A few weeks ago, emails obtained via FOI request revealed how America’s most senior government scientists sought to discredit the Great Barrington Declaration. In particular, the email below was sent by Francis Collins (former director of the National Institutes of Health) to Anthony Fauci:
Amazingly, Collins refers to the authors of the Declaration as “three fringe epidemiologists”, despite the fact that they held positions at Harvard, Stanford and Oxford respectively. (If even Harvard professors are considered “fringe”, there isn’t much hope for the rest of us…)
The use of “fringe” is particularly egregious when you consider that lockdowns represent a radical departure from the pre-Covid science. As Fauci himself stated on the January 24th last year: “Historically when you shut things down it doesn’t have a major effect.”
Collins then wrote, “There needs to be a quick and devastating takedown of its premise.” Which sounds like the sort of thing a PR consultant would say – not a supposedly neutral scientist. Further details of the exchange can be found in this article by Phil Magness, who actually obtained the emails.
Now two of the Great Barrington authors have hit back at Collins and Fauci. Writing in the Epoch Times, Martin Kulldorff and Jay Bhattacharya say that their critics “got the pandemic strategy they advocated for, and they own the results”. As the two professors explain:
Lockdowns protected young low-risk affluent work-from-home professionals, such as administrators, scientists, professors, journalists, and lawyers, while older high-risk members of the working class were exposed and died in unnecessarily high numbers. This failure to understand that lockdowns could not protect the vulnerable led to the tragically high death counts from Covid.
Kulldorff and Bhattacharya’s piece offers a clear and forthright defence of the Great Barrington Declaration. Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
“While illegal content that incites violence, racism or child sex abuse”
A telling error here. “Violence” and “child sex abuse” are actual criminal acts. “Racism” is mere dissent from the prevailing orthodoxy.
But the antiracist dogma is now so deeply embedded in our culture that most people just assume the nonsense that “racist” opinions are in themselves evil thoughtcrmes, and expressing them an evil speechcrime.
But in the end this is just more of the same as the suppression of “antivax” opinion – the suppression of opinions that those with the power to get laws enacted believe would be better suppressed, for the greater good of society.
I’d argue that the meaning of violence is now being blurred. So many left academics in the US advocating that certain words are violence
That’s a key part of the mechanism of the ongoing leftist assault on freedom of speech. The goal in the US is to redefine dissenting speech as “hate speech” – a separate category from political opinion that amounts as you suggest to violence rather than speech. It’s an attempt to do an end run around the US First Amendment, either by judicial activism and a SCOTUS decision, or by a political constitutional amendment.
In this country they have found it easier because there is no such constitutional obstacle.
Total BS of course – these interest groups seem to be trying to dismantle and ‘deconstruct’ reason and the whole basis of successful and fulfilling human interaction and relationship in pursuit of their psychotic and dystopian political goals
They are Cultural Terrorists.
and racism is yet another word that’s been “re-defined” when used by the lugepresse to mean practically the opposite of what most think it to mean
“Weaponsied” by aggressive self-serving political minorities more like.
“Censorship” is now just applied to preserve whatever narrative is chosen by those in power to further their own ends – simple as that. ( See Soviet Union Nazi Germany, Iran and Communist China).
There is no “moral”defence of it as those who impose it have no “morality” and increasingly see themselves as outside the law ( which they can in any case manipulate and alter ) anyway.
Excellent point. I noticed this too. The blind acceptance that racism, a thing that happens in your head, is as egregious as illegal physical acts. How did it come to this? How did racism become elevated to such heights?
The classic example of why this is dangerous is the verboten subject of average group differences in IQ in racial and cultural groups, a subject often studied by exceptionally careful researchers. By tarring it with the toxic word “racism” it gets no further than publication in obscure journals. This despite the obvious profound effects on the quality of people’s lives.
Oh, don’t worry. The Labour peers just voted to make “misogyny” a “hate” crime. Whether they will actually ban flirting is not clear…
The people most guilty of misogyny (and homophobia) are the aggressive and vocal advocates of ‘gender’ ideology and those who practise fundamentalist religions. Will they ever be prosecuted? Of course not!
Boris will be gutted.
The word they actually use more than any other is “extremist” speech. Which is of course a completely subjective term. It is being used as a synonym for “racist.”
If you disagree with the narrative you are either an “extremist” or a “racist.” These views are “dangerous” or “potentially harmful” and therefore must be legally blocked. Also, those who produce “extremist” commentary can be prosecuted, lose their jobs, etc.
Big Tech should let us know the truth behind the following
Unexplained Non-COVID Mortality Spike in Americans Aged 18 to 49: Federal Government Mum on Data
https://www.theepochtimes.com/biden-administration-mum-on-mortality-spike-in-americans-age-18-49_4221057.html?utm_source=newsnoe&utm_campaign=breaking-2022-01-19-1&utm_medium=email&est=nHcvjc6TrZPiv%2FmATfgQZd9HKo1m12d6%2BGh7SuuOu4%2Fs58krSmn1wl3Heyj51Ww4EKhI
Federal authorities have yet to respond to an Epoch Times analysis that shows a dramatic increase in deaths of 18- to 49-year-olds in the United States in the past year. The majority of those deaths weren’t associated with the COVID-19 disease. By Petr Svab
Please come and join our friendly peaceful events.
Thursday 20th January 5pm
Silent lighted walk behind one simple sign
“No More Lockdown”
Bring torches, candles and other lights
Meet by the Town Hall, Market Place,
Henley-on-Thames, Oxfordshire, RG9 2AQ
Stand in the Park Sundays 10am make friends, ignore the madness & keep sane
Wokingham Howard Palmer Gardens Cockpit Path car park Sturges Rd RG40 2HD
Henley Mills Meadows (at the bandstand) Henley-on-Thames RG9 1DS
Telegram Group
http://t.me/astandintheparkbracknell
The same Royal Society that claims CAGW is “settled science”
“The Global Warming Policy Foundation has accused the Royal Society of presenting a misleading picture of climate science.
The briefing, entitled The Small Print: What the Royal Society left out, challenges claims made in the Royal Society’s recently published Short Guide to Climate Science, and demonstrates how the Society has left out many important facts, caveats and doubts on subjects as varied as the causes of climate change, extreme weather and the role of the Sun.
“As an example, the Royal Society addresses the question of why Antarctic sea ice is growing,” says Prof Ross McKitrick, the chairman of the GWPF’s Academic Advisory Council, “but in doing so they present a recently proposed hypothesis as if it were settled science. Failing to admit when the answer to an important question is simply not known does a disservice to the public. We believe that this new paper does a much better job of presenting the whole picture to the public.”
The briefing paper was written by an international panel of climate experts, including two Fellows of the Royal Society. The paper is the latest in a series of exchanges between GWPF and the Royal Society on the subject of climate change and follows a 2013 meeting between experts from the two sides, which was held behind closed doors at the insistence of the Royal Society.”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/03/16/the-royal-society-misrepresents-climate-science/
Wait, silencing scientific debate is unhealthy? No way, don’t believe it, Big Tech told me it was fine!
Hey, if you were making billions selling a dud product to people which will result in injury which will allow you to sell even more products to the same people to treat the injury your dud product caused, you would totally think it was fine. Of course, you must be entirely devoid of scruples and a conscience. As far as I’m concerned, Big Tech and Big Pharma are one and the same, the same dirty fingers in the 2 pies.
The fact-checkers agree with you.
The average 22 year old emo intern at Twitter is obviously well trained to make these decisions
lol.
The thing that should really happen is that Big Tech and Big Pharma should be broken into many little pieces.
All countries have anti-trust laws for very good reason. Big Tech has way, way too much power, which is far too easy to abuse. There are ties between Big Tech and Big Pharma – one seeks to control our minds, the other our bodies. More heinous than Big Tobacco and Big Oil ever were.
As a by the by – if these dipsticks wish to engage with ‘anti-vaxxers’, they can start by refraining from referring to people who are merely looking out for the health and well-being of themselves and those they love by seeking openness and honesty from profit-making enterprises by a term that is purely and alone meant to be derogatory and dismissive. Of course, that would mean they really do want to engage in genuine scientific debate, rather than trying to sucker people like a perv offering a lollipop to a child. Or, if I’m not mistaken, a doughnut in return for getting vaxxed.
“The thing that should really happen is that Big Tech and Big Pharma should be broken into many little pieces.”
Absolutely so.
Those on the right who oppose such measures out of a general resistance to big government and to state interference in business (the likes of corporate “libertarian” Chris Snowden – I’m looking at you) are discredited fools, who should be ignored on this.
The state already has the power to intervene when corporations get too powerful, and this is a case where corporate wealth and power clearly has been abused, massively, to the detriment of liberty (and indeed of reason).
The covid panic and the cynical manipulation of the US election to remove a populist President and replace him with a senile and corrupt corporate stooge backed by authoritarian hard leftists should be the final straw for the abusive big tech, big media and big pharma corporations.
Hopefully when the Republicans sweep away the corporate stooges and leftist fanatics of the Democrat Party, work on this can begin in the US. Our elites will follow, as usual, even if it’s with much grumbling.
The US is really the only country who can effectively tackle big tech, as they are all US-based companies.
Yes, exactly. Our elites are largely irrelevant here, except insofar as they can influence events on the US as (mostly) adjuncts to the illiberal Democrat side.
No you need to weaken the WAY they get rich by taxing patent title protection (a government product) not “income”.
This is actually pretty capitalist, well Adam Smith would like it.
“No you need to weaken the WAY they get rich by taxing patent title protection (a government product) not “income”.”
Don’t think anybody here suggested taxation as the solution did they?
I agree that there are structural issues here that would benefit from being looked at for the long term, but the urgent and important issue is to break up and defang these particular corporations.
the problem will just move to whomever owns these patents.
So much filth to clear from the stables of Power!
Yes, but you will need to start by not voting for right wing political parties, who are overwhelmingly “business first”. They will never break up big pharma.
If you don’t have “big pharma”, who develops the drugs. Should governments fund this and focus on the needs of the population? That’s a bit socialist, isn’t it?
Hear, hear!
Emphatically not. This presupposes the same people who brought us lockdowns, masks and the injecting of children with experimental drugs ought to be the people we turn to when a problem needs solved. If anything characterizes how weak we have become it is this.
The antidote is, as ever, free speech. Private companies can censor what they wish. A reinforcement of the importance of free speech is enough, ideally backed up with a First Amendment style piece of legislation. There are plenty of young entrepreneurial types out there who can create the next big platform.
It’s a clear sign of the times we live in that it took an investigation for the Royal Society to feel safe in coming out against the suppression of scientific dissent.
yes, shouldn’t really need an investigation – should really be their motto. the scientific process and free speech are bound together since the time of Galileo
“should really be their motto”
It kind of already is:
Nullius in verba
‘Nil by mouth’?
Perhaps the Royal Society membership’s knowledge of latin is no longer what it once was, and they thought it meant “shut your mouth”.
Nullius addictus judicare in verba magestri… Horace
Not compelled to swear to any master’s words.
free speech should be absolutely fundamental. and some people will say things other people disagree with.
lets face it – the authorities have been shouting ‘fire’ in a crowded theatre for the last 2 years
Exactly this, often overlooked in favour of elaborate regulation (by the very people who locked us down).
The emergence of free speech is a watershed in history, and it’s decline accounts for much of the nonsense we see around us.
Why is something that contradicts scientific consensus automatically labelled “misinformation”!? What a crock, the last 2 years have proven that.
Need more proof, well for a start the earth likely isn’t flat and the sun probably doesn’t revolve around the earth – but at one point these things would have been considered Misinformation!!
science is far from finished and it won’t progress if anything that goes against the ‘scientific consensus’ is marginalised
Prove your minority view scientifically, or be quiet.
Yes. It was only a few centuries ago that the scientific consensus was that Earth was the centre of the universe. And then Galileo came along with his misinformation, saying that the Earth orbited the Sun.
To be fair, he lacked proof at the time.
As opposed to the other side?
All that is necessary is to prove a novel point of view, against the prevailing view.
There has never been a better environment to publish your point of view, but the reality is that these opposing views don’t get proven, as they have no merit.
The fact that there are a small number of people who believe (but don’t understand) the nonsense and are unhappy doesn’t mean the prevailing view is wrong. Look to your “minority scientist” to do better.
It was proven that the earth isn’t flat. Science proved that. Those people did a good job.
Ask you “minority scientist” to do the same. When they fail (and they will) accept the outcome.
Accept that you know nothing and just believe…..Sounds like a religion.
Another good analysis – thought provoking from Rancourt
https://www.bitchute.com/video/CvSFYAM4pMP1/
He seems to think the geopolitical war between the west and Russia and china includes the extreme control on domestic populations imposed by the Vax pass covid measures.
A CIA coordinated campaign to impose these measures prior to an upregulated hot/cold war with Russia China. All countries want maximised control internally as part of the war measures.
The west has found a way to remove the nuisance of democracy prior to increased aggression directed externally.
So Klaus Schwab the NEF etc etc are just hoaxes to divert attention from the next phase of the global struggle between great powers.
The US does not want a multipolar world, so a new digital international currency (no exclusion of dollar based trading as Russia ands China were moving towards) wholesale control of economics by the US through these CV measures internally and externally.
Initial phase is psychological deconstruction….no dissent will be allowed.
So this is tyranny imposed by the US deep state on all allies.
Rancourt says it is insanity.
Highly impressive analysis from a slightly different perspective, do watch.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/CvSFYAM4pMP1/
Back in the 1950s, the Science Fiction author James Blish wrote a series of four books under the title “Cities in Flight”. The world depicted in the chronologically first book “They Shall Have Stars” is set around 2013 onwards. In this world, the West, in order to compete against the Soviet East, has introduced so many controls and restrictions that it becomes indistinguishable from the Soviet model. I always thought that was an interesting idea in itself. Maybe it is coming about, in principal if not in detail.
Turns out the most dangerous religion is scientism.
As it seems that anybody who even questions a single part of the vaccination policy, is immediately called an anti vaxxer, perhaps there should be open discussion on the use of the term. I couldn’t care what I’m called personally, but the term has been weaponised to take down even those who are generally pro vax
I’m pro-science and so generally pro-vax. This covid rushed out vax for children has been about as far from science as you can get
Show me the science that proves vaccines are safe? How many scientists do you know work for free, don’t have families to care for, mortgages to pay. There’s a term for people that believe in science.
Most people don’t know the difference between pure science & applied science.
“anybody who even questions a single part of the vaccination policy, is immediately called an anti vaxxer, the term has been weaponised to take down even those who are generally pro vax”
As I’ve noted here before, this is exactly how all smear terms of this kind work – antivaxxer, sexist, racist, homophobe, antisemite, islamophobe, transphobe, etc.
Take examples of the most extreme kind to initially define the term and establish its evilness, then extend it to cover anyone vaguely associated with that line of thinking.
If anyone the says that a smear target or his views actually aren’t that bad, revert to the original meaning and declare they are “defending” whatever the original evil is.
It’s a political weaponisation of a motte and bailey fallacy.
In the case of “antivaxxer”, it had been pre-demonised long before covid during the long battles over vaccination, and in particular the MMR disputes. Its demonisation was particularly strong within the medical professions, wherein it is pretty thoroughly verboten for any respectable medic. That made it a particularly effective smear for silencing dissent within the profession, and for ensuring medics were strongly pressured to dissociate from any sceptical views and people.
Why do you think anti-vaxxers are wrong?
This is nothing more than a reflection of their insecurity. Contrast with the attitude towards creationists who are at most dismissed. No one gets their knickers in a twist about them.
People only get triggered with issues of faith. At some level the recently vaxxed are aware they made a choice. The existence of those who chose differently is uncomfortable. Much easier to make them go away.
So all the antivax terminology for me is a sign of deep doubts in the obedient, doubts that are eating away at their sanity buried deep in their subconscious.
With you on that analysis.
Schizer | Because We Care (About Our Profits) Schizer & Murderna advert.
The narrative has been anti-science since March 2020.
Throw away pandemic plan
Rubbish anyone against lockdowns
If we’d have had open and honest dialogue, they may have realised that harms outweigh (non-existent) benefits. There was plenty of evidence and plenty of published papers showing that
Instead of trying to force ‘misleading content’ on for example climate change, 5G, vaccinations and Covid off line why do the authorities not instead explain why these views are wrong? For example, Chris Whitty could have a live TV debate with someone like Vernon Coleman. If what Dr Coleman is saying is all a load of nonsense then someone like Chris Whitty should have no problem explaining in a live debate why this is a case and put a stop to such ‘misinformation’ once and for all. In fact, given the concern the authorities have about ‘misinformation’ I would have expected them to relish the opportunity to do this. The fact that they would instead rather ban people from expressing views they do not agree with and won’t/cannot explain why these views are wrong is concerning to say the least.
Much better I think would be Dr Aseem Malhotra, a top mainstream medic. who openly says the jabs are doing more harm than good and in his spare time writes good books on how to stay healthier … diet and exercise.
Dr Vernon Coleman is a bit ‘fringe’, although I like his eye-witness comparisons between the efficiency of the NHS 40-45 years ago and its sheer wastefulness now.
That’s exactly my view. The lack of candour and the inability to consider anything that runs contrary to one’s own view is stifling everything. For instance, if “vaccines” are so safe, and present ARs and future unknowns like ADE are such off-beam concerns, it would behove the vaccine proponents to rebut them with sensible reasoned discussion, rather than the blanket “They’re safe” or worse, “The Government says there’re safe” statements which add nothing to the sum of knowledge on the subject.
Granted that any number of cats might be let out of numerous bags, but for people who want the truth and so forth, that’s a desirable thing. It’s the biter bit, on the “if you’ve nothing to hide, you’ve nothing to fear” rationale.
Dr Prasad’s piece was NOT excellent. It was not balanced. He clearly stated his belief that covid represented a real threat to life and vaccines were good. From this perspective he grudgingly admitted some comments were valid, but continued to preach the ‘acceptable’ line on others.
If you start from the perspective of millions of covid deaths rather than low thousands ‘of’ covid deaths you write something like this. Reverse the perspective and you attack the ‘accepted scientism’.
Same with the Royal Society, who reject criticism of the settled science of climate change. Their report just says that the establishment needs to be cleverer at stifling dissenting voices .
Why DS think either of these is ‘good news’?
Quite right. He is entirely on message with the issue of adverse events. He says, “I think it is premature and misleading to talk suggest that the vaccine caused 45,000 deaths. If McCullough wishes to make this case, the best forum would a scholarly publication, where other researchers can examine and critique his methodology.”
Well McCullough has written just such a paper but it was pulled by Elsivier, a little trick that he is taking them to court for. Prasad completely ignores the fact that anyone trying to question the safety of the gene therapies is silenced by the medical establishment and the media.
“Plan B restrictions in England will be lifted next week, Boris Johnson tells MPs.”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-60046073
I don’t know what that includes or whether it applies to vaccines mandates. I’d rather he just abolished everything brought in since March 2020
“He adds the decisions reflect the government’s intention to trust the British people to make the right choices.”
lol!
“The Royal” may like to pretend that it’s on the side of the angels but that’s hardly consistent with its actions over the past several years. How are the mighty fallen.
Boris latest bullshit
“Boris Johnson says the government will set out its long-term strategy for living with Covid and how to avoid restrictions in the future.”
please god no. the way to avoid restrictions is to not implement them
“He says that to do that we will have to remain cautious during these last weeks of winter.”
no we don’t.
“He says the pandemic is not over and adds that Omicron is “not a mild disease for everyone, especially if you are not vaccinated”.”
Its over. Its a mild disease for everyone that isn’t already dying of something else
Quite.
Flu can kill people. Colds can kill people. But generally only if they are already seriously ill with something else, and we don’t take any silly, pointless measures against them.
BBC R4 is now utterly anti-Johnson.
Even David Davis has called for Johnson to go … hope DD knows what he’s doing.
who can replace him? Steve Baker? Are there any generally palatable MPs with a high enough profile who were anti-lockdown from the beginning?
All of the able politicians (not there are many of them) have no principles and the wrong instincts. And all of the principled politicians with principles aren’t very good at politics and would be eaten alive by the globalists and 24 hour rolling news.
So no, there is nobody to replace him.
Lord Frost seems to have good instincts but he isn’t an MP. I know that there are precedents for a non-MP to be PM but it is basically impossible politically these days.
“The well informed majority can act as a “collective intelligence”
Sounds a bit like the Borg to me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WdFxe-xMdY
Pfiser talks to FBI and CIA about journalists!
If it looks like a deep state and quacks like a deep state…
“Starmer says there were 438 Covid deaths yesterday which he calls “a solemn reminder that this pandemic is not over” and urges the public to remain vigilant”
Thick twat Starmer not got the memo yet.
what about the 1300 non-Covid deaths yesterday. No-one seems to care about them.
Tremendous scientists and people of integrity at the Royal Society, just a few doors down from the Rothschilds. When the following agreed to masking/double masking and lockdowns a few of us plebs thought it would be good to list their names for future reference…
List of 148 Prominent Health Officials
North American Signatories (70)
• Jeremy Howard: University of San Francisco, co-founder fast.ai, Member World Economic Forum Global AI Council
• [Dr Vincent Rajkumar](https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(11)61801-1.pdf): Editor in Chief, Blood Cancer Journal
• Dr Harold Varmus: Nobel Prize-winning virologist; Professor, Weill Cornell Medicine; former Director, NIH and NCI
• Dr Bengt Holmström: Nobel Prize-winning economist; Professor, Economics, **MIT**
• Dr Siddhartha Mukherjee: Professor of Medicine, Columbia University Medical Center.
• Dr Eric Topol: Director, Scripps Research Translational Institute; Executive VP & Professor, Molecular Medicine, Scripps Research.
• Dr Robert Wachter: Professor, Medicine Chair, UCSF; Chair of Advisory Board, Healthcare Improvement Studies, Univ of Cambridge.
• Dr Anne W. Rimoin: Professor, Department of Epidemiology; Director, UCLA Center for Global and Immigrant Health; Director, UCLA-DRC Health Research and Training Program
• Dr Erik Brynjolfsson: Professor, MIT Sloan; Senior Fellow, Stanford Institute for Human-Centered AI & Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
• Dr Diana Romero: Chief Editor, Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology
• Dr Sagar Lonial: Chair and Professor, Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology; Anne and Bernard Gray Family Chair in Cancer; Chief Medical Officer, Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University School of Medicine.
• Dr Albert Icksang Ko: Professor, Epidemiology and Medicine, Chair, Epidemiology of Microbial Diseases, Yale School of Public Health
• Dr Christina Ramirez: Professor of Biostatistics, UCLA Fielding School of Public Health.
• Dr Carlo Brugnara: Editor in Chief, American Journal of Hematology
• Dr Michael Picard: Editor in Chief, Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography
•Dr Jeff Drazen: Professor of Medicine, Harvard
• Dr Monica Bertagnolli: Chair, Board of Directors, American Society of Clinical Oncology; Group Chair, Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology
• Dr Yann Le Cun: Professor of Computer Science and Data Science, NYU; Chief AI Scientist, Facebook; Turing Laureate 2019
• Dr Edith Mitchell: Past President, National Medical Association; Professor, Thomas Jefferson University
• Dr Corey Cutler: Medical Director, Stem Cell Transplantation, Harvard Medical School.
• Dr De Kai: Professor, Computer Science and Engineering, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology; Distinguished Research Scholar, Berkeley; Founding Fellow, Association for Computational Linguistics
• Dr Charles Ericsson: Professor and Head of Infectious Diseases, McGovern Medical School, University of Texas.
• Dr Ann Prestipin: Senior Vice President, COVID response, Massachusetts General Hospital
• Dr Noopur Raje: Professor, Harvard Medical School; Director Center for Multiple Myeloma, Chair in Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center.
• Dr Christopher Manning: Professor of Linguistics and Computer Science, Stanford.
• Dr Ruvandhi Nathavitharana: Vice Chair, TB Proof; Associate Professor, Division of Infectious Diseases Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Harvard Medical School.
• Dr Edward Nardell: Professor, **Harvard Medical School**.
• Dr Gregg Gonsalves: Assistant Professor, Epidemiology, Yale; Co-Director, Global Health Justice Partnership; Co-Director, Collaboration for Research Integrity and Transparency.
• Dr David McAdams: Professor, Business Administration (Fuqua School of Business) and Economics, Duke University
• Dr. Walt de Heer, Regent’s Professor of Physics, Georgia Institute of Technology.
• Dr Lin Chen: Associate Professor, Harvard Medical School;, Director of Travel Medicine Center, Mount Auburn Hospital.
• Dr Marc Suchard: Professor of Human Genetics, Biostatistics and Biomathematics, UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine.
•Marietje Schaake: International Director of Policy, Cyber Policy Center, Stanford; Member of the European Parliament (MEP) 2009-2019
• Dr Michael Joyner: Anesthesiologist and Lead Investigator, Convalescent Plasma Program for COVID.
• Dr Jagmeet Singh: Professor, **Harvard Medical School**.
• Dr James Armitage: Professor of Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center.
• Dr Eric Westman: Professor, Duke University Medical Center, Past President, Obesity Medicine Association.
• Dr Chadi Nabhan: Professor, Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Outcomes Sciences, University of South Carolina; Chairman, Caris Precision Oncology Alliance.
• Dr Ik-Kyung Jang: Professor of Medicine, **Harvard**.
• Dr Anas Younes: Professor of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center.
Cont.
• Dr James Januzzi: Professor of Medicine, Harvard; Professor, Cardiology, Massachusetts General Hospital
• Dr Vikas Sukhatme: Dean, Emory School of Medicine; Chief Academic Officer, Emory Healthcare.
• Dr Barbara Murray: Past President, Infectious Diseases Society of America; Professor of Medicine, University of Texas
• Dr Michael Lin: Associate Professor, Neurobiology and Bioengineering, Stanford; Member of Scientists to Stop Covid-19.
• Dr Priya Sampathkumar Infection Control and Infectious Disease Specialist.
• Dr Mike Thompson: Director, Early Phase Cancer Research, Aurora Health Care.
• Dr David Shlim: Past President, International Society of Travel Medicine; Medical Director, Jackson Hole Travel and Tropical Medicine.
• Dr Daniel Morgan: Professor of Epidemiology and Public Health and Medicine, University of Maryland.
• Dr Lee Ellis: Professor of Surgery, Molecular and Cellular Oncology.
• Dr Dawd Siraj: Professor, Infectious Diseases, University of Wisconsin Madison.
• Dr Michael Sauri: Clinical Professor, Occupational Medicine, Johns Hopkins and USUHS Bethesda.
• Dr Amy Tan: Associate Professor, Medicine, University of Calgary
• Dr Ross Levine: Professor, Economic Analysis and Policy, UC Berkeley
• Dr Netanya Utay: Assistant Professor, Medicine, University of Texas
• Dr Avinash Sinha: Assistant Professor, Anesthesia, McGill University
• Dr Chip Lavie: Editor in Chief, Progress Cardiovascular Diseases; Professor and Medical Director, John Ochsner Heart and Vascular Institute.
• Dr Lin Chen: Associate Professor, Medicine, Harvard.
• Dr Katrina Armstrong: Physician in Chief, Massachusetts General Hospital
• Dr Carlos del Rio: Professor of Medicine, Global Health & Epidemiology, Emory University.
• Dr Jordan Lake: Associate Professor, Infectious Diseases, University of Texas.
• Anna Kaltenboeck: Program Director, Center for Health Policy and Outcomes, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center.
• Dr Krishna Komanduri: Chief, Division of Transplantation and Cellular Therapy; Professor of Medicine, Microbiology and Immunology, University of Miami.
• Dr Mark Harrington: Executive Director, Treatment Action Group.
• Dr Vishal Sikka: CEO, Vianai Systems. Board of Directors, Oracle and BMW; Former CEO, Infosys.
• Dr Joe Vipond: Clinical Assistant Professor, Emergency Medicine, University of Calgary.
• Dr Jason Abaluck: Associate Professor of Economics, Yale School of Management.
• Dr Miguel Perales: Chief, Adult Bone Marrow Transplantation Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center.
• Dr Judith Chevalier: Professor, Economics and Finance, Yale University
• Dr Lawrence Greenblatt: Professor, Department of Community and Family Medicine, Duke University.
• Dr Adriaan Bax: Member, National Academy of Sciences
Dr Zeynep Tufekci: Associate Professor, Information and Library Science, UNC; Adjunct Professor, Department of Sociology; Writer: The Atlantic and NY Times
European Signatories (27)• Dr Richard Horton: Editor in Chief, The Lancet; Honorary Professor, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, University College London, and University of Oslo.
• Dr Magdalena Skipper: Editor in Chief, Nature
• Dr Martin McKee CBE: Past President, European Public Health Association; Professor, Public Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine; Director, European Observatory.
• Dr Trish Greenhalgh OBE: Professor, co-Director of Interdisciplinary Research In Health Sciences, Primary Health Care Sciences, University of Oxford.
• Dr Meletios-Athanasios Dimopoulos: Rector, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens.
• Dr Jesus San-Miguel: Director, Clinical & Translational Medicine, Universidad de Navarra.
• Dr Vladimir Zdimal: Head of Department of Aerosols Chemistry and Physics; Institute of Chemical Process Fundamentals of the Czech Academy of Science
• Dr Charles Tannock MBE: Member of the European Parliament (MEP) 1999-2019; NHS Consultant.
• Dr Keertan Dheda: Professor, Infectious and Tropical Diseases, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; Director, Centre for Lung Infection and Immunity; Head: Division of Pulmonology, University of Cape Town; Professor of Medicine, Groote Schuur Hospital.
• Dr KK Cheng, Director, Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham.
• Dr Mario Boccadoro: Director, Hematology, University of Torino.
• Dr Adrian Alegre: Head Hematology Department, Universitary Hospital La Princesa.
• Dr David Wraith: Director, Institute of Immunology and Immunotherapy, University of Birmingham
• Dr Anna Sureda: Head, Clinical Hematology Department, Catalan Institute of Oncology; President, Spanish Group for stem Cell Transplantation and Cellular therapy.
• Dr Miguel Sanz: Researcher Emeritus, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe; Honorary Professor, Medicine, University of Valencia.
• Dr Carlos Solano: Professor of Medicine, University of Valencia; Director, HSCT and Immune Therapy program, Hospital Clinico Universitario.
Cont.
• Dr Jürgen Kuball: Chair, Department of Hematology, UMC Utrecht.
• Dr Catherine Cordonnier: Professor and Head of Haematology, Henri Mondor University Hospital.
• Dr Javier Zulueta: Director, Pulmonary Medicine, Clinica Universidad de Navarra.
• Dr Anna Rotkirch: Research Professor, Population Research Institute, Family Federation of Finland.
• Dr Key Pousttchi: Professor and past chair, Business Informatics and Digitalization, University of Potsdam.
• Dr Chris Papadopoulos: Public Health Director, University of Bedfordshire.
• Dr Alexey Morgunov: CEO, Manifold Research; Lecturer, University of Cambridge.
• Dr Christophe Rapp: President, French Society of Travel Medicine.
• Dr Helene-Mari van der Westhuizen: Oxford University; Co-founder TB Proof.
• Dr Frederik Questier, Professor, Vrije Universiteit Brussel.
• Dr Lucica Ditiu: Executive Director, Stop TB Partnership.
African Signatories (6)• Dr Anneke Hesseling, Professor, Dept Pediatrics and Child Health, Stellenbosch University; Director of the Desmond Tutu TB Centre.
• Dr Rodney Ehrlich: Emeritus Professor, Senior Research Scholar, School of Public Health and Family Medicine, University of Cape Town.
• Dr Shaheen Mehtar, (retired) Professor, University of Stellenbosch, Chair of Infection Control Africa Network (ICAN).
• Dr Angela Dramowski: Professor, Pediatric Infectious Diseases, Department of Pediatrics and Child Health, Stellenbosch University.
• Dr Gavin Churchyard: CEO, The Aurum Institute; Honorary Professor, University of Witwatersrand; Honorary Professor, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.
• Dr Arne von Delft: University of Cape Town; Co-founder of TB Proof
South American Signatories (2)• Dr Guillermo Ruiz-Arguelles: Director General, Centro de Hematologia y Medicina Interna de Puebla.
• Dr Luis Lamb: Professor, Computer Science & AI, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul; Secretary of State for Innovation, Science & Technology.
Asian Signatories (8)• Dr Lalit Kumar: Professor and Head of Medical Oncology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences.
• Dr Lei-Han Tang, Professor, Director, Institute of Computational and Theoretical Studies, Hong Kong Baptist University.
• Dr Chi Chiu Leung: Editor-in-Chief, International Journal of Tuberculosis and Lung Disease; Chairman, Advisory Committee on Communicable Diseases, Hong Kong Medical Association.
• Dr Mammen Chandy: Director, Tata Medical Center.
• Dr Tai Hing Lam: Chair Professor, Community Medicine, Professor in Public Health, University of Hong Kong.
• Dr Mushfiq Mobarak: Scientific Director, Innovations for Poverty Action, Bangladesh; Professor of Economics, Yale.
• Dr Zhiyuan Li: Professor, Center for Quantitative Biology, Peking University.
• Dr Hisao Hayakawa: Professor, Theoretical Physics, Kyoto University
Oceania Signatories (3)• Dr James Brown: Professor of Statistics, University of Technology Sydney.
• Dr Ben Marais: Associate Professor Paediatrics & Child Health, University of Sydney.
• Dr Bart Willems: Co-founder, TB Proof; Public Health Medicine Specialist, Nga Tai Ora, Public Health Northland.
Additional Signatories – After initial release (32)• Dr Michaela Routhu: Assistant Professor.
• Dr John Middleton: President, Association of Schools of Public Health in the European Region.
• Dr Steve A. N. Goldstein: Vice Chancellor, Health Affairs, Distinguished Professor of Pediatrics, Physiology & Biophysics, University of California, Irvine.
• Dr Alan Barbour: Distinguished Professor of Medicine and Microbiology & Molecular Genetics, University of California Irvine.
• Dr Panu Poutvaara: Professor of Economics at the University of Munich and Director of the ifo Center for International Institutional Comparisons and Migration Research.
• Dr Gary Slutkin: Former Chief, Intervention Development, World Health Organization; former Director, East and Central African Programmes, Global Program on AIDS, WHO.
• Dr Melanie Thompson: Principal Investigator, AIDS Research Consortium of Atlanta.
• Dr David Fisman: Professor, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto.
• Dr Irfan Dhalla: Vice-President, Unity Health Toronto; Associate Professor, University of Toronto.
• Dr Laura Davisson: Associate Professor Of Medicine West Virginia University, Governor of WV Chapter of the American College of Physicians.
• Dr Bart Croes: Member of the Board of Atmospheric Sciences and Climate at NASEM. Chief of the Research Division (retired) at the California Air Resources Board.
• Dr Rama Ramakrishnan: Professor of the Practice of Data Science, MIT.
• Dr Michael LaGier: Associate Professor of Biology and Department Chair.
• Dr Linsey Marr: Charles P. Lunsford Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering.
• Dr Guruswamy Kumaraswamy: Professor of Chemical Engineering, IIT Bombay.
• Dr Sherri Alderman: Adjunct Faculty Portland State University, American Academy of Pediatrics Council on Early Childhood Executive Committee.
• Dr Andrew Noymer: Associate Professor, Public Health, University of California, Irvine.
• Dr Shirley Ho: Group Leader of Cosmology X Data Science.
• Dr Randall King: Professor of Cell Biology, Harvard Medical School
• Dr Giovanni Battista Migliori: Chair, Global Tuberculosis Network.
Dr Eric Feigl-Ding: Senior Fellow, Chief Epidemiologist, Federation of American Scientists. Chief Health Economist, Director of Epidemiology, Microclinic International.
• Dr Yogi Goswami: Distinguished University Professor and Director, Clean Energy Research Center, University of South Florida.
• Dr Krishanu Saha: Associate Professor, Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
• Dr Alan Tan: Director of GU Medical Oncology.
• Dr John Middleton: President, Association of Schools of Public Health in the European Region.
• Dr Elson Romeu Farias: Professor de Medicina da Universidade Luterana do Br.
• Dr Prabhjot Singh: Associate Professor of Medicine and Global Health.
• Dr Carlos Ramos: Professor of Medicine, Center for Cell and Gene Therapy, Baylor College of Medicine.
• Dr Allyson Ocean: Associate Professor of Clinical Medicine, Weill Cornell Medical College.
• Dr Joshua Gans: Author of Economics in the Age of COVID-19.
• Dr Artur Jurczyszyn: Professor at the Jagiellonian University, President the Myeloma Tretment Foundation in Poland.
• Dr Ranu Dhillon: Former Special Advisor to the President of Guinea on Ebola; Division of Global Health Equity, Brigham & Women’s Hospital/Harvard Medical School.
• Dr Nicholas Gruen: CEO, Lateral Economics.
We’ll need a bigger one…
And have three up-votes for all your hard work… and a star.
I’d prefer a long sentence with their income and savings during the fake pandemic confiscated and given back through reduced utility bills for those who lost their jobs and small businesses.
But many will agree with your option.
Head of your list:
• Jeremy Howard: University of San Francisco, co-founder fast.ai, Member World Economic Forum Global AI Council
“Last March, as the COVID-19 pandemic was spreading around the world, Jeremy co-founded the #Masks4All campaign. It challenged the global consensus advice at the time on wearing face coverings to protect each other from infection. The campaign is estimated to have reached more than a billion people on social media, and was covered by global news outlets. “This has completely taken over my life,”said Jeremy in an April 1st interview. His June-19 epic tweet-thread reviewing the scientific evidence in support of mask-wearing is a paragon in science communication.”
A campaign based on lying propaganda. What a sad case.
Ha! ‘A paragon in science communication’. NOT.
Qualifications in science?
Oh, well, at least he has a degree in philosophy.
Why it took so long to publish this report, now that the harm is done?
The internet is but a tool. The Big Tech leaders are but glorified hardware store shop assistants, who think they run the planet.
I’m reading comments in the Daily Telegraphy of totally idiotic things that have gone on and going on in the interests of “safety” from that non killer disease. Like corpses in a mortuary wearing masks, a boarding school canceling a camping trip as students couldn’t isolate in a tent but could share a dormitory, being able to call a patient/loved one in hospital but couldn’t use FaceTime/Zoom etc etc. I’m no author but this has got to be the grounds for a great book about the Great Covid Hysteria and other lunacies.
There’s literally a Harvard study showing the numbers are under-reported 10 fold. Yes many people may think they have problems when they don’t – and they probably do get reported, but that is unlikely to balance the under-reporting.
The imagined symptoms also works both ways – with Long Covid and Covid a well. I would say the psychosomatic effects of Covid19 have been way worst. 80% of the UK population believes if you don’t get vaccinated you’re going to be in ICU sooner or later.
There’s a really interesting discussion on just how powerful the human mind is imagining health problems on a Michael Shermer Podcast with Suzanne O’Sullivan. She was an expert witness (neurologist) for a case where Swedish refugees fell into self-created comas after being threatened with deportation.
“We need new strategies to ensure high quality information can compete in the online attention economy,” said Gina Neff, Professor of Technology and Society at the University of Oxford, and a co-author of the report. “This means investing in lifelong information literacy programmes, provenance-enhancing technologies and mechanisms for data sharing between platforms and researchers.”
Sorry I don’t speak globalist technocratese. Shove your surveillance up your arse.
The have to hobble those WITH high quality information by censorship to prevent the low quality narrative collapsing
Where is your high quality information?
I look at what you write and know the opposite is true!
This black cloud of COVID-19 and poisonous fake vaccines that descended on the UK and the world in general might well have a silver lining. It might open people’s eyes to the absolute dangerousness of “wokeness” and “cancel culture,” both of which are choking the life out of Western societies and destroying the Western way of life.
If people’s eyes are not opened by the criminal events inflicted upon them over the last two years by their politicians, Health Services and pharmaceutical companies, then Western culture is dead and all but buried, and soon to be just a footnote in history.
What should make people’s blood boil is how “wokeness” has become like a giant octopus in the UK. This monster’s tentacles have now reached into every institution and are actively and eagerly sucking the life out of the country.
A recent article in the now woke Mail about a savage, Shawn Laval Smith, that randomly and brutally stabbed to death a young 24-years-old girl – Brianna Kupfer – in her place of employment is a perfect example of how disgustingly backward and societally rotten the UK has become.
Click the image below to see the vile comments that the Mail published underneath this article about this brutal murder.
Bear in mind that the Mail’s comment’s threads are very heavily moderated. If you attempt to make comments on Mail articles that even hint at being against the fake COVID-19 vaccines, they simply will not be published. Not a chance will they be published, a few of us have run a trial, and such comments were consistently rejected by the Mail’s moderators.
But yet the disgusting dirt-rag Mail sees no contradiction in allowing its woke sociopathic readers to use its online platform to make disgusting and derogatory comments about this murdered girl. Some of these commenters actually say in not so many words that this 24-year-old girl deserved to be brutally stabbed to death because she and her family were not on the breadline, and her murderer was.
The Mail’s new readership, typical of the woke progressive, are of the jealous and resentful type. They are lazy, unintelligent and can’t make a life for themselves outside of traipsing to the corner to buy narcotics every other day. And they hate those that do a normal day’s work and have a comfortable home life.
In the space of a few years, the Mail has become far more disgusting than the Guardian ever was. At least the Guardian doesn’t openly sneer at the brutal murders of young girls, and make excuses for their murderers.
“Covid Fraud, Climate Fraud” just about sums it all up!
Phrases that make the climate change deniers and ant-vaxers froth at the mouth.
Seems to me the aim is still to suppress speech and debate, they just want to find ‘better’ ways of doing it.
They still believe one particular narrative (theirs) should prevail, because they believe in their own superiority.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/CvSFYAM4pMP1/
The U.S. is decoupling from China with whom it is in an economic war. As a result, there’s going to be huge inflation which will wipe out the savings of ordinary people. He sees “COVID19” as being war measures applied to completely control domestic populations in the shadow of the U.S.-China geopolitical and geoeconomic conflict that will last at least a decade and even risk hot war. A totalitarian system is being put into place to get rid of democracy, and it has the potential to last a really long time. All countries must apply these measures in the context of this global war to ensure stability against unrest among their own populations. He thinks Western elites want an e-currency that will take over the world and gobble up any completing digital currencies, and which also cannot be circumvented. We also discuss resistance and non-compliance.
LOL!
Wikipedia: ‘Thoroughly Corrupt’ says Co-Founder
Ah, nothing like accidental, laugh-out-loud humour!
I think Wikipedia is fine. If you want a list of Indian rivers or the birthplace of a Napoleonic brigadier. Only fools wouldn’t cross-check against other material.
The problematic bits are current politics and scamdemics. That is just made up crap on the hoof, not a real encyclopaedia. No objectivity, no perspective.
I’ve not used it since Mr William M. Connolley was exposed.
https://spectator.org/40334_wikipedia-meets-its-own-climategate/
wikipedia is absolutely excellent for most stuff. I wouldn’t go near it for anything controversial or politics
Yup!
Trouble is people now use Wikipedia to validate ongoing situations and narratives. It’s become a sort of twitter not a body of settled knowledge. This makes it somewhat dangerous as an ‘absolute truth’ backstop for students and the gullible.
Since it can be corrected by people with knowledge, you will never find the nonsense you are looking for.
I contribute to it, on anodyne and uncontroversial topics about English places, and a couple of other equally staid interests of mine. It is utterly hopeless on “moving” current affairs and subjects which involve opinions, and has been completely captured by professional contributors, hired by commercial outfits to plant information or push various agendas.
Over the years, I have given them some modest sums of money, but since 2020, no more. When last asked for alms, I told them that I wouldn’t, for reasons outlined in my paragraph above.
It’s a good resource, and has undoutedly increased the availability if not always the quality of info available to non-specialists or even specialists just starting their research.
Why should opinions be included in something that should be factual.
Apparently Plan B has been scrapped but plan A remains (whatever that is). Is the Pi variant about to be announced?
(No trust in politicians since 2003 (the Iraq War))
“Misinformation” is a two-way street, wherever it appears from. Admittedly, there are some extreme views coming from any direction, and it’s always difficult to be able to determine whether something is delusional, somebody’s strongly-held belief, or there for more nefarious reasons.
Of course, most of the “misinformation” comes in the form of propaganda, usually state-sponsored or endorsed by governments, and is more generally known as “lies”.
It is a ridiculous state of affairs when the “Big Tech” companies, who are the very conduits for this stuff from either direction, set themselves up as arbiters; often employing a subset of bought-and-paid-for propagandists known as “fact checkers”.
That’s just the background, and there are serious problems in crushing free speech, for whatever reason, along with any dissent or debate, especially about scientific matters.
At root of all this is the fact that Tech, MSM, the education systems and societal influences have removed the ability for day-to-day critical thought and analysis from swathes of the population, who no longer form their own ideas from information received, but are mere sponges to soak up pre-digested pap from these sources.
Don’t see much “critical thought and analysis” on these pages.
Apparently it’s ok to lose your job to Covid restriction, unless you name end with Johnson!
Some good news at least, the highly compromised moron has to perform one final U-turn and remove all restrictions, and he may yet lose his job, not a bad day all told.
What do we do about all the morons who voted for him?
From yesterday, but the Royal Society has concluded that the risks of censorship outweigh the benefits…
COVID Lab-Leak Whitewash Has Been ‘The Death Of Science’ Says Professor Who Found ‘Unique Fingerprints’
…
I don’t remember the government ever saying, “Children are not at risk.” They said over and over – and are still saying – that children ARE at risk. Maybe this is a typo?
Disagree. Dr Vinay Prasad’s piece is not excellent, not even good overall, only ‘good in parts’.
Really, some of his comments are most ignorant and flat out wrong.
Then of course there is that argumentum ad ignorantium: he says,
Malone alludes to many potential side effects of vaccination, claiming it can result in seizure and paralysis, and that the menstrual irregularities associated with the vaccine suggest it is a “major threat to reproductive health” for women. He suggests that vaccination can suppress T cells, raising the risk of unusual cancers.To date, I have seen no evidence to support any of these claims, and I believe it is a mistake to raise them. First, they are irresponsible — Malone’s rhetoric verges on fear-mongering
‘I have seen no evidence to support any of these claims’ is an argument from ignorance, but then he goes on to brand Malone as an irresponsible fearmonger for stating things that Malone has evidence for of which Prasad is currently unaware.
In fact, many readers of this blog will know that there is a significant prevalence of facial paralysis (Bell’s palsy) after vaccination; that the ovarian uptake of nanolipids is very high, and that menstrual disturbances after vaccination are common, which must at least be taken seriously as a potential threat to reproductive health; and there are peer-reviewed academic papers showing that the vaccines suppress the production of T-cells, which play a role in suppressing cancers.
If Prasad – an oncologist – is unaware of this, as he claims, then he is incredibly poorly read, and being incredibly dense. Instead of blasting a person who does have evidence that is publicly available, Prasad, who admits his ignorance (‘I have seen no evidence’) should spend a few minutes checking out the claims. After 15 minutes he could no longer say ‘I have seen no evidence’, and he wouldn’t then be able to abuse Malone as an irresponsible fearmonger.
In this respect, Prasad is being irresponsible, as well as peddling a common (fallacious) and rather stupid and unfair rebuttal.
This is NOT excellence.
I was watching an old episode of Top Gear before. “Alice” Cooper was explaining how Mary Whitehouse wanted him censored, and how this was the best thing that happened for him as the British people resented being told what they could watch. It seems things are different these days…
As they say, there’s no such thing as bad publicity.
This is THE issue (Censorship). Covid, one assumes, will pass, but this censorship craze will continue. Soon nobody who challenges any narrative will be able to do so in a forum that reaches large numbers of people. The goal is to prevent dissenting information from “going viral” – This, in turn means, that the censors are trying to block important information that has the potential to reach large numbers of people. Basically, if any allegedly “misleading” information is published, they want this to be at alternative or fringe sites – which is really what is already happening.
It’s terrifying that journalists and editors who should champion genuinely free speech are instead partnering with “Big Brother” to block free speech and punish those who produce it.
This is to say that the real mission of The Daily Sceptic will continue long after COVID has finally disappeared from the headlines. The fight is just beginning. It’s good that we have one site with a large and growing audience that will counter this Orwellian movement.
The real benefits of censorship are for the globalist criminals. Everyone else will lose sooner or later.
Australia invites international backpackers to help ease workforce shortage — RT World News
Fuck Morrison. Fuck Australia
RT offered an undertaker in the UK £83,000 to withdraw allegations he made about the COVID-19 pandemic being a fraud. The undertaker refused to accept this bribe.
I not going to bother searching for links, but this is fact. RT is obviously well in with the promoters and instigators of the COVID-19 plandemic. And RT will not issue any news without first getting it approved by the Kremlin and Putin.
All of this goes a long way to proving that the current issues between the UK & US and Russia are just theatrics designed to keep us plebs preoccupied. They might even embark on a managed war if they deem it necessary to take the heat of the poisonous gene serums.
About 800,000 young British men died fighting in Europe in WW I. These young men died for only two reasons: 1. The Cabal in London wanted sole control of the rich reserves of oil which at that time they knew to be in the Middle East. 2. The Cabal in London resented the fact that the quality of German manufacturing had surpassed that of the UK and was gaining more of the world’s market.
Basically, nearly one million British men, the majority of whom were well educated, died so a clique in London could remain top-dogs in Europe.
British people will have to face up to historical truths like this. Because if they don’t, they’ll be suckered into such needless death and destruction again in the future – as per the current needless death, destruction and injuries caused by a fake pandemic and poisonous fake vaccines.
Talkin’ ‘bout fraud?
Those most guilty of perpetrating fraud are the people themselves. And the victims of this fraud are these very same perpetrators.
Take the COVID-19 fake vaccines. Everyone knew when these so-called vaccines were rolled-out, that they were experimental. We all knew that these pharmaceuticals had not been put through the rigorous trials and tests which vaccines are legally bound to be put through before being dispensed to the general public.
Yet many people defrauded themselves into believing it would be safe to take these untrialled and untested pharmaceuticals. They did this by defrauding themselves into believing that the management of pharmaceutical companies were infallible, they defrauded themselves into believing these people would do no wrong in pursuit of profits, or in the pursuit of a reduction in the world’s population.
Wilfully ignoring the very large amount of planning that has to have gone into the setting up of the gene serums, and the implementation of the Vaccine Passport orientated COVID-19 plandemic, is yet another fraud many people are perpetrating upon themselves.
Boris Johnson comes from a family of eugenicists. As does Bill Gates. Johnson and Gates have had private meetings on many occasions. No minutes are available to show what they spoke about at these meetings.
Did Johnson’s and Gates’ familial ties to eugenics crop up at these meetings? Was Johnson’s financially complicated and much divorced private life offered amelioration by the billionaire “philanthropist” Gates?
People, though, defraud themselves into believing that questions like this are inconsequential. Just like they defraud themselves into believing that politicians, Health Services and pharmaceutical giants are to big to be charged and tried in courts of law for crimes of negligence or wilful murder.
A common utterance is: “Ah, they’ll never be charged or taken to trial, we can forget about that”. But, if people fought back, the arrogant sociopathic bullies behind this plandemic would develop some respect for them, and, as a consequence, might lay-off such schemes in the future.
The average arrogant sociopathic bully has no respect whatsoever for the meek that accept such schemes from them. The sociopathic bullies see in this meekness a mirror image of themselves – all bullies are cowards, and when they beat-off on others, they are actually beating on the inherent coward within themselves.
When Bill Gates’ talks about exterminating millions of humans, he’s probably really talking about exterminating the disgustingly sly coward that takes a sociopathic pleasure in causing hurt to others, which he knows that he himself is.
Watch this video of Gate’s where, with what can only be described as sociopathic excitement, he says:
Gates is a despicable demonic creature that should be burned at a stake, and his ashes then encased in a heavy lead box and buried deep below the earth’s mantle.
Stupid people don’t defraud themselves, because they don’t know any better. But regular people that stupidly ignore their own common-sense in attempt to fit-in with what they perceive to be the tribe’s orientation, do actually defraud themselves.
Proverbs 14:7-9:
In modern times this proverb might say:
Feigning to believe that the Woke are not doing damage to societies, and that they can be tolerated with no ill consequences, is yet another example of how the majority of British people are perpetrating a fraud upon themselves.
the existence of “echo chambers” and “filter bubbles”
If we – as individuals and a society – were mature, those wouldn’t be a bother. Our children would glance that way, wonder for a moment “What th’ hay is THAT?” … then shake their heads and turn away, going on with living their lives.
The problem is modern-ism, in its broadest non-ideological sense. Since the late Forties, “me-ism” has been taking hold. The Sixties were all about it, and the emotion has only entrenched itself deeper and deeper into our collective behavior.
I’ve been on the Web since the public was given access to it. Large parts it have descended into the blatant gratification of “ME!” Social media has rapidly been developed into the primary tool for the expansion of that. It has nothing to do with rational thought, and everything to do with behavior. Behavior is where content of character is seen. Look at today’s social media and you’ll see tomorrow’s Human Race.
There once was a serious philosophical debate about Freedom versus Responsibility. I haven’t heard squat about that in the past 20 years. Did a Google search a few months ago and came up with all sorts of blather that had nothing to do with Barth or Sartre or Kierkegaard or that ultra-hedonist Rousseau. That topic was about, just how central should “ME!” be to the human being’s life. The Sixties deliberately did away with that debate, because it was heresy to what Mod life was supposed to be about.
The echo chambers are more prevalent that one might think. Flip back to the late 40s, to Kinsey and exactly how he organized his “research”, and then flip forward to two generations from now. If that doesn’t scare the poo out of you, nothing will.
(Or … just sing the Song of Mehitabel and race down the garden path into that which George Santayana warned us about.)
One might have hoped that the Royal Society would also have stated that differences of opinion should be encouraged in seats of learning in order to forestall their descent into seats of groupthink.
It would be handy if the Royal Society could give its opinion on the universal use of lockdowns by government the world over coupled with the blocking of public information that early treatments existed for SARS-CoV-2 while giving medically dangerous advice to covid sufferers that killed hundreds of thousands, in order to enable the illegal EUAs for dangerous drug and not-real-vaccine treatments that shovelled billions of moolah into the offshore accounts of big Pharma and their fast track pals.
Wikipedia is not exactly a shining example of uncensored information thanks to public scrutiny: On anything even remotely politicized, its content is How the culturally dominant left-wing academic establishment sees things.
There is an ivermectin panic on the big tech and MSM right now. Massive articles from MSM on Ivermectin trying to push a danger narrative and also negative press on Americans Frontline Dr’s, again, to keep the Covid narrative alive. Just go to the Goog and type ivermectin then look at all the panic news articles. We are over the target. Big-Pharma is panicking. This medicine has been widely used by humans without any problems for 40 years. It’s inventor won a Nobel Prize after 20 years of successful use and after 100 million people were cured of a broad spectrum of problems without any side effects. Get your Ivermectin while you still can! https://ivmpharmacy.com
Google
who they 
Only Duck Duck Go….at least until they sell out
I have been banned from Facebook several times for saying that ‘gender’ does not exist outside linguistics and that mammals cannot change sex. I have often been sent links, by members of the ‘trans’ cult, to some delusional ‘science’ that aims to validate their nonsense. None of that is ever censored.
A bit of sense from the Royal Society. But the assumption that simple old thickos like me can’t tell sh** from clay without info literacy programmes is insulting. I thought the idea of schooling was to give folk the tools to think for themselves.
I’m an anti-vaxxer because I have listened to both sides and the evidence available clearly shows that vaccines cause massive amounts of harm.
Only those financially benefiting from them support them (along with nodding dogs that don’t actually bother to do any research)
There are many scientists, researchers and doctors who agree with Dr Peter McCullough. I know which Doctor I would take my medical advice from, and it isn’t Dr. Prassad.