Last Update: 6 December, 2023

Please see our related page on Conventional Medicine Clearfacts

Here are clear and important facts on the COVID-19 crisis to understand and share to protect life:

  1. FACT: There are no medical benefits to mandatory surgical masks, social distancing, and lockdowns of healthy people.

  2. Ultimately, socal restriction of health people offers no medical safety but only shows arbitrary puppet-like control of Government over the Public.

    As for Masks specifically:

    Article: Physician and Ex Medical Journal Editor: 8 Ways Covid Masks Are HARMFUL

    These disadvantages should be recognized as existing when considering mask mandates, rather than evaluating maks mandates as if there is no cost to them except people's pride about their freedoms.

    Besides the freedom, cost, enverionmental, communication, and inconvenience disadvantages, the medical disadvantages of extended mask use, especially in unprofessionals, and especially when there is no mandated time to have them off, include:

    1. They restrict breathing, which is a vital process. The more or better filtration the masks the more the airflow is restricted. By restricting breathing, they must therefore restrict what breathing does: the release of carbon dioxide and supply of oxygen to the body. This must have secondary medical effects which are not good. For example, some otherwise healthy people actually collapse from them:


      2. Oregon Revises Mask Rule After Female Athlete Running with a Mask Collapses at Finish Line or High School Athlete Collapses at Finish Line After Being Forced to Wear a Mask During Race: 'I Just Felt Super Dizzy'

    2. They collect bacteria near the mouth in a moist environment. This can only be magnified with unprofessionals who are not trained or required or in the habit of frequently replace disposable masks like professionals are. Rather their cost and convenience incentive is to keep using the same mask until either it breaks or their health does. Who warns them about this danger? Or are the mask mandates designed to increase the number of people complaining of respiratory illness? Example article: Pathogenic Bacteria and Fungi Found on Masks: Study, which is based on this study: Bacterial and fungal isolation from face masks under the COVID-19 pandemic. One surprising finding was that washing a reusable mask didn't significantly reduce the bacteria or fungi on it.

    3. They restrict blood flow around the face and head, especially if the straps are tight, which they are supposed to be to restrict airflow. It doesn't help larger heads that masks are usually sold 'one size fits all' even though it doesn't, and even if there is sizing, you can't check it until after you buy the masks. All of your cells depend on bloodflow to live and be healthy.

    When the masks are incapable of filtering the particles you intend to filter out, there is really no benefit to even begin to counterbalance all of these disadvantages.

  3. FACT: COVID-19 Disease poses no serious risk to the vast majority of people

  4. Video 11 May 2020: UK Gov't confirms Covid19 harmless to VAST MAJORITY of people

  5. FACT: The COVID-19 crisis could have been easily averted.

    It was grossly mishandled by governments following the ridiculous and often unprecedented advice of experts they appointed, ignoring many existing remedies and most common sense. Example artile September 06, 2022: The COVID pandemic was entirely unnecessary. Cures were available. The medical profession is responsible for the murders of huge and growing numbers of people

  6. FACT: There is no rational reason to automatically trust scientific literature, the scientific community, scientists advise, or to call trusting anyone a trust of 'science'.

    1. Science has nothing to do with believing or obeying an announcement.

    2. Science is not the trust of anyone, not even scientists; trust of someone is the realm of religion.

      Science is a method of finding truth which relies on hypotheses tested by well-designed repeatable experimentats. The scientific method was created to get away from needing to trust anyone. In fact, science is specifically based on distrust, espeically that experiments are designed to be repeatable by anyone else (to test them) and that they attempt to disprove (not prove) a hypotheses.

    3. Science isn't accessible to most people. Real science requires verifying experiments yourself by reating them yourself. If you're not in a position, yourself, to repeat and therefore verify the experitmental results to presented you, you're forced into a position of trusting someone else for truth, which is no longer science. The best you can do is try to compare opinions from diverse sources, and try to compare them against each other, considering motivations and favouring evidence, which is journalism.

    4. What the scientific community portrays as truth is highly subject to political influence:

      1. First, whoever decides a study is needed usually also has an idea of who this kind of study will please, because they usually need to approach someone to fund it. As an example of influence, with Government and medical corporations funding medical research, and them being strongly behind a pro-COVID-vaccine narrative, it would not be easy to win or keep their support with studies which cast any negative light on that vaccine.

      2. Scientists having an understanding of what kind of results are desired by whoever is funding the study isn't usually a factor eliminated by the design of the study. Therefore even at the point of data collection, scientists will often know which data is wanted and which is not. There's usually nothing to stop a scientists from writing down whatever data they want, or exaggerating it in the favour of what is desired, in place of what was observed in the experiment.

      3. There is no obligation to publish every study performed (this is probably the greatest failure of science culture to give the Public an overview of truth). There are many influencers between the collection of the data and the public publishing of the paper, and sometimes after that, who can decide to have studies which produced inconvenient results disappear from public view: such as by scientific journals refusing to publish it, the authors retracting it, etc.. For example, if 100 studies indicate that the world is cooling and 1 study indicatees that the world is warming, you only need to publish that 1 study, while refusing publication of the others, to declare a crisis of global warming. It requires a certain cooperation between Government, media, and the scientific community, but after we saw them cooperate in unprecendented ways in the COVID-19 crisis we know that the potential for this cooperation is very real, and certainly there is nothing in the scientific method which prohibits these alliances.

    5. Science is about refuting criticism never silencing it.

    6. Science is criticism. Only by testing our hypotheses and beliefs for flaws can we hope to advance. Silencing criticism stops science and becomes a religious climate where everyone either says nothing or only says what supports the existing belief.

      Criticism saves lives by testing narratives for flaws, without which testing they would be adopted blindly.

      Criticizm of COVID-19 narratives should be welcome, not punished, if we follow science and care about finding fault with what we believe or do.

      When the Establishment demands silencing of criticism, calling it dangerous or misleading or even costing lives, we should be asking why the narrative needs protection from criticism?

      Freedom of expression isn't a thorn in the side of society to allow enemies to say unhelpful things, but is a necessary window for criticism so that we can detect, correct, and improve flaws which we don't yet recognize.

  7. FACT: Officials are not people to automatically trust.

    No one but God should be trusted. With anyone else, we need to test the truth and sense of what they're saying before we follow it.

    Neither does it make sense for a People to elect someone as their representative, and then suddenly consider them infallible and all-knowing because they elected them.

  8. FACT: It's rational to be opposed to vaccines, even all vaccines.

  9. There is too much effort on the COVID-19 anti-vax side for people to claim that they're not against vaccines in general, or that they do trust science.

    Being against all vaccines shouldn't be a controversial position. We have such a wonderful, innate, and proven immune system that we're far better off supporting it with the natural things it requires rather than artificially tamper with it. We do not need any vaccine to be healthy, but we do need our immune system to work well, and this should not be controversial.

    Related articles:

  10. FACT: Just because information comes officials doesn't mean that their only incentive for the Public's wellbeing.

  11. For example, when governments are already committed to huge vaccine orders, to supply it for the entire population and years into the future, what do you think their incentive is in reacting to any reports of vaccine harm? Similarly, when they award themselves dictatorial power based on COVID-19 fear, is their incentive to relieve the Public of that fear, or keep that fear going?

    When medical industry leaders support COVID-19 fear, or advocate for vaccination, do they profit from COVID-19 spending or the vaccination program? Might this affect the advice they give the Public?

    However when your friend or family member comes to you with health information, do you think their incentive is to help you be well or sick?

    Should you really listen only to officials, or should you listen to friends and family also, or maybe even examine the evidence yourself without trusting anyone?

  12. FACT: It's extremely dangerous when Government takes a fiercely positive position on any pharmaceutical product.

    These products have risks, and we depend on Government regulation to remain suspicious of any such product, and especially be ready to pull any product from the market on any significant harms without worrying about saving their face.

    Unforutnately there is no level of vaccine harm which Governments have indicated they will stop the COVID-19 vaccination program.

  13. FACT: The COVID-19 threat, and its remedy, however touted as science, is based on unscientific principles.

  14. These failures include:

    1. Virology is a notoriously unscientific profession, at least as conventionally performed, especially having a chronic deficiency of control experiments in their methods. Please see:

      1. The truth about rabies, tobacco mosaic virus, graphene and the results of the 2nd phase of control experiments.

      2. Virology Debunks Corona

    2. As discussed, the SARS-CoV-2 virus was never isolated. That means that this agent being any cause of disease is only an unproven theory.

    3. The method used to supposedly determine the genetic sequence of this virus is complete computer software nonsense which begins with the fact that there are no pure samples to attempt a sequencing from.

    4. Since COVID-19 has no unique symptoms, on a practical level, it is therefore no unique threat.

    5. There is no scientific basis for masking healthy people. There are many costs to doing this, including an impairment of air exchange, and providing a moist breeding ground for pathogens near the mouth.

    6. There is no scientific basis for locking down healthy people.

    7. For the many people who live in apartment or condominium buildings, locking them down there would only increase virus spread. It's worth reminding that the WHO admits that the virus is airborne.

    8. There is no sense in supposedly controlling virus spread by preventing people from going to their local Church while keeping not only the biggest stores but domestic and international flights open.

    9. There is no scientific rationale why people can spread a virus if they are not wearing a mask except if they are eating (when they are permitted to take it off).

    10. There is no scientific rationale why masks should be mandated but only those not of medical quality.

    11. There is no scientific basis to always equate a positive test result with a virus 'case'.

    12. There is no scientific basis to count anyone who dies with COVID as a 'COVID death'.

    13. There is no official recognition that COVID tests can sometimes give a false result for many reasons.

    14. There was little official recognition that the daily COVID case counts has a direct relationship with the number of people tested.

    15. The genetic and nanoparticle elements of the COVID-19 vaccines are new and radical enough to warrant caution rather than distribution to everyone.

    16. Vaccines cannot be safe if they are too knew to possibly know long-term effects.

    17. Officials usually ignored risks when presenting the vaccines as a benefit. In fact they usually often presented the vaccines as 'safe': as though there were no adverse effects in anyone.

    18. Vaccine adverse events were dismissed as not being proven to be caused by the vaccines. Actually as long as a link to the vaccines is possible, that is a danger, and failure to determine cause should not have been accepted.

    19. There is no rationale why vaccination with an old strain of virus should make people immune to new strains.

    20. There is no rationale why a vaccine which doesn't prevent transmission of the virus can possibly end the pandemic.

    21. There is no legitimate reason to ignore the natural immune system and what natural factors it requires to function well.

    22. There is no legitimate reason to ignore or condemn naturally acquired immunity.

    23. There is no reason why every new variant of every virus must be an inernational emergency. By germ theory, pathogens are ubiquitus in our environment

    24. It is illogical, fruitless, and abusive for officials to implement aggressive measuers to stop the spread of a virus which they also admit can never be erradicated.

  15. FACT: The COVID-19 social restrictions were accepted based on fear.

    Fear was the justification used by Government to insitute radical measures to supposedly save lives from the supposed threat.

    No virus masked us, locked us down, vaccinated us, turned our Government into dictatorship, or bankrupted our economy. Government did all that on excuse of terror of a an invisible threat as revealed to the Public by their own appointed experts, supported by leaders of the established scientific and medical industry.

    Nazi officer Hermann Goering, remarked, at the time of the Nuremberg trials, ...the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.

  16. FACT: We were wrong to follow experts.

  17. The expert-recommended social restrictions and vaccines, despite great sacrifices on many levels, did not end or obviously mitigate the pandemic.

    It only grew as more variants and waves were announced despite Public compliance to expert orders and vast majority acceptance of vaccines.

    We should have had more confidence to stand up to experts; just because an expert says something wrong doesn't make it right.

    If experts are not responsible for their advice, should we take that into consideration when evaluating their advice? In particular: even if someone is an expert in the field, if they are not personally responsible for their advice, it makes that advice unreliable.

    If the social restrictions were ineffective, why did we do them?

    If the experts were wrong, at what point are they responsible for their advice?

    If the experts didn't know, how are they experts?

    Rather experts were horribly wrong in the COVID-19 crisis, which they often admit, in the face of great and unnecessary social losses. For example:

  18. FACT: No direct evidence of the existence of any COVID-19-causing virus has been found.

    There is no evidence that a COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) virus has ever been isolated by anyone, even though that is a logically necessary prerequisite to anyone claiming to have identified the virus, or sequenced its genetic code, or calibrate any test specifically for it. In this video, and this follow-up video, Dr. Andrew Kaufman discusses the original scientific paper announcing COVID-19 the supposed virus to the world (downloadable here), exposing the slipshod science used. Other articles on this include:

    No one is known to have an isolated sample of COVID-19 virus; in fact inability to source a sample was how some researchers got to suspect that something was wrong. Examples include:

    Supposed photographs of COVID-19 virus are arbitrary labelling of photographs of exosomes not proven to be causes of disease.

    Further resources on this argument that there is no COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) virus and/or that the COVID-19 pandemic is a hoax include:

    1. Covid Hoax Exposed

    2. Covid hoax compilation of doctors

    3. Mike Pompeo refuses to say if covid19 is a hoax

    4. Covid Hoax: Defined and Destroyed

    5. Biochemistry Debunks Corona

    6. Germs Debunk Corona

    7. Newsbreak 105 | Frances Leader on UK MHRA Info:COVID Vaccine Uses Computer-Generated Codes, No Virus

    8. Laboratories In Germany Publish Evidence That There Is No Virus And That COVID Does Not Exist

    9. Proof That Covid-19 Is A Massive Worldwide Hoax

    10. February 09, 2022: COVID-19 is a fraud, says Dr. Andrew Kaufman – Brighteon.TV

    11. Video: (22) International Network of Lawyers, the CV19 crisis is a Fraud and those Responsible will be sued

    12. BOMBSHELL: HHS documents admit the CDC has never isolated any “covid-19 virus” … PCR tests nothing but instrument NOISE … the global HOAX is rapidly unraveling, and

    13. Spain: Ministry of Health Forced to Confirm It Has Never Isolated the SARS-CoV-2 Virus (Nobody Has!)


    15. Video: There is no Covid-19

    16. Published Admission From CDC And FDA Re: Nonexistence Of COVID-19

    17. Newsbreak 105 | Frances Leader on UK MHRA Info:COVID Vaccine Uses Computer-Generated Codes, No Virus

    18. German microbiologist calls coronavirus pandemic a “fake”. It includes the quote, "People who are not ill are tested with a test that is lying most of the time.”

    An alternate theory: 08/16/2021 What exactly is causing illness worldwide if SARS-CoV-2 has never been isolated, purified and shown to cause any human disease, let alone a pandemic?

  19. FACT: The COVID-19 PCR test is fraudulent.

    It was designed was without access to any sample of the supposed COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) virus, neither was it calibrated to any sick person. For this evidence, please download the FDA document here, search it for "were available for CDC use", and read the sentence you find. A related article, ie. discussing this problem, is here.

    In addition to that, a co-inventor of PCR, Dr. Kary Mullis, against his own incentive to promote the usefulness of what he discovered, made it clear that the test CANNOT diagnose illness: Inventor of COVID test calls Fauci a liar, says it ‘doesn’t tell you that you’re sick’.

    This article discusses its uselessness in detail: COVID19 PCR Tests are Scientifically Meaningless

    PCR is prone to false positives when run at too high a cycle rate, which is exactly how it was recommended to be run. Example article: High-cycle PCR tests do not properly diagnose covid-19, were weaponized to terrorize nations and deprive personal liberties.

    Yet despite all these facts, individuals and society at large were held at ransom, even locked down by order, simply and solely over the number of daily positive PCR test results.

  20. FACT: Enough testing can create a statistical pandemic without requiring any virus to actually exist.

    As long as infection of a person by a virus is determined only by a test, even without showing any symptoms (as in COVID-19), and assuming there is no perfect test withouth false positive results, then all that would be required for a pandemic to grow statistically is to select a test which sometimes gives false-positive results, and then test enough people for enough of them to show positive to be a pandemic. After that, it only takes growing the amount of people tested to grow the statistics-based pandemic, or stopping the testing to end the pandemic.

    This is the basic idea behind the video, Morgan Freeman narrates the entire PANDEMIC in 6 minutes!:

  21. FACT: COVID-19 is not the first virus hoax perpetrated on the Public.

  22. It shouldn't surprise anyone that COVID-19 is a hoax, as so many times virologists have promoted public scares of some new dreaded virus and demanded widespread vaccination or radical treatment as the only solution for, after which we find out that the death toll didn't happen, not even when there was no vaccine. For example:

    1. 1976 Swine flu and its vaccine: In 1976 the CDC called for mass vaccination to combat a pandemic which never emerged before the vaccine rollout. The vaccine did hurt people. Smithsonian article: The Long Shadow of the 1976 Swine Flu Vaccine ‘Fiasco’ and article When the US Government Tried to Fast-Track a Flu Vaccine. Unlike with the COVID-19 vaccine, however, when harms emerged, the Government stopped the program (in December).

    2. The AIDS scare and its bogus test and causative treatment. This is the virus scare of the 1980s which was supposed to decimate the population and was supposed to work by disabling the victim's immune system. The thing is, the main treatment, AZT, administered following a positive (bogus) test, definitely causes immunosuppression. So people die by a system of testing, false positives, treatment which suppresses their immune system, opportunistic infection, and death. Article: AIDS and the AZT Scandal: SPIN’s 1989 Feature, ‘Sins of Omission’

    3. The exaggerated H1N1 scare and excessive Government spending based on that fear:

    4. An outbreak hoax was perpetrated on the public before, complete with social restrictions and medical treatments, based on PCR tests: The epidemic that wasn’t: In 2006, doctors used PCR testing to cause mass hysteria over a “whooping cough” outbreak that didn’t even exist

    5. And now the COVID-19 scare, perpetrated on models of exponential public death, and a vaccine which does nothing but harm. A clue that something is wrong with the rollout is how satisfied public officials remain with the vaccine no matter how ineffective it is or how harmful it is.

  23. FACT: Contrary to the official timeline, the SARS-CoV-2 virus has existed in scientific literature, under that name, since at least as far back as 2006.

  24. What ever SARS-CoV-2 is, it's not new.

    Here's the free 2006 article by Chinese scientists mentioning data on the SARS-CoV-2 virus as shown in its Figure 1: Preparation of a Chimeric Armored RNA as a Versatile Calibrator for Multiple Virus Assays (see on right side):

    But we've been ecouraged to believe that the COVID-19-causing virus (SARS-CoV-2) was only first discovered since it appeared in a Wuhan outbreak in 2019, which would eventually become the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic:

    It's worth notiong that there are no cases of SARS-CoV-2 reported in wild animals (as this scientific paper (as an example) reveals in its abstract).

    So since SARS-CoV-2 was used in scientific research by at least as far back as 2006, and since it didn't exist in the wild, wouldn't that mean it had to come from a lab, and that the Public has been horribly mislead on this critical fact?

  25. FACT: In other ways, the official story behind the COVID-19 virus and/or vaccines is literally impossible.

  26. It's too shady for anyone responsible to go along with it.

    According to the official timeline, COVID-19 is a diseased cause by a 'novel' coronavirus given the unique name SARS-CoV-2, for which the first cases were seen in China in December 2019, and the virus was first revealed to the rest of the world in early January 2020. Considering that:

    1. EU members Question how vaccine trials could start almost immediately after, or even years before, COVID-19's discovery. October 11, 2022: Press Conference After Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla Refused to Answer in Front of European Parliament
      14 Jan 2020 (3 days after first publication of COVID-19's existence 11 Jan 2020 by Chinese Government, and 1 month after discovery of cases in China) in Pfizer started clinical trial for vaccine
      Moderna: submitted vaccine trials since 2017

    2. The USA Deparatment of Defense issued a contract for COVID-19 research 3 months before COVID-19 was known to exist. Article 6 Oct 2022: U.S. D.O.D issued a contract for COVID-19 Research to a company in Ukraine, 3 months before COVID-19 was known to exist

  27. FACT: The COVID-19 vaccination mandates are a violation of at very least the basic premise of the Nuremberg code, if not its letter.

    The code is a set of ten ethical rules for human experitmentation.

    The following three principles (of the ten) were clearly violated:

      [1] The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment. The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs, or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.[13]

      It's certainly not voluntary consent once the vaccines were mandated, such as for: travel, dining at restaurants, or employment. That falls under the 'coercion' wording, above.

      [5] No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.

      Of course harms were expected. At the time of the vaccination program rollout, they were known to cause close to 1300 adverse effects. After the vaccination program started, the Government has been keeping track of many adverse effects and deaths following vacination.

      [10] During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required of him that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.

      Since officials have no apparent level Public harm or death at which they will stop the vaccination program, and real harms published by Government, and mounting, this rule is broken.

    Hasn't anyone picked up on this? Yes, many people have noticed the violations, but the defense popularly offered is that the Code doesn't apply because it's regulation of human experimentation and the COVID-19 vaccination program is not 'human experimentation' (example of this defense here). They say that since the vaccines are authorized, it's not an experiment.

    This argument fails for three reasons:

    1. Non-experimental 'authorized' procedures should have a higher standard of ethics and safety than experimental procedures, not a lower one. That's the whole point of small-scale testing before general distribution: to detect and limit any harms at the small-scale while protecting the larger population. Otherwise it's like telling commercial flight passengers that they'll be dealt with at a lower standard of ethics and safety than test pilots face with experimental aircraft, because flight ethics laws only apply to experimental aircraft.

    2. However vaccine advocates may obscure it, there is a difference between 'emergency authorization' and approval. The difference is that many risks are still unknown, data is still being collected, and effectively the Public becomes part of the experimental trials.

    3. Many formal clinical trials were/are still ongoing after the start of Public distribution. This makes it experimental in practice, regardless of legal or approval status, because it is still being experimented with to determine risks and other important features. At the time of this writing (15 Aug, 2022), long after the vaccine rollout, there are still 944 active clinical trials for condition 'COVID-19' and search term 'vaccine' showing on the website (up-to-date search here).

  28. FACT: The promise that the COVID-19 vaccine would stop virus transmission, and thereby protect others and end the pandemic, was a lie.

  29. Pfizer's representative admitted that the vaccine wasn't even tested for stopping transmission prior to the rollout. Article Oct 24 2022: ‘Speed of Science’ — A Scandal Beyond Your Wildest Nightmare

  30. FACT: Physicians who speak or seem to act contrary to the pro-vaccine narrative are typically subject to punishments from superiors or Government.

  31. So in case you've been wondering why more physicians aren't speaking out, now you know a reason.

    1. Doctor Who Was Reporting On Vaccine Side Effects On pregnant Mothers Disappeared In Canada

    2. Meet the Doctors Who Were Punished or Threatened for Questioning the COVID Vaccines

    3. Canadian college of physicians targeting doctor who refuses to turn over medical records of patients she exempted from COVID vaccines. She was actually forbidden from writing vaccine exemptions.

    4. UK doctors who question vaccines, lockdowns could lose careers under new medical council proposals

    5. Physician in Ontario, Canada, being stripped of her medical license for opposing COVID vaccines.

    6. Biden poised to ROUND UP anti-vaccine doctors and force them into insane asylums

  32. FACT: It's dangerous to install software which is not from the creator of your operating system.

  33. We know this in computing, but we've been slow to realize this concerning genetic vaccines (which are an attempt to install programming, ie. software, into our cells). The danger in both cases is that you don't really know what's in that code. In the case of biology, the creator is the Creator of life, ie. God: it's dangerous to allow anyone else to reprogram your life code.

    There are concerns that howevermuch the vaccines code for spike protein, and besides the risks of that, the vaccines may also code for the production of venom within the body. Supporting references include:

  34. FACT: Pharmaceutical companies ran the pre-clinical and clinical trials of their own COVID-19 vaccines; this was the data the Government relied on for deciding vaccine approval.

  35. Example article: Pfizer and Moderna Covid vaccines 95% effective in clinical trials

    The incentive for fraud, especially with the extreme profitability of government-forced-market COVID-19 vaccines, was/is tremendous.

  36. FACT: The COVID-19 vaccination program fits the definition for genocide.

  37. Here are the requirements for 'genocide' and how the COVID-19 vaccination program meets them:

    1. Genocide Requirement 1: Serious harm or death is caused.

    2. (There are many reported harms, in both types of harms and the number of people affected; please see the vaccine section of our main presentation on the COVID-19 Crisis for details.)

    3. Genocide Requirement 2: The harm must be deliberate. Regarding the COVID-19 vaccination program:

      It must be deliberate when a Government tells the public that the vaccine is 'safe' despite such facts as statistics on serious harm and/or death following those same vaccines which is not proven to be unrelated.

    4. Using the example of Canada:

      It must also be deliberate when Government and the medical industry strongly recommend pregnant women take it when the manufacturer product monographs, which the same Government offers for download by health professionals, show the risk to pregnant women as unknown. We will use the example of Canada:

      The Promotion by Canadian Public Officials

      The Warnings from the Manufacturers

      (from Government of Canada website)

      From the Federal Government of Canada webpage as of 5 July 2022:

      The National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) recommends that people who are planning a pregnancy, pregnant or breastfeeding get a:
      - complete series with an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine
      - booster dose when eligible"

      Getting the COVID-19 vaccine can help prevent serious illness, hospitalization and pregnancy complications. Evidence [what evidence? where?] about the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy has been growing from real-world use.

      From the Comirnaty (previously Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine) product monograph updated 2022-06-01:

      7.1.1 Special Populations

      Pregnant Women

      The safety and efficacy of COMIRNATY in pregnant women have not yet been established.

      From the Provincial Government of Ontario, Canada webpage as of 5 July 2022:

      COVID-19 vaccines are safe if you are, or plan to become pregnant

      You can safely get the COVID-19 vaccine before becoming pregnant or in any trimester of pregnancy. It is important that you stay up to date with your vaccines and receive all recommended doses of the COVID-19 vaccine, including booster doses.

      The benefits of getting vaccinated in pregnancy far outweigh the risks [isn't that for the patient to decide?]

      From the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine product monograph updated 2022-06-08:

      7.1.1 Pregnant Women

      The safety and efficacy of the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine in pregnant women have not yet been established.

      From the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada (SOGC) webpage as of 5 July 2022:

      What do we know about the safety of the COVID-19 vaccine in pregnancy?

      The SOGC, the National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI), and a number of other national and international bodies “Recommend the COVID-19 vaccine for all pregnant, breastfeeding and planning to become pregnant women and persons”. The COVID-19 vaccines are considered safe and recommended for all pregnant persons at anytime during pregnancy.

      From the Vaxzevria (previously Astrazeneca Covid-19 Vaccine) product monograph updated May 5, 2022:

      7.1.1 Pregnant Women

      The safety and efficacy of VAXZEVRIA in pregnant women have not yet been established.

      From the CHEO webpage as of 5 July 2022:

      Ottawa, Toronto, Hamilton and Kingston — January 5, 2022 — CHEO, The Hospital for Sick Children (SickKids), McMaster Children’s Hospital and Kingston Health Sciences Centre are encouraging anyone who is pregnant to get vaccinated against COVID-19 for the protection of their baby, as well as themselves.

      From the SPIKEVAX (previously COVID-19 Vaccine Moderna) product monograph updated 1 June, 2022:

      7.1.1 Pregnant Women

      The safety and efficacy of SPIKEVAX in pregnant women have not yet been established.

      Related article Nov 18, 2022: Giving experimental COVID jabs to pregnant women has been the greatest medical disaster in history

      The American Government didn't protect the American Public any better. For example:

      The WHO also recommended this vaccine for pregnant women: WHO green-lights mRNA vaccine experimentation on pregnant women and newborn infants. That is despite that many miscarriages have been reported following COVID-19 vaccination:

      1. 14 Year RN: Vaxx Killing Many, Nurse: Massive Surge in Late-Term Miscarriages

      2. Study Shows That Up To 8 In 10 Women Had A Miscarriage After Getting The Covid Vaccine Before The Third Trimester

      3. Hidden Pfizer trial data shows that ALL “vaccinated” women in pregnancy lost their unborn babies

      4. Pregnant Participants Experienced Spontaneous Abortion With Jab

      5. Baby after mother took the Pfizer vaccine while pregnant


      7. Ontario MP Rick Nicholls asks Parliament Why 86 Stillbirths of Fully Vaccinated Mothers Have Occurred

      It must also be deliberate if a dose or new dose was approved for public distribution despite the product being shown to those regulatory authorities to be harmful:

      It must be deliberate if officials won't stop the vaccination program, nor even tone down the public assurances of that the vaccine is 'safe', no matter the harms reported:

      It must be deliberate when the precautionary principle is inverted to defense of the vaccine program:

      Although it is recognized by all sides that, at least in 'exremely rare' cases, vaccines can kill (or harm), what's not so well recognized is how difficult it is to prove a vaccine as the cause of death when they do kill (or harm). Vaccines do not leave a knife in the back of someone, but kill almost invisibly. They harm at the cellular level, which might not be checked properly during an autopsy. Even if cellular harms are detected, in a real person living in an uncontrolled environment, blame can usually be dismissed based on an unlimited number of other simultaneously occuring factors during the time in question.

      Put another way, the technology to detect vaccine harms has not kept up with the technology of vaccines.

      The precautionary principle is that when harms follow an intervention, the burden of proof is placed on the intervention, to absolutely prove no cause of the harms, rather than on the harms needing to be absolutely proven as a result of the intervention. This principle helps protect the Public even with advanced interventions where the full consequences are not, or cannot, be academically understood, nevermind specifically looked for.

      At least due to the speed of the COVID-19 vaccines' development and rollout, with no time to know long-term harms, a precaultionary principle should have been in strong effect.

      Rather, for the COVID-19 vaccination program, the principle was inverted, with harms following vaccination often dismissed as not having any proven link to the vaccination. By this resort, the pro-vaccine side was able to socially defend the COVID-19 vaccination program despite any data of harms following: simply to stating that harms following do not prove cause (this kind of caption often accompanied Government presentation of such data).

      It must be deliberate when officials deliberately conceal vaccine harms data from the Pulic to protect Public perception of the vaccination program:

      It is deliberate and reckless to skip vaccine trials whose purpose is to expose risks before rollout to the Public.

      It must be deliberate if the COVID-19 vaccine injections are toxic by design:

      It must be deliberate when even admitted detection by governmnt health agencies of undisclosed contamination of COVID-19 vaccines with DNA plasmids and a sequence from cancer-linked SV40 somehow isn't enough to motivate them to immediately recall the COVID-19 vaccines from the market. Example articles:

    5. Genocide Requirement 3: Specific groups are targetted (up to and including the entire nation). Although the entire adult population of the nation was eventually directed to be vaccinated, and later children also, certain specific groups were encouraged to be vaccinated first and foremost, based on their medical vulnerability, but they just happened to also be groups which the Government has an obligation to make payments to/for:

    6. There are reports that vaccinations were seggregated by race, raising the possibility that a different formulation was given to different races: WHY ARE BLACKS GETTING A DIFFERENT COVID VACCINE THEN WHITES?.

    7. Genocide Requirement 4: We can assume that a label of 'genocide' requires that the harm is not knowingly and freely consented to. True consent requires informed free will, which is impossible when the Public is deceived as to the risks (eg. simply told it is 'safe'), or is coerced to take the injection (eg. mandated to accept the vaccine or lose your lifelihood and not even be allowed the usual employment insurance), or when the information inserts provided with the vaccines are blank.

    8. Genocide Double-Down: The killing is shown all the more deliberate when Government resists evidence that the vaccines might be spiking death rates to continue the vacination program regardless.

    9. This is usually by an inversion of the precautionary principle (which is, where harms follow an intervention, the burden of proof must be on the intervention, ie. to prove no link to the harms, rather than the other way). When challenged with evidence of harms following COVID-19 vaccination, it is typical for officials behind the COVID-19 program to dismiss it with the argument that no matter how unusual the rate, they are not necessarily due to the vaccine and make to effort to investigate what they are due to. Example video Dec 6, 2023: NZ Government Doubles Down on Vaccine Democide. Even worse, Government hasn't interrupted the COVID-19 vaccination program despite some deaths actually being medically confirmed, by autopsy, to have been caused by the COVID-19 vaccine:

    10. Other COVID-19 vaccine genocide references:

  38. FACT: The COVID-19 vaccination program fulfills all of the criteria of the Bradford Hill Criteria of Causation to connect the vaccine with deaths.

  39. Please see this article or from approximately the 1 hour 12 minute mark of Episode 9 of 'Propaganda Exposed! [UNCENSORED]'.

  40. FACT: Myocarditis is a serious condition.

  41. The Public has been mislead by the Establishment to think that although myocarditis is a risk of the COVID-19 vaccination, it is somehow nothing to worry about, because it's either 'rare' or 'mild' or that affected patients tend to 'recovery quickly'.

    There is an incentive. It should be obvious that, since the Public is aware that myocarditis is linked to COVID-19 vaccination, that if myocarditis was recognized as serious, then it would motivate people to stop receiving vaccines.

    It should also be obvious that anything affecting your heart must be serious, because it is the most life-dependent system of the body: in fact having a pulse or not is what determines clinical death.

    Is the person's heart going to be the same as before? We should question the definition of what 'recovery' means when used in assurances that most patients 'recover' from myocarditis. It might not mean cure ie. that the the heart is restored to how it was before the disease. More likely it means only that the patient has improved enough to be discharged from hospital.

    What the Establishment says:

    What the independent media says:

  42. FACT: Human genetic alteration has potentially dire non-medical consequences also:

    • New Species: Regardless of whether the change is permanent or temporary, artificially reprogramming your cells on a genetic level with foreign genetic code, such as in the genetic vaccines, makes you a transgenic or 'genetically modified' organism (GMO), by definition: no longer 100% human. Surprisingly, although it's been popular to resist genetically modified (GMO) foods (there is even a 'non-GMO' promise on the bag of Wonder Bread as of this writing), many of the same people there has been little resistance to accepting these genetic vaccines turning people's bodies into a GMO.

    • It's worth noting that not all COVID vaccines worldwide or in development attempt to artificially corrupt your genetic information. Some use attenuated (weakened/killed) virus, which is the traditional approach to vaccines, and one uses virus proteins manufactured in plants.

    • Legality: From a legal standpoint, there are some dangerous legal conquences of genetic alteration by these vaccines:

      1. If a human genome is artificially altered, that genome is no longer completely human.

      2. Not being completely human, such a person would not legally be entitled to human rights.

      3. If such a genome is altered with a patented genetic code, there is legal precedent that the entire genome becomes the legal property of the patentholder. In other words, if you accept a patented genetic COVID vaccine, and if it alters your genome, then you become no longer human but the legal property of the patentholder. Resources:

    • Morality: The genetic code inserted into the human body by the vaccine is by definition a reprogramming of your body, but are they morally authorized to do that? When you update software on your electronic device, aren't you supposed to be suspicious of installing any software which is not from the manufacturer? Who is the manufacturer of the human body?

    • Spiritual Implications: Spiritual implications are the most serious because they are potentially eternal. A physical alteration can have spiritual consequences when you accept it, out of your free will, to happen to you. Spiritual consequences are only negated if the change is absolutely forced upon you without any opportunity to choose anything. This may be why the Government has been pushing so hard to encourage and coerce people to get the vaccination, but not actually hold them down and vaccinate them against their will. However coerced with pressures, ultimately the Government wants us to agree to the injection first, presumably so that our destruction will be thorough on all levels.

  43. FACT: The Public is typically not permitted to see the entire contracts your Government has made with the vaccine manufacturers.

  44. Maybe you are allowed to see a redacted form, or nothing at all.

    This is very suspicious because there should be no reason for secrecy in a medical intervention to save lives.

  45. FACT: Some of the Government agencies most strongly supportive of public COVID-19 vaccination, and on which the Government most relies for that kind of advice, did not have vaccine mandates within their organization and don't know how many of their staff are vaccinated or not.

  46. FACT: The different batches (or 'lots') of the same vaccine are not the same.

  47. The assumption that different batches of vaccine are formulated the same was a fatal mistake. As consumers, we are just too used to the same manufactured product from the same company being exactly the same in every way even if bought at opposite ends of the country years apart. This goes for everything from DVDs to soft drinks.

    Different formulation within the same product, in a community where people are more than accustomed to the same product always having a consistent formulation, helps the vaccines avoid implication despite great harms happening. If everyone who received the vaccine had a serious reaction, it would be easy for the average person to perceive the danger. If, however, only 1 in 20 people were giving a dangerous formulation, and the other 19 a placebo, most people wouldn't even know someone who was vaccine injured, and even if they did, and even if they suspected the vaccine, based on the assumption of product consistency, it would be difficult to explain why 19 other people are healthy.

    Without extensive forensic testing, and without the Public being allowed to read the contracts which vaccine manufacturs have with our governments, there is know way to know the mechanism of how this could be working with the COVID-19 vaccines.

    Detecting this phenomenon usually takes a compilation fo the data over many vaccinations and sorting it for batch number; fortunately, some people have done just that:

    Using your vaccination certificate, you can actually look up the batch you received to see statistics on its harms:

  48. FACT: The medical industry won tremendous money and acclaim for initiating and maintaining the COVID-19 narrative.

    Public coffers were opened wide, to spend literally any amount of money, through incentives such as:

  49. FACT: The medical industry can expect to make much more money off of a multi-dose series of injections, if one injection proves inadequate.

    Why make something that actually works if the Government will simply mandate more doses if it doesn't?

  50. FACT: Rather than simply rely on their supposed safety, the manufacturers of the COVID-19 vaccines secured immunity to legal liability for any side effects resulting from these products of theirs.

    Neither the people making the vaccines, nor the officials and telling you the vaccines are 'safe', are responsible if it harms you. Example article from CNBC: You can’t sue Pfizer or Moderna if you have severe Covid vaccine side effects. The government likely won't compensate you for damages either

    As Brazilian president Bolsonaro put it, in explaining why he won't take the vaccine, if you turn into a crocodile, it's your problem.

    If the vaccines are safe, why do its manufacturers need their legal immunity secured before you take the shot?

  51. FACT: The medical industry can expect to make a lifetime of revenue off of people disabled for life by any vaccine.

    Someone permanently medically disabled by definition would be dependent on medical services for the rest of their life. Of course those medical services we can expect to come from the medical industry, and that they won't be in much position to haggle price. Rather they are turned into a major revenue stream for the industry.

    Since the medical industry is made legally immune for liability for such harms, they stand only to gain money, and not to lose it, if someone is vaccine injured.

  52. FACT: Officials and experts alerting the Public have been wrong many, many times in past: horribly wrong and to our harm.

  53. Examples include: why the Lusitania was sunk (yes it had munitions on board), the reality of the 4 August 1964 Gulf of Tonkin incident (initiating the Vietnam war now officially admitted to not have happened), fluoride scare (supposedly catastrophic tooth decay if we don't add this poison to public drinking water: an early example of Government-mandated medication for the Public), 70s petroleum-exhaustion scare (that supposedly we'd completely run out long before now), AIDS scare (was supposed to decimate the population), Y2K scare (was supposed to bring us back to the stone age), H1N1 scare, SARS scare, allegation that Iraq had WMDs, and now the COVID-19 scare: just to name a few.

  54. FACT: Many media outlets providing positive coverage of the COVID-19 vaccine were paid by the Government to advertise it.

  55. FACT: The Establishment launched an aggressive campaign to label any criticism of the pro-vaccine narrative as 'misinformation' and obstruct the sharing of such information, without opportunity for debate or to defend the information presented.

  56. The World Health Organization compared the sharing of information to the spread of disease by using the term 'infodemic' to label and attack criticism as though free speech is a kind of disease.

    The attack on criticism generally ignored the evidence and arguments presented against the narrative, and discouraged listening to family and friends, while directing the population to only rely on official sources for truth.

    This conveniently ignored the fact that the pro-vaccine officials already made themselves legally immune for harms resulting from that advice and those products, while family and friends tend to have more vested interest in your wellbeing. As for medical industry experts, that industry actually profits more the more medically dependent you become.

    Other example articles:

    Here is why the censorship of vaccine criticism worked against truth and the Public interest:

    1. Without truth you cannot make the right decisions even if you have the right intentions.

    2. It prevents the formation of truly informed consent to the treatment. Medicine is supposed to be based on informed (information-based) consent not trust(-based) consent. Restriction of sharing of information impairs peoples' ability to make informed choices, because you're preventing them from being informed.

    3. Freedom of expression is a human right. Everyone should be able to share what they believe is true, and there is nothing malicious about it.

    4. Science protected from criticism isn't science. It's either religion or politics. Real science welcomes criticism and intellectual challenge as a way of testing truth.

    5. What can best stand to all criticism is most likely the truth. Truth doesn't need protection from criticism, but any lie can stand if it's artificially protected from criticism.

    6. Debate and experimentation are the main tools we have on earth for finding truth out. Since experimentation regarding the COVID-19 virus is out of the reach of most of the Public, to deny them the ability to openly discuss and debate the issue strangles the Public's ability to find truth.

    7. Hearing all sides, and looking at all the evidence, is a far more reliable way to find the truth than trusting official sources. Official sources always have potenital ulterior incentives tempting their intentions, however reliable their knowledge.

    8. Encouraging the sharing of evidence and theories is not the enemy, but the only way we can improve as a society. Where would we be, for example, if, before emancipation, discussion of the issue of slavery were cancelled as 'misinformation'?

  57. FACT: The COVID-19 vaccines are INEFFECTIVE to protect against COVID-19 (if it even exists)

  58. There wasn't even any medical benefit to being vaccinated that a rational person should consider significant.

    1. De waarheid video

    2. Here is a humorous video of the decline in the reported effectiveness of the vaccines set to music.

    3. Article: Pfizer, Moderna data shows no indication that COVID jabs save more lives than they take

    4. Article: J&J vaccine found to produce ZERO antibodies against omicron strain… vaccine is now worthless

    5. Numerous fully-vaccinated individuals admit subsequently contracting (testing positive for) COVID-19 virus. For example:

      1. Biden Tests Positive for COVID-19: White House. President Biden has received 4 doses.

      2. Obama, Kamala Harris’ husband announce they have COVID despite being vaxxed to the max

      3. Triple Vaxxed Justin Trudeau Tests Positive for Coronavirus as Anti-Vaccine Mandate Truckers Hit Ottawa

    6. Health officials now insist that someone vaccinated, even fully vaccinated, for COVID-19 can still contract and spread the virus, even to the point that they should still wear masks and engage is social precautions identical or almost idential to the unvaccinated. For example:

      Here’s an article discussing that the vaccinated should still wear masks indoors:

      In fact, the vaccinated are sometimes admitted to be just as dangerous to spread the virus as the unvaccinated:

      1. Moderna

      2. Fauci

    7. Countries and communities with high vaccination rates are not seeing any obvious benefit to vaccination, and in many cases the COVID-19 test positivity actually got worse. For example:

      1. April 06, 2022: CDC: The most-vaccinated US counties also have the most COVID cases

      2. March 29, 2022: ‘100 Percent’ Vaccinated Cruise Ship Hit With COVID-19 Outbreak

      3. March 28, 2022: Data: Canada and Israel are suffering from a pandemic of the fully vaccinated

      4. Chile sees Covid surge despite vaccination success

      5. Article: Ireland: Two Counties With 99.7% and 98%+ ‘Fully Vaccinated’ See Massive Covid ‘Outbreaks’

      6. Video: Israel Study May Prove This Is a Pandemic of the VACCINATED Covid-19 Ben Swann;
        and this video: Situation Update, Jan 21, 2022 - After draconian MASKS, JABS and vaccine PASSPORTS, Israel's covid cases go PARABOLIC

        and this article (January 27, 2022): Israel is Now #1 in Covid Cases Per Capita, Proving All the Draconian Measures Are Utterly Worthless
  59. FACT: The assurances from Government that although the vaccines were approved quickly, they were approved thoroughly, ignores the need for a long timeframe to know the long-term harms.

    A related official Health Canada video (from this webpage) on the safety of the COVID-19 vaccines is: How do we know the COVID-19 vaccines are safe?

    You simply can't 'speed up' knowing the long-term harms by a faster evaluation process: by definition, long-term harms are seen only over the passage of a long time. For example, you can't know 10-year harms in a 1-year evaluation process, no matter your credentials (except if you're God).

  60. FACT: COVID-19 symptoms are so broad and unspecific that many different diseases and no disease could be called COVID-19.

  61. Reported symptoms ranged from seizures to trouble breathing, to fatigue, to even no symptoms at all being considered a symptom of COVID-19.

    In particular, cold and flu were touted to have nearly or completely disappeared during the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic. Many believe that cold and flu were symply rebranded as COVID-19 to conincide with political narrative.

    1. What Happened to the Flu Season? Epidemiologist Says the Flu Has Been Reclassified as COVID-19

    2. MAGIC: Seasonal Flu Doesn’t Exist Anymore, Only COVID-19

    3. Colds Nearly Vanished Under Lockdown. Now They’re Coming Back

    4. Seasonal Flu Nearly Eradicated During Pandemic, Despite Rising COVID-19 Cases

    Neither were the symptoms consistent: the earliest reports out of China showed people falling over on the street and having seizures, dead bodies littering the pavement; that is not what was seen in the West with supposedly the same disease. It could not be the same disease.

    The 5G rollout occurred in many places at approximately the same time as the pandemic, making it virtually impossible to disern the possible harms of 5G radiation on the Public without attributing them to COVID-19. However since the COVID-19 virus doesn't exist, suddenly that comparison becomes easier.

  62. FACT: COVID-19 death and hospitalization numbers were inflated by such a loose definition to be included in the count that it made the count meaningless.

    COVID-19 cases were tallied by including anyone testing positive for COVID-19, whether that was the reason for their death or hospitalization or not, and even if it certainly was known not to be the cause.

    In addition, physicians could also declare a COVID-19 diganosis 'presumptively' without even any test being performed.

    In other words, what were publicly reported as 'COVID-19 death' and 'COVID-19 hospitalization' statistics did not mean 'COVID-19-caused death' and 'COVID-19-caused hospitalization' counts, as they seemed to mean, but actually meant 'COVID-19-positive death' and 'COVID-19-positive hospitalization' counts, because the COVID-19 positivity was independent of the medical event in question.

    It means that the 'COVID-19 death' and 'COVID-19 hospitalization' numbers did not actually correspond to any harm caused by COVID-19, and so should not have been interpreted as a measure of danger of harm to the Public from the disease or anything to fear. Put another way, if 100 people die of causes clearly unrelated to COVID-19 (such as an explosion), but test COVID-19 positive, is that really fair justification to, for example, lock down the society?

    1. CDC Director Admits 75% of COVID Deaths Not From COVID

    2. NSW Government Confession: 993 COVID Deaths not FROM Covid. This is a response to this article: NSW Health switches to recording patients as dying 'with' Covid instead of 'from' after finally acknowledging many of Australia's 993 casualties died from something else or had even recovered from the virus

    3. 61% of CDC’s COVID Deaths Did NOT Have Pneumonia

    4. Breaking CDC Admits At Least 94% Of Deaths From COVID Were Wrong!

    5. Credibility In Shreds: CDC's Shocking Admission On Covid Deaths

    6. Ontario mayor calls for overhaul of 'misleading' COVID-19 hospitalization data

    7. COVID Cases Inflated for Profit: ‘The Guy Went in for Multiple Gunshot Wounds and he was Coded as COVID’

  63. FACT: Telling the Public to wait 12 to 18 months for relief to maybe be invented was a sacrificial decision which did not match the immediate nature of the threat.

  64. Articles:

    If there's any threat killig people now, it is tantamount to murder for authorites to tell people to wait for a remedy to be invented instead of using what we have now. That's like a house being on fire and the fire department telling the homeowners to wait for a new type of fire extinguisher which might be developed in a year, or the development could fail. For immediate threats killing people now, only remedies available now are appropriate.

    Does it really make sense that no vitamin, mineral, or drug we had already available would have made any difference, considering that many things support the immune system, and the immune system, even without any help, nearly always conquers COVID-19? Of course not.

    Worse, vaccine development isn't guaranteed, and in particular a vaccine for SARS-Cov-1 (SARS virus, the closest relative to SARS-Cov-2 (COVID-19 virus) FAILED to be developed.

    Staking everyone's lives on something which might never be developed, and would take at least 12 months even if it could be, was reckless.

  65. FACT: Many other remedies were immediately and cheaply available and publicly known.

    They included:

    1. Ivermectin:

      1. Doctors sue FDA for campaigning against use of ivermectin to treat COVID-19

      2. Here is a University of Oxford article on an ivermectin study there, which has this line in the introductory paragraphs: "Ivermectin is a safe, broad spectrum antiparasitic drug which is in wide use globally to treat parasitic infections."

      3. Research Articles (by date):

        1. Published on paper in May 2020 but available online 03 March 2020: The broad spectrum antiviral ivermectin targets the host nuclear transport importin α/β1 heterodimer. The last line of the abstract says, "Since it is FDA approved for parasitic indications, ivermectin merits closer consideration as a broad spectrum antiviral of interest. "

        2. Published online 2020 Dec 2: A five-day course of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19 may reduce the duration of illness

        3. Published online 2021 May 26 (since retracted): Effects of a Single Dose of Ivermectin on Viral and Clinical Outcomes in Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Infected Subjects: A Pilot Clinical Trial in Lebanon

        4. 2021 Jan 10: Ivermectin: an award-winning drug with expected antiviral activity against COVID-19

        5. June 17, 2021: Antiviral effect of high-dose ivermectin in adults with COVID-19: A proof-of-concept randomized trial. One quote from this one, near the top: "Ivermectin (IVM), a macrocyclic lactone with a wide anti-parasitary spectrum, has shown potent activity against SARS-CoV-2 in vitro."

        6. 2021 Aug 3: Ivermectin: a multifaceted drug of Nobel prize-honoured distinction with indicated efficacy against a new global scourge, COVID-19

      4. News Articles (by date):

        1. September 29, 2020: Doctors cure 6,000 patients with Covid-19 with Ivermectin

        2. December 8, 2020: Physician Tells Senate, Ivermectin Is a COVID 'Wonder Drug;' 'If You Take It, You Will Not Get Sick'

        3. April 30, 2021: Doctor Defends ‘80 Clinical Studies’ Showing Ivermectin is ‘89% Effective’ at Preventing COVID

        4. June 1, 2021: Ivermectin obliterates 97 percent of Delhi cases

        5. September 9, 2021: STUDY: Ivermectin is a “broad spectrum antiviral of interest” for humans

        6. September 14, 2021: Australia’s murder regime government bans ivermectin prescriptions for covid in order to maximize covid casualties

        7. September 15, 2021: Trust the Science: The Evidence for Ivermectin and COVID-19

        8. September 19, 2021: Explosive! India State of 241 MILLION People Declared COVID-Free After Government Promotes Ivermectin

        9. September 20, 2021: Indian state with 240 million people completely eradicated covid with ivermectin

        10. September 28, 2021: Widespread ivermectin use has caused a 97% drop in coronavirus cases in Delhi, India

        11. Oct 05, 2021: Top Israeli Doctor Says Ivermectin ‘Really Has Antiviral Activities’, Urges More Research As Potential COVID Treatment

        12. Nov 30, 2021: Father is Saved by His Daughter After Hospital Vehemently Opposes Ivermectin Treatment, Even Though He Was Almost Dead

        13. Dec 13, 2021: Brazilian City Cuts Hospitalizations and Mortality Rates in Half After Implementing Ivermectin as Prophylaxis for COVID

        14. January 10, 2022: Twitter complicit in GENOCIDE by censoring large-scale study revealing ivermectin can prevent 68% of covid deaths

        15. January 12, 2022: Leaked military documents show that ivermectin “works throughout all phases” of covid… so why has the medical establishment SUPPRESSED it for two years?

    2. Vitamin D:

      1. May 7, 2022: Preventable Deaths and Vitamin D3


      3. Vitamin D supplements might have saved thousands of Americans from dying with COVID

      4. Vitamin D Deficiency Linked to Severe, Deadly COVID-19: Study

      5. Israeli research: Vaccines don’t prevent serious COVID-19, but Vitamin D does. This article inludes this statement: "the impact of vitamin D was so strong that they could actually predict just how well infected patients would fare simply by looking at their ages and vitamin D levels"

      6. video: Vitamin D And COVID - 19

      7. video: The importance of Vitamin D to build up your GOD given natural immune system!

    3. Hydroxychloroquine and/or Zinc (example articles: Doctor who developed HCQ protocol has now successfully treated thousands of COVID-19 patients
      and Zinc can help in the COVID-19 fight – but only if you pair it with a zinc ionophore

    4. Vitamin C

    5. Some combination thereof, example article: If hospitals had utilized the Zelenko protocol with intravenous vitamin C and vitamin D, then covid-19-associated deaths would be virtually nonexistent

    6. Honey with Black Cumin

    7. Sunlight

    8. UV light

    9. NAC: Corrupt FDA trying to ban NAC, which detoxifies the body and wards off COVID

    10. Iodine: Article: Iodine, a preventive and curative agent in the COVID-19 pandemic?

    11. Chlorine Dioxide: Chlorine dioxide to treat COVID? YES, says Dr. Manuel Aparicio

    12. Nutrition. The human body depends on it to work, and this includes our immune system.

      Sir Robert McCarrison: "The right kind of food is the most important single factor in the promotion of health, and the wrong kind of food is the most important single factor in the promotion of disease."

    13. Sleep.

      1. Sleep and COVID-19: considerations about immunity, pathophysiology, and treatment

      2. Sleep and immunity in times of COVID-19

      3. Getting Good Sleep and Managing Stress During the COVID-19 Pandemic

      4. Why it’s important to get a good night’s sleep during the coronavirus outbreak

    14. Even breathing (without a mask):New science proves that merely BREATHING fights off respiratory viruses – now we know why they push masks

    15. Do nothing differently. That's right. Rather than look at graphs of projections going up and surrendering everything just based on our imagination of what might happen, we could have chosen to delay our reaction until we saw the reality, or choose to not do anything because we will never surrender our human rights. Here's an article about success doing exactly that. It's also worth noting that SARS pandemic, which is the closest virus related to COVID, disappeared on its own.

  66. FACT: There is no reason to expect that different COVID-19 vaccines, being based on a variety of fundamentally different technologies, are equally safe or equally effective.

    Apparently based on the premise that they are equal, in the UK, patients aren't even allowed to choose which vaccine they receive; the NHS website says this: "You cannot usually choose which vaccine you have. If you book online, you'll only be offered appointments for vaccines that are suitable for you."

    If Government cared about the Public, they would identify which vaccine is best and guide us to it only, rather than protecting market share for every vaccine manufacturer they have a COVID-19 vaccine contract with.

  67. FACT: Different COVID-19 vaccines indeed showed different rates of reported harms.

  68. Did your Government and health provider reveal this to you in helping you to make an informed vaccination decision?

    Here is a figure from this page of the Government of Canada website in August 2023:

  69. FACT: Adverse Events following Any Vaccination are Underreported:

    We can see from this official document from the USA's Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), that "fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported" (page 6, here's an article on the story).

  70. FACT: There are reports of COVID vaccine adverse events being underreported or deleted from the Government/Public reporting systems.

  71. FACT: COVID politics allow harms which happen within 14 days of vaccination not to be counted as vaccine harms.

  72. This is because a person is not considered 'vaccinated' until 14 days from the injection. On paper it's like the vaccine never happened.

    Related article: “The Resistance Chicks” discuss the large number of deaths linked to COVID-19 vaccines – Brighteon.TV

  73. FACT: Due to data on serious and lethal harms following COVID-19 vaccination being publicly available, a court in Paris has ruled that taking a COVID-19 vaccine is legally an act of suicide.

    Article: Life insurer refuses to cover vaccine death.
  74. FACT: Many medical professionals question or oppose the narrative that the COVID-19 vaccines are safe. It is far from a consensus.

    1. Dr. Zelenko: The Vaccine Is An Instrument of Absolute MASS MURDER It includes the quote, at approximately 28:04, "for every one child that dies from COVID, one hundred die from the vaccine".

    2. Prof Sucharit Bhakdi LOSES HIS PATIENCE!

    3. July 14, 2022: New Zealand doctors call for criminal homicide investigations into covid-19 vaccine deaths


    5. December 18, 2020: 100,000 doctors & medical professionals oppose COVID-19 vaccine

    6. July 08, 2021: Canadian doctors SLAM coordinated censorship of coronavirus vaccine information

    7. 9 May, 2021: 57 Top Scientists and Doctors: Stop All Covid Vaccinations

    8. April 26, 2021: ‘Coercion is not consent’: Doctors, attorney slam coronavirus vaccine blitz

    9. May 18, 2022: Dr. Robert Malone leads thousands of scientists in calling for a total end to ‘orchestrated’ COVID crisis

    10. Jun 27, 2022: Media outlet publishes then removes professor’s article debunking mainstream COVID narrative

    11. Vaccine Carnage In The ER , a nurse speaks out

    12. 21 April 2022: A Moratorium on mRNA 'Vaccines' is Needed.

    13. February 05, 2022: HISTORY IS MADE: Top 6 Covid Corruption Whistleblowers of 2021 and 2022

    14. Dr. Peter McCullough, MD - Talks about how this whole fake pandemic was ALL about the Vaccine SHOT!!

  75. FACT: Surviving one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine doesn't mean you will survive the next dose.

    One of the basic principles of immunity is the body reacting stronger the next time it's exposed to the same thing.

    This is the premise vaccines themselves are based on: trying to expose the body to an antigen it will react to much stronger and faster next time, on the assumption that next time will be the real virus.

    Guess what happens if that 'next time' of exposure is another dose of the same vaccine, and if your prior reaction was a bad one. If you had a bad reaction to a vaccine, you risk an even worse reaction if you take the exact same vaccine again.

    If you didn't notice anything bad on the first dose, but there was something bad, then you're blind to this risk.

    Here is a video disussing one mechanism of why the second dose might hit you harder than the first one: Dr Sucharit Bhakdi.

    Perceiving the warning or not, people have been harmed or killed following COVID-19 vaccination on a second, third, or fourth dose, even if they survived the first one:

    1. ‘Healthy’ boy, 13, dies suddenly in his sleep three days after getting second dose of Pfizer vaccine

    2. 15-Year-Old California Boy Dies 2 Days After Second Dose of COVID-19 Vaccine

    3. Ohio student developed severe heart problems after second dose of Pfizer vaccine

    4. Woman left unable to speak after receiving second dose of AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine

    5. Australian aboriginal dies six days after second dose of Pfizer vaccine, sending shock waves through the indigenous community

  76. FACT: The genetic COVID-19 vaccines (eg. Pfizer's) are gene therapy.

  77. gene therapy (article: Is the Associated Press Lying About Gene Therapy Shots?

    This makes them radically different from traditional 'vaccine' technology.

  78. FACT: There is a real danger of mRNA vaccines interacting with and/or changing a patient's DNA despite all claims that this is impossible.

  79. Concerns about a risk of alteration to human DNA from genetic vaccines has been strongly dismissed by Government and other official sources, but the risk is real.

    The dismissal is based on an oversimplified biological model rather than checking to see if it's happened. Although cellular information usually flows from DNA to RNA to protein, our science is well aware of mechanisms by which RNA can turn into DNA; for example, retroviruses do this on every infection.

    It's also alleged that Moderna was founded on the proven ability for mRNA to write itself into the human genome.

    It doesn't help that COVID-19 vaccine mRNA is engineered to resist the rapid degradation which natural mRNA is normally prone to, such as by replacing uridine nucleotides in the mRNA sequence with artificial nucleotide N1-methyl-pseudouridine nucleotides (because they allow transcription but resist degradation). This is nothing natural.

    Reporting from those who have actually checked for conversion into DNA have found evidence that it is happening: Pfizer’s COVID-19 Vaccine Goes Into Liver Cells and Is Converted to DNA: Study.

    It's interesting that Government gives this kind of assurance for the mRNA vaccines, while being silent about any DNA modification potential of the other vaccines.

  80. FACT: The COVID-19 vaccines which are abased on 'Adenovirus' (also called 'Viral Vector') technology are designed to introduce DNA to patients' bodies as their mechanism of action, and not only DNA, but deliver it right into the nucleus of cells.

    Here's detail on how adenoviruses work: Wikipedia

    There's no reason to think that this DNA introduction won't be permanent.

    Official sources typically omit mention of DNA at all while 'informing' the Public of how adenovirus vector vaccines work:

    1. Canada: The the description about how these vaccines work on the Canadian Government website, under the subheading 'Viral vector vaccines', doesn't mention DNA at all, but insist that a 'delivery system', rather than what it delivers, is what induces the cells to make coronavirus protein: "This type of vaccine uses a harmless virus (in this case, an adenovirus) as a delivery system. This delivery system helps your cells to make a coronavirus protein."

    2. America: The CDC website, on their 'Understanding Viral Vector COVID-19 Vaccines' webpage similarly makes no mention of DNA in describing how these 'viral vector' vaccines work to the Public: "The vector virus delivers important instructions to our cells on how to recognize and fight the virus that causes COVID-19."

    3. UK: Their NHS website is even worse, giving only one video with one vague description of what all the COVID-19 vaccine types are hoped to do, rather than how they hope to do it, in their video entitled What is in the vaccine and how does it work? | NHS. They just say, "Vaccines train our immune system to make antibodies and cells to fight the infection". That's all the desription of mechanism of action you are permitted. Shortly before that, in the same video, they also make the asinine claim that "the COVID-19 vaccines work just like any other vaccine you have ever had", ignoring how many fundamentally different types of COVID-19 vaccines exist, and without knowing what a person is already vaccinated with. Even their patient leaflet on the Oxford/AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine, dated 27 June, 2022, omits any mention of DNA.

    Fortunately at least the Wikipedia 'COVID-19 Vaccine' page, under the sub-heading 'Adenovirus vector vaccines' on COVID-19 vaccines preserves the truth of these adenovirus vaccines delivering DNA into the nucleus: "These vaccines are examples of non-replicating viral vector vaccines, using an adenovirus shell containing DNA that encodes a SARS‑CoV‑2 protein."

    It is also inconsistent that the inactivate virus, subunit, and mRNA COVID-19 vaccine types are called by the format of the instructions they deliver, rather than the mechanism of delivery (for example lipid nanoparticles), but the Adenovirus COVID-19 vaccines are instead referred to by their delivery system.

  81. FACT: Even according to the official narrative, mortality due to COVID-19 drops so dramatically with decreasing age that children are almost completely safe from dying from COVID-19 without any interventions.

    Yet Governments have been making an urgent push for the approval and vaccination of children.

    The only rational explanation is that it is some kind of child sacrifice cult:

  82. FACT: The World Health Organization violated accepted public health principles in its response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

    News Article: The WHO review: WHO’s COVID and monkeypox policies fail every one of the 10 public health principles
    the Review: The WHO Review and why it matters to you

  83. FACT: Resentment aimed at the COVID-unvaccinated for supposedly burdening the medical system ignores clearly deliberate healthcare system abuses.

    There has been a mainstream narrative building resentment against COVID-unvaccinated individuals for supposedly burdening the healthcare system (which the vaccine supposedly prevents). Example articles:

    1. Singapore will stop covering the medical bills of unvaccinated COVID-19 patients

    2. Unvaccinated COVID-19 hospitalizations cost billions of dollars

    Nobody refuses a free vaccine because they want to destroy their health, but to protect their health according to what they believe is true (for example, please see table 3 of this study). Both sides seem to understand that the vaccine 'hesitant' side, as it is called, hesitates for lack of trust in the nature, safety, and/or efficiency of the vaccine. Refusing COVID vaccination is a choice for greater health based on a belief, flawed or not, that the vaccine puts health at unacceptalbe risk. The vaccine hesitant are not people who are knowingly abusing their health by refusing vaccines, but believe (right or wrong) that they are making a healthy choice.

    Yet there are people who deliberately abuse their health, and healthcare systems have not refused to keep supporting their medical bills. There are many people who chronically smoke, chronically abuse alcohol, chronically consume narcotics. Others fail at committing suicide and need emergency care. Others take up dangerous sports and/or fail to use safety equipment adequately (eg. seatbelts) and need emergency care following accidents. Whatever the medical treatments required to support them in their chosen unhealthy lifestyle, is typically paid for by medical systems, and, so long as legal, they are never coerced by physicians or politicians or police to stop their unhealthy habits out of respect for their personal choice.

    Even if it were true (for argument's sake) that the unvaccinated burden the healthcare system more, we should not be punished for making a choice we believe (right or wrong) is for our better health, when there are many other peopel who clearly and deliberately make terminal health choices at public funding for their healthcare bills and no one expecting them to change: not in the past and not now. Put another way, if there is a resentment that people who refuse vaccination run a risk of becoming patients in the respiratory hospital ward, and if the unvaccinated deserve to be punsihed for that, then definitely those who smoke should be treated no better. After all, the packages of cigarettes have clear medical warnings right on them.

  84. FACT: The choice to avoid COVID-19 vaccination actually did not burden healthcare systems and was not socially irresponsible.

    The vaccines did not prevent infection or transmission, as originally promised, and so could not stop the pandemic. This Covid video is perfection…

    Therefore the unaccinated were wronfully maligned. Article: New Study: Unvaccinated Wrongly Maligned

    Here's a video of someone coming to a similar realization based on tough personal experience: ‘The Unvaccinated were the smart ones’…

    In fact, if anything, the vaccinated have been burdening the healthcare system. Ignoring the treatment they need for vaccine harm, and the costs of the vaccine and all future boosters, even with COVID itself there's been a burden of vaccinated people on the healthcare system:

    1. June 21, 2022: Vaccination Increases Risk of COVID-19 Infection, But Infection Without Vaccination Gives Immunity: Study

    2. June 18, 2022: Eighty percent of those DYING from “covid” in Canada are fully jabbed

    3. May 20, 2022: CDC data: Fully vaccinated kids are more likely to get COVID-19 than unvaccinated kids

    4. CLEAR EVIDENCE: COVID deaths worldwide - before & after mass vaccination programs

    5. 16 May, 2022: Higher COVID-19 Infection Rates Among Vaccinated Children Than Unvaccinated, CDC Data Show

    6. March 24, 2022: UK data reveal that vaccinated people have highest numbers of COVID cases and deaths

    7. February 17, 2022: Report: 4 of every 5 COVID deaths in Australia are among VACCINATED people

    8. February 14, 2022: Triple vaccinated deaths skyrocketed 495% in January; 80% of all new covid cases are fully jabbed and Vaccine die-off: Fully vaccinated and triple-vaccinated deaths skyrocket

    9. January 10, 2022: Bombshell data from 145 countries show that covid vaccines INCREASE covid-19 associated sickness and death

    10. BREAKING : Vaccinated 27 Times More Likely To Catch COVID

    11. Nearly all “covid” deaths in September occurred in the fully vaccinated

    12. PHS Report: Fully Vaccinated Account for 9 in Every 10 Covid-19 Deaths Over the Past 4 Months

    13. Video: Nurse reports ALL Covid patients on hospital floor were double VACCINATED!

    14. Video: Vaccinated Covid Patients Fill Hospitals 95-99%

    15. Minnesota: Breakthrough Cases from Fully Vaccinated Account for 99% of All New COVID Cases

    16. UK gov’t data suggests the vaccinated are more likely to get COVID infection

    17. States with highest covid vaccination rates also seeing highest surge in omicron cases

    18. Ireland experiencing highest number of new covid infections in Europe despite also having highest percentage of adults “fully vaccinated”

    19. Scottish data shows that covid case rate is highest among fully vaccinated, lowest among unvaccinated

  85. FACT: Officials have given no indication that ANY amount of harm from the vaccines is reason to stop the vaccination program.

    On the contrary, at least the Canadian one has admitted there is NO LEVEL OF DEATH at which they will stop the vaccination program: COVID Vaccines: No Death Toll Threshold for Withdrawal From Market, Says Canadian Official Behind Vaccine Authorization

    With other products, a small amount of injuries or deaths is enough to pull it from the market. But that's when there's a genuine concern for safety, such as there is for pets for example: Israel wants to HALT rabies vaccine for animals after just 10 adverse events, but won’t stop covid vaccines for humans after hundreds of thousands of injuries and deaths.

  86. FACT: Many people accepted COVID-19 vaccines they didn't want solely because of the coercion.

    Such practices included:

    • Forbidding travel unless someone was vaccinated, or Government detainment if someone wasn't vaccinated in travel.

    • Forbidding visiting anyone in hospital, even your own child, unless you were vaccinated.

    • Forbidding attendance at school unless vaccinated.

    • Forbidding organ transplants unless vaccinated.

    That is not the way a free society is supposed to work.

    Therefore it's not a free society.

  87. FACT: There is plently of evidence that the COVID-19 vaccines contain microchips for tagging the Public.

  88. Please see our comprehensive presentation for links but in brief:

    • Yes microchips exist that small for over a decade now: even in the Public domain. They're called 'smart dust'.

    • Structures which seem like microchips are found in the vaccines.

    • Patents for technology like this exists.

    • Many people report prophetic visions about this truth, ie. visions of microchips in the injection.

    • Using Bluetooth scanning apps on their cellphone, many people report being able to pick up MAC addresses for those people who are vaccinated: one MAC address for each vaccination.

    • One hacker reports accessing a database of these microchips for each person.

    • Dr. Yuval Harari revealed a link between COVID-19 crisis and the Public consenting to under-the-skin surveillance.

    • Governments already admit to tracking people using their cellphones.

    • Governments arguably must have some other purpose for the COVID-19 'vaccines' for those Governments to remain completely committed to and enthusastic about the vaccination programe despite many deaths/harms following vaccination and a miserable fail of purpose to end the pandemic despite vast majority acceptance. It would also explain why Government wants every last person vaccinated, far beyond what would be required for herd immunity, ignoring even provable natural immunity.

  89. FACT: The COVID-19 virus is officially reported to be airborne.

    That makes the 6 foot / 2 meter social distancing orders useless abuses of power.

    See Coronavirus disease (COVID-19): How is it transmitted? and notice where it says 'long-range'. Or see this article 25 Nov, 2022: WHO chief scientist reveals key Covid blunder

    That means the particles would linger in the air for hours: Airborne transmission of respiratory viruses

    That means that social distancing is of no value to protect us. You would need a positive pressure suit to protect you, or indoor social distancing on the order of perhaps hundreds of feet.

    It also means that locking people down inside is the worst thing to do, especially for multi-unit dwellings which share air. Getting outside is the best readily available way to greatly reduce airborne particles arising from other people.

    Assuming you believed and followed social distancing as for your protection, that means you've either been fooled into getting much closer to others than is safe, or the threat is imaginary.

  90. FACT: Government-appointed health experts are still Government.

    Government has often insisted they are only acting on the advice of health experts, but when they appoint those experts, it's really just something they are doing themselves at their own discreation. It is an excuse to usurp power.

  91. FACT: Many human rights were broken in Governments' measures to supposedly keep the Public safe from COVID-19.

    If we review the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, we find that 15 of 30 articles listed there were broken in the COVID-19 pandemic, namely articles: 1, 2, 3, 9, 11, 12, 13, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 26, and 27 were broken (such as the Article 18 right to worship in community with others being broken by lockdown orders; click here for a deeper discussion).

  92. FACT: World governments enacting similar and unprecedented human rights suspensions at the same time on the same nonsense excuse without citizen referendum proves there is such a thing as global government conspiracy against the People.

    It is no longer a delusion (if it ever was) to believe that Government conspiracies are possible, but a delusion to believe they are impossible. This crisis is the proof.

  93. FACT: It's an immoral attack on humanity to mandate an irreversible and/or risky medical procedure for someone else.

    If that someone else can be harmed or killed by an action you coerce them to do, then it's like forcing someone else to play russion roulette.

  94. FACT: Even those who support medical mandates for the current vaccine may regret the precedent of Government mandating medical treatments.

  95. The whole idea of mandates is to compel some people who don't want it to accept it.

    There may come a day, treatment, or dose that you do not want, but you can be caught in the system of mandated medical treatments that you previously supported. Even if you miss the next mandated dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, for your disobedience you will be put under the same punishments you approved for those who refused the first dose.

    Let the wicked fall into their own nets, whilst that I withal escape.
    (Holy Bible, KJV, Psalms 141:10)

  96. FACT: Human rights are easy to lose but difficult to gain.

    It took thousands of years to get Government to allow us the rights we had before the pandemic.

    We gave half of them up on a 2-week promise to flatten the curve of a line on a page.

    Since then we wait every month to see how we are allowed to live.

  97. FACT: Your personal security in society absolutely depends on your human rights.

    Your personal wealth and security absolutely depends on your human rights! Otherwise you are just building up a pile for someone else to easily take away.

  98. FACT: If you lose the right to decide your own medical treatments the other rights don't matter in practice.

    This is because you can be killed or silenced at any time by whoever does the mandating. Even just a change of dose of medication can kill. It doesn't help that euthanasia and shock treatment are both considered medical treatments.

  99. FACT: It is contrary to the incentive of Government to award human rights.

    Government is typically the counterparty, in human rights for the Public, such that any rights we gain mean a loss for Government.

    For example, if we have a right for personal property, it restricts Government from seizing our stuff whenever they want.

    For this reason we cannot trust Government to award us human rights. Rather we should watch to ensure they aren't encroaching on them.

  100. FACT: There is a moral duty to disobey cruel or nonsensical orders.

    This moral principle is the basis of the fourth Nuremberg Principle of international law, which states: "The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him." For example, when we put Nazi officers on trial, we didn't allow the defense that they were 'just following orders'.

    We should hold ourselves to at least a high a moral standard when evaluating if we were right to lock down, mask, and inject our own children, for example, because we were 'just following orders'.

    To our shame, we also obeyed to:

    • Coerce people to take a vaccine which has risk of serious harm or death, in the short-term, and unknown risks in the long-term.

    • Blame those who refused the vaccine for the pandemic, rather than those who created the virus.

    • Thrust people out of their livelihood, either by termination or ordering their business to close, either due to fear of COVID-19 or fear of unvaccinated people. Is this not a threat to that person's life?

      This also included thrusting medics out of thier profession only to complain of a medical staff shortage later.

    • Agreed to the suspension of our human rights.

    • Prevented people from getting organ transplants, for example: Canadian legal group blasts Alberta magistrate who ruled that doctors can require COVID vaccination before organ transplants

    • Closed schools.

    • Closed places of worship.

    • Restricted travel, even citizens trying to get back into their own country.

    • Ordered all non-emergency medical proceures stopped.

    • Weared masks, even in track & field sports, causing some to collapse.

    • Socialed distance.

    • Put children in bubbles at school.

    • Spent unlimited public money when a small fraction of this would have ended world hunger.

    • Imposed a 2-tiered social system based on vaccination.

    • Detained innocent people in militarized camps.

    • Welded or otherwise lock people in their homes without food. This was mostly in China, especially in Shanghai in early 2022.

    All these were in exchange for nothing (failed promises): none of these measures stopped the pandemic, now in its 7th wave as of this writing.

    Human beings should have more sense and integrity than to submit to any order. We were wrong to shame others for not obeying the 'rules'. Such rules were a shame to obey.

  101. FACT: Citizens in a democratic society have a duty not only to decide issues, but verify the information on which those decisions are based.

    It's not good enough to make the wrong decision, because you were decieved, because you didn't bother to check or hear counterarguments.

  102. FACT: Anyone who suspends human rights is morally guilty of crimes against humanity.

    These rights are supposed to be inalienable, so to suspend them is an attack on humanity.

  103. FACT: Government 'emergency' powers are dictatorship (at least for that time).

    A virus shouldn't justify immediate transformation of a democracy to dictatorship, but that's exactly the main mistake of the COVID crisis.

  104. FACT: Having used it sucessfully in the COVID-19 crisis, Government has precedent to use Government-appointed experts' warnings to give themselves 'emergency powers' again.

  105. FACT: The majority of citizens around the world gave passive, implied, or even explicit signs of approval to the Government for COVID-related human rights suspensions.

  106. This was done by either:

    1. Being obedient to Government mandates no matter how immoral.

    2. Not voicing any complaint through their elected representatives. This is implied consent for the measures.

    3. Not voting. At best this is implied consent for the status quo to continue.

    4. Expressing clear desire for new or continued human rights suspensions in Government opinion polls. For example:

    5. Re-electing the same politicians who imposed or promised emergency powers, lockdowns, and other region-wide tyrannical human rights violations on the excuse of COVID. For example:

      1. Re-election of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in late 2021, on a clear platform to implement mandatory vaccination (while insisting on free choice for abortion for example).

      2. Re-election of Ontario, Canada Premier Doug Ford (in mid 2022, who imposed some of the longest and strictest lockdowns in North America, and renewed his emergency powers so many times it was difficult to keep track of), and brought in a proof of vaccination requirement despite previously announcing that he wouldn't.

      3. Re-election of Toronto, Ontario, Canada mayor John Tory in October 2022, even though he was aggressive to demand and implement stricter COVID-19 pandemic measures and enforcement for his own city.

      4. Re-election of Quebec premier François Legault, who instituted arguably the most severe COVID restrictions in North America, and threatened to impose a health tax on the COVID-unvaccinated (but not on, for example, smokers).

      5. Re-election of Quebec premier François Legault, who instituted arguably the most severe COVID restrictions in North America, and threatened to impose a health tax on the COVID-unvaccinated (but not on, for example, smokers).

      Watching voters consistently reward tyranny with their vote is extremely disturbing on many levels.

  107. FACT: We can't expect the Establishment to stop the pandemic themselves when it has worked so well for them to gain in power and/or profit.

  108. Let's consider it by sector:

    1. Government gained the ability and precedent to grant itself emergency powers renewable at its own discretion, and order people around as if human rights don't exist.

    2. The medical industry profited tremendously. Perhaps this was their reward for supporting, rather than opposing, the COVID-19 threat narrative.

      • Vaccine Manufacturers were awarded grants and able to sell vaccines to almost the entire population in repeated doses by the forced market created by Government-imposed mandates. Plus they are granted legal immunity by Government regarding any vaccine harms.

      • Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Manufacturers benefitted greatly from a forced market created for mandates of these products.

      • Hospitals were awarded plenty of extra public money specifically for treating COVID patients: not the same money they get for any sick person, but bonus money specifically for COVID diagnosis and treatment.

      • Medical Researchers gained a lot of public money from new grants

    3. Big business gained in that the largest in-person stores, and those with distribution centers ready for quick widespread delivery, were generally allowed to remain open while most small businesses were forced to close.

  109. FACT: Belief that Government is an all-powerful immovable force is the basic false belief required to maintain a totalitarian regime.

    When people actually believe that objection is futile they stop even somuch as objecting to any order no matter how immoral or nonsensical. That's what totalitarian regimes depend on. That's when people will even re-elect the same people who oppress them, even when given a secret voting ballot.

  110. FACT: Objection would have stopped the mandates and social restrictions.

    The only laws which can stand are the ones which the Public accepts.

    It's important to note that the mandates and social restrictions were a matter of Government order not anything a virus did to us.

    Although objection was rare, when enough people did object to Governments' COVID-19 pandemic orders, those orders were quickly rescinded to yield to the objection.

    Victory over tyranny didn't require attending a rally, or going to jail, or being shot, as some people might imagine activism requiring, but instead reversing the course of government only took a small group of the population simply voicing their objection about it to Government rather than voicing their objection only to friends, or to store owners, or remaining silent.

    Put another way, the only reason the Government was able to suspend half our human rights at their discretion in the COVID-19 crisis was that almost no one bothered to notify Government of their disapproval, and that's even in democratic societies, where citizens have a right and a duty to speak up in this way. Rather than even once say 'no', we went through a tremendous amount of daily inconvenience and suffering in social restrictions we didn't want, hoping they would somehow go away on their own, despite their silent compliance legally implying our approval.

    This even though our democratic systems provide convenient and inexpensive means of contacting our elected representatives.

    The result was that the dictatorial ('emergency') Government powers and the Government-ordered social restrictions (oppressions) were extended again and again, ad nauseum, simply due to lack of almost anyone objecting to them, despite having the right, reason, duty, and convenient peaceful mechanism to do object.

    The phenomenon of obeying ridiculously harmful and senseless orders from authority, without voicing any objection, despite knowing you have a right and means to object, is an incomprehensible phenomenon worthy of psychological study in the hopes of eventually understanding it.

  111. FACT: Officials have made it clear that the COVID-19 pandemic is their 'Opportunity' to change our society into what they (not us) envision for us.

    1. Canada: PM Justin Trudeau

    2. UK: Prince Charles

  112. FACT: The globaist plan is to enslave everyone in a worldwide technocracy of extreme surveillance with no human rights or even free will.

  113. The globalist plan is publicly known to include taking everything you have away: You will own nothing but be happy

    Though generally not triggered yet, some regions have been quietly passing laws which give them sweeping emergency powers to the point that they can do virtually whatever they want to you, your family, and your property, so long as they invoke the word 'emergency' when doing it. Examples include:

    1. Saskatchewan's Emergency Planning Act (see section 18).
    2. Alberta's Public Health Act (see section 52.6(1)).

    There are hints that the Government intends to come into your house and take family members away. This include:

    1. Dr. Ryan of WHO
    2. Refusal to vaccinate a child can be considered medical neglect in court, or even child abuse, and therefore apparently legal grounds to have your children removed by the Government for their 'safety'.

    Beyond that, they apparently want to merge humanity with technology in such an intense way that even your thoughts will be monitored: The Great Reset | The Entire Great Reset Agenda Explained In 17 Minutes (Featuring Biden, Schwab, Harari, Musk, Gates, WEF, etc.)

  114. FACT: Compliance to the oppressive COVID-19 Government agenda can only enslave us more (not less), because it is an agenda to enslave.

  115. Officials have made it clear that they will not allow us to go back to the old 'normal' social model (eg. rights and freedoms) which we were used to.

    1. Video: Coronavirus: no return to normal 'for the foreseeable future', says WHO

    2. We're never going back to normal says Klaus Schwab

    3. Video: Ben Shapiro: The left will never let you go back to normal

    4. Video: Fauci admits we likely will not fly without masks again

    5. Video: WHO: There's no going back to 'old normal' as coronavirus accelerates

    6. Video: 'We're NEVER Getting Back to Normal': Australian Nightmare Intensifies

    Therefore, if you want a society where you're not constantly ordered how you're allowed to live or breathe by Government, compliance will not take you there. Compliance to Government agenda purposed to take away your rights and freedoms slowly but permanently can only help to achieve their goals not yours.

  116. FACT: Society learned the WRONG LESSON from the horrors of the Jewish Holocaust.

  117. The less our sociery learned is something like this: we must never allow one identifiable group of people to dehumanize, experiment on, or kill another one.

    But in the COVID-19 crisis, the Israeli government was one of the most aggressive countries to impose vaccine mandates and a proof-of-vaccination system on its own people, despite the dehumanising mechanism of action (reprogramming human genetics), horrific harms known in the short-term, and no data on long-term harms. Somehow dehumanising, experimenting on, and killing a large number of people was accepted so long as it's done without racial discrimination by your own government!

    It's also worth noting that the Jewish Holocaust was an action by their own government, ie. the ruling Government of the region, rather than an action by individuals or mobs.

    The relevant lesson we should have learned, and can learn now, regarding these holocausts is something like this: we must never allow any humans to be dehumanized, experimented on, or killed in innocence by anyone INCLUDING by their own government.

  118. FACT: It's a lot easier to escape a trap before it is fully formed.

  119. Once all the parts of the New World Order are in place, in statuatory law and precedent, and in functional new social system, those establishments make it far more difficult to reverse them than before these take place.

    Just like with The Tholian Web, the window to object is before the trap completely closes, not after.

  120. FACT: The COVID-19 crisis established a new social principle that expert advice must always override individual, democratic, and Government rights and choice.

  121. By this diabolically clever argument, when experts said social restrictions were needed, the only responsible thing to do seemed to be for everyone else to follow, since no non-expert has standing to argue with an expert. Based on this thinking, experts directed Governments, even to suspend human rights, and disobedient individuals were despised as being irrationally stubborn (to expert advice) and needing to be coerced.

    That would be like an economic experts tell you that you are not permitted to sell your house because that would depress prices and therefore be a danger to yourself and other homeowners.

    It didn't seem to matter that many independent experts disagreed with the government-appointed experts, the fact that they weren't government-appointed being considered a lower level of credibiltiy and therefore, presumably, knowledge.

    It didn't seem to matter that the Government actually appointed the same medical experts it portrayed as needing to obey the advise of. Allegations of conflict of interest was ignored as a distrustful wild conspiracy theory.

    It didn't even matter when these appointed experts admitted that they were only reading what they were given to read: WARMINGTON: Top Ontario doctors' hot-mic moment spreads fast.

    When experts are appointed and given scripts to read which individuals and governments are expected to follow and without limit, who is writing that script? Whoever they are, they rule in that situation.

  122. FACT: The Government is leaving the door open to perpetrating something like the COVID-19 pandemic response again and maybe worse next time.

    This is in terms of: lack of any apology but rather pats on the back, in terms of support for a WHO Pandemic Treaty (essentially for international centralization of social restrictions under medical guise), and in terms of voting down legislation which would prevent it (example article: Tory Private Member's Bill to Prevent Future COVID Vaccine Mandates Fails in Parliament).

  123. There are also some laws which would give local goverments tremendous power in the event of a pandemic: more than was used during COVID-19 and presumably they intend to use it eventually. One example is the wording in the 'Public Health Act' section 52.6(1) of Alberta (another Canadian province):

CONCLUSIONS: What reasonable conclusions can we draw from these facts which will help us make decisions in our lives and our societies?

  1. COVID-19-related social restrictions, mandates, and vaccines were only to our risk, harm, and suffering.

  2. COVID-19 is nothing but a widely accepted excuse for Government and other social institutions to abuse the Public.

  3. Our society is no longer ruled by the will of the People but by Government-appointed experts, the data they present, and the advice they give. No one is accepted to disobey expert advice in our society, and so we are ruled by appointed experts.

    Unappointed experts are expected to conform or be de-licensed (and therefore no longer experts due to Government removal of their expert credentials).

  4. Whatever the true nature of the genetic code being used in the vaccines, it has nothing to do with any COVID-19 virus (the virus has never been isolated so it could not have been genetically sequenced).

  5. The COVID-19 'vaccines' must have another purpose (rather than inducing protection from a COVID-19 virus).

    These injections are physically real, but cannot be based on a virus for which no one even has a sample or direct evidence of.

    This would explain why Governments remain so enthusiastic about the vaccination program, and working to expand it to youger ages and more doses, despite the vaccines admittedly failing to prevent infection, prevent transmission, or end the pandemic, as well as the many harms including deaths which have followed them. The only sensible explanation is that although they are a failure at their status purpose, they must be a success at some hidden purpose.

  6. The engine of the COVID-19 crisis is a mutually beneficial cooperation between Government and the medical industry.

    It works like this:

    • The medical industry announces and supports the narrative of a pandemic, in exchange for tremendous revenue from Public money and policy, including by: research grants, years-ahead vaccine contracts, and a mandated market for their products even in successive doses.

    • The Government directs Public money and market towards the medical industry, in exchange for supposedly unquestionable apparently independent expert declaration of an emergency which doesn't exist and on which the Government can take up dictatorial powers indefinitely.

      ThePublic money they overspent in the name of COVID-19 could have ended world hunger many times over, and is now triggering inflation.

    • Both actions are untimlaetly at the cost of the People, who suffer tremendous losses of: health, human rights, Public money, and economic stability.

  7. The ultimate purpose of the COVID-19 crisis, from the Government's side, seems to be a first step in the institution of dictatorship, including distribution of an vaccine injection for microchipping the Public (for under-the-skin surveillance).

  8. The Public is also responsible for these atrocities. Apparently out of fear and foolishness, the Public not only failed to object to these infringements, but rather consented to them or even explicitly voted for them.

  9. We've absolutely betrayed our country and our species to so easily forfeit the human rights passed down to us. Having human rights and freedoms or not is permanent. Just as we remember soliders who accepted certain death to defend our human rights, future generations should also remember us for immediately giving them up in fear of a false scare which, even if it was real, reportedly has an infection fatality rate of much less than one percent.

    We didn't need to to fight for human rights to be brought into existence, like our ancestors did, but our moral obligation was only to object to established human rights from being taken away.

    Maybe future generations will exhume our bodies from our graves and hang us posthumously, like was done to Cromwell, for this betrayal.

  10. There can be no reliable profit in this life in focusing on anything else if human rights are not restored. This is because whatever else you might choose to focus on can easily be taken away if you don't have rights to support keeping it. Human rights should not be an abstract concept but a deeper layer of awareness. For example, if you like to be in control of your health, you should ask yourself whether or not you actually have the right to decide your medical treatments anymore, because if you don't, you might work on your health for many years only to have it suddenly taken from you with one mandated injection. Similarly, if you prefer to focus on making money rather than object to human rights suspensions, you apparently will eventually discover that the plot to take your possessions away was real, and everything you think you own can be taken away with the stroke of a pen by taking away your right to own anything.

  11. If we want to go back to having security, human rights must be restored to 'inalienable' status.

  12. We cannot expect human rights to somehow be restored by Government at their own volition. Don't expect them to end the pandemic which has worked so well to increase their power. It is against Government incentive to do that. We must object.

Other Fact Summaries on the COVID-19 Crisis:

Article Mar 24, 2023: 40 Facts You NEED to Know: The REAL Story of “Covid”

CLEARSIGHT: How to understand this issue correctly in 5 seconds starting with only a conventional understanding:

  1. Picture in your mind everything that has happened in the COVID-19 crisis.

  2. Subtract the existence of any COVID-19-causing virus.

  3. Now you understand what's truly happened.

Still don't get it? Try this: If you think Government was justified to suspend human rights to defend us from a threat, then YOUR attitude is the first crime against humanity because there is supposed to be NO acceptable reason to suspend human rights. They are supposed to be INALIENABLE. Government-suspendable human rights are NO HUMAN RIGHTS AT ALL because it's FROM the Government that we need human rights protected.

CLEARQUESTION: Is there anything you won't surrender to fear of an invisible threat?

This is the central question of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the point which Government kept testing.

For fear, will you surrender your:

  1. Freedom to leave your house?

  2. Freedom to congregate with others?

  3. Freedom to visit your mother (eg. in nursing home)?

  4. Freedom to attend divine-worship services?

  5. Freedom to breathe the air unmasked?

  6. Employment?

  7. Economy?

  8. Neighbours (in snitching)?

  9. Body (to mandated vaccines)?

  10. Humanity (natural genetic integrity)?

  11. Children (to mandated abuse, including: masking, distancing, vaccines)?

  12. Other Human Rights?

  13. Common Sense?

  14. Soul?

About 'CLEARFACTS': 'Clearfacts' presentations are an attempt to pick out just those facts from an issue which are of the greatest importance to protect life with any evidence they reasonably require. They are not an attempt to address all important aspects of an issue, but are a intended as a tool for sharing truth: getting the most important and incontestable points across to other people while consuming the minimum of their attention. Although the presentation does include hyperlinks, it is presented in black print on white background for easy printing, with the following QR code for easy sharing (a link to this webpage):

Back to main (comprehensive presentation) COVID Page

Back to website Homepage

Flag Counter