An opinion piece from an Australian writer:

This felt good to read 😊

An opinion piece from a vaccinated Australian writer:

“If Covid was a battlefield it would still be warm with the bodies of the unvaccinated.

Thankfully the mandates are letting up and both sides of the war stumble back to the new normal.

The unvaccinated are the heroes of the last two years as they allowed us all to have a control group in the great experiment and highlight the shortcoming of the Covid vaccines.

The unvaccinated carry many battle scars and injuries as they are the people we tried to mentally break, yet no one wants to talk about what we did to them and what they forced “The Science“ to unveil.

We knew that the waning immunity of the fully vaccinated had the same risk profile as others within society as the minority of the unvaccinated,

yet we marked them for special persecution.

You see we said they had not “done the right thing for the greater good” by handing their bodies and medical autonomy over to the State.

Many of the so-called health experts and political leaders in Australia admitted the goal was to make life almost unliveable for the unvaccinated,

which was multiplied many times by the collective mob, with the fight taken into workplaces, friendships, and family gatherings.

Today the hard truth is none of it was justified as we took a quick slide from righteousness to absolute cruelty.

We might lay the blame on our leaders and health experts for the push but each individual within society must be held accountable for stepping into the well-laid-out trap.

We did this despite knowing full well that principled opposition is priceless when it comes to what goes inside our bodies and we let ourselves be tricked into believing that going into another ineffective lockdown would be the fault of the unvaccinated and not the fault of the toxic policy of ineffective vaccines.

We took pleasure in scapegoating the unvaccinated because after months of engineered lockdowns by political leaders blinded by power, having someone to blame and to burn at the stake felt good.

We believed we had logic, love, and truth on our side so it was easy to wish death upon the unvaccinated.

Those of us who ridiculed and mocked the non-compliant did it because we were embarrassed by their courage and principles and didn’t think the unvaccinated would make it through unbroken and we turned the holdouts into punching bags.

Lambie, Carr, Chant, Andrews, McGowan, Gunner, and the other cast of hundreds in prominent roles need to be held to account for vilifying the unvaccinated in public and fueling angry social media mobs.

The mobs, the mask Nazis, and the vaccine disciples have been embarrassed by “betting against” the unvaccinated because mandates only had the power we gave them.

It was not compliance that ended domination by Big Pharma Companies, Bill Gates and his many organizations, and the World Economic Forum…

It was THANKS to the people we tried to embarrass, ridicule, mock and tear down.

We should all try and find some inner gratitude for the unvaccinated as we took the bait by hating them because their perseverance and courage bought us the time to see we were wrong.

So if mandates ever return for Covid or any other disease or virus, hopefully, more of us will be awake and see the rising authoritarianism that has no concern for our well-being and is more about power and control.

The War on the Unvaccinated was lost and we should all be very thankful for that.”

This is the best thing I have read in 3 years. What a well-written article/apology, whatever you want to call it.

To have someone realize everything that we have gone through to save humanity from certain doom is reassuring.

I’ve lost many many friendships, argued with family and been banned from every social media platform I’ve been on either for life or like Facebook 30 days then a few days on and then 30 days again. That has been going on for 3 years. Twitter just banned me for life and TikTok is holding on by a thread. I tried to raise money for charity this year. I managed £62 in 8 weeks. That’s the extent of my lost friendships.

I have a group called “ castlemans disease UK “ and I’m a member of the CDCN ( Castlemans Disease Collaborative Network )

I sense the tension between us because of my views on the vaccines. I was right and always knew I was right because I had data and critical thinking. It doesn’t mean you’re dumb to have been sucked in, but some people wanted and wished I would die of covid. I wasn’t worried about the dying bit because I know that covid didn’t exist. However, the thought that people were wishing me dead because I was trying to save their lives was quite heartbreaking. I said no more endless times, but I couldn’t stop exposing these rich criminals.

But they haven’t finished with you yet. Now it’s destroying the Russian Federation and using you as tools.

They condemn Russia, but do you know

The United States Has Been at war 225 out of 243 years since 1776

The US Has Been at war for more than 92 per cent of the time

The American history of overt and covert foreign interventions dates back to 1811, when it had invaded Chile, just a year after this South American country had gained independence from Spain.

Research conducted by the “Jang Group and Geo Television Network” reveals that the United States has been at war for about 225 of the 243 years since its inception in 1776. While the number of US foreign military interventions had stood at 188 till 2017, the world superpower was found involved in 117 “partisan electoral interventions” between 1946 and 2000 or around one of every nine ballot exercises held since the Second World War.

This means that the United States has been at war for more than 92 per cent of the time since its birth, making critics view that the rulers of the land found by Christopher Columbus have been addicted to the use of military might and intoxicated with their successes against weaker nations that could not defend themselves for one reason or the other. Or in other words, the United States has only been at peace for less than 20 years.

In one of its November 23, 2017 reports, a known British media house “Channel 4 News” had carried a research undertaken by the Institute for Politics and Strategy at Carnegie Mellon University, a private research university based in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania State. The researcher had calculated the vast scale of election interventions by both the US and Russia.

The media outlet had stated: “According to his research, there were 117 “partisan electoral interventions” between 1946 and 2000. That’s around one of every nine competitive elections held since Second World War. The majority of these – almost 70 per cent – were cases of US interference. And these are not all from the Cold War era; 21 such interventions took place between 1990 and 2000, of which 18 were by the United States, and 60 different independent countries have been the targets of such interventions.” The researcher interviewed by “Channel News 4” had maintained: “But almost two thirds of interventions were done in secret, with voters having no idea that foreign powers were actively trying to influence the results. According to Levin’s research, those countries where secret tactics have been deployed by the US include Guatemala, Brazil, El Salvador, Haiti, Panama, Israel, Lebanon, Iran, Greece, Italy, Malta, Slovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, Sri Lanka, the Philippines, South Vietnam and Japan.”

He had asserted: “For Russia, the list of covert interventions includes: France, Denmark, Italy, Greece, West Germany, Japan, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, the Congo, Venezuela, Chile, Costa Rica, and the US.”

By the way, the United States also has a long history of rigging polls, supporting military coups, channelling funds and spreading political propaganda in other countries. The United States has been involved in several foreign interventions throughout its history.

It was engaged in 46 military interventions from 1948–1991. “The National Interest”, an American bimonthly international affairs magazine, had carried a report in 2017, which had held: “The United States engaged in 46 military interventions from 1948–1991. From 1992–2017, this number had increased four-fold to 188. These statistics introduce two important puzzles. First, why would military interventions rise at the same time success in military interventions has been declining? Second, why would military interventions increase after the Cold War?”

The journal had added: “In other words, if the United States only intervenes with armed force when its vital interests are at stake, why intervene more often when there are arguably fewer vital interests at stake? The answer is that Washington too often intervenes militarily when it should not – and US security and prosperity have both suffered as a result.”

According to the prestigious “The Washington Post”, till December 2016, the United States had tried to change other countries’ governments 72 times during the Cold War.

The widely-read and quoted American media house had written: “Between 1947 and 1989, the United States tried to change other nations’ governments 72 times. That’s a remarkable number. It includes 66 covert operations and six overt ones. Of course, that doesn’t excuse Russia’s meddling in the 2016 US presidential election. These 72 US operations were during the Cold War – meaning that, in most cases, the Soviet Union was covertly supporting anti-US forces.”

“The Washington Post” had asserted: “We examined unclassified Central Intelligence Agency documents and historical academic research on US interventions to identify 27 US clandestine operations carried out between 1949 and 2000. Most US “secret wars” were against other democratic states.” The report continued: “Unclassified documeit’s published by the US national security archive at George Washington University shows that the British government helped the United States overthrow Mohammad Mosaddegh, a democratically elected prime minister of Iran, and tried to block the release of information about its involvement in the coup.”

The 143-year-old ace American newspaper had gone on to write: “But that’s just one example. In 1954, an anti-Communist “army” trained and armed by the CIA deposed democratically elected president Jacobo Arbenz Guzman in Guatemala – leading to years of violent civil war and rightist rule. Fifty-seven years later, Guatemalan President Alvaro Colom, on behalf of the state, asked Guzman’s family for forgiveness. And in 1981, President Ronald Reagan authorized the funding for the CIA-led “secret wars” against the democratically elected Sandinista government in Nicaragua. These are but a few examples of the US covert operations abroad.”

Everything above has been perfectly worded and orchestrated, to blame others. Russia meddling with 2016 election YAWWWNNN. But they have missed out on the years of secret biological weapons in Ukraine. No mention of the 8 years of shelling Donetsk.

But when Russia think “ right that’s it, they have intensified shelling on our Russian people and are planning to release biological weapons ( War Crimes ) on the world and move in to protect you and me, the West cover it up and blames Putin.

They even want to charge Putin with war crimes. I can assure you that I get a lot of information from Russia and the Western journalists and the people of Ukraine and the DPR daily. Ukrainian forces and the Azov battalion are savage with Zelensky snorting at least half an ounce of high-grade cocaine daily.

Here he is being interviewed and boasting and another great capture whilst during a zoom meeting.

If you look through my articles you will find stuff that will make your skin crawl. I’m not an “ I told you so “ type of person, but I have been relentless.

My new thing now along with my existing exposure will be “ climate change

To be a liar, especially a public liar, you need to have a very good memory and concentrate on every letter that comes out of your mouth.

Just Like Greta Thunberg. She’s useless on the spot. LISTEN

We are winning. The more that take it on the chin and just say “ hey, they got me “ the better chance we’ll have. So, please share my blogs and help save humanity.

Dave Begley

Advertisement

The Facts About Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Risks to Unborn Babies

May 20, 2022 • by Linnea Wahl, Team 5 Data Group

The Facts About Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Risks to Unborn Babies
This report has been brought to you by the War Room/DailyClout Pfizer Documents Research Volunteers

As we all know, there is much conflicting information on the internet about the safety of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine during pregnancy. Official health sources recommend the Pfizer vaccine as safe for pregnant women and their babies (for example, US Centers for Disease Control, https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/recommendations/pregnancy.html). On the other hand, many sources suggest grave danger from the vaccine to pregnant women and their babies (for example, https://dailyexpose.uk/2022/05/09/confidential-pfizer-docs-90percent-pregnancies-miscarried/). 

The fact is that women who receive the Pfizer mRNA vaccine may be putting their unborn babies at a very high risk of dying during the pregnancy. So why do Pfizer and the FDA continue to recommend that pregnant women receive the Pfizer mRNA vaccine?

To understand the increased risks, we need to understand first what is normal; that is, how often does a baby die during an unvaccinated woman’s pregnancy?  Early in a pregnancy, miscarriage or spontaneous abortion (the death of a baby before 13 weeks gestation) happens in 1 of 10 (10%) pregnancies (https://www.acog.org/womens-health/faqs/early-pregnancy-loss). Later in a pregnancy, the risk of a baby dying decreases dramatically: stillbirths (the death of a baby after 20 weeks gestation) occur in 1 in 160 (0.6%) pregnancies (https://www.marchofdimes.org/complications/stillbirth.aspx).

These are the normal background rates of in utero death. Yet after mothers receive the Pfizer mRNA vaccine, in utero deaths appear to be much, much higher. The truth lies in Pfizer’s own documents submitted to the US Food and Drug Agency. 

Following FDA’s initial emergency use authorization of Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine on December 11, 2020, Pfizer was required to submit periodic reports of side effects (adverse events) from the vaccine. In its April 30, 2021, adverse event report to FDA, Pfizer analyzed the effects of the vaccine in patients around the world (https://www.phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/reissue_5.3.6-postmarketing-experience.pdf). Although the conclusion of this report states that “review of the available data . . . confirms a favorable benefit:risk balance”  for the Pfizer mRNA vaccine (p. 29, https://www.phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/reissue_5.3.6-postmarketing-experience.pdf), the details of the report tell a different story for the babies of pregnant women who receive the vaccine.

Pfizer reported that pregnancy outcomes were available for only 32 of 270 pregnancies and 4 associated fetus/baby cases (p. 12, https://www.phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/reissue_5.3.6-postmarketing-experience.pdf). In these 36 cases, 28 babies (78%) died after their mothers received the Pfizer mRNA vaccine. Pfizer and the FDA knew by April 2021 that the babies’ mortality rate may have been much greater than normal. This is a serious claim, so it’s important to explain where this number comes from.

Pfizer’s Table 6 (excerpted in Fig. 1, below) notes that 124 of 270 vaccinated mothers (46%) experienced adverse or serious adverse events. A total of 75 of these mothers (28%) and 4 additional unborn babies or neonates were reported to have had serious adverse events after the mothers received the mRNA vaccine. Of the 36 babies for which Pfizer knew the outcome, 25 died before birth and 3 died at birth. The babies’ deaths are categorized as follows:

  • 23 spontaneous abortions
  • 2 spontaneous abortions with intrauterine death
  • 2 premature births with neonatal death
  • 1 spontaneous abortion with neonatal death

Thus 28 out of 36 babies with known outcomes died at or before birth—a crude mortality rate of 78%.This suggests a mortality rate much higher than normal (10% for early pregnancies; less than 1% for pregnancies that last longer than 20 weeks). But we must keep in mind that these data are incomplete; Pfizer reported no information on 238 babies. For a truly valid estimate of the mortality rate, one would need either the complete data set or a random sample. Pfizer collected neither. 

Just the suggestion that more babies were dying during pregnancy should have raised alarms at Pfizer. Instead Pfizer concluded that the benefits of the mRNA vaccine were worth the risks of a pregnant woman losing her baby.

So the question remains: Why do Pfizer and the FDA continue to allow pregnant women to be vaccinated? They know that unborn babies may be at increased risk of death from the Pfizer mRNA vaccine. Why aren’t pregnant women warned of these risks?

The OODA loop

Our enemies are obsessed with jamming our OODA Loops. They do not want us to have even a moment to think. An OODA loop is a decision making process: observe–orient–decide–act. We take in information, and we make a decision on how to act to change things. Our enemies keep distracting us with constantly changing information, and we keep getting stuck in the OO stage, never making decisions, never acting to change things, because we are constantly trying to figure out the nature of the trap we are caught in. But that is the trap we are caught in! We end up stuck in endless puzzling debates, making no productive plans to achieve victory in even one small way.

When a fresh news story gets hyped up, and people say “oh oh they are just distracting us”, it is THINKING TIME they are distracting us from. A moment for the dust to settle, for even a minute of propaganda-free time, to be able to make a plan to counter our enemy’s plans. They cannot allow us this minute. We are allowed no firm place to stand. They have to bombard us with useless factoids and storylines 24/7, little rabbit holes and dead-ends and intrigue and drama, or else we might form together into something capable of defeating their psychological operations. Distraction and overload is their primary weapon against us. Unfortunately, we keep falling for this trick.

The OODA loop is the cycle observe–orient–decide–act, developed by military strategist and United States Air Force Colonel John Boyd. Boyd applied the concept to the combat operations process, often at the operational level during military campaigns. It is now also often applied to understand commercial operations and learning processes. The approach explains how agility can overcome raw power in dealing with human opponents. It is especially applicable to cyber security and cyberwarfare.[1]

The OODA loop has become an important concept in litigation,[2] business,[3]law enforcement,[4] and military strategy. According to Boyd, decision-making occurs in a recurring cycle of observe–orient–decide–act. An entity (whether an individual or an organization) that can process this cycle quickly, observing and reacting to unfolding events more rapidly than an opponent, can thereby “get inside” the opponent’s decision cycle and gain the advantage.

Inquest due to Pfizer vaccine

An Inquest, Likely due to the family not expecting an ‘unexplained’ death and pushing for answers, is further proof of the dangers of the Pfizer Vaccine. Another healthy young woman, daughter, mother and wife has lost her life from being coerced by our lying governments, global ‘health agencies’ and big Pharma.

She leaves behind her year old son… How many more will we lose, how many children?

‘A post-mortem examination on the body of Dawn Wooldridge had previously proved inconclusive but an inquest heard on Thursday that the unexpected death, which happened 11 days after Dawn’s first Covid jab, was likely caused as a result of the vaccination.

The 36-year-old was found dead in her home by her brother in June last year, after she failed to collect her five-year-old son from school that day.

In a statement to the Berkshire coroner by Dawn’s husband, Ashley, he said: “We met on holiday in Turkey and we have been married for seven years this year.’

t.me/FionaRoseDiamond

Davos Man, his World Economic Forum, and his Servants

The purpose of this essay and the accompanying spreadsheet is to provide you with information and transparency about who these people are, where they come from, what their ethics and policy positions are, where they work, what sectors they work in, and when they were trained to do the bidding of the World Economic Forum (“WEF”).

These people have been trained to believe in and support a globalist form of unelected government, in which business is at the centre of the management and decision-making process.  They are fundamentally anti-democratic, and their views are both fundamentally corporatist and globalist, which is another way of saying that they are for totalitarian fascism – the fusion of the interests of business with the power of the state – on a global scale.

The Malone Institute, in collaboration with the Pharos Foundation and Pharos Media Productions in Sweden, has invested months of time and hundreds of labour hours to mine existing and historic publicly available data sources to develop a detailed summary of graduates from two WEF training programs; Global Leaders of Tomorrow (a one-year program that ran from 1993 to 2003) and Young Global Leaders (a five-year program started 2004/2005 and still running).

Who are the globalist members of the trade organisation known as The World Economic Forum (“WEF”) and their servants, why should you care, and what can you do about it? 

First, “who are they?” 

The current 100 WEF full members (“Strategic Partners”) are drawn from the largest corporations in the world, together with their owners and managers (referred to as “Davos Man”).  The list of corporations, owners and managers who control the WEF is not disclosed and membership can only be inferred indirectly.  However, the WEF members do not act alone, but have developed various groups of globally distributed trainees who generally act in accordance with the detailed policies and positions developed and distributed by WEF leadership.  These training programs have been operating for over three decades, resulting in placement, distribution and rapid advancement of many thousands of WEF-trained operatives throughout the world.  WEF chairman Klaus Schwab has famously claimed that these operatives have been strategically inserted into key positions in various governments, as well as influential spots in key industries such as media, finance, and technology. 

Davos Man” is a term coined by former Harvard University Director of the Centre for International Affairs Professor Dr. Samuel Huntington (1927-2008) to define an emerging group of economic elites who are members of a social caste which has “little need for national loyalty, view national boundaries as obstacles that are thankfully vanishing, and see national governments as residues from the past whose only useful function is to facilitate the elite’s global operations.”  The title of his prescient 2004 article published in The National Interest is telling: “Dead Souls: The Denationalisation of the American Elite”.

In a 2005 article published in The Guardian titled “Davos man’s death wish”, Timothy Garton Ash described Davos Man and the World Economic Forum:

Davos Man is mainly white, middle-aged and European or Anglo-Saxon. Of course, some of the participants at this year’s five-day meeting of the World Economic Forum in the Swiss mountain resort were Indian, Chinese, African or/and women. But they continue to be a minority. The dominant culture of Davos remains that of white western man

Davos man has a troublesome pre-history of combining brilliance and stupidity, of being blinded by national and ideological prejudice to his own long-term interest and destroying with one hand what he has built with the other.”

Wikipedia defines “megalomania” as “an obsession with power and wealth, and a passion for grand schemes.”  It also relates this term to the following psychological terms: Narcissistic personality disorderGrandiose delusions, and Omnipotence (psychoanalysis), a stage of child development. Davos Man fits the definition of megalomania and has acquired what he believes are the financial and political resources to try to force his obsession and grand schemes on the world, and to force you, your family, and the world to comply with his vision.

Regarding the WEF, Andrew Marshall developed a brief introductory summary which I strongly recommend reading, published in a 2015 article entitled “World Economic Forum: a history and analysis”. The membership of the WEF is divided into three categories: Regional Partners, Industry Partner Groups, and the most esteemed, the Strategic Partners. Membership fees from corporations and industry groups finance the Forum and provide the member company with extra access and to set the agenda. A full list of current Strategic Partners can be found HERE.

“Why should you care?” 

The WEF is the organisation which has masterminded the globally harmonised planning, development and implementation of the lockdowns, mandates, authoritarian vaccine campaigns, suppression of early treatment options, global targeting of dissenting physicians, censorship, propaganda, information and thought control programs which we have all experienced since late 2019.  This is the organisational structure used by the ones who have sought to control and manage the world to advance the economic and political interests of their members through the ongoing “Great Reset” (as named and described by their chairman Klaus Schwab) by exploiting and exacerbating the social and economic disruption which they have artificially and intentionally crafted since SARS-CoV-19 began spreading across the world. 

The musings and plans of this trade organisation read and sound like the implausible sinister plot of an international spy novel concocted by a second-rate version of Ian Fleming, John Le Carre, or Robert Ludlum.  Unfortunately, they are backed by the financial resources of many of the wealthiest people in the world.  For examples of the muddled thinking and pseudo-science which these self-appointed masters of the universe proudly publish, I recommend that you do your best to read COVID-19: The Great ResetThe Great Narrative for a better future (both by Klaus Schwab and Thierry Malleret), and How to Prevent the Next Pandemic (by Bill Gates).  A detailed interactive summary of their policy positions and the interrelationships of those policies (“transformation map”) can be found HERE and for COVID-19, HERE.

“What can you do about it?” 

After all you have seen and experienced since September 2019, please look in the mirror and ask yourself these two questions:

Are these people I can trust with my future and that of my children?

“Do they represent my interests, values, and what I believe in?”

If you decide that you cannot trust them, or that they do not share your interests and values, then it is high time to act to prevent them from taking control of all aspects of your life.  Otherwise, the WEF seeks to take away everything you own, and to completely control all aspects of your life.  One of the key predictions of their “Global Future Councils” is that by 2030, you (or your children) will own nothing, and will be happy.  Here is a LINK to other aspects of their vision of tomorrow.

If not us, who?  If not now, when

Susan George, “Whose Crisis, Whose Future?”  (Polity Press and John Wiley & Sons, 2010)

Whatever your answer, you deserve to know who these people are that wish to control the world, your daily life, what information you can access, what you are allowed to think, and what you are allowed to own.  You deserve to know who they represent, and what are their names.  The purpose of this essay and the accompanying spreadsheet is to provide you with information and transparency about who these people are, where they come from, what their ethics and policy positions are, where they work, what sectors they work in, and when they were trained to do the bidding of the WEF (there are often close bonds between members of the same class year). 

These people have been trained to believe in and support a globalist form of unelected government, in which business is at the centre of the management and decision-making process.  They have been trained to advance the interests of a global transnational government which represents a public-private partnership in which the business interests of the WEF members take precedence over the constitution of the United States.  The WEF believes that the concept of independent nation-states is obsolete and must be replaced with a global government which controls all.  They are fundamentally anti-democratic, and their views are both fundamentally corporatist and globalist, which is another way of saying that they are for totalitarian fascism – the fusion of the interests of business with the power of the state – on a global scale. These people do not represent the interests of the nation-state in which they reside, work, and may hold political office, but rather their allegiance appears to be to the WEF vision of a dominant world government which has dominion over nations and their constitutions.  In my opinion, in the case of those trainees and WEF members who are in politics, and particularly those who have been used to “penetrate the global cabinets of countries”, these persons should be forced to register as foreign agents within their host countries.

Davos Man’s Servants are Foreign Agents. The full title of the US Foreign Principal Registration Act of 1938 (FARA) is “An Act to require the registration of certain persons employed by agencies to disseminate propaganda in the United States and for other purposes.”  Citing Wikipedia,

“The Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) (2 U.S.C. § 611 et seq.) is a United States law requiring persons engaged in domestic political or advocacy work on behalf of foreign interests to register with the Department of Justice and disclose their relationship, activities, and related financial compensation. Its purpose is to allow the government and general public to be informed of the identities of individuals representing the interests of foreign governments or entities. The law is administered and enforced (or not…) by the FARA Unit of the Counterintelligence and Export Control Section (CES) in the National Security Division (NSD).”

The List of WEF Trainees

The Malone Institute (primarily Dr. Jill Glasspool-Malone and Anita Hasbury-Snogles), in collaboration with the Pharos Foundation and Pharos Media Productions in Sweden, has invested months of time and hundreds of labour hours to mine existing and historic publicly available data sources to develop a detailed summary of graduates from two WEF training programs; the World Economic Forum’s Global Leaders of Tomorrow (a one-year program that ran from 1993 to 2003) and Young Global Leaders (a five-year program started 2004/2005 and still running).  Pharos foundations’ summary can be found here. These people have been intentionally and internationally deployed as foreign agents representing the interests of the WEF members to “penetrate the global cabinets of countries” as well as a wide range of key business sectors including banking/finance, other business sectors (including health and biotechnology), academia and health, media, technology, logistics, arts and culture, sports, politics and government, think tanks, telecommunications, real estate, financial investment/holding companies, a variety of non-governmental organisations, energy, aerospace and military, food and agriculture. 

This list can be found and downloaded at the following link:

THIS IS THE LIST OF WEF TRAINEES

The list contains a summary of the graduates of the World Economic Forum’s Global Leaders of Tomorrow (a one-year program that ran from 1993 to 2003) as well as the Young Global Leaders (a five-year program started 2004/2005 and still running).

To create this list, the Malone Institute and the Pharos Foundation have used World Economic Forum search engines and cross-checked published lists, Wayback Machine archives, Wikispooks, and other complementary sources. It may not be 100% accurate, but we have done our best to make it as correct and updated as possible.  Some people have been removed from the WEF website, and some were never listed but have been identified by Klaus Schwab himself as members of his young global agents of change. We have done extensive manual research in order to identify and verify those for whom very little information has been provided. When missing, there has been an attempt to find and add relevant countries, positions etc.  When identified, links have been provided to existing biographies, primarily those included in World Economic Forum webpages, or else Wikipedia, LinkedIn, company pages, or articles. In some cases (when available) we have also provided links to organisations they have worked at. When possible, positions and organisations in many cases have been updated to the most recent identifiable.

The Sector designations chosen by WEF have changed over the years, so the spreadsheet uses the most descriptive term for their updated sector and position, but in some cases we have added our own – especially in the Business sector where we have added Sub-sectors for more detailed information. The Region designations used by WEF have also changed over the years, so we have used simpler geographical regions. We have added extra columns in the spreadsheet for Sex, Political position, Health connection, and finally Notes for additional or relevant information.

This list is open to corrections and additions, should anyone spot an error or have more information.  Please write to us at info@MaloneInstitute.org  if you have additional information, details, or corrections.

Once again, here is the LANDING PAGE WHERE YOU CAN DOWNLOAD THE DEFINITIVE LIST OF WEF YLT and GLT GRADUATES

Source Information

So that you can cross-check for yourself, below are provided hyperlinked sources for this summary, which includes only the listed groups (GLT = Global Leaders of Tomorrow, YGL = Young Global Leaders). There are additional WEF trainee groups including “Young Scientists”, and these will be the focus of future similar summary spreadsheets. The lists below do not contain the full documentation of the members found on our master list above.

GLT class of 1993

GLT class of 1994

GLT class of 1995

GLT class of 1996

GLT class of 1997

GLT class of 1998

GLT class of 1999

GLT class of 2000

GLT class of 2001

GLT class of 2002

GLT class of 2003

According to economist Richard Werner, who was selected for the GLT program in 2003, the Global Leaders of Tomorrow program (GLT) was closed down and rebooted as a more controllable group called the “Young Global Leaders” (YGL) because too many people were asking difficult questions in the forum (see “Last American Vagabond” podcast titled “COVID Measures And The Central Controls Over The Economy” here).  Many of the more recently graduate classes are explicitly identified as revolutionaries who are “Driving the Fourth Industrial Revolution” on behalf of the WEF.

YGL class of 2005

YGL class of 2006

YGL class of 2007 (select year 2007 on the tab at right)

YGL class of 2008 (select year 2008 on the tab at right)

YGL class of 2009

YGL class of 2010

YGL class of 2011

YGL class of 2012

YGL class of 2013

YGL class of 2014

YGL class of 2015

YGL class of 2016

YGL class of 2017

YGL class of 2018

YGL class of 2019

YGL class of 2020

YGL class of 2021

Covid infection raises risk of developing fatal blood clot in lung by 33-fold, says study

A 33-fold spike has been witnessed in the occurrence of a blood clot in the lung, which can be fatal, in 30 days after getting infected with coronavirus, found a new study.  

Another five-fold rise in the risk of getting deep vein thrombosis (DVT) has been linked with contracting Covid, it also said.

The findings of the research were published in the British Medical Journal on Thursday.

The study was carried out by Anne-Marie Fors Connolly of Umeå University in Sweden and her colleagues. The team looked to check the risk of DVT, pulmonary embolism, which is a blood clot in the lung, and other types of bleeding in over one million people, who were also the confirmed cases of Covid.

They also found a two-fold hike in the risk of bleeding after 30 days of the infection.

After becoming infected with coronavirus, patients remain at heightened risk of pulmonary embolism for six months. For bleeding and DVT, the risk is for two and three months, respectively.   

“Pulmonary embolism can be fatal, so it is important to be aware [of this risk]. If you suddenly find yourself short of breath, and it doesn’t pass, [and] you’ve been infected with the coronavirus, then it might be an idea to seek help, because we find this increased risk for up to six months,” Connolly told the Guardian.

Schools in Wales offer vaccines.

Despite the massive 300% rise in myocarditis, the Welsh government are still rolling out vaccines for children.

The first minister Mark Drakeford knows of the vaccine injuries and deaths but still rolls out these death shots. Mr Drakeford is therefore culpable in the murder of innocent children in wales and guilty of crimes against humanity. We therefore must protect the children and bring charges against Drakeford. The link below is a letter to parents from a primary school who will also be served with a liability letter.

https://acrobat.adobe.com/link/review?uri=urn:aaid:scds:US:429bcd75-3e71-3971-99e4-ad3d26dcc67b

Heart Damage Found in Teens Months After Second Pfizer Shot, Study Shows

A new peer-reviewed study shows more than two-thirds of adolescents with COVID-19 vaccine-related myopericarditis had persistent heart abnormalities months after their initial diagnosis, raising concerns for potential long-term effects and contradicting claims by health officials that the condition is “mild.”

By 

Megan Redshaw

A new peer-reviewed study shows more than two-thirds of adolescents with COVID-19 vaccine-related myopericarditis had persistent heart abnormalities months after their initial diagnosis, raising concerns for potential long-term effects.

The findings, published March 25 in the Journal of Pediatrics, challenge the position of U.S. health agencies, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which claim heart inflammation associated with the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines is “mild.”

Researchers at Seattle Children’s Hospital reviewed cases of patients younger than 18 years old who presented to the hospital with chest pain and an elevated serum troponin level between April 1, 2021, and Jan. 7, 2022, within one week of receiving a second dose of Pfizer’s vaccine.

While 35 patients fit the criteria, 19 were excluded for various reasons. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the remaining 16 patients was performed three to eight months after they were first examined. The MRIs showed 11 had persistent late gadolinium enhancement(LGE), although levels were lower than in previous months.

According to the study, “The presence of LGE is an indicator of cardiac injury and fibrosis and has been strongly associated with worse prognosis in patients with classical acute myocarditis.”

In a meta-analysis of eight studies, LGE was found to be a predictor of all-cause death, cardiovascular death, cardiac transplant, rehospitalization, recurrent acute myocarditis and requirement for mechanical circulatory support.

BUY TODAY: Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s New Book — ‘The Real Anthony Fauci’

Similarly, an 11-study meta-analysis found the “presence and extent of LGE to be a significant predictor of adverse cardiac outcomes.”

Researchers said that while symptoms “were transient and most patients appeared to respond to treatment,” the analysis showed a “persistence of abnormal findings.”

The results “rais[e] concerns for potential longer-term effects,” researchers wrote, adding that they plan to repeat imaging at one year after the vaccine to assess whether abnormalities have resolved.

“The paper provides more evidence that myocarditis in adolescents that result from COVID-19 vaccines is very serious,” said Dr. Madhava Setty, senior science editor for The Defender.

“All patients had significantly elevated serum troponin levels indicative of heart damage. And LGE, which is indicative of poor outcome, was present in more than two-thirds of the kids.”

The study stated, “All patients had elevated serum troponin levels (median 9.15 ng/mL, range 0.65-18.5, normal < 0.05 ng/mL).”

“These young patients had a median troponin level of 9.15 — more than 20 times greater than the levels found in people suffering heart attacks,” Setty said.

Commenting on the study, Dr. Marty Makary, surgeon and public policy researcher at Johns Hopkins University, tweeted “CDC has a civic duty to rigorously study the long-term effects of vaccine-induced myocarditis.”

CDC has a civic duty to do rigorously study the long-term effects of vaccine-induced myocarditis. New follow-up study 3-8 months after myocarditis shows the MRI heart abnormality of late gadolinium enhancement seen in 63% of children. Merits further study. https://t.co/klPVsnqrkc

— Marty Makary MD, MPH (@MartyMakary) March 27, 2022

Dr. Anish Koka, a cardiologist, told The Epoch Times the study suggests 60% to 70% of teenagers who get myocarditis from a COVID vaccine may be left with a scar on their heart.

“Certainly, children who had chest pain severe enough to merit seeking medical attention need to at least make sure they get a follow-up MRI,” Koka said, adding that the findings “should have clear implications for the discussion around vaccines, especially for high-risk male teenagers … and definitely for vaccine mandates.”

Both Pfizer and Moderna COVID vaccines have been linked to several forms of heart inflammation, including myocarditis and pericarditis.

Myocarditis, or inflammation of the heart, is a severe and life-shortening disease. It was virtually unknown in young people until it became a recognized side effect of mRNA COVID vaccines, especially in boys and young men.

Pericarditis is inflammation of the pericardium, a sac-like structure with two layers of tissue that surrounds the heart to hold it in place and help it work.

According to the CDC, the most at-risk group is 16- and 17-year-old males, who have reported rates of 69 per million after the second dose of Pfizer’s COVID vaccine, although that number is likely underreported.

The CDC presentation also reported that in three-month follow-up evaluations, less than one-third of adolescents 12 to 17 who suffered vaccine-induced myocarditis (reported in Vaccine Safety DataLink) had fully recovered.

The 69-per-million rate the CDC uses to determine the incidence of myocarditis in 16- and 17-year-olds came from the agency’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) — a U.S. government-run database that receives reports of vaccine adverse events.

One of the biggest limitations of passive surveillance systems, like VAERS, is that the system “receives reports for only a small fraction of adverse events,” according to the Department of Health and Human Services website.

recent study from Hong Kong suggests the incidence of myo/pericarditis after two doses of Pfizer’s Comirnaty vaccine was 37 in 100,000 (370 per million).

This incidence matches nearly exactly with findings from a study that used the Vaccine Safety DataLink system, which showed 37.7 12- to 17-year-olds per 100,000 suffered myo/pericarditis after their second vaccine dose.

This indicates an incidence rate that is almost six times higher than the 69-per-million rate reported by the CDC.

In a preprint study from Kaiser Permanente, the incidence of myocarditis in 18- to 24-year-old males post-vaccination was even higher — at 537 per million, or 7.7 times higher than the statistics reported by the CDC.

No such thing as ‘mild’ heart damage

paper published Jan. 14 in Circulation summarized the clinical course of 139 young patients between the ages of 12 and 20 who were hospitalized for myocarditis following COVID vaccination.

Of those patients, 19% were taken into intensive care, two required infusions of potent intravenous drugs used to raise critically low blood pressure and every patient had an elevated troponin level.

Troponin is an enzyme specific to cardiac myocytes. Levels above 0.4 ng/ml are strongly suggestive of heart damage.

The paper concluded, “Most cases of suspected COVID-19 vaccine myocarditis occurring in persons <21 years have a mild clinical course with rapid resolution of symptoms.”

“We suppose [a ‘mild clinical course] refers to the 81% who did not go to the ICU or the fact that none died or required ECMO (Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation, a desperate means to keep the body oxygenated when a patient’s heart or lungs have completely failed),” wrote Setty and Josh Mitteldorf, Ph.D., a theoretical physicist, in an articlecritiquing the Circulation paper.

“When does a ‘mild clinical course’ require hospitalization for a two-day median length of stay?” they asked. “How does anyone know if symptoms rapidly resolve?”

“We don’t know what it will do to young boys in the long term, especially since every patient had some damage to their heart as evidenced by significantly abnormal troponin levels,” Setty and Mitteldorf wrote. “And we don’t fully understand the mechanism by which the vaccines cause myocarditis.”