Let's talk about it...

Matt le Tissier - On the Record

Tonight 7pm GMT

Links will be posted here.

Share. Download. Reupload.

t.me/oraclefilms

Seven signs that they're taking us for a ride.

1. When you enter a restaurant, you need to wear a mask. As soon as you sit down to eat, you can take it off (https://bit.ly/3uhzQOU - see bullet point #3). There is no single virus that solely hovers at an altitude of 1.50m and above or double-checks whether someone is eating/drinking before choosing that person as a host.

2. The goalposts regarding the vaccine's efficacy are constantly shifting (https://bit.ly/3KZJITo). We all remember that self-proclaimed experts such as Fauci and Drosten claimed to achieve herd immunity against a respiratory virus (LOL!) at a vaccination rate of 60%. Now, the countries with the highest vaccination rates suffer from the highest number of cases. Surprise, surprise!

3. There is no robust scientific evidence that masks work (https://t.me/goddek/1169). However, there is much evidence that masks harm those who wear them (https://bit.ly/3LczvDx). And yet, people in many countries have to wear such masks throughout the whole day - even outside. This raises the suspicion that they are primarily used to gag us and serve as a daily reminder that we are in the middle of a "deadly pandemic".

4. The majority of the experts presented in the media have substantial conflicts of interest, such as being funded from the Welcome Trust, the Gates Foundation or Big Pharma (https://bit.ly/3HoDuKH). Independent scientists with dissenting opinions are pigeon-holed as dangerous heretics.

5. Big Tech bans dissidents who question the official narrative. I, for instance, have been removed from social media platforms for spreading "dangerous misinformation about Covid-19". There is nothing dangerous about facts about viral evolution, the efficacy of Ivermectin, or citing my own vitamin D publication (https://t.me/goddek/1149). Worse still, it is currently being debated to ban alternative social media, such as Telegram, as it provides a platform for "dangerous" alternative opinions (https://bit.ly/3ghT8f3). The truth is that we are a danger to their narrative and that is why they are fighting us.

6. There is no single need to vaccinate young people or children that are not exposed to any risk of becoming seriously ill. The narrative that "they need to get vaccinated to make sure that the vaccines of others work" is a mixture of illogicality and absurdity. Alternative treatment methods such as using Ivermectin have been fiercely criticized by so-called "experts" from the beginning, even though the body of evidence was already overwhelming back then (https://c19ivermectin.com).

7. Politicians never cared about our health; otherwise, they would long have enlightened us about the importance of vitamin D, physical exercise, a healthy diet etc. It speaks volumes that the first thing they closed were sports clubs while locking us up at home so food delivery companies could flourish. Obesity is associated with a much higher risk of hospitalization (https://bit.ly/3Hf0Pym). And yet, many obese politicians argue for compulsory vaccinations instead of using a treadmill. Well done, hypocrites!

There are many more signs that this is a big hoax. What is your favourite one? Leave a comment below.

Cheers and remain sane,
Dr. Simon

👉🏻 https://t.me/goddek (click + join!)

https://zeeemedia.com/interview/dr-mike-yeadon-ex-pfizer-chief-scientific-officer-exposes-deadly-vax-lots-for-nuremberg-2-0/

An interview yesterday with Maria Zeee in Australia. Apologies for occasional bad language. Uncharacteristic of me. A sign of growing frustration.

Best wishes & thanks,
Mike

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020...

I can’t read anything from this bunch of common criminals without my lip curling.
Take a look at the mendacious claims here.
That “>2B people are living under some kind of lockdown” tells us NOTHING about respiratory viruses & everything about a global fraud & PsyOp.
Similarly, you see the repeated claim that “you might think things will return to normal. You’d be wrong”.
Why is that?
In light of that, should we take seriously the alleged threat from a cyber-pandemic? Sure: because it’s invented, just for now. Luckily, you’re not susceptible to the PsyOp aspect of it. Nevertheless, if bad actors decide to disrupt the world in this way, I’ve no idea how bad that might be.
I’ve no skills in the field at all. If anyone does, please would you warn us what kind of this to expect? Thanks 😎
Mike

Bring back the guillotine.

"Western Australia bans unvaccinated parents from seeing their sick children in hospital. The media applauds exploiting desperate parents in their darkest hour." [Caldron Pool]

"A license to live."

"I don't know who this guy is but people need to listen to him. The Digital Identity Bill going through Australian Parliament is a massive worry. Digital ID's will enable a social credit system and mark the end of universal human rights. It is on the agenda throughout the world." [Daniel Fooks, Twitter]

I have now read the Human Rights review documentation and I am seriously concerned.

The review seeks to impose a rights culture that displaces personal responsibility in favour of "the public interest”.

The proposed reforms say “the international human rights framework recognises that not all rights are absolute and that an individual’s rights may need to be balanced, either against the rights of others or against the wider public interest.

Further concerning statements are:

“The idea that rights come alongside duties and responsibilities is steeped in the UK tradition of liberty, but is also reflected in the qualifications in the Convention and is explicit in Article 29 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights (‘Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible’). The increasing reliance on human rights claims over the years has, however, led to a culture of rights decoupled from our responsibilities as citizens, and a displacement of due consideration of the wider public interest”.

"Whilst human rights are universal, a Bill of Rights could require the courts to give greater consideration to the behaviour of claimants and the wider public interest when interpreting and balancing qualified rights. More broadly, our proposals can also set out more clearly the extent to which the behaviour of claimants is a factor that the courts take into account when deciding what sort of remedy, if any, is appropriate. This will ensure that claimants’ responsibilities, and the rights of others, form a part of the process of making a claim based on the violation of a human right”.

There are other concerning statements too, but you get the gist from the above.

Under the proposed reforms it is clear that Parliament is seeking to impose itself as arbiter of when a person can have human rights and when they cannot. This is disgraceful. It does not matter the crime, major or minor, a person must always have their human rights available to them and protected. It is abundantly clear to me that although the proposed reforms mention the courts power to decide matters, the govt expect the courts to be led on this by parliament, (and legislation), whatever the govt decide their rules to be at any given time.

This is an overt attack on personal freedoms in a bid to enforce communitarianism (which is worse than socialism, and is in fact totalitarianism). Wider interests should never trump an individual’s rights, the latter of which are fundamental freedoms that are God given.

These proposed changes seek to make sure that Human Rights are NOT fundamental and universal. Giving power to the courts to say you are not entitled to your human rights if they think your behaviour has not been what they consider "good" is a huge worry, knowing how much the courts are now refusing to challenge govt policy decisions and harmful legislation.

The separation of powers has been lost in this country for some time now. These proposed reforms confirm parliaments march to make itself the sovereign power and authority to decide on people's fundamental rights according to its own whim, and this must be stopped at all costs.

The consultation is open until 8th March and the link to respond to it is below. We desperately need everyone to take action and say no to these reforms.

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/human-rights-act-reform-a-modern-bill-of-rights

Jan 31, 2022: Premier of Manitoba (Canada) Heather Stefanson has removed Josh Guenter from his recent appointment as a legislative assistant to the minister of health for defending bodily autonomy, and government overreach. Media tows line in sowing division and hatred, painting resistance as racist, etc.

https://globalnews.ca/news/8584907/manitoba-tory-backbencher-loses-appointment-after-meeting-with-trucker-convoy/

We'll be at The Albert Hall Weds 2nd Feb 6pm to protest against their discriminatory and bio-fascist decision to CONTINUE demanding covid passports or proof of negative SC2 test upon entry. They're doing this via "spot checks" They have also decided to stop taking cash for tickets and all bars/cafes inside their venue, using “covid” as the pathetic excuse.

This is medical apartheid.

You can also let them know what you think of their policy here https://www.royalalberthall.com/your-visit/contact-us/


https://t.me/Pierscorbyn

https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/shining-s...
You’d be forgiven for thinking I’d long have been beyond shocking.
That’s wrong. Ignoring suffering is never OK. But these bastards at the NIH are knowingly doing just that. They were probably told to stop responding. Right. That would have been the moment when I would have ignored the orders, at best. Folk at NIH: wth has happened to you???
Best wishes
Mike

Dr Mike Yeadon

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
A request for victims in West Yorkshire to contact the police regarding any adverse reactions or blackmail relating to covid_19 vaccines
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Crime Reference Number from West Yorkshire Police
#13220052372

Issued at Elland Rd Police Station, Leeds.
Saturday 29th January 2022
Linked to Hammersmith Crime Ref : 6029679/21
Victims in West Yorkshire can quote this number to link it to the ongoing investigation

JUST IN - Canada's Quebec scraps proposed tax on the unvaccinated: Premier Legault

Follow @InsiderPaper

Human rights are not rights if they can be taken away by the state, and are in fact therefore privileges to be dealt out how the state sees fit. This cannot be allowed to be the case

This is the most-cited paper claiming asymptomatic transmission.
There are a number of problems with it.
The main one, apparently reported in the German main media, is that the claimed index Patient was “well & with no symptoms” during her visit to Germany.
Apparently the reality was that she wasn’t well & had dosed herself with all the pharmacy preparations she could use in order to barrel through her short, but intense, multi-site visit. She fell frankly ill on the flight back to China.
That rather changes things, because there’s no other written-up evidence of mass asymptomatic transmission. At all.
On the contrary, large real world studies failed to find convincing evidence of it.
It’s fraud. A carefully thought out one, too.
Scroll to the end of the listing of doctors & scientists acknowledged.
See “Christian Drosten”.
By astonishing coincidence, he was a senior advisor to Angela Merkel for many years. The same Angela Merkel who was one of Klaus Schwab’s “Global Young Leaders” (yes, it’s been in planning that long).
Turns out that Christian Drosten makes another, utterly pivotal contribution to blowing life into this global fraud.
He’s one of the authors of the first paper describing the PCR method allegedly for detection of infection by SARS-CoV-2. That method manuscript was already on the WHO website before it was published & is what Tedros refers to when he says “Test, test, test”.
Anyway, the paper is submitted to the journal “Eurosurveillance”, accepted 24h later & published a further 24h after that.
The paper is a fake, as is the faked peer review which cannot have been done at the pace they claim.
Typically it takes months for the average paper to go through peer review & finally to get published (usually after amendments).
The journal has a fast track process. The median time in fast track is a few weeks.
Drostens faked PCR methods paper stands out in being the only paper reviewed & published in two days in the entire history of the journal.
A little later, several authors pulled that methods paper to pieces & demanded its retraction. I’ll post a link to that, called the “Corman Drosten Review”.
You decide.
How likely is it that one person should find themselves as pivotal creators of the two enduring scientific lies underscoring the fake pandemic we’re living in?
Both the duff PCR method (recall that it’s Nobel Prize-winning inventor always argued against using PCR for clinical diagnosis....such a shame he died late in 2019, isn’t it? He’d have been such an ally. RIP Kary Mullis). Without this test, they wouldn’t be able to invent “cases” & to assign large numbers of deaths to “covid19”.
And then also the asymptomatic transmission lie. Without that, there would be no reason to lock down healthy people, perform mass testing, force people to wear masks & persuade them to get injected with bad gene based treatments.
What a coincidence.
Best wishes
Mike

Dr Mike Yeadon

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2001468