2025-02-04

This site has been reporting on Covid since for ever, to the point where we must surely have exhausted the historical facts, but the story has always become more complex as additional layers have been uncovered by independent investigators around the world.

So, far from being a simple instance of a pandemic, it has become an information mine for conspiracy theorists everywhere. Well, if you suspect a conspiracy, you need an conspiracy theorist (or several hundred) to investigate!

James Roguski reminds us of just how far from reality the original "simple pandemic" premise turned out to be.

Read his full article here. It's a useful summary of the main points of what we now know.

Watch the video from the article, or here below:

(31 minutes)

...

2025-02-01

The WHO is an exceptionally remote body that is exceptionally well-funded, and through its constitution is more or less obliged to do the bidding of Big Pharma.

How so?

"The WHO is funded by countries and non-state entities"

" ... most of the budget is derived from voluntary funding provided by countries and private or corporate donors"

"Nearly all voluntary funding is ‘specified’... WHO must do the funders’ bidding"

"In response to its funders, the WHO has shifted focus to areas where large Pharma profits can be accrued"

So in effect, he who pays the piper calls the tune.

"Pharma

2025-01-28

To me it's reasonably obvious that, since the only major pandemic of living memory was the so-called 1918 "Spanish Flu" (about which there is much controversy), there is in point of fact no natural reason to suppose that any string of pandemics is likely to afflict the world any time soon.

Some (including ex-Pfizer Dr Mike Yeadon) believe that the Covid "pandemic" was faked. Whilst the  "science" is either convoluted or obfuscated or maybe both, Occam's Razor suggests that the simplest reasoning may be closest to the truth.

The simplest reasoning has nothing to do with the alleged research conducted by "Bat Lady" at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and everything to do with the enormous profits to be made from a "pandemic", real or imagined, that would accrue to the pharmaceutical industry for fake vaccines paid for by governments, or by anybody other than the proposed vaccinees themselves who would be

2025-01-28

The Brownstone Institute reviews a number of "the Donald" 's executive orders that have slapped a wide-ranging communications ban on the US public health bureaucracies.

One might speculate that investigative measures may follow in due course, with consequences that only a few outside of the medical-pharmaceutical-public-health bureaucracies may foresee.

"One Health, as newly embraced by the CDC, amounts to a radical transformation of the basis of social order itself, under the guidance of god-like scientists who alone know how to structure the best life for all living things"

"How it came to be that our main engines of public health came to be captured in whole by such a crazed ideology would require a deep and expansive investigation"

"Now Dr.... heads the agency he defied. He remains in that position until the man once called a “fringe epidemiologist” by the previous head of NIH takes

2025-01-27

"Each covid vaccine that is approved has been through rigorous clinical trials and safety checks".

Well, such was the wording received from my MP when I suggested some years ago that the MHRA might not be sufficiently diligent in the matter of ensuring vaccine safety. It hasn't aged well has it?

The truth is leaking out, even if only anecdotally.

But with MPs in thrall to the MHRA's alleged dedication to public safety, who is to provide a properly researched and audited authoritative opinion?

Welcome to the present - it isn't what we thought it was, and nor are our "independent" regulatory agencies.

2025-01-27

Legal processes are infamous for lack of rapidity, and it's clear that time is required to make proper investigations and ensure that the arguments are properly presented and logically resolved. When the outcome will affect people's lives, that much can be agreed upon and should be uncontroversial.

It's a great shame therefore that the same thoroughness of approach was evidently not considered applicable to the Covid "pandemic" situation, when the WHO and all national authorities down to your local authority fell over themselves to introduce novel pandemic countermeasures not based on any previously accepted pandemic policies, and then to rush novel technology "vaccines" into the arms of everybody worldwide who could be persuaded or cajoled into accepting them.

That those whose traditional function was to "speak truth unto power" and to "hold authorities to account" should have inverted those functions to uncritically support the authorities "come what may" was indeed a surprise, a surprise that

2025-01-27

A everybody no doubt realises, Baroness Hallett's "Covid Inquiry Module 4" hearings grind on, succumbing to handy confusions over terminology which would be unacceptable in a school debating society.

Are the differences between Process 1 and Process 2 the same as the differences between Processes A and B?

I suppose it depends on how closely and confidently you were able to attend and decipher the long and rambling question.

"The inquiry has thus enabled a situation where the primary failing of the MHRA has apparently been denied. The truth can now be dismissed as yet another ‘conspiracy theory’ "

Happily for us mere mortals, the Perseus Group (who they?) has form in questioning the response of the UK medical regulators to the Covid alleged pandemic, and

2025-01-27

No, apparently his case has not fallen by the wayside, it is progressing on the basis of factual discovery.

Of course that means a delay whilst the necessary facts are discovered, and brought before the Court, but hey, that can't be too difficult for our safety-conscious no-stones-unturned medical-pharmaceutical-political complex can it? 

They have been given 3 days (until tomorrow 28th January).

Place your bets now...

2025-01-23

"Chris Whitty... told the Covid Inquiry this week that the decision to mandate Covid jabs was “100 per cent a political one” and he was "sceptical" of it"

"Has the public health establishment at least learned something from the last few years?"

If nothing else, these last few years have permitted the "public health establishment" in all its varied forms to demonstrate that they are totally immune to all criticism, whether justified or not. Immune even to the Nuremberg Codes that declared unequivocally that anybody to be subjected to a medical experiment must be (a) fully informed of the risks (b) free to decline to take part. They were coerced at every turn into taking an experimental intervention described as a "vaccine" which was in fact a largely untested gene therapy that turned out to confer no stoppage of onward transmission and negligible effective

2025-01-22

From the name itself, one might think of UFOs / UAPs, or some science-fiction portal concept. The truth seems to be more prosaic, but just as topical and probably just as much misunderstood:

AI

But not just any AI...

Conspiracy Sarah asks the relevant question - what could (possibly) go wrong?

Does Trump believe this stuff?

Or is he indulging his favoured tactic of putting likely miscreants squarely into the limelight for investigation by the public? And if he isn't, it's a good bet that there will be no shortage of public volunteers who will oblige anyway, given the current reputation of the mRNA shots

2025-01-21

Are you a living breathing human being, with family, friends, acquaintances, aspirations, skills, qualifications, life history, health issues, and opinions that have all been hard-come-by?

Or are you a 64-bit sequence of ones and zeroes on a computer database somewhere "in the cloud"?

Would you prefer to deal with another flesh and blood human being, capable of recognising you for what you are, and your circumstances for what they are, or should you just quote your id number to an AI system that has somebody else's values and objectives (not necessarily known to you) built into its code?

"The Open Society, the Gates Foundation, the Bilderberg Group, the Council on Foreign Relations, they are in direct control of the UK"

The problems with government are actually many, but the primary problem is that they want to govern.

...

2025-01-21

In amongst a long raft of new Executive Orders, Trump has reportedly signed one to remove the US from the World Health Organisation.

We can now speculate how long it will be before the appropriate personnel are faced with criminal charges.

Read all about it.

2025-01-19

Dr David Martin tells it like it is - once more.

Let us pray that he doesn't have to say it again.

(26 minutes)

Like / Dislike this video here.

2025-01-17

Well, obviously, when it's a whitewash.

That's rather a blunt start to any article, but I feel that it sets the right tone.

And it's not really even controversial - after all, everything about the Covid "pandemic" has been corrupted from the start, so why should the inquiry in the aftermath be any different?

So specifically for those who can't tear their attention away from this sophisticated study into how the great and the good persist in manipulating a public inquiry to ensure that it produces the desired favourable results, HART bring us their commentary on "Module 4 Vaccines and therapeutics day 1 Tuesday 14th of January".

Enjoy.

The rest of us will no doubt find no shortage of more useful learnings to

2025-01-15

It appears that there is evidence that the Covid "pandemic" was staged as (or became) a secret unacknowledged military operation, at least in all NATO countries.

So maybe we were secretly at war with somebody somewhere...  but it was judged expedient not to alert the public.

From the unified response of the anglosphere countries that involved ditching the long-prepared pandemic response plans in favour of measures that had previously been almost universally discredited (lockdown of the fit and able, universal masking, anti-social distancing etc), it was reasonably obvious that something untoward was afoot, although it wasn't at all clear that this was a military operation. Nor is it clear to this day whether that military operation could be in any way justified.

The Brownstone Institute reviews the

2025-01-12

This site has maintained that the Covid "pandemic" was a hoax from beginning to end.

Why? Because "they" went to absurd lengths to fix the statistics to make it appear so. If there was a real pandemic, why the need?

Dr Yeadon even believes that the whole "science" of virology is unproven, which would set the cat amongst the pigeons big time. I don't go as far as to assert that, since I don't have the evidence, but I suspect that he's right...

There is so much apparently wrong with the Covid jabs that we might feel non-plussed about where to start.

Dr Mike Yeadon (whom I have followed since 2020) has done a lot of good work in this area, and you can find his substack here.

Dr Roger Hodkinson Speaks to Anna Brees about Covid

2024-12-26

Covid is the topic that divides the world.

Actually, the world divides itself into two camps - those who don't want to know regardless of the arguments, and those who are prepared to think the unthinkable, or perhaps merely just to look at it to check how unthinkable the unthinkable may actually be. I'm sure that there cannot be a single person alive who doesn't know people close to them in both camps.

It's not a race thing, it's not a left/right thing, it's not a religious thing, but it is possibly a maturity thing in so far as a child when faced with an unfamiliar intrusion (such as a less than familiar Nana and Grandad arriving on a too infrequent visit!) will cling to the familiar comfort of Mum or Dad to save them from the unfamiliar threat, whilst an adult would face the intrusion, try to understand it, and decide accordingly how to react.

The adult is responsible, the child is still neither responsible nor competent.

...

2024-12-22

"Mistake" is an ambiguous word. On the one hand it can reflect a happenstance where the effect is unwanted but was not intended, on the other hand it may indicate that the action was intended but that the result was unwanted. Unhappily, some events such as "yes I thought that hitting the cricket ball out of the field was a good idea, but I hadn't reckoned with it smashing a window or hitting a passer-by on the head" might be considered a "mistake" on both counts.

However, deliberately throwing the cricket ball out of the ground at the head of a passer-by would not normally be regarded as a mistake, as the result would be clearly intended.

So we could recognise an intermediate state where hitting the ball out of the ground may avoid damage to windows and heads most of the time, but not all the time, so may be considered deliberately reckless, and thus culpable.

So we may transpose the argument to a different situation, and ask whether recommending a novel

2024-12-16

Minutes of the Vaccine Benefit Risk Expert Working Group for Covid-19 are published on the government website.

"Safe and Effective" might be expected to figure prominently in their deliberations, because that was what we the public were told, in no uncertain terms.

"What’s even more troubling from these minutes, is the intention of the UK health authorities to assess the serious risks raised only after authorisation!"

As ever, expect the truth to be "nuanced".

It doesn't paint a good picture, but why publish these minutes at all if the turkeys are still in