EU e-Privacy Directive

This website uses cookies to manage authentication, navigation, and other functions. By using our website, you agree that we can place these types of cookies on your device.

You have declined cookies. This decision can be reversed.


The truth has been in short supply in recent years, perhaps especially in the scientific journals, so it's with some surprise that I note the publication of this highly critical editorial by Russell L. Blaylock (retired neurosurgeon) in a prestigious journal, Surgery Neurology International.

It's a wide-ranging and thorough review of all the horrors that the "pandemic" was used to unleash on us.

Some relevant points below but these are a long way from illustrating the full breadth and depth of the article, which pulls no punches.

"Cancer patients are being told they should get vaccinated with these deadly vaccines. This, in my opinion, is insane"

"It should be noted that no studies were ever done on several critical aspects of this type of vaccine"

"Previous experience with the flu vaccines clearly demonstrates that the safety studies done by researchers and clinical doctors with ties to pharmaceutical companies were essentially all either poorly done or purposefully designed to falsely show safety and coverup side effects and complications"

"It is beyond ironic that those claiming that they are responsible for protecting our health approved a poorly tested set of vaccines that has resulted in more deaths in less than a year of use than all the other vaccines combined given over the past 30 years"

" ... an expert in maternal-fetal medicine, demonstrates that these covoid-19 vaccines given during pregnancy have resulted in a 50-fold higher incidence of miscarriage than reported with all other vaccines combined"

"When we examine his graph on fetal malformations there was a 144-fold higher incidence of fetal malformation with the Covid-19 vaccines given during pregnancy as compared to all other vaccines combined"

This is probably as authoritative a review as we are likely to get - download it and save it before it "disappears".

Read the article.

Download it.



Watch right through.

As many times as necessary.

" ... the average person dies on day 9 of Covid-19 hospitalised treatment ... "

(47 minutes)


The above video has provoked a whole barrage of controversy, understandably, since it would upend all the narratives of the last two years - if true.

A lot of it is undoubtedly true, in terms of the use / abuse (according to your persuasion) of remdesivir.

Remdesivir is alleged by leading alternative medical authorities to cause organ failure.

Here we have a leading champion of non-pharmacological healing, gentle guru Clive de Carle, discussing the points raised:

(57 minutes)



This is yet another follow-up interview - the idea that "Covid" is being delivered via the public water supply is coming in for some heavy criticism!

Here Dr Ardis is explaining that the CDC is "testing the water" for Covid-19. But from this site's point of view the tests are perhaps the most highly suspect aspect of the Covid narrative, so this idea of delivery via the water supply is equally suspect.

That doesn't necessarily invalidate the main point: that elements of the snake venom may be involved in both the vaccines, and the drug used to "treat the disease". The delivery via the vaccines is perfectly understandable, since it's clear that the vaccine content is deliberately opaque, and that the vaccinated seem to suffer reduced immunity.

Personally I would think that delivery of Covid via chemtrails is an idea that could stand some investigation; but in all truth, delivery of the toxin through the vaccine, allied with unwarranted faith in bogus tests, is probably sufficient to account for everything.

(19 minutes)





If you are still doubtful about the role of Pfizer in 2020/21, this is the video to view.

(23 minutes)



Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency

Pfizer's Documents



Army Generals are used to assessing battlefields dispassionately, and this one doesn't disappoint.

Is he scaremongering?

Impossible to say, but he's not the first to connect these points.

Think this won't happen here? The UK has always followed the US in all matters Covid.

"There are things that can be done ... ". Starting now. 

(NB: 5G is a generic term that effectively means "post-4G", covering a range of mostly higher frequency bands. To my knowledge nobody has yet rolled out 18GHz and higher anywhere, except possibly for Wuhan in China in early 2020, which may have accounted for the scary videos that we saw at that time. If they did roll it out in China, they rolled it back again to stop the deaths.)

(36 minutes)




ICAN (Informed Consent Action Network) has written to the VRBPAC (Vaccine and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee) (approximately the equivalent of our own JCVI Joint Committee on Vaccines and Immunisation) to urge them not to approve Pfizer's application for emergency authorisation for their Covid vaccine for children below the age of 5.

They make the pertinent (and seemingly unarguable) point that there is no Covid emergency for this age group. Mind you, this point would seem equally applicable for ages 5 to 18 and beyond.

"As of January 19, 2022, the rate of hospitalization in children under 4 years old was reported to be just 6 per 100,000" - although the true rate is likely even lower if those that died "with Covid" rather than "of Covid" are stripped out.

The letter to VRBPAC also goes into the serious efficacy and safety issues with this vaccine and you can download the entire letter, which has other pertinent points to make:

"The Clinical Trial and Resulting Data is Wholly Inadequate to Support Authorization for This Age Group

"Pfizer announced it was 'initiat[ing] a rolling submission' of its data on February 1, 2022 'following a request from the [FDA].' 17 Your committee will meet to discuss this incomplete data only two weeks later. This is incredible and cannot possibly be adequate time in which to confirm, analyze, and assess such critical data."

There is more, including an identified mismatch between the application for authorisation (a two dose schedule) and the latest proposed dosage (a three dose schedule for which data is as yet unavailable) ...

Worth reading, if only to get a flavour of the proceedings of those entrusted with protecting the public from the products of unscrupulous pharmaceutical companies.