EU e-Privacy Directive

This website uses cookies to manage authentication, navigation, and other functions. By using our website, you agree that we can place these types of cookies on your device.

You have declined cookies. This decision can be reversed.


Covid is polarising opinion.

Those who trust the authorities and the NHS, and those who half-trust them but find the idea that they are actively acting against the population impossible to accept, these are on one side of the argument.

Those observers who have watched the systematic overturning of good science and good statistical process for no good reason, along with the implicit chorus of "we are scientists and we say so" coming from official advisers in the face of medical practitioners 'at the coal face' around the world who are telling them that they have got it wrong. These observers are on the other side.

Add to this mix the blatant censorship of views that contradict officialdom, add to this the blatant campaigns of fear that were and are being waged by governments to terrify us all into compliance with ever-changing rules and saturation advertising, add to these the use of force to ensure compliance in various countries, and we can see why the authorities are increasingly losing the support of their populations.

Use of coercion tells us that they know they have lost the argument.

So where does the truth lie?

This article presents a number of videos and linked articles that taken in turn explain why many are now convinced that the world's governments are either stupid and ignorant, or criminally complicit in a great global scam called Covid.

There is no attempt at balance here. The scam has gone too far for that, and anyway, it would make this article too long. We will not even attempt to answer the question "why?" - it's not really necessary, since we can be sure that no scam works to the advantage the scammed.

The first video is a quick overview of a complex situation, but it's very clear what is going on. Follow the money, follow the influence, follow the conflicts of interest. Then tell me how it constitutes independent oversight:


Do you think this sort of thing doesn't affect the UK?

Now we must consider both the virus and the "vaccines" - which are not in fact vaccines as they used to be known.

The death statistics have been very clearly manipulated from the beginning of the pandemic to attribute as many deaths as possible to the virus (PHE: any death within 28 days of a positive test result - even if the patient "fell under a bus" - oh, and no autopsies, so no challenge possible).

Supporting evidence comes from the statistics of 'excess deaths from all causes' for most of Europe and the UK for 2020. In a pandemic of this scale, these deaths should tell the story, and they do. The excess deaths from all causes reported by Public Health England (and Euromomo for Europe) did not show any pandemic-sized increase in deaths for 2020. No great surprise if indeed flu and much else besides had simply been rebadged as "Covid". 

The accuracy of the RT/PCR test itself has long been disputed and the WHO in Jan 2020 released an advisory that the test by itself cannot be relied upon, as it can produce false positives, especially when used in a population where the disease prevalence is rare (for example, in the general asymptomatic population). This would seem to totally discredit our government's mantra of "test test test".

Note that 2021 is a different ball-park - wide-spread "vaccination" had begun and continued throughout. Did the "vaccines" cause deaths in 2021? Not according to any official sources - even the MHRA yellow card system doesn't appear to be being used by the MHRA for any follow-up action. All we have are more deaths classed as "Covid", and we have already remarked how those figures are skewed.

The "vaccines" are novel gene-editing inoculations whose stated purpose is to modify our cell's DNA to persuade them to express a "spike protein" that is foreign to the human body. It is also apparently toxic to blood, which has obvious ramifications to all parts of the body including all the vital organs. Whilst these infected cells remain active, it also sets up the body for an auto-immune response against the continuing production of spike proteins.

Like all real vaccines, they also contain toxic adjuvants designed to provoke the immune system, and reportedly other ingredients not fully declared in the official documentation (metal contaminants have been found, graphene oxide has been alleged (& this video is subtitled in English).

And now, microscopic examination has identified what appears to be hydra:

Now I'm not saying that the hydra thing is true, and I'm not saying it's untrue - but the assertion is "out there" and I do believe that the vaccination drive is in pursuit of an undisclosed malign global agenda.

Until we have a full independent analysis of these vaccines, we don't know, but we can keep such assertions in mind.

More work needs to be done, and it won't be done by the vaccine manufacturers . . .

So how did the politics of Covid stack up in the fount of these various "vaccines", the USA?

Stew Peters takes the Trump administration to task:


It's hard to disagree.

"The push now by Pfizer is to vaccinate children 5-11"

Whatever you may think of any of the above, the totally unknown long-term safety risk of these injections, the almost unknown but likely significant short-term safety risk, coupled with zero benefit of "vaccination" in this age group, should in a sane world mean peremptory rejection. It doesn't, our world is sane no longer.

I predict that Pfizer will be given some form of authorisation. Where Pfizer leads, the other "vaccine" companies will follow. Where the CDC/FDA leads, the MHRA will follow.

The danger is that this programme is going to make the thalidomide tragedy look like a trivial event.