We are still living through both the failures and the successes of the societal changes of the 1960s. What our generation achieves in these few years will determine the next 50 years of our children's lives. This is what is really important now about our actions.
Robin
Robin
Forwarded from Russian MFA 🇷🇺
🎙 President of Russia Vladimir Putin answered questions from media representatives following visit to Turkmenistan
❓The NATO summit has begun with the war-mongering rhetoric. Russia has been declared a “direct threat” to the security of the Alliance. How would you assess these statements?
💬 President Putin: As regards their preparations for some actions against us since 2014, this information is not new to us. They have long been looking for an external enemy, for a threat that would rally their allies. I am referring above all to the United States.
This is fresh proof of what we have been saying all along: that NATO is a relic of the past, of the Cold War era.
They always replied that NATO had changed, that it had become more of a political alliance, but at the same time they were looking for an opportunity to give it a new lease on life as a military organisation. Well, this is exactly what they are doing now. There is nothing new in this for us.
❓The NATO summit has begun with the war-mongering rhetoric. Russia has been declared a “direct threat” to the security of the Alliance. How would you assess these statements?
💬 President Putin: As regards their preparations for some actions against us since 2014, this information is not new to us. They have long been looking for an external enemy, for a threat that would rally their allies. I am referring above all to the United States.
This is fresh proof of what we have been saying all along: that NATO is a relic of the past, of the Cold War era.
They always replied that NATO had changed, that it had become more of a political alliance, but at the same time they were looking for an opportunity to give it a new lease on life as a military organisation. Well, this is exactly what they are doing now. There is nothing new in this for us.
Forwarded from Russian MFA 🇷🇺
⚡️🇬🇧 On June 30, UK Ambassador to Russia Deborah Bronnert was summoned to the Foreign Ministry. She received a strong protest in response to the overtly inappropriate statements by UK leaders as regards Russia, its leader, government officials and the Russian people.
The ambassador was given a memo on the unacceptability of insulting rhetoric by representatives of the UK’s institutions of authority.
❗️ In a civilised society, it is customary to apologise for such statements.
Read in full
The ambassador was given a memo on the unacceptability of insulting rhetoric by representatives of the UK’s institutions of authority.
❗️ In a civilised society, it is customary to apologise for such statements.
Read in full
Forwarded from Russian Embassy in London
Forwarded from Dr. Simon
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Bolsonaro is a real advocate for freedom and science.
In this interview with Tucker Carlson, Bolsonaro brings up several valid points that are worth mentioning:
▪️ Mainstream media have instilled fear amongst the population and opposed preventive treatment methods. (Remark: The vaccination campaign in Brazil was beyond the good taste. Every commercial break consisted of several vaccine propaganda clips addressing adults and children.)
▪️ State Governors misused the situation to oppress the general public and force an experimental vaccine upon them. (Remark: Many states still communicate that wearing masks prevents the spread of viruses. Heretics!)
▪️ The Brazilian (woke) supreme court opposed the rights of bodily integrity, physical autonomy and self-determination. (Remark: It is also co-responsible for the strict entrance regulations for tourists.)
▪️ Big Pharma has too much power and undermines the democratic structures of many countries. (Remark: Pfizer has been accused of holding Brazil ‘to ransom’ over vaccine contract demands.)
▪️ Early treatments (i.e. Ivermectin etc.) could have saved many lives. (Remark: The data shows that he was right from the beginning. Early treatment with Ivermectin is highly efficient; however, the media and Lula supporters still claim that Ivermectin killed more people than it saved. A blatant lie!)
Contrary to Bolsonaro, his challenger Lula is highly autocratic. Lula called Bolsonaro's approach a 'genocide', and if it had been up to him, everybody in Brazil who rejected the vaccine would have lost their civil rights.
Unfortunately, Brazil is still in a state of fear due to the most prominent media network, "Globo". Many people are still wearing masks while sitting alone in the car or going for a walk. I hope that the truth concerning the vaccines and the political corruption will come to light before the general elections this year so Lula can be avoided.
All the best from Brazil 🇧🇷,
Dr. Simon
👉🏻 @Goddek | Minds | Bastyon | Gettr
In this interview with Tucker Carlson, Bolsonaro brings up several valid points that are worth mentioning:
▪️ Mainstream media have instilled fear amongst the population and opposed preventive treatment methods. (Remark: The vaccination campaign in Brazil was beyond the good taste. Every commercial break consisted of several vaccine propaganda clips addressing adults and children.)
▪️ State Governors misused the situation to oppress the general public and force an experimental vaccine upon them. (Remark: Many states still communicate that wearing masks prevents the spread of viruses. Heretics!)
▪️ The Brazilian (woke) supreme court opposed the rights of bodily integrity, physical autonomy and self-determination. (Remark: It is also co-responsible for the strict entrance regulations for tourists.)
▪️ Big Pharma has too much power and undermines the democratic structures of many countries. (Remark: Pfizer has been accused of holding Brazil ‘to ransom’ over vaccine contract demands.)
▪️ Early treatments (i.e. Ivermectin etc.) could have saved many lives. (Remark: The data shows that he was right from the beginning. Early treatment with Ivermectin is highly efficient; however, the media and Lula supporters still claim that Ivermectin killed more people than it saved. A blatant lie!)
Contrary to Bolsonaro, his challenger Lula is highly autocratic. Lula called Bolsonaro's approach a 'genocide', and if it had been up to him, everybody in Brazil who rejected the vaccine would have lost their civil rights.
Unfortunately, Brazil is still in a state of fear due to the most prominent media network, "Globo". Many people are still wearing masks while sitting alone in the car or going for a walk. I hope that the truth concerning the vaccines and the political corruption will come to light before the general elections this year so Lula can be avoided.
All the best from Brazil 🇧🇷,
Dr. Simon
👉🏻 @Goddek | Minds | Bastyon | Gettr
Looks like 1% of the. Israeli population per day were testing positive during the largest peak.
In separate “studies”, it appears that the “positivity”, the fraction of the PCR tests that were positive, was in the high-20% range. I find those numbers as unrealistic. Something is wrong, people. You can tell this isn’t correct if you only consider that a sizeable minority of the population had immunity to whatever infectious gent was responsible. Additionally. most people who encounter the alleged pathogen either developed no, or mild symptoms & we subsequently knot made ill again. I’m accepting that c19 “vaccinated” people can & do get reinfected & display signs of clinical illness.
In a setting like this. I find it unfeasible that the positivity could remain at or above 20% for more than a few occasions before there are too few susceptible hosts to keep such assets in that state position.
You’re not yet required to believe any particular thing. What do you think?
Best wishes,
Mike
In separate “studies”, it appears that the “positivity”, the fraction of the PCR tests that were positive, was in the high-20% range. I find those numbers as unrealistic. Something is wrong, people. You can tell this isn’t correct if you only consider that a sizeable minority of the population had immunity to whatever infectious gent was responsible. Additionally. most people who encounter the alleged pathogen either developed no, or mild symptoms & we subsequently knot made ill again. I’m accepting that c19 “vaccinated” people can & do get reinfected & display signs of clinical illness.
In a setting like this. I find it unfeasible that the positivity could remain at or above 20% for more than a few occasions before there are too few susceptible hosts to keep such assets in that state position.
You’re not yet required to believe any particular thing. What do you think?
Best wishes,
Mike
Ps: I’m not criticizing Paul or Geert. I am challenging the public health bodies responsible for these high positivity values to show that this isn’t in any way a consequence of the potential unreliability of their testing protocols.
Why This New Virus Testing Makes No Sense
If we were to have routinely tested everyone for spike proteins or other coronavirus target genes before 2020, we would have found them in approximately one third of what we call winter colds or flus if not higher. This is likely to be what is happening now: tests include gene targets shared with other common coronaviruses, and may result in positives to other coronaviruses too in certain circumstances. Further to this, most often infection is caused by more viruses at the same time, meaning someone can test positive to SARSCoV2 yet be coinfected with and have symptoms of any influenza virus instead at the same exact time.
For coronavirus infections, it was found that in approximately one case out of two there was a co-infection from at least another pathogen at the same time as the coronavirus infection. How can you determine whether the symptoms are due to the coronavirus or the other pathogen?
So testing for a single virus without testing for the hundreds of others someone could be co-infected with makes no sense.
Robin
https://nulluslocussinegenio.com/2021/12/22/why-this-new-virus-testing-makes-no-sense/
If we were to have routinely tested everyone for spike proteins or other coronavirus target genes before 2020, we would have found them in approximately one third of what we call winter colds or flus if not higher. This is likely to be what is happening now: tests include gene targets shared with other common coronaviruses, and may result in positives to other coronaviruses too in certain circumstances. Further to this, most often infection is caused by more viruses at the same time, meaning someone can test positive to SARSCoV2 yet be coinfected with and have symptoms of any influenza virus instead at the same exact time.
For coronavirus infections, it was found that in approximately one case out of two there was a co-infection from at least another pathogen at the same time as the coronavirus infection. How can you determine whether the symptoms are due to the coronavirus or the other pathogen?
So testing for a single virus without testing for the hundreds of others someone could be co-infected with makes no sense.
Robin
https://nulluslocussinegenio.com/2021/12/22/why-this-new-virus-testing-makes-no-sense/
No Place Without Spirit
Why This New Virus Testing Makes No Sense
In summer 2003, a respiratory outbreak was investigated in British Columbia, during which nucleic acid tests and serology unexpectedly indicated reactivity for severe acute respiratory syndrome cor…
"That first SARS event gave rise to a ‘very problematic’ April 2003 patent filing by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). It was for the entire SARS gene sequence, and for a series of derivative patents covering means of detection, including the PCR test [widely used today purportedly to diagnose cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection].
‘The reason why that is a problem is that if you both own the patent on the gene itself, and on its detection, you have a cunning advantage to being able to control 100 per cent of the provenance of not only the virus itself, but also its detection. Meaning, you have the entire scientific and message control.’"
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/twenty-year-genetic-trail-behind-covids-creation-3/
‘The reason why that is a problem is that if you both own the patent on the gene itself, and on its detection, you have a cunning advantage to being able to control 100 per cent of the provenance of not only the virus itself, but also its detection. Meaning, you have the entire scientific and message control.’"
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/twenty-year-genetic-trail-behind-covids-creation-3/
The Conservative Woman
Top posts of 2021: Twenty-year genetic trail behind Covid's creation - The Conservative Woman
S-protein shedding from jabbed individuals and testing positive. Please note that the:
Thermo Fisher TagPath COVID-19 Combo Kit
Uses the S-protein as a genet target: recently jabbed individuals are likely to test positive to the S gene, as are their close contacts.
https://blog.microbiologics.com/sars-c0v-2-tests-their-targets/
"The kit used by the Glasgow and Milton Keynes lighthouse laboratories is the
ThermoFisher TaqPath RT-PCR
which tests for the presence of three target genes from SARS-COV-2"
So what happens next? They reduce the target genes from 3 to 1!
BINGO!
THE JABBED AND THEIR CONTACTS SHOULD TEST POSITIVE TO 1/3 GENES!
"In correspondence with Mr Nicholas Lewis about single gene testing, in February 2021, the ONS confirmed that they do indeed call single gene targets as positives in their Covid-19 Infection Survey and also confirmed that the samples are processed by UK lighthouse laboratories"
https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n208/rr-3
Thermo Fisher TagPath COVID-19 Combo Kit
Uses the S-protein as a genet target: recently jabbed individuals are likely to test positive to the S gene, as are their close contacts.
https://blog.microbiologics.com/sars-c0v-2-tests-their-targets/
"The kit used by the Glasgow and Milton Keynes lighthouse laboratories is the
ThermoFisher TaqPath RT-PCR
which tests for the presence of three target genes from SARS-COV-2"
So what happens next? They reduce the target genes from 3 to 1!
BINGO!
THE JABBED AND THEIR CONTACTS SHOULD TEST POSITIVE TO 1/3 GENES!
"In correspondence with Mr Nicholas Lewis about single gene testing, in February 2021, the ONS confirmed that they do indeed call single gene targets as positives in their Covid-19 Infection Survey and also confirmed that the samples are processed by UK lighthouse laboratories"
https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n208/rr-3
Microbiologics Blog
SARS-C0V-2 Tests & Their Targets - Microbiologics Blog
Put to the test: use of rapid testing technologies for covid-19
"As early as April 2020, the UK lighthouse laboratories were testing for single genes and discounted the S gene as early as mid-May [10], months before the discovery of the new variant B1.1.7. Indeed, in Table 1 of [10] 18% of tests were positive on one gene only.
Furthermore, in a Public Health England report on variants [2] published 8 January 2021, it states the goal of using one gene was explicitly to approximate the growth of the new B1.1.7 variant:
“There has recently been an increase in the percentage of positive cases where only the ORF1ab- and N-genes were found and a decrease in the percentage of cases with all three genes. We can use this information to approximate the growth of the new variant.”
Section 10 of this ONS Covid-19 Infection Survey report [11] on 8 January 2021 confirms that one gene is sufficient for a positive result.
Obviously, there is a higher risk of encountering false positives when testing for single genes alone, because of the possibility of cross-reactivity with other human coronaviruses (HCOVs) as well as prevalent bacteria or reagent contamination. The potential for cross reactivity has already been confirmed by the German Instand laboratory report from April 2020 [12] (note that Prof. Drosten, co-author of Corman et al [2] is a cooperating partner listed in this report). The report describes the systematic blind testing of positive and negative samples anonymously sent to 463 laboratories from 36 countries and evaluated for the presence of a variety of genes associated with SARS-COV-2.
They reported significant cross reactivity and resultant false positives for OC43, and HCoV 229E (a common cold virus) as well as for SARS-COV-2 negative samples, not containing any competing pathogen.
Likewise, 70 Dutch laboratories were surveyed in November 2020, by the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment [13], with 76 diagnostic workflows reported as using only one target gene to diagnose the presence of SARS-COV-2 (46% of all workflows).
Without diagnostic validation it is not clear what can be concluded from a positive PCR test resulting from a single target gene call, especially if there was no confirmatory testing.
Many of the reported positive results may be inconclusive, negative or from people who suffered past infection for SARS-COV-2. Even with diagnostic validation of the single target gene call, the UK lighthouse laboratories appear not to be in strict conformance with the WHO emergency use assessment and the manufacturer instructions for use.
Given this it is clear the ONS and the UK lighthouse laboratories needs to publicly clarify their use of, and justify the reasons for, deviating from these standards."
https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n208/rr-3
"As early as April 2020, the UK lighthouse laboratories were testing for single genes and discounted the S gene as early as mid-May [10], months before the discovery of the new variant B1.1.7. Indeed, in Table 1 of [10] 18% of tests were positive on one gene only.
Furthermore, in a Public Health England report on variants [2] published 8 January 2021, it states the goal of using one gene was explicitly to approximate the growth of the new B1.1.7 variant:
“There has recently been an increase in the percentage of positive cases where only the ORF1ab- and N-genes were found and a decrease in the percentage of cases with all three genes. We can use this information to approximate the growth of the new variant.”
Section 10 of this ONS Covid-19 Infection Survey report [11] on 8 January 2021 confirms that one gene is sufficient for a positive result.
Obviously, there is a higher risk of encountering false positives when testing for single genes alone, because of the possibility of cross-reactivity with other human coronaviruses (HCOVs) as well as prevalent bacteria or reagent contamination. The potential for cross reactivity has already been confirmed by the German Instand laboratory report from April 2020 [12] (note that Prof. Drosten, co-author of Corman et al [2] is a cooperating partner listed in this report). The report describes the systematic blind testing of positive and negative samples anonymously sent to 463 laboratories from 36 countries and evaluated for the presence of a variety of genes associated with SARS-COV-2.
They reported significant cross reactivity and resultant false positives for OC43, and HCoV 229E (a common cold virus) as well as for SARS-COV-2 negative samples, not containing any competing pathogen.
Likewise, 70 Dutch laboratories were surveyed in November 2020, by the National Institute for Public Health and the Environment [13], with 76 diagnostic workflows reported as using only one target gene to diagnose the presence of SARS-COV-2 (46% of all workflows).
Without diagnostic validation it is not clear what can be concluded from a positive PCR test resulting from a single target gene call, especially if there was no confirmatory testing.
Many of the reported positive results may be inconclusive, negative or from people who suffered past infection for SARS-COV-2. Even with diagnostic validation of the single target gene call, the UK lighthouse laboratories appear not to be in strict conformance with the WHO emergency use assessment and the manufacturer instructions for use.
Given this it is clear the ONS and the UK lighthouse laboratories needs to publicly clarify their use of, and justify the reasons for, deviating from these standards."
https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n208/rr-3
Graph shows: Common (green tick), occasional (orange circle) and never (red cross) symptoms of the common cold, hay fever and Covid
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-10969823/Are-sniffles-caused-hay-fever-cold-Covid.html
What do you think of this chart?
I am not sure about the accuracy, yet probably makes much more sense than the "Covid tests".. 🤡
And where has the flu gone!? 🤷♂️
Robin
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-10969823/Are-sniffles-caused-hay-fever-cold-Covid.html
What do you think of this chart?
I am not sure about the accuracy, yet probably makes much more sense than the "Covid tests".. 🤡
And where has the flu gone!? 🤷♂️
Robin
❤1
Forwarded from Dr. Simon
"Modelers aren't scientists. Evidence-based conclusions cannot be drawn from made-up parameters that support one's own belief."
— Simon @Goddek
P.S.
Thanks, @abirballan1, for this wonderful illustration.
— Simon @Goddek
P.S.
Thanks, @abirballan1, for this wonderful illustration.
Forwarded from Fiona Rose Diamond (Fiona CoviLeaks)
‼️WE ARE STAGING A PROTEST TO SAVE ERIC LEVY‼️
Eric is a Hero and Living Legend; at 94 years old he is a protester who is NOT TOO SICK TO SAVE (as so deemed by the NHS) and is receiving ‘end of life care’ (which means no care at all!) at UCL Hospital Euston Square.
Eric has spent all his life protesting for freedom for Palestine, Syria, Iraq, Iran and Julian Assange (to name a few!) and he is now fighting for his life.
Please come to support Eric and help fight for a man who has dedicated his life to fight for Freedom and Peace for all.
FRIDAY 1ST JULY FROM 12 NOON
Stay all day or come between 3pm & 5pm, and from 7pm so we can demand the NHS #LetEricLive
Bring a placard/sign with the following:
Free Eric Levy
No End Of Life For Eric
94yr old Protester Wants To Live
Let Eric Live
Eric Captive at UCL
Don’t Kill Eric Levy
We Love Eric
Palestine Loves Eric
Julian Assange Loves Eric
#LetEricLive
Eric is a Hero and Living Legend; at 94 years old he is a protester who is NOT TOO SICK TO SAVE (as so deemed by the NHS) and is receiving ‘end of life care’ (which means no care at all!) at UCL Hospital Euston Square.
Eric has spent all his life protesting for freedom for Palestine, Syria, Iraq, Iran and Julian Assange (to name a few!) and he is now fighting for his life.
Please come to support Eric and help fight for a man who has dedicated his life to fight for Freedom and Peace for all.
FRIDAY 1ST JULY FROM 12 NOON
Stay all day or come between 3pm & 5pm, and from 7pm so we can demand the NHS #LetEricLive
Bring a placard/sign with the following:
Free Eric Levy
No End Of Life For Eric
94yr old Protester Wants To Live
Let Eric Live
Eric Captive at UCL
Don’t Kill Eric Levy
We Love Eric
Palestine Loves Eric
Julian Assange Loves Eric
#LetEricLive
Forwarded from Spirit of Liberty
Why Are US Hospitals Sending Sensitive Data to Facebook?
"Data is the new oil. Every second, a person creates roughly 1.7 MB of data. Not surprisingly, there is a concerted effort from Big Tech companies to mine data flows and drain us dry
One such company is Meta, more commonly known as Facebook, a company known for violating users’ rights repeatedly, without remorse
According to a recent Markup report, a tracking tool installed on dozens of hospitals’ websites 'has been collecting patients’ sensitive health information—including details about their medical conditions, prescriptions, and doctor’s appointments. Rather alarmingly, this sensitive info has been sent to the data gurus in Silicon Valley
Last year, as you might recall, Facebook changed its name. Different name, same problems. The change was merely aesthetic—more marketing savvy than a change of actual substance. In reality, Meta appears to be no less trustworthy now than it was prior to the name change…"
👉 Read more: The Epoch Times / Archive
"Data is the new oil. Every second, a person creates roughly 1.7 MB of data. Not surprisingly, there is a concerted effort from Big Tech companies to mine data flows and drain us dry
One such company is Meta, more commonly known as Facebook, a company known for violating users’ rights repeatedly, without remorse
According to a recent Markup report, a tracking tool installed on dozens of hospitals’ websites 'has been collecting patients’ sensitive health information—including details about their medical conditions, prescriptions, and doctor’s appointments. Rather alarmingly, this sensitive info has been sent to the data gurus in Silicon Valley
Last year, as you might recall, Facebook changed its name. Different name, same problems. The change was merely aesthetic—more marketing savvy than a change of actual substance. In reality, Meta appears to be no less trustworthy now than it was prior to the name change…"
👉 Read more: The Epoch Times / Archive
Forwarded from Spirit of Liberty
Drug Cartel: Biden Admin Agrees to Pay Pfizer 56% More for Their COVID Shots
The pharma giant is already shattering profit records, and is expected to generate well over $100 billion in 2022 revenue.
"Pfizer is already swimming in record profits, but that hasn’t stopped the drug company from gouging the American taxpayer for every last dollar.
On Wednesday, the Biden Administration signed off on a new vaccine supply deal with Pfizer for $3.2 billion for 105 million COVID injections, but that’s only for the first batch of mRNA shots. The contract will generate well over $9 billion for Pfizer, as this latest purchase agreement tops off at 300 million doses. Compared to previous settlements with Pfizer, this public-private no-bid arrangement will come at a much higher cost to the U.S. taxpayer.
The Biden Administration has justified the deal by claiming that it needs to restock supply to prepare for seasonal spikes. The data does not support such a claim…"
👉 Read more: The Dossier
The pharma giant is already shattering profit records, and is expected to generate well over $100 billion in 2022 revenue.
"Pfizer is already swimming in record profits, but that hasn’t stopped the drug company from gouging the American taxpayer for every last dollar.
On Wednesday, the Biden Administration signed off on a new vaccine supply deal with Pfizer for $3.2 billion for 105 million COVID injections, but that’s only for the first batch of mRNA shots. The contract will generate well over $9 billion for Pfizer, as this latest purchase agreement tops off at 300 million doses. Compared to previous settlements with Pfizer, this public-private no-bid arrangement will come at a much higher cost to the U.S. taxpayer.
The Biden Administration has justified the deal by claiming that it needs to restock supply to prepare for seasonal spikes. The data does not support such a claim…"
👉 Read more: The Dossier
Forwarded from GreenMedInfo
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Valerie Borek, Policy Analyst for Stand for Health Freedom did an incredible job at the FDA's Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee meeting on Tuesday expressing deep concern over the FDA's conflicts of interest and mishandling of the vaccine roll-outs, on behalf of the over half a million Americans who are advocates of informed consent and no medical mandates! Please share this far and wide, and remember to stay abreast of the latest SHF actions and updates here: https://standforhealthfreedom.com/