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.
Who or what is (b) (6)?
Not that surprising when we now know they were planning genocide
The COVID-19 Fraud & War On Humanity (Part 3) (odysee.com)
Dr Sam Baily.
“The first coronavirus vaccine to use the S spike protein was patented by Pfizer in January 2000 (Patent No. 6372224). It was a spike protein virus vaccine for canine coronavirus. You can look up the actual patents for yourself on the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s website,7 if you like.”
Patents Prove SARS-CoV-2 Is A Manufactured Virus | Citizens Journal
So they are giving us dog treatment as opposed to the horse treatment ivermectin which we were told wasn’t for humans despite it being used for years to treat parasites in humans.
I wish she wouldn’t say that the disease doesn’t exist.
Dr. Malcolm Kendrick, whom I trust, saw a new disease affecting elderly people in spring 2020. Based on his evidence (n=1), he judged it to be similar to severe flu.
Agreed.
I think you’re misunderstanding Sam Bailey, I don’t think she’s denying the existence of the disease CoViD19 but the cause, she doesn’t hold with germ theory but rather domain theory of disease.
A summary of the above is the Germ theory is complete bo*locks
…he judged it to be similar to severe flu.
So how did he know it wasn’t flu? Perhaps more tellingly it would have been an illness almost to a man or woman, in those who would had received a flu shot in the autumn of 2019.
I suppose what hey mean is that it is a manufactured disease based on the manipulated ‘gain of function’ enhancement and the pathogenic synthetic spike protein – it is not a disease in ‘nature’, it is a Gene Therapy.
The synthetic virus is just the enabler of the real purpose – the mass, mRNA, gene altering vaccination programme
When Dr. Sam Bailey says the “disease doesn’t exist” she’s correct. The disease they push the vaccines on the back of does not exist.
What exists is a more virulent strain of the flu virus, which people with weak immune systems and co-morbidities fall victim to.
The 2017/18 flu season saw 50,000 excess deaths, which were reported as being flu related.
PROVE it exists!! If she is saying something doesn’t exist and you disagree the onus is on you to prove her wrong.
There have been a couple of electron microscope pictures of the so called SarsCov2 released. When the NIAD were questioned on the pictures this was their reply
‘The electron microscope images of CoV2 are not confirmed to be a virus. I contacted NIAID and asked for confirmation that they isolated a virus and that is what the images show. They responded to say that this is not from an isolated virus and is just a soup of genetic debris.’
“German Government Data for the alleged Omicron variant of Covid-19, suggests that most of the “fully vaccinated” will have full blown Covid-19 vaccine induced acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) by the end of January 2022, after confirming that the immune systems of the fully vaccinated have already degraded to an average of minus 87%”
Official German Government data suggests the Fully Vaccinated will develop Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome by the end of January 2022 – The Expose (dailyexpose.uk)
We have friends and family who are fully jabbed, all coming down with colds at least. They all do LFT’s and PCR tests of course, and come up variously positive and negative in the same household.
It’s all covid, of course, in their belief.
Lost!
Yes lost indeed. It’s these people, mindlessly playing the government’s testing game, that are keeping the Covid scam going.
Yes indeed – all going according to plan then!
See also’ “Pseudo Pandemic” the New Normal Technocracy” by Iain Davis – a chilling read.
The faint hope of the Great Barrington Declaration seems so long ago. All johnson could say was that they just wanted to “let it rip”. There needs to be a Great Day of Reckoninng for all this responsible for this.
Stand in the Park Sundays from 10am – make friends, ignore the madness & keep sane
Wokingham – Howard Palmer Gardens Cockpit Path car park Sturges Rd RG40 2HD
Telegram http://t.me/astandintheparkbracknell
Even now they are preparing their next offensive! Who will bring on the Day of Reckoning? The Courts?
When they use the term ‘fringe’ they mean fringe to the genocide
Also I read the Epoch article and the professors suggest in one paragraph that that Fauci and accomplices really did know about the devastation of lockdowns but must have had another agenda that gave them to drive this global fear driven lockdown.
This the quote !!
“Part of the answer may lie – in different puzzle- their blindness to the devastating effects of lockdowns on other public health outcomes”
In other words they were not blind to it instead they chose a route that many say is corporate and global government manslaughter !
Of course they did ! It is all in Robert Kennedy’s devastating exposure of Fauci and Gates – working together since 2000!
In a just world Farrar, Fauci and Collins (who I met once at a conference and seemed a very nice man) would face criminal charges for every suicide and abuse death caused by lockdowns. Their reputations should be left as those of Burke and Hare. And that is to say nothing of their covering up their funding of and protection of Chinese GOF research that led to this who disaster.
The world isn’t just though. I just hope these 3 GBD do get their reputations back and receive groveling apologies from governments and media every day of the rest of their lives. No one will ever apologise to our kids for lost schooling and the rest of medical sufferers for being pushed to the back of the queue while we fought a virus with an average age of death above life expectancy.
I learned a valuable lesson about “nice” authority figures when I was a 19 year old at Police College. From day one we literally had a good cop bad cop duo of instructors. By the end of our three month stay the roles were reversed and the ‘bad cop’ who laid down the law, bullied, cajoled and demanded of us got us through our course far more effectively than the other.
The ‘good’ cop turned out to be a backstabbing, self interested, self promoting low life who prowled the mess noting how many pints we were consuming of an evening.
That valuable lesson has served me well throughout my life.
What is “a very nice man”?
One who will not inject you with a very nasty substance on the first meeting.
Justice is never finished and achieved in this life, though let’s hope that in as many cases as possible re Covid19 it will be partly achieved. In the next life there has to be the full reckoning for those who never turned from their wickedness… It will come as a shock to the eugenicist plutocrats…
You liked lockdowns, masks and vaccines? How’s that working out for you? Any Australians in the house? Mum, you reading this? This is your mess now, your pickle. This is what you wanted. Now hurry along it’s time for your next booster.
Eventually somebody will twig that is all that matters in this belief system. The political parties in charge protect their own.
The whole point is that these people are funded like landed lords by the captive state while everybody else slaves at the coal face.
That is the plan.
The plan is genocide by injection.
Were the dark side scientists true believing covidians, duped, careerists, complicit, or plain evil?
Fauci, at around 80 years old has spent more than the working lifetime than most barricading himself in his job, probably by having dirt on everyone else.
What normal person wouldn’t want to retire on a fat state funded pension at 65 or so. Who really want’s to die in harness? Who wouldn’t want to mentor successors and walk away from a job well done? Certainly not Fauci it seems.
We joke about Biden’s mental state at around 80 years old, and Trumps health if he runs in 2024, also around 80 years old, why does Fauchi, who presents himself as an aggressive attack dog when grilled by state Senators etc., get a free pass?
Fauci can’t let go because when he does eventually, there will be a Pandora’s box to be opened. But it won’t be.
Is Fauci going to turn out to be another Louis Pasteur, I wonder? Obfuscating and lying his way to his eventual demise.
The lot! Money is of course the ultimate driver.
Genocide is the ultimate driver and the dirty money is just a bonus.
I do find it troubling that the rebuttal refers to ” this terrible pandemic” – thus reinforcing the catastrophist mentality.
I have seen no figures which, when put into historical context, show the effects of this ‘Non-High Consequence Disease’ to be ‘terrible’. It was only deemed ‘pandemic’ by a redefinition of the term.
I lived through the Asian ‘Flu epidemic of 1957/8. It was far worse – as were many other years.
TPTB have also redefined how the population responds to all sorts of slightly adverse events. When I was a kid in the 80s you’d almost never hear about bad weather bringing the country to a halt, but these days a flake of snow and everyone panics. Further, it’s recently struck me how many TV shows and films these days celebrate ‘no one dies today’ storylines. So much conditioning and programming…
Another regular hoorah for deeply flawed and ill considered GBD. And just because the criminal Fauci hates it doesn’t make it OK, as it still remains a rancid piece of age apartheid 15 months on. Queue down votes from the usual ‘didn’t bother to read GBD properly but everyone else thinks its great’ types.
A key passage from the GBD:
In other words ‘Retired People’ become social outcasts and prisoners of Big Pharma and its Crony State lackeys. There’s nothing vaguely voluntary about this statement, the term ‘should’ is used in auxiliary function to express obligation (or at best propriety or expediency).
Whichever way one spins the GBD, ‘Retired People’ have still been singled out, identified and demonised as being problematic for others, and so have this unnecessary burden placed on their backs and resultant social decision to make; especially regarding multi-generational households. And just to reinforce the fact that this IS compulsory apartheid the GBD leaves one on no doubt:
A pox on them all. How can any sane person think the GBD is anything but Goebbels-esque propaganda – after all the GBD is openly advocated ensuring younger people live their lives as normal during the fake pandemic by the expedient of locking down the elderly and non-productive? The GBD discredited itself from the outset, it needed no help from Fauci & co.
An interesting post. I’m certainly one of those who hasn’t read the Declaration, and your interpretation of the authors’ intent may well be true.
However, since they seem to have been most interested in sparing society as a whole the grief that government policies undoubtedly brought (not to mention the long-term debt) I’m prepared to cut them some slack. By which I mean that they could have intended for those who considered themselves vulnerable should have been offered the means to stay relatively isolated, save meeting family in outside air.
Your Goebbels-esque comment may be correct, but a slightly less accusatory reading of the words you quote does allow for differing interpretations.
I believe that was the case: they advocated protecting vulnerable people *who wanted protection*. It was never to be mandatory.
So please answer me why the GBD uses the obligatory term ‘should’ throughout, and in 15 months failed to change it? GBD never once mentions voluntary, so this is no rushed grammatical faux pas. GBD has had plenty time to replace ‘should’ with a diluted term such as ‘could, if deemed acceptable’, which would bestow the voluntary principle that you wrongly ascribe to the current version. It is a nasty, elitist, apartheid document
“Should” is not “must”!
So all the pro-GBD commenters are keen to tell me, without ever taking time to understand the nuanced auxiliary functions of ‘should (as I have set out elsewhere).
And in bringing up this up, you likewise miss the whole point. Why did the GBD seek to make any case at all for limiting the movement and activities of healthy retired people in the first place (incorrectly classifying them as being vulnerable in the process)? ‘Should’ (even ‘could’, even ‘might like to think about’) is the not so thin end of the wedge – it still implies an obligation that should not be present al all on this demographic. The retired are not answerable to this form of casual, creeping medical discrimination.
If a sign says “Dogs should be on a lead” I don’t put my dog on a lead.
If a sign says “Dogs must be on a lead” I still don’t put my dog on a lead but I’m aware that the word “must” means there might be negative consequences.
The very strongest term the GBD could use in its advocacy of age apartheid (and with it an end to equal legal rights for ALL citizens) is ‘should’, and it duly used it without any hesitation. Ultimately, it is a no more than a discussion document put out by academics, it is certainly not a legal act nor decree. In this context ‘should’ denotes the strongest possible suggestion of the type of discriminatory lock down rules that retired persons would be subject to. Subsequent legislation based upon the GBD could turn SHOULD to MUST – as we have seen in countless recent acts/decrees since March 2020 – or it would risk being legally toothless.
The intent of social control of a targeted demographic is crystal clear for those who want to see, which is confirmed by this group’s failure to clarify the document in the 15 months or so since it released. The fact the best the sorry apologists on here can do is argue over the word should, while ignoring completely the thrust of the suggested discrimination, is itself telling.
And if we are to haul out semantics one more time. Would one escape prosecution under hate crime legislation if they were to Tweet that ‘*a certain ethnic group/person/etc* should go back to whence they came’ because of the word ‘should’ not being ‘must’? The interpolation of caveats and due caution is the stock in trade of the legal professions when drafting documents, and doubtless the GBD was carefully vetted first, but this cannot disguise the overall discriminatory direction of travel, nor (I suspect) was it meant to.
BFF, Your knickers are well, and truly, twisted!
Dogs ‘are to’ be on a lead, would make it quite clear as to the ‘rules’.
So saying that a vulnerable person should be protected by having deliveries, and should minimise contact in confined poorly ventilated spaces is somehow worse than was actally done?!
What was done was to make it ILLEGAL to visit family in any way. What was done was to make it ILLEGAL to meet indoors or outdoors. What happened was that the laptop class snagged all the home delivery slots so the vulnerable still had to go out. What happened was that the laptop class hid at home while the older blue collar workers carried on working.
Your assertions about the gbd are so flawed that I wonder how you manage to dress yourself. How can you not tell the difference between recommendations for a few vulnerable people, and forced compliance for everyone?
In one sentence:
(1) a false dichotomy. State policy was wholly unnecessary and (for the elderly) in many cases murderous. What GBD advocates is equally unnecessary, and ethically deplorable.
(2) a false equivolence. How does being retired make one vulnerable? This is absolute ageist BS. or does the day one retires mark the immediate onset of physical change? If so with the retirement age set to increase again in the coming years will SARS-CoV-2 be informed in advance?
(3) a false assumption: Protection is not necessary for the retired, This is exactly the crap Johnson spouted in March 2020 when bundling together the “elderly and the vulnerable” as needing to be locked down, isolated and controlled under the excuse of being protected.
(4) A blindness to the institutional extension of the word ‘protection’ to act as a by-word for coerced imprisonment (when in a lockdown context). Protection racket gets closer to the modern contextual meaning
(5) A total buy in to the use of state coercion in medical health matters that has hitherto been inalienable informed voluntary consent – as per the Nuremberg Code – whereas you casually use the word ‘should’ in the same way the GBD does.
How easily self-declared sceptics become voluntary state enforcers.
You’re obviously committed to your interpretation of those ‘shoulds’. My own take is that the government panicked and, recognising that they were going to do something, the GBD suggested minimising the harm.
If you’re right and they meant what you say, then that would be unfortunate, but there’d still be fewer dead oldies as a result. Most of the country have become ‘voluntary state enforcers’ due to credulous acceptance of MSM paid-for propaganda.
As I have explained elsewhere the GBD term ‘should’ is ill advised (or intentionally vague at best), and even if were to be changed for something less coercive it wouldn’t salvage the discriminatory age-apartheid element of the GBD.
In other words the GBD bashing us over the head with a baseball bat is to be preferred to Johnson bashing us with a pick axe? Both are wrong.
Your thoughts are well articulated and make great sense to me.
“The government panicked”. Oh dear, Toby would just love that.
I would welcome your view on another possible false dichotomy – whether the retired and vulnerable should isolate themselves or the entire population must isolate themselves.
My understanding of normal pre-covid life was that people who were vulnerable or likely to suffer a bad outcome from an infection would voluntarily isolate themselves and family, neighbours or the authorities wouls support them. My view is that the GBD was really no different to a reiteration of this situation in which “should” forms the basis of a recommendation, and quibbling about the choice of words is detracting from the meaning.
At the time my view as an old and supposed vulnerable person was that I would voluntarily shut myself away if the younger members of society could get on with their jobs, education and social lives.
If you want to know who I think were selfish, they were not the people who had reasons to decline a vaccine but the ones who wanted everyone to suffer for the sake of their personal perception of safety.
I have already accepted this point when stating:
‘Retired People’have still been singled out, identified and demonised as being problematic for others, and so have this unnecessary burden placed on their backs..’
The degree of pressure then applied to comply (from informal peer pressure to outright coercion or state mandate) is very much secondary to this effective demographic apartheid. There was no proven medical reason to pick on the over 65s (over 55s in some cases) but the GBD, like Johnson, still did.
So, you bought into the BS hook, line and sinker? There is no connection! A retired person does not become vulnerable because they draw a state pension! Only Johnson’s idiot Big Pharma driven draconian rules have ever stopped the young people from working – NOT the elderly (who are not the medically vulnerable).
I actually voiced that opinion in public when lock-down was first being talked about and before it was introduced. I believe the lock-down could have one purpose and that was to delay the numbers hitting the NHS, before we knew about the real outcomes. The way this government treated it subsequently was the main reason that we had a second wave, because it postponed the full impact of an epidemic, which, if it had been allowed to work its way through the population, would have brought levels of immunity to such a level that subsequent versions of the virus may not have had the opportunity to develop.
I agree, and this has likewise been my attitude from the get go. Natural immunity applies to all age groups, and as other commenters have correctly stated there were far more proven and effective treatments for those who became very ill due to the virus (Ivermectin, Budesonide etc).
Unfortunately, these treatments (along with basic vitamins, minerals and healthy diet) were deliberately ignored, shelved and discredited even though – in March 2020 – there were (supposedly) no alternatives.
It’s complex, not least the role played by the various experimental genetic treatments in the mutation of the virus, but one day there will be a reckoning – if we can pick through the daily propaganda and BS and not give in.
Quite right. The correct response to a nothing burger of a virus (in the grand scheme of things, if it ever even existed which is still UNPROVEN so until I see verifiable irrefutable proof of such a thing, ill not allow the criminals main assertion to get the green light) is to do NOTHING and allow life to carry on. If HMG really wanted to “save” the elderly, they would mail them packs of Vits D C and Zinc every winter with whatever Zelenko “gun” is cheapest (ivm, hyd or que), tell them to get out for regular walks WITH their family to boost their spirit and circulation and health, eat a super healthy alkalising anti inflammatory diet and give them a few drops of full specturm CBD oil every day. That is all you need to do. Instructing them to engage in demonic satanic rituals where nobody is allowed to see their family is DEGRADING AND INHUMANE AND SAVES NOONE IT ONLY DESTROYS LIFE ITSELF.
Even if they “catch” the low mortality virus which has not been proven to exist, it only ever had the same mortality rate as the missing in action regular flu, so unless you and your family were acting like OCD consumed morons before this manufactured scam (kicked off at the opening ceremony to the London 2012 Olympics COVID-19 Predictive Programming at the 2012 Olympics in Londonhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4aiScgSvCs), then anything people have done post Convid is a result of being brainwashed taking health advice from war criminals and liars and void of all morals agencies of government.
Fact of life people need to get used to to resume normality in the mind – life expectancy reduces with age. Its part of Gods plan. Destroying and darkening those final years with this Communist evil being spewed out by the scum in HMG is a betrayal of your relatives. “Here you go – we love you so much were going to isolate you and cut off all human contact and deprive you of love and affection and warmth because the war criminal genociders in the British government say its a good idea.” Cue the theme tune to Laurel & Hardy – the new National Anthem.
Laurel and Hardy Cuckoo Theme
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mD8NjVVKvuE
The notion that something unprecedented in terms of respiratory viruses happened in 2020 is false. There was no super killer mega virus. Here is the worlds number one epidemiologist confirming this in April 2020:
BREAKING NEWS ! Prof Dr John Ioannidis Stanford University On Real Data On Coronavirus Pandemic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btvDL6kIDsA
It reminds me of the old Jack Dee joke, in response to calls to make it illegal to smack your children –
Hows about we stop murdering old people with midazolam. Hows about we stop murdering old people via removal of health services. Hows about we stop turning the world upside down and forcing people into isolation which we KNOW FOR A FACT causes a whole mutlitude of ill health effects in response to a virus which is either so low mortality as to be completely unnoticeable in mainstream society or simply does not exist, its just old flus and colds and pneumonias rebranded as something novel.
Stop focusing on what needs or does not need to be done in response to Convid. The only thing we need to focus our attentions on is bringing justice to the guilty. That and dismantling this illegitimate illegal immoral unethical unlawful framwork that has been set up via fraud and deception. That and undoing the moron mentality which believes things like locking up and isolating the elderly is a display of love. That and stopping the real time destruction of liberty and life happening right before our eyes, all on the back of an easy to prove SCAM.
Terrific.
Obviously you don’t understand your highway code either. Massive difference between “should” and “must”.
I write policies for a living, lucky me. ‘Should’ leaves room for judgement, ‘must’ doesn’t. Its also necessary to write in such a way that the majority of readers can understand, otherwise people will simply say its too complicated to bother reading.
It probably doesn’t apply to the GBD, but back when I did engineering for major oil companies, the glossary in a report would include:
‘may’ – a measure that could be implemented if thought prudent
‘should’ – a measure that, if possible, ought to be implemented
‘shall’ – a meaure that must be implemented.
Perhaps, if I had ever read the GBD, my previous experience would have led me to interpret it with a less jaundiced eye than some.
Not a massive difference at all with some auxiliary usages of ‘should’. In many official documents should is used instead of must to imply a level of choice that simply does not exist, or to make a request in a polite manner, or to soften a direct statement. This is the case in the GBD.
As I have stated elsewhere in these comments, the GBD has remained unedited for 15 months, in which there was plenty of time to clarify the meaning and ascribe an aspect of voluntary buy in that many (incorrectly) choose to believe exists in the document.
As for the Highway Code, a small excerpt perfectly illustrates my point:
Are you saying that should doesn’t effectively mean MUST here? The only latitude is that if you checked these before parking at the supermarket, then it’s maybe reasonable to suppose they still be OK – but that is your risk…
*must* is law. Should is a recommendation – there’s no law saying you have to do it and you’re not going to get a fine if the police see you drive off without checking your car first (how many people do you know that bother any of that?)
I’d be perfectly happy being told I *should* stay at home for my own health. I can easily reply with “and you should mind your own business”.
If one is caught with a defective vehicle it is an offence under the RTA; whether an accident has occurred or not. Precisely when one checks those key elements is not stipulated, but strongly suggested nonetheless.
That one must regularly ensure these things conform to the RTA is beyond doubt, and the defence of “I was not aware I must check my brakes and lights because it only said ‘should’, M’lud..” will not cut any ice in court.
but the point is it says you *should* check them *every* time you get in the car not you *must* check them *every* time you get in the car.
There is zero compulsion there and it is totally up to you whether you do it or not *every* time.
Much the same as if (in the long distant past) you went to see your doctor and s/he said something like “you should eat less” or “you shouldn’t drink so much”. They’re not forcing you to stop, only suggesting that in their opinion it might be in your best interests to do so.
Of course it says ‘should’ or it would create unenforceable laws. Bad law is no law at all. Nevertheless, a car must be roadworthy and if one is pulled over by plod (even if the checks had been carried out that morning) and something proves to be defective then one IS breaking the law.
GBD, on the other hand, is not a legal document nor a manifesto, but clear statement of intent – and so uses ‘should’ as the strongest possible non-legal obligation. You are incorrect in saying there would be ‘zero compulsion’ (zero legal compulsion, maybe), as by singling out a demographic to be targeted the compulsion has already started via societal pressure, media pressure, peer pressure and family pressure. From which all laws start!
This is the same propagandist method used by MSM when demonising ‘refusenik anti-vaxxers’. Similarly there is no official vaxx mandate, but 90% compliance (and rising) is a damned good result without ever using MUST!!
GBD could have weakened the term ‘should’ to imply a voluntary aspect, it deliberately didn’t.
Precisely!
It is “cue” not “queue”, but that is not your only mistake.
Brilliant Norman, just brilliant, you can spot a typo!! Likewise when quoting from written text speech quotation marks (“..”) are not used.
You mean like when I was quoting from your post?
Could you explain how what I have done differs from this online reference “They’re used to indicate things people have said, or reference something from another piece of writing.”
No I can’t, as there’s clearly slackness everywhere. But in a blog to and fro there has to be a degree of latitude for such errors. Cue cymbal….
It clearly isn’t a typo: you’re semi-literate.
Then I trust my perceived semi-literacy will make you and the GBD’s sycophantic supporters feel much better about signing up to (and then defending) age apartheid. Hypokrit.
I agree. Theirs is just a “kinder, gentler” form of control and oppression. Typical academics.
I do not agree with your interpretation of the GBD. The delclaration also states:
“Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity.”
This indicates that individual choice should be exercised in questions of vulnerability and that the purpose is to confer protection on the vulnerable should they wish it.
The cost of this freedom offered here is discrimination against the healthy retired population, by classifying them (wholly incorrectly) as being medically vulnerable because they are over 65. This is fascism. I quote from the central paragraph in GBD defining who is vulnerable:
‘People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity.’
People have a habit of ignoring the final sentence of the Declaration: ‘People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity.’
Basically, it said ‘We’ll help you hide if you’re scared, but if you’re not, you can live normally.’
If it really said that, which of course it didn’t, the GBD would have been far worse than even I have rightly given it stick for – as it would effectively have had no point at all! Whichever way you spin it, the GBD deliberately and wrongly conflates vulnerability with age – and uses this as an excuse to push an unjustified social control agenda aimed at the elderly.
People of all ages can and should participate in societal kickback against the atrocious governmental decisions made over the last 21 months, and live life how they wish. No approval, blessing or assistance from these tedious ivory tower dwelling GBD elitists is required.
Founders of the GBD didn’t have shares in Big Pharma and were more concerned with people’s well being.
Fauci et al will go down in history as a modern day Mengele.
History is on the GBD side.
Truth is on their side.
Humanity is on their side.
Time is on their side.
The future is theirs.
Fifty years (or quite possibly far less) from now, the academic and scientific world will goggle in disbelief at the insanity that gripped its predecessors in the 2020s.
The naivety here verges on breathtaking – so I’m already goggling in disbelief at your credulity towards the GBD. It’s no the wonder our fascist state if finding this WEF global re-set malarkey such a doddle when BTL commenters are keen on penning supporting propaganda for them – and in prose too!
If the openly apartheid GBD had been written identical word for word by Pfizer or Fauci would you have been so keen to see it as having any humanitarian value at all? If the future belongs to the elitist signatories of the GBD and their ilk, then it’s a bleak future indeed; except perhaps for those with shares in Midazolam and euthanasia clinics?
And is this coerced addictive experimental killer genetic treatment still simply ‘Snake Oil’?
No, the GBD is neither apartheid nor openly apartheid.
The root of your moronic screaming is purposeful illitera
Francis Collins is a disgusting human being, a fake Christian, a shill for the devil. Collins and Fauci, twins joined at the hip, are responsible for gain-of-function research.
“Noted evangelical political commentator David French, for example, rushed to praise Collins as “a national treasure.”
But Collins’s real legacy is anything but praiseworthy, and the tendency of figures in the faith community to ignore his real record is far from admirable.
This year of all years should have made the truth about Francis Collins clear. Last month, documents were released suggesting that top National Institutes of Health (NIH) officials may have lied when they denied that the NIH had funded “gain of function” research in Wuhan, China, that could have resulted in a pathogen that could infect humans.
After reviewing the documents, Rutgers University biologist Richard Ebright had a blistering response: “The documents make it clear that assertions by the NIH Director, Francis Collins, and the NIAID Director, Anthony Fauci, that the NIH did not support gain-of-function research or potential pandemic pathogen enhancement… are untruthful.”
It was another blow to the reputation of Collins in a year when his agency has faced multiple scandals and controversies.
More…
“He then became a hero to many Christians with the publication in 2006 of his book The Language of God, which recounted his journey from atheism to Christianity.”
Never trust a zealot convert. They are like evangelical reformed alcoholics and smokers. Everyone must conform to their distorted standards and they will connive and break every rule to achieve that objective.
Lockstep has been talked about for a long time, no one involved in it got it wrong, they knew what they were doing and followed the plan. Orchestrated brainwashing, infantalisation of people, hands face space.
Not only does standing up in a pub immediately give you a fatal dose of the rona, standing up at a football match turns you into a Nazi drug addict. Syuntz.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/police-chief-safe-standing-leads-to-more-cocaine
“Nine years on and the bobby has been booted upwards to now being Chief Constable for the whole of Cheshire.”
I see the age old tradition of promotion within the police to get the incompetents out the way is still ongoing.
It’s not just the police, the whole of public services works this way.
Oh and remember the boobgate copper at GMP? She got booted upwards, screwed up again, 12 months garden leave then forced to resign.
Those delightful people at OMBC gave the poor dear a (non) job.
On more money than she earned at GMP.
NICE.
Visor wearing, mask toting, triple vaxxed lunatic US Defence Secretary. catches the rona.
https://twitter.com/ianmSC/status/1477831073098711043
Yet more Limited Hangout, and the GBD group seem to have taken the bait. Look it up, you’re going to see a lot of it in the coming months.
https://en-academic.com/dic.nsf/enwiki/3065176
German Omicron stats:
Unjabbed have 186 cases out of 26.5% of the population
Fully jabbed have 4020 cases out of 70.53% of the population.
Jabbed are 8.12x more likely to test positive for Omicron.
Jab efficacy -87%.
Those Germans sure do love their jabs….
Imagine publishing a “devastating” rebuke on a html page which can override any doubt on the masses?
For crying out loud, the article leads with an FOI email from Francis Collins to Fauci which proves beyond doubt that badness is afoot and this thread breaks down in to a row over semantics.
Come on, let’s get a grip.
2nd Jan 2022 (paraphrased) Discussion between Jonathan J Couey & Charles Rixey (DRASTIC research)
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1250966880
@jjcouey
@CharlesRixey
On January 11th 2020 the CCP released
the SARS CoV2 genome, 6 days later Moderna proudly stated they had
created a synthetic prototype for an mRNA vaccine that used the
entire spike protein. So that means by January 17th, 3 days before
the WHO admitted human to human
transmission, and 6 days before the CCP
locked down the city of Wuhan, Moderna already knew the spike portion
of the SARS CoV2 genome contained the Furin Cleavage Site (FCS). They
knew this FCS was exquisitely targeted to a very specific human
protease. Which means that it was not only amazing at getting into
human cells, but that it was perfect, unnaturally perfect, and they
knew this by January 17th, they had to know this.
So what is amazing is that the whole
world didn’t really discuss this, Fauci didn’t discuss this, it
wasn’t until a group of French scientists ~February 9th 2020 that
pointed out there was a FCS that was highly effective at targeting
humans, it was exactly a month after the genome was released.
To put this in perspective, without that FCS SARS CoV2 would have been able to infect humans and cause Covid 19, but it would not have been able to cause a pandemic,
because without the FCS it’s just not that efficient.
That one specific part of the genome is incredibly important, it’s also exactly what Scientists use when they are doing Gain of Function research to try to make something more
pathogenic, and everybody who’s studied GoF, every molecular biologist who uses transfection, everybody involved in mRNA vaccine development, KNEW THIS.
At least 2 weeks after they knew this in the US, Dr. Fauci not only went against what the President was publicly stating and calling for, and he had the authority to do it, the President instigated a travel ban. And the same day President Trump instigated that travel ban, Dr. Fauci publicly stated the science didn’t support it, which is interesting because if anybody
had known about the FCS outside of Fauci, the science would have supported that.
Not only should they have known that it would be a specially infectious virus because of the FCS being present. But even worse, the details of the molecular biology, of the FCS, is such that they already should have recognised it as being a FCS which is optimized for a human protease. Those details, for a molecular biologist, isn’t that hard of a jump, it’s not that far,
and again this is a known molecular methodology, a known molecular signature of infectivity because they already knew from many scientific experiments, there are many papers discussing this.
When these spike proteins can be cleaved it increases infectivity, they’ve done it with trypsin, they done it with lots of experiments to show that cleaving these proteins causes the viruses to be more infectious. And then the PREEMPT document was a grant proposal that discusses the introduction of, and the optimization of, just such a FCS.
Remember this is still January 2020, this is TWO YEARS ago, Fauci and many others, they KNEW EVERYTHING.
This is just like the email from Collins & Fauci saying there has to be a devastating take down of the GBD. You can rest assured that Charles Rixey and the DRASTIC team
has outlined very succinctly the fact that, from the very beginning they have been taking down, devastatingly, everything that goes against their narrative which preserves the history of their research and their ideas, to hide it, to hide their intellectual and financial contribution to the long term progress, results of, and consequences of Gain of Function Research.
Remember this is still January 2020, this is TWO YEARS ago, Fauci and many others they KNEW EVERYTHING.
The US congress knows this because Charles Rixey and other have told them, face to face. Congress has been using a lot of DRASTIC material for a year and a half, but in this particular case congress does know this, congress also knows that at this same time, January 31st, Trump called for the travel ban. on February 1st Dr Fauci had a conclave with a bunch of scientists and they got together.
All this came from the FOI emails but we don’t know exactly what happened there because it was all redacted, but Fauci and his boss Francis Collins (who runs the entire NIH), and between them these two men they control about ~70% of all biomedical research grant funding in the world, which means that every public Dollar on the planet that goes towards biotech research, Dr Fauci and Francis Collins control it. One of the other people on that phone call was Jeremy Farrar from the UK, the Welcome Trust, who controls about 2%, all of these people control research.
When you think about that, it becomes a
lot easier to understand how moving forward they would have been able
to censor all this information.
This is important because without this
complete censorship of the lab leak, complete control of their
narrative, without a complete lock on all discussion of anything that
could be potentially damaging to vaccine research, because they KNEW
the trail would lead back home to them eventually.
Two days after the February 1st phone
meeting, they had another meeting, only this one was held with the
director of the Office of Science and Technology (OSTP) it’s an
executive branch panel, headed by somebody formally known as the
Presidential Science Advisor, at the time it was a man named Kelvin
Droegemeier/ What he, and Dr. fauci did, was to conspire to hide this
information from the President of the United States.
They conspired to hide all of the ties
between the NIH, NIAID, their funding, their histories of research,
everything involving certain GOF research, and to anything that tied
them to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The hid it from President
Trump, they hid it from the wider scientific community, they hid it
from the National Security Council. We know that because several
members of the Security Council explicitly state that in Sharri
Marksons fantastic documentary (What Really Happened in Wuhan?) shown
in Australia several months ago.
So, when you put that in perspective
that’s insane. Because what that means is that the Presidents people
that he trusted, his own personal Science Advisor, and the future
person that was going to be in charge of the US entire pandemic
response, were, before there was even a pandemic declared by WHO,
were using their positions to smother all of the evidence that could
implicate them in ties to this research.
Nothing is happening in Congress
because congress doesn’t have enough votes to impanel a special
investigation, because if the house of Representatives did that they
could use it’s subpoena power to subpoena Dr. Fauci, Peter Daszak et
al, basically anybody with the force of law for any American citizens
or institutions.
There are at least three, possibly
four, committees who have been gathering this evidence for more than
a year, but they can’t do anything with it because they are outvoted
on the committees for what can only be assumed to be political
reasons.
Charles Rixey knows this for a fact,
because he’s spoken to them, half of Congress has been raring to go
for more than a year, and especially the last six months, to begin
these enquiries, and they have been publicly refuted by the speaker
of the house, Nancy Pelosi.
She has explicitly stated that she will
not be investigating this. President Biden has made it clear that he
has no interest in pursuing this, the only thing he has done with
this is make political shows of the brief intelligence community
investigations further obsfuciating the known facts.
Meanwhile Nancy Pelosi blocks any
investigation, the media refuse to investigate, and big tech censors
any discussion of it in social media.
Any journalists want to grow a pair and
investigate this can contact Charles Rixey who would be happy to give
the full story and indeed testify to this information before
congress.
While the MSM condemns the use of ivermectin, the most populated state in India just declared they are officially COVID free after promoting widespread use of the safe, proven medicine. In addition to this, Ivermectin attaches to covid spikes and prevents them from binding to ACE2. Get your Ivermectin today while you still can! https://ivmpharmacy.com
Francis Collins should be tossed out on his ear. A disgrace to the country, a total disgrace. Leave now Frances before you cause further harm.
Fauci is the fringe scientist and whose decisions are based on the continuing massive profits of big pharma companies. Due to his support both intelectual and financial of creating Covid viruses originally in America and subsequently in China, he has had a big part in creating Covid 19. Why is he still in post when his decisions have cost so many lives?
I wonder why they say ”the tragically high death counts FROM covid”? Surely it’s been shown enough times by now that most deaths were WITH ‘covid’ of poor souls who were well on their way anyway. And that there are few ‘excess deaths’ anywhere – except in care homes where they were helped on their way.
Shouldn’t these three eminent scientists receive awards rather than Twitty and Wig Wam Bam and a man labelled a war criminal?