugs and junk food cheap.
The global corporate state is smart, first they turned citizens into consumers, real communities into virtual ones, and people with specific cultures and traditions into deracinated monads who should never not be apologizing for the crimes committed by someone who looked like them a century or 2 ago. Once this was achieved, the flock was easy to shepherd, and (to mix my bestial metaphors), now 9 out of 10 of our fellow citizens will gladly file into the slaughterhouse, because only Bad People don't.
What continues to amaze me is that the light bulb didn’t go off for everyone when Hancock stated on camera that he knew what to do when he watched the movie Contagion! How much more evidence of delusion and self aggrandisement do you need, for a fake pandemic too. Fake pandemic, fake climate alarm, fake woke culture, fake fact checking on an industrial scale, fake (deadly) vaccines and fake pharma industry, fake economy (and data) build by fake economic models, fake capital markets. Is anything real? Well the March of neo Feudalism dressed up as neo Marxism and the associated rise of totalitarianism is real, it is self evident. Actual inflation is real, also self evident. The indoctrination efforts being applied to our children in schools is real and the fact that Job Biden is a corrupt puppet with an equally corrupt hand up his ass is also real, indeed it is hard to see a Western leadership that isn’t so.
It is not China that is the Communist enemy, it is the world economic forum, which intends to subjugate China to itself, to achieve unipolar dominance. And the result will not be communism, but Neo feudalism.
First it's "zero covid." Coming next: "Zero Carbon." And, once again, most of the brainwashed public will not be able to admit that we are the carbon they want to reduce to zero. Even though some of the psychopathic monsters who are squealing with glee over this prospect have quite publicly either written about it, or have openly said as much. If there isn't a mass awakening in conjunction with a willingness on behalf of those awoken to become ungovernable, the monsters will get their way...
Except in the many ways that communism and fascism are similar, it is FASCISM, NOT COMMUNISM, that is the global(ist) ruling force today, temporarily through their national-government minions. The top leaders of China are "simply" globalists as well, who are part of the FASCIST game plan. It is CORPORATE-FASCISM, as it long has been through the various "reichs", run by the same eight (8) most powerful bankster-globalist families in the world, as it has been for a very long time. So, though the takeover may have parts of communist planks (because their planks are quite similar---the communist one just has a few more steps) for complete global(ist) domination, subjugation and mass-eugenicide, it is a corporate-fascism-dominated coup d'etat and coup d'gras, now in its/their Satanic endgame.
“...recruit through a process of manipulation and entrapment, gradually estranging individuals from what they believed to be their values, until all that’s left is nihilism, self-interest, and complete loyalty to the organisation.”
Sounds just like what the US military is doing by going woke and mandating mRNA. Weed out the patriots and thinkers leaving those that might be most willing to fire upon their fellow citizens in the future.
Supporting the thinking of Mr. Richard Horton is a book I discovered while reading the Council on Foreign Relations' story from March, 2020 about how China was a model for pandemic guidance. Foreign Affairs is the most influential publication about international affairs in the world.
This Foreign Affairs piece from March, 2020 provides a greater understanding of the pandemic:
This book was contained as a link in the FA article which informs of The Logic of Disease Politics and provides a blueprint to transforming a nation of free individuals into an authoritarian collectivist society:
Rural Health Care Delivery
Modern China from the Perspective of Disease Politics
It's a very long book hard to summarize, but my Stack lists several of the chapters and sections I found most insightful and applicable, though if you have time for a full read you may discover other interesting information.
Yes. Disease politics is the midwife of Marxism. The UK, US and western formerly liberal democracies have been following the blueprint for our fundamental transformation into collectivist authoritarianism. We must not comply.
My submission for the UK Covid Inquiry currently under way, sharing here for information...
Do you think they pay any attention to submissions from members of the public?
Q. Please explain why you think the draft Terms of Reference do not cover all the areas that the Inquiry should address.
The major focus of the Covid-19 response in early 2020 was a 'vaccine solution'.
This must be examined now - why was a 'vaccine solution' embarked upon in response to a virus it was known from the beginning wasn't a serious threat to most people?
This is crucial to consider now given a plan to vaccinate the entire global population has unfolded - how did this happen?
What was the evaluation process to proceed with the global 'vaccine solution'?
Q. Which issues or topics do you think the Inquiry should look at first?
- Development of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine was already underway in January 2020, according to this report in Nature: 'I've never worked harder': the race to develop a COVID-19 vaccine: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03139-x
What was the evaluation process undertaken to justify a vaccine response to a virus it was known from the beginning wasn't a serious threat to most people.
Is this evaluation process publicly accessible?
- The Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine trials were undertaken in healthy people aged 18-55 years, and subsequent trial in children. How did an ethics committee approve these trials in people who weren't at serious risk of the virus? I raised this matter in an email to Andrew Pollard, the Chief Investigator of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine trials, see: Who initiated the plan to vaccinate the entire global population against SARS-CoV-2? 30 June 2021: https://vaccinationispolitical.files.wordpress.com/2021/06/who-initiated-the-plan-to-vaccinate-the-entire-global-population-against-sars-cov-2.pdf
- It's now clear the Covid-19 'vaccines' are actually 'leaky vaccines' that don't prevent infection nor transmission. In the case of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine, this was known from the beginning, when the monkey trial demonstrated that the vaccine did not prevent the animals from catching or spreading the virus. What consideration was given to this matter before progressing to human trials? I've raised this matter with UK prime minister Boris Johnson, see my email: Were 'leaky vaccines' deliberately spread round the world? Considering the monkey trial... 22 March 2022: https://vaccinationispolitical.files.wordpress.com/2022/04/were-leaky-vaccines-deliberately-spread-round-the-world_-considering-the-monkey-trial.pdf
- In an article published in The Telegraph on 23 May 2020, Adrian Hill, a member of the team working on the Oxford vaccine trial, revealed that his team faced a major problem - that their adversary, the virus, was disappearing so rapidly in the UK that next phase of trials had a reduced chance of success.
If the virus was 'disappearing' - should the vaccine trials have gone ahead? See: Exclusive: Oxford University Covid-19 trial has 50 percent chance of 'no result'.
- As reported on The Independent on 13 March 2020, it was expected to build 'herd immunity' i.e. natural immunity, see: Coronavirus: 60% of UK population need to become infected so country can build 'herd immunity', government's chief scientist says.
But it appears this plan was over-ridden by Neil Ferguson et al's Imperial College Report 9, published on 16 March 2020, which suggested the global impact of Covid-19 was the most serious seen since the 1918 H1N1 influenza pandemic, and recommended 'suppression' of the virus (aka lockdown) "until a vaccine becomes available". Again, what was the process for evaluating the 'vaccine solution'?
While the Ferguson report suggested Covid-19 was on a par with the 1918 H1N1 influenza pandemic, as at 19 March 2020, COVID-19 was no longer considered to be a high consequence infectious disease (HCID) in the UK, see for example: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/high-consequence-infectious-diseases-hcid
Was it appropriate to pursue a vaccine solution?
- Neil Ferguson et al's Report 9 noted: "Results in this paper have informed policymaking in the UK and other countries in the last weeks. However, we emphasise that is not at all certain that suppression will succeed long term; no public health intervention with such disruptive effects on society has been previously attempted for such a long duration of time. How populations and societies will respond remains unclear."
Given the now obviously devastating impact on society and the economy of the 'suppression' strategy recommended by Ferguson et al, it's astonishing that it seems the Boris Johnson government didn't consider and evaluate the potentially catastrophic impact of the 'suppression'/restriction/lockdown strategy. How could this incredible oversight occur?
- Why was there an eagerness to beat up the number of 'cases' and deaths attributed to Covid-19? Was it to justify the over-the-top 'suppression' strategy? The mainstream media pumped out fear mongering propaganda constantly about 'case' numbers and deaths. But a recent report shines a light on the classification of 'covid' deaths - were they actually 'covid' deaths? See: CG REPORT 8: Understanding Definitions and Reporting of Deaths Attributed to COVID-19 in the UK - Evidence from FOI requests: https://collateralglobal.org/article/understanding-covid-19-deaths-in-the-uk/
- Neil Ferguson et al's report was very much focussed on a vaccine solution at all costs. But a very serious conflict of interest was not disclosed in Report 9, i.e. that Neil Ferguson (a member of SAGE) is funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation which is very influential on international vaccination policy, including being a major funder of the World Health Organization, founder of the Gavi Alliance, a founder of CEPI, etc.
I raised the question of conflicts of interest of members of SAGE in a BMJ rapid response, see: Who are the members of SAGE? There must be transparency and accountability for coronavirus policy, 6 November 2020: https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4235/rr-1
This was subsequently discussed in a BMJ article, see: Covid-19: SAGE members' interests published by government 10 months into pandemic, 17 December 2020: https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4911
- It was known from the beginning that Covid-19 wasn't a serious threat to most people. Why are people of all ages and health status, including children, now being pressured to have Covid-19 'leaky vaccines'?
In Australia millions of people are being mandated to have the Covid-19 jabs to maintain their livelihoods, i.e. No Jab, No Job. How can these obviously failing medical interventions be mandated, trashing the principle of 'valid voluntary consent'?
The points raised above all question the 'vaccine solution' pursued in the UK and pressed all around the world - but was this appropriate?
Q. How should the Inquiry be designed and run to ensure that bereaved people or those who have suffered serious harm or hardship as a result of the pandemic have their voices heard?
The inquiry must be open to all for submissions, including people around the world who have been impacted by the UK's response to Covid-19, i.e. by leading with the highly questionable 'vaccine' solution, and Neil Ferguson et al's 'suppression' "until a vaccine becomes available" strategy. The 'suppression'/restrictions/lockdown strategy has had a devastating impact, e.g. in Australia for the past two years, with Melbourne/Victoria in particular being an extremely severe 'lockdown' example.
Elizabeth Hart
Independent researcher investigating vaccine products and conflicts of interest in vaccination policy
The deception continues worldwide with the fiercest proponents of the worst draconian measures now proudly telling us how successful they were in minimising the effects of the pandemic. All with no real evidence, and assisted by the MSM and compliant social media sites.
Official inquiries are always meant to cover and displace blame, not to reveal facts.
If there is no other message in this, we should all understand clearly: “They’ll be back.”
They view their primary failure as being unable to convince us all of the veracity of their “experts” who said simply: “be afraid, trust us, and comply” while they dismantled all that is/was good in our respective societies. Never forget.
“Ruling class”. Glad we’ve stopped calling them Elites. They are nothing of the sort
Ah, lock downs. They are still not asking the correct questions. Talking of lives “saved”—even though all these numbers are at best gross estimates and the result of bad modeling—is not really the question. The question is what is a “life saved” worth economically. Yes, and that translates into dollars, or for you in the UK, pounds. Coming from the USA, I’ll talk in terms of dollars.
Every benefit has a cost. We make sound economic decisions by weighing costs against benefits. Here in the USA we spent *trillions* on the Covid scamdemic. The bulk of the populace that died were old (>65) and co-morbid. The typical oldster who perished, as the result of Covid (much mischief in counting Covid cases here as the hospitals received a bounty from the government for each case reported) has been estimated to have had a smallish remaining life span. So the benefit of a saved life is—especially in the case of nursing home deaths—estimated as short as a few months.
Much is touted of the 1 million or so deaths here from Covid (again a completely bogus number), but we as a large and aging country have an annual death rate in excess of 3M. Now that the worse of Covid has passed, we seem to be realizing—not a death decrease, but an unexpected *increase* in our “all cause death rate” for the country. Estimated anywhere from 13 to 20 percent! Again I repeat this increase is not explainable as directly from Covid. Some argue vaccinations, others delayed critical non-Covid health care, others depression and loneliness from lockdowns, and so forth. But the result is that this increasing death rate may indeed total *more* than the official total Covid deaths in the years to come!
A million times a million is a trillion (American numbers). We could have paid (compensation of) a $1M for each death and still came out ahead in economic terms. Until we stop thinking emotionally and come to terms with diseases like Covid rationally, the next pandemic will cause a total bankruptcy of the nation and economic ruin—if that has not already happened this time.
Not all life is of infinite value and not all lives are of equal worth.
There is just no way anyone in any power center or any aspiring commissar or credentialed petty tyrant is ever going to willingly cede the enormous power they've accrued in the past 3ish years...to be able to control entire populations at the push of a button, to tell people where and when they can leave their homes (and for how long), not to mention to force them into receiving a pharmaceutical product while threatening them with social death if they refuse or even just ask uncomfortable questions.
Imagine the electric thrill all this power gives to the constantly striving, status-obsessed, brainless and soul-less bureaucrat...this to them is like a wet dream come true.
The root cause here is how passive and demoralized all the citizens of the Anglosphere have become...veal calves and zoo animals herded by the algorithms, happy to agree to anything as long as the WiFi is strong and the drugs and junk food cheap.
The global corporate state is smart, first they turned citizens into consumers, real communities into virtual ones, and people with specific cultures and traditions into deracinated monads who should never not be apologizing for the crimes committed by someone who looked like them a century or 2 ago. Once this was achieved, the flock was easy to shepherd, and (to mix my bestial metaphors), now 9 out of 10 of our fellow citizens will gladly file into the slaughterhouse, because only Bad People don't.
The walkout on Andrew Bridgen should've signalled to the people that the whole parliament was captured and should be dismissed as corrupt
What continues to amaze me is that the light bulb didn’t go off for everyone when Hancock stated on camera that he knew what to do when he watched the movie Contagion! How much more evidence of delusion and self aggrandisement do you need, for a fake pandemic too. Fake pandemic, fake climate alarm, fake woke culture, fake fact checking on an industrial scale, fake (deadly) vaccines and fake pharma industry, fake economy (and data) build by fake economic models, fake capital markets. Is anything real? Well the March of neo Feudalism dressed up as neo Marxism and the associated rise of totalitarianism is real, it is self evident. Actual inflation is real, also self evident. The indoctrination efforts being applied to our children in schools is real and the fact that Job Biden is a corrupt puppet with an equally corrupt hand up his ass is also real, indeed it is hard to see a Western leadership that isn’t so.
It is not China that is the Communist enemy, it is the world economic forum, which intends to subjugate China to itself, to achieve unipolar dominance. And the result will not be communism, but Neo feudalism.
First it's "zero covid." Coming next: "Zero Carbon." And, once again, most of the brainwashed public will not be able to admit that we are the carbon they want to reduce to zero. Even though some of the psychopathic monsters who are squealing with glee over this prospect have quite publicly either written about it, or have openly said as much. If there isn't a mass awakening in conjunction with a willingness on behalf of those awoken to become ungovernable, the monsters will get their way...
Except in the many ways that communism and fascism are similar, it is FASCISM, NOT COMMUNISM, that is the global(ist) ruling force today, temporarily through their national-government minions. The top leaders of China are "simply" globalists as well, who are part of the FASCIST game plan. It is CORPORATE-FASCISM, as it long has been through the various "reichs", run by the same eight (8) most powerful bankster-globalist families in the world, as it has been for a very long time. So, though the takeover may have parts of communist planks (because their planks are quite similar---the communist one just has a few more steps) for complete global(ist) domination, subjugation and mass-eugenicide, it is a corporate-fascism-dominated coup d'etat and coup d'gras, now in its/their Satanic endgame.
“...recruit through a process of manipulation and entrapment, gradually estranging individuals from what they believed to be their values, until all that’s left is nihilism, self-interest, and complete loyalty to the organisation.”
Sounds just like what the US military is doing by going woke and mandating mRNA. Weed out the patriots and thinkers leaving those that might be most willing to fire upon their fellow citizens in the future.
Supporting the thinking of Mr. Richard Horton is a book I discovered while reading the Council on Foreign Relations' story from March, 2020 about how China was a model for pandemic guidance. Foreign Affairs is the most influential publication about international affairs in the world.
This Foreign Affairs piece from March, 2020 provides a greater understanding of the pandemic:
Past Pandemics Exposed China’s Weaknesses
The Current One Highlights Its Strengths
Foreign Affairs, March 27, 2020
https://web.archive.org/web/20200328050913/https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2020-03-27/past-pandemics-exposed-chinas-weaknesses
This book was contained as a link in the FA article which informs of The Logic of Disease Politics and provides a blueprint to transforming a nation of free individuals into an authoritarian collectivist society:
Rural Health Care Delivery
Modern China from the Perspective of Disease Politics
library.lol/main/DB87C08A174B849E1EB047…
Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2013
('GET' .pdf download)
I give an overview of the book in my Stack on this:
https://freedomfox.substack.com/p/the-devious-use-of-infectious-disease
It's a very long book hard to summarize, but my Stack lists several of the chapters and sections I found most insightful and applicable, though if you have time for a full read you may discover other interesting information.
Yes. Disease politics is the midwife of Marxism. The UK, US and western formerly liberal democracies have been following the blueprint for our fundamental transformation into collectivist authoritarianism. We must not comply.
Ludicrous virtue signalling. No different in NZzzz. COVID inquiry explicitly excludes the shots.
My submission for the UK Covid Inquiry currently under way, sharing here for information...
Do you think they pay any attention to submissions from members of the public?
Q. Please explain why you think the draft Terms of Reference do not cover all the areas that the Inquiry should address.
The major focus of the Covid-19 response in early 2020 was a 'vaccine solution'.
This must be examined now - why was a 'vaccine solution' embarked upon in response to a virus it was known from the beginning wasn't a serious threat to most people?
This is crucial to consider now given a plan to vaccinate the entire global population has unfolded - how did this happen?
What was the evaluation process to proceed with the global 'vaccine solution'?
Q. Which issues or topics do you think the Inquiry should look at first?
- Development of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine was already underway in January 2020, according to this report in Nature: 'I've never worked harder': the race to develop a COVID-19 vaccine: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03139-x
What was the evaluation process undertaken to justify a vaccine response to a virus it was known from the beginning wasn't a serious threat to most people.
Is this evaluation process publicly accessible?
- The Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine trials were undertaken in healthy people aged 18-55 years, and subsequent trial in children. How did an ethics committee approve these trials in people who weren't at serious risk of the virus? I raised this matter in an email to Andrew Pollard, the Chief Investigator of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine trials, see: Who initiated the plan to vaccinate the entire global population against SARS-CoV-2? 30 June 2021: https://vaccinationispolitical.files.wordpress.com/2021/06/who-initiated-the-plan-to-vaccinate-the-entire-global-population-against-sars-cov-2.pdf
- It's now clear the Covid-19 'vaccines' are actually 'leaky vaccines' that don't prevent infection nor transmission. In the case of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine, this was known from the beginning, when the monkey trial demonstrated that the vaccine did not prevent the animals from catching or spreading the virus. What consideration was given to this matter before progressing to human trials? I've raised this matter with UK prime minister Boris Johnson, see my email: Were 'leaky vaccines' deliberately spread round the world? Considering the monkey trial... 22 March 2022: https://vaccinationispolitical.files.wordpress.com/2022/04/were-leaky-vaccines-deliberately-spread-round-the-world_-considering-the-monkey-trial.pdf
- In regard to 'leaky vaccines', the Marek's disease in chickens study raises alarming prospects about the use of 'leaky vaccines' - was this considered in regards to the apparently 'leaky' Oxford/AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine? In this regard, please see my email to Andrew Read: If Covid-19 vaccines don't prevent transmission, can they facilitate the evolution of more virulent strains, 27 January 2021: https://vaccinationispolitical.files.wordpress.com/2021/03/covid-19-vaccines-can-they-facilitate-the-evolution-of-more-virulent-variants.pdf
- In an article published in The Telegraph on 23 May 2020, Adrian Hill, a member of the team working on the Oxford vaccine trial, revealed that his team faced a major problem - that their adversary, the virus, was disappearing so rapidly in the UK that next phase of trials had a reduced chance of success.
If the virus was 'disappearing' - should the vaccine trials have gone ahead? See: Exclusive: Oxford University Covid-19 trial has 50 percent chance of 'no result'.
- As reported on The Independent on 13 March 2020, it was expected to build 'herd immunity' i.e. natural immunity, see: Coronavirus: 60% of UK population need to become infected so country can build 'herd immunity', government's chief scientist says.
But it appears this plan was over-ridden by Neil Ferguson et al's Imperial College Report 9, published on 16 March 2020, which suggested the global impact of Covid-19 was the most serious seen since the 1918 H1N1 influenza pandemic, and recommended 'suppression' of the virus (aka lockdown) "until a vaccine becomes available". Again, what was the process for evaluating the 'vaccine solution'?
While the Ferguson report suggested Covid-19 was on a par with the 1918 H1N1 influenza pandemic, as at 19 March 2020, COVID-19 was no longer considered to be a high consequence infectious disease (HCID) in the UK, see for example: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/high-consequence-infectious-diseases-hcid
Was it appropriate to pursue a vaccine solution?
- Neil Ferguson et al's Report 9 noted: "Results in this paper have informed policymaking in the UK and other countries in the last weeks. However, we emphasise that is not at all certain that suppression will succeed long term; no public health intervention with such disruptive effects on society has been previously attempted for such a long duration of time. How populations and societies will respond remains unclear."
Given the now obviously devastating impact on society and the economy of the 'suppression' strategy recommended by Ferguson et al, it's astonishing that it seems the Boris Johnson government didn't consider and evaluate the potentially catastrophic impact of the 'suppression'/restriction/lockdown strategy. How could this incredible oversight occur?
- Why was there an eagerness to beat up the number of 'cases' and deaths attributed to Covid-19? Was it to justify the over-the-top 'suppression' strategy? The mainstream media pumped out fear mongering propaganda constantly about 'case' numbers and deaths. But a recent report shines a light on the classification of 'covid' deaths - were they actually 'covid' deaths? See: CG REPORT 8: Understanding Definitions and Reporting of Deaths Attributed to COVID-19 in the UK - Evidence from FOI requests: https://collateralglobal.org/article/understanding-covid-19-deaths-in-the-uk/
- Neil Ferguson et al's report was very much focussed on a vaccine solution at all costs. But a very serious conflict of interest was not disclosed in Report 9, i.e. that Neil Ferguson (a member of SAGE) is funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation which is very influential on international vaccination policy, including being a major funder of the World Health Organization, founder of the Gavi Alliance, a founder of CEPI, etc.
I raised the question of conflicts of interest of members of SAGE in a BMJ rapid response, see: Who are the members of SAGE? There must be transparency and accountability for coronavirus policy, 6 November 2020: https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4235/rr-1
This was subsequently discussed in a BMJ article, see: Covid-19: SAGE members' interests published by government 10 months into pandemic, 17 December 2020: https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4911
Disclosure finally appeared, including Neil Ferguson's, in this document: SAGE COVID-19 Register of Participants' Interests: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/971151/Covid-19_SAGE_register_of_participants__interests.pdf
- Bill Gates was the leader of the 'race for a coronavirus vaccine' - how could this happen, why was a software billionaire given free rein to dominate this area? See for example: GatesNotes: What you need to know about the COVID-19 vaccine, 30 April 2020: https://www.gatesnotes.com/health/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-covid-19-vaccine Also see: UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson meets Bill Gates to discuss Covid-19 vaccine, 12 November 2020: https://www.wionews.com/world/uk-prime-minister-boris-johnson-meets-bill-gates-to-discuss-covid-19-vaccine-342652
- It was known from the beginning that Covid-19 wasn't a serious threat to most people. Why are people of all ages and health status, including children, now being pressured to have Covid-19 'leaky vaccines'?
In Australia millions of people are being mandated to have the Covid-19 jabs to maintain their livelihoods, i.e. No Jab, No Job. How can these obviously failing medical interventions be mandated, trashing the principle of 'valid voluntary consent'?
The points raised above all question the 'vaccine solution' pursued in the UK and pressed all around the world - but was this appropriate?
Q. How should the Inquiry be designed and run to ensure that bereaved people or those who have suffered serious harm or hardship as a result of the pandemic have their voices heard?
The inquiry must be open to all for submissions, including people around the world who have been impacted by the UK's response to Covid-19, i.e. by leading with the highly questionable 'vaccine' solution, and Neil Ferguson et al's 'suppression' "until a vaccine becomes available" strategy. The 'suppression'/restrictions/lockdown strategy has had a devastating impact, e.g. in Australia for the past two years, with Melbourne/Victoria in particular being an extremely severe 'lockdown' example.
Elizabeth Hart
Independent researcher investigating vaccine products and conflicts of interest in vaccination policy
vaccinationispolitical.net
Ahh I still remember those videos of people allegedly keeling over from C19 in China in early 2020. Still haven’t seen one since.