May 2020. John Pospichal was on the ball. Multiple graphs, multiple countries… all telling the same story… leading to obvious, penetrating questions… which politicians and mainstream media were NOT asking.
The extracts below are to encourage you to read Part 1 and Part 2 in full – because the questions make most sense in the context of the graphs.
We now have mortality data for the first few months of 2020 for many countries, and, as you might expect, there were steep increases associated with the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in each one.
Surprisingly, however, these increases did not begin before the lockdowns were imposed, but after. Moreover, in almost every case, they began immediately after. Often, mortality numbers were on a downward trend before suddenly reversing course after lockdowns were decreed.
This is an astonishing finding. But before I discuss its full import, and pose some questions to those who still defend the utility of lockdowns, I want to present the data that proves it…
You will notice that only after each country (or city) was locked down did the increases begin. Moreover, they began immediately, and in nearly every case, precipitously.
Now let’s examine the data for a few of these countries and cities in greater detail…
Last week I led a team of seven Rebel News journalists in covering the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland. Despite not being officially accredited to enter the conference, the Rebel News team managed to gain access to some of the wealthiest and most influential people in attendance. We wanted to be part of the small number of journalists who will actually hold these people to account.
Sometimes the silencing of dissenting viewpoints is achieved through overt censorship – as we saw when Facebook suppressed arguments that entertained the Wuhan lab leak hypothesis, or when Twitter censored pretty much any assertion that could be construed as even slightly disfavourable to Covid vaccines. But more often than not, it is achieved by refusing to give any airtime to arguments from “the other side.” In many ways, this is more sinister than overt censorship, because it is subtle and may easily go completely unnoticed.
I have had personal experience of this “from the inside,” so to speak. I used to write ocassionally for a prominent national newspaper in Ireland, as well as a regional newspaper in Spain. Soon after I began to seriously question Covid measures or the science behind lockdowns, my contributions at both newspapers ceased to be published, quite abruptly. There was simply no editorial interest in questioning the fundamentals of the national response to the virus.
The average newspaper reader or TV viewer knows nothing of this filtering process. They just pick up the newspaper or switch on the TV and assume that there are “serious” people and experts who will be given a platform to express themselves. They will naturally assume that if no credible voice defends this or that position, it must be because the position is weak or indefensible. It will not occur to the average reader or viewer that the reason there are no “credible voices” on the other side is because they have been filtered out in advance…
Age-stratified infection fatality rate (IFR) of COVID-19 in the non-elderly population
The largest burden of COVID-19 is carried by the elderly, and persons living in nursing homes are particularly vulnerable. However, 94% of the global population is younger than 70 years and 86% is younger than 60 years. The objective of this study was to accurately estimate the infection fatality rate (IFR) of COVID-19 among non-elderly people in the absence of vaccination or prior infection… we identified 40 eligible national seroprevalence studies covering 38 countries with pre-vaccination seroprevalence data…
If your kid gets COVID, the risk is 3 in 1 million that your child will die from COVID. And that is likely an over-estimate because today all early treatment protocols are suppressed worldwide.
Steve Kirsch (referencing a previous Ioannidis study with similar findings, Oct 2022)
Covid’s Infection Fatality Rate (IFR) Has Always Been Similar to the Flu
It appears that the political establishment has circled its wagons and decided it will make a stand against any and all who voice questions regarding Covid vaccine. No gradual rolling back on vaccine efficacy or safety, but a doubling down on the dishonest propaganda that espouses the importance and essential need for the vaccine and ongoing vigilance, and acceptance of Government as the only source of truth for future emergencies (e.g. catastrophic climate change).
The expulsion of Andrew Bridgen is a shot across the bows of any other MPs who might consider raising their heads above the parapet. The claims of vaccine safety and effectiveness will be amplified, false data re-asserted as truth, and opposition quelled by any means.
This is authoritarianism coming out into the light, ready to use its recently found power over our lives. Over the last three years it has taken control over almost all aspects of our lives, and now it has decided it is going to go on the offensive to cement its position of dominance over the shaping of all our futures, and it will not be forced to relinquish its grip without drastic action by us, the electorate.
Jack Last, 27, from Stowmarket, was vaccinated on 30 March 2021 and a week later was admitted to hospital after experiencing headaches and sickness.
A scan on 10 April revealed a cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST) and he died 10 days later.
Senior coroner Nigel Parsley… said: “Jack Last died of a blood clot to the brain, caused as a direct result of his body’s reaction to the AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccination which he had received on March 30, 2021.”
Speaking after the two-day inquest, the solicitor working on behalf of the family said they would be pursuing a clinical negligence case against the hospitals involved in Mr Last’s care…
Former Australian Medical Association President and a former MP, Dr. Kerryn Phelps, just defected and is on our side!
A wide-ranging article in The Chronicle1Archive. reveals that she and her wife suffered devastating injuries from Covid vaccines. Dr. Phelps submitted her reports of injuries, as well as her mistreatment and silence imposed on Australian doctors, to the Parliament of Australia.
Another medical professional speaking out. Great! Maybe the tide is turning?
Australian Media non-combative?
Phelps joins a growing number of high-profile physicians worldwide, including British cardiologist Dr. Aseem Malhotra and oncologist Professor Angus Dalgeish, who have turned against the shots after publicly supporting them in 2021.
But Phelps’s history of aggressive advocacy for the Covid vaccines – and all Covid countermeasures – makes her comments particularly hard to dismiss…
As striking as Phelps’s warning is the reception that Australian media gave it. While other physicians have faced scorn for their recent efforts to discuss potential vaccine injuries, Phelps is being treated largely respectfully.
Maybe the obvious failure of the vaccines to prevent Covid infection is leading to a larger reassessment of their benefit and risks, or maybe Phelps’s advocacy for other Covid countermeasures improves her credibility with journalists. Either way, though, the wall of silence around vaccine injuries seems to be cracking. At least a little.
To provide the best experience, Oisin.Page uses technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies allows processing of data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, might affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
