This isn’t about protecting lives—it’s about controlling them. After the disastrous COVID-19 response, where governments and corporations colluded to strip citizens of their freedoms under the guise of "science," DARPA is now doubling down on its quest to perfect psychological manipulation. Their latest initiatives—Kallisti and MAGICS—aim to develop an algorithmic "Theory of Mind" to predict and suppress dissent before it even emerges....<<<Read More>>>...
Which leads to the burning question of whether or not the notoriously censorial UK Government of Keir Starmer will do anything about it.
If not, we can reasonably consider this prima facie evidence that the UK government is (at a minimum) complicit in spreading disinformation and promoting false fear of infectious disease for some hidden purpose....<<<Read More>>>...
You may not realise it, but the changes in the way medicine is practised (the long waiting times, the unavailability of good care, the endless “mistakes,” the withdrawal of safe medicines and their replacement with new untried products, the toxic vaccines and so on) are not happening by accident. This has been planned for a long time. It is no coincidence that GPs work an average of 23 hours a week while the elderly in hospitals and care homes are murdered with impunity.
Everything
bad that is happening is part of a plan devised by the medical
establishment to satisfy the promoters of the global warming myth, who
are operating on behalf of the insane bankers who are promoting their
entirely unnecessary depopulation plan....<<<Read More>>>...
Members of the World Health Organisation (“WHO”) adopted a global
pandemic accord on Tuesday, 20 May 2025; 124 countries voted in favour,
no countries voted against, while 11 countries abstained and 46 countries were not present. The total votes cast don’t add up, but those are the numbers WHO has declared.
For
the countries that abstained – of which, shamefully, the UK was not one
– their concerns included loss of national sovereignty, lack of legal
clarity and the risk of unelected institutions imposing policy.
Please note: The Pandemic Agreement has been called various names over the years. It has also been referred to as the Pandemic Treaty, Pandemic Accord and WHO Convention Agreement + (“WHO CA+”).
To
ensure the Pandemic Agreement was adopted by the easiest possible
route, WHO had determined that a vote need not take place, and instead
it would be adopted by “consensus.”
Surprised that a “democratic
institution” did not want to have a vote, Slovakia requested that a
vote on the draft Pandemic Agreement take place, which Tedros the
Terrorist attempted to stop hours before the vote was scheduled.
The
vote was conducted by “a show of hands,” by “representatives” holding
up their name plates, and then people counting the number of name plates
raised. Which way countries voted was not recorded. It all sounds a bit
dubious and fraught with error, with no way of checking whether an
error, inadvertently or deliberately, has been made. A “show of hands”
might be a good way to gauge how many bags of sweets to buy for a school
outing, it certainly isn’t the way to vote on a global agreement.
To watch a video of the vote, go to WHO’s 78th World Health Assembly webpage, HERE,
and select the ‘Committee A’ tab shown under the current video. Then
from the list of ‘Committee A’ videos, select ‘WHA78 – Committee A,
Second Committee A Meeting, 19/05/2025 – 18:50-21:40’. The “show of
hands” voting begins at timestamp 02:47:20. The results were (see
timestamp 03:08:08):
Number of members entitled to vote, 181
Number of members absent, 46
Number of abstentions, 11
Number of members present and voting, 124
Number of votes in favour, 124
Number of votes against, 0
Number of votes required for the majority of two-thirds of members present and voting, 83
Yes,
the Chair read out that the number of members present and voting was
the same as the number of votes in favour; 124. In other words, the
Chair claimed that all countries that had representatives present at the
meeting voted in favour of the Pandemic Agreement. When no name plates
were raised during the time allotted for votes against the Agreement,
the so-called country representatives gave themselves a standing
ovation....<<<Read More>>>...
If it is “adopted,” countries need to notify Tedros on whether they intend to accept the Pandemic Agreement within 18 months of the WHA. However, member states can only sign the Pandemic Agreement after an annexe for the much-contested PABS System has been adopted by a future WHA.
From the moment a member state signs the Pandemic Agreement, it will be expected not to undermine it. Does this mean that they cannot speak against it or criticise it? Is WHO using a top-down approach to censor governments, officials and advisors? Is WHO also expecting governments that sign its agreement to ensure that their citizens do not undermine the Pandemic Agreement as well? Censorship is the first sign that something bad is afoot.
After signing the Pandemic Agreement,
the member states then need to take the appropriate action within their
countries to ratify or adopt the agreement so it takes effect. In the
UK, for example, the Public Health (Control of Disease) Act [1984]
grants the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, currently Wes Streeting,
the power to adopt or give effect to such an agreement without
reference to anyone else. To stop WHO’s nefarious pandemic agenda from
being implemented in the UK, the section of the Act granting Streeting
this power, section 45, needs to be repealed....<<<Read More>>>...
Another friend had a son and a daughter. The daughter, following her
first round of childhood shots, experienced almost exactly the same
scenario described above, minus the blindness. At the time my friend did
not connect the dots and when it came time for his son to be
vaccinated, the child began to seize. In the room, my friend put it
together and stopped the rest of the shots. Today, his son is only
mildly autistic while his daughter, at 26, is non-verbal, incontinent,
and often uncontrollable. Since the son is only mildly autistic, I
suppose we shouldn’t look into the cause of his issues? It’s a gift,
right?...<<<Read More>>>...
Still, somehow, mass media and “leading experts” (recall who those were during the Covid plandemic) claim that the U.S. is “staring down the barrel of another pandemic” as bird flu “spirals out of control” across U.S. farms. Sure.
It’s the slow-motion pandemic and it’s happening one bird at a time. Get ready to mask up, social distance, lock down, and inject heart-stopping “technology” for the ‘greater good’ and to flatten out that dreaded curve. Got cow flu? What about Bird-Cow-Human flu?
The H5N1 avian influenza, a highly pathogenic virus with a historic
fatality rate as high as 50%, has now infected over 1,000 dairy cattle
herds and 70 humans in the U.S., marking the largest outbreak in
decades. The first U.S. death—a Louisiana resident exposed to infected
birds—was reported in January 2024, while recent cases among farmworkers
underscore the virus’s growing reach. Experts warn that without robust
surveillance and biosecurity measures, the virus—already adapting in
mammals—could evolve to spread between humans, echoing early COVID-19
missteps....<<<Read More>>>...
The petition alleges that Meta colluded with Biden administration officials to censor CHD’s content, particularly regarding vaccines and COVID-19. This move comes after Meta initially waived its right to respond, raising questions about the social media giant’s transparency and its role in suppressing dissenting voices.
The case, which dates back to 2020, has gained renewed attention following Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s public admissions that government officials pressured the company to censor content during the pandemic. CHD, a nonprofit organization advocating for vaccine safety and informed consent, was deplatformed from Facebook and Instagram in August 2022 and has not been reinstated. The Supreme Court’s decision to compel Meta to respond suggests the justices are taking the case seriously, potentially setting the stage for a landmark ruling on censorship and free speech in the digital age...<<<Read More>>>...
Facts and figures must be discussed and considered, from long-overlooked medical journals and books, including myth-shattering graphs revealing the mass decline of infectious disease before vaccines, and before antibiotics and pharmaceuticals came into the picture at all.
The medical profession is trained to ignore the truth. Live virus vaccines against paralytic poliomyelitis carry with them the inherent difficulty of controlling live viruses once they are placed in a live person. Today, Western Medicine has frightened parents into believing their children will likely die young if not inoculated with a schedule of over thirty injections by age six, starting from the day the child is born. Measles, smallpox and polio are not the plague. Any well-nourished child who gets adequate vitamin A and D will normally recover just fine...<<<Read More>>>...
New Zealand is leading the way with a new pandemic plan that allows the minister of health to utilize "special powers" in the event of an emergency, allowing politicians to become dictators. The goal is to force everyone to take every new "vaccine" that comes down the pike for whatever contrived "pandemic" they come up with next.
According to the plan, the minister of health will have the power to "detain, isolate, or quarantine persons, places, buildings, ships, vehicles, aircraft and animals" in the event of a public health scare.
Unelected medical officers will have the power to force people to take experimental drug shots, drug pills and other pharmaceutical poisons for their own good, much like what happened during the Wuhan coronavirus (covid-19) "pandemic."
Police will also have newfound authority to help medical officers and other public health officials enforce the new rules, which will be mandatory for everyone (except those on the top, presumably)...<<<Read More>>>.....
There are multiple lines of evidence to dispute the classic viral disease paradigm, including historical records, biological evidence (or lack thereof) and clinical “experiments” according to Dr Lee Merritt.
Yet, while this is true, there are many self professed “awake”
individuals who although are willing to accept that we have been
continually lied to on a grand scale to enable our enslavement, will not
open their minds even to the possibility that one of those lies has
been the unproven viral disease paradigm.
Orthopaedic surgeon
and past president of the Association of American Physicians and
Surgeons, Dr Merritt writes “I hear it all the time. From Physicians,
“How can you say viruses don’t exist? I treat people with viral illness
all the time.” Or from patients, “My whole family got really sick—so
there must be viruses!” Dr Merritt adds “Let’s be clear. There is
disease, as in “Dis-Ease”. People get sick and some die of the
sickness. And I can admit to the ability of harvesting tissue from one
animal and injecting it into another species and causing disease– as
Judy Mikovits describes it—“infection by injection”. But that does not
prove the existence of invisible, sub-microscopic unicorns that fly from
one person’s nose to another as the CAUSE of that disease.
“It is the unproven notion of airborne viral illness that has enslaved humanity to the corrupt medical cartel.“
“What
better psychological wedge can be implemented against humanity than
making people afraid of invisible emanations from other people?” she
asks....<<<Read More>>>....
McCrae and other colleagues from all over the state of California were not overwhelmed at any time during the first year of Covid in 2020 the hospital began to fill up with patients with the flu during the winter of 2020/21, however, that happened every year for the whole twelve years she had been working in the acute care setting. It was nothing unusual.
This alerted McCrae to the fact that “there were things going on that shouldn’t have been going on.” she says. and realised that when having to tell family members that they were unable to be at the bedside of their dying loved ones due to their isolation policy, for her it was a crime against humanity and a violation of her oath.
“I knew right away, it should not have been happening.” she said, “We isolate people in prison, we put them in the brig, when they do something wrong, to torture them, and that’s what I felt like I was being forced to do when I had to tell my patients’ family members when they couldn’t come into the hospital to be near their dying loved ones.”
The nurse knew she needed to critically analyse what she was being told to do, such as the administration of Remidisvir, which she knew to be an experimental use authorisation medication, and the only drug they were allowed to give patients who were hospitalised with “Covid.”
However, Remidisvir is an antiviral and she knew from her nursing training in her bachelor’s degree that an antiviral should not be given more than 24 to 48 hours post-symptom onset for a viral infection.but patients were usually not given it until between ten and twelve days post-symptom onset, which does more harm than good.
Unfortunately, she does say that she would ask her colleagues, “why are we giving this medication?” and “why are we doing this?” And their eyes would glaze over. so it can be assumed, possibly like many other nurses, she knew it was wrong, but did it anyway?
The proposal is raising concerns among some medical experts.
According to a JD Supra article, these “new international recognitions routes” announced by the MHRA are intended for the quick “approval of medicines that are already authorised in Australia, Canada, the European Union (EU), Japan, Singapore, Switzerland or the United States.” The new “routes” are expected to begin by Jan. 1, 2024.
Medications already licensed in any of these “trusted partner” countries would receive “a fast-track U.K. application process.”
The plan builds on the MHRA’s existing European Commission (EC) Decision Reliance Procedureand also “complements the U.K. national authorisation process and accelerated access route, the Innovative Licensing and Access Pathway (ILAP).”
This procedure was introduced following Brexit to allow the MHRA to “rely” on drug approvals from the European Medicines Agency (EMA). If a drug has received EMA approval or a “positive recommendation,” the MHRA can then proceed with a “lighter touch” assessment and “accelerated decision from the MHRA within 67 days or less.”
In March, the U.K. government awarded the MHRA £10 million ($12 million) in funding “to help bring innovative new medicines and medical technologies to U.K. patients more quickly.”
Describing this new process as a “milestone,” JD Supra claimed it “is intended to result in faster access for U.K. patients to new innovative medicines.”
The Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry said the process will reduce “the time delay for regulatory approval.”...<<<Read More>>>....
