Very early on, I took the chance to make a rough estimate that, if the toxicity of the c19 jabs in adults translated to children, I expected 50X more deaths from these injections than from Covid.
I got a lot of criticism for that.
My main point wasn’t digital precision but to illustrate that the risk from the alleged virus was so low that no intervention could possibly be justified.
It now appears it might be even worse than I thought.
Please do all you can to head off parents thinking of having their children injected.
Below is a letter signed by 76 doctors in the UK, to the Medical and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and other U.K. Government officials. This letter lays out comprehensive reasons why the recent U.S. FDA decision authorizing COVID vaccinations in infants and young children must not happen in the UK. The letter is well-sourced and accurate. Let us hope that mainstream media here in the USA and the UK report on this letter in an unbiased fashion.
I have not changed or added anything to this letter except that everything I write or copy and paste is put through a professional grammar-checking software, so some words and sentences may be corrected or changed. They shall mean and seam the same and so not alter the meaning of the letter in any way.
the letter continues)
We are writing to you urgently concerning the announcement that the FDA has granted an Emergency Use Authorization for both Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines in preschool children.
We would urge you to consider very carefully the move to vaccinate ever younger children against SARS-CoV-2, despite the gradual but significant reducing virulence of successive variants, the increasing evidence of rapidly waning vaccine efficacy, the increasing concerns over long-term vaccine harms, and the knowledge that the vast majority of this young age group have already been exposed to SARS-CoV-2 repeatedly and have demonstrably effective immunity. Thus, the balance of benefit and risk which supported the rollout of mRNA vaccines to the elderly and vulnerable in 2021 is inappropriate for small children in 2022.
We also strongly challenge the addition of COVID-19 vaccination into the routine childhood immunization program despite no demonstrated clinical need, known and unknown risks (see below) and the fact that these vaccines still have only conditional marketing authorization.
It is noteworthy that the Pfizer documentation presented to the FDA has huge gaps in the evidence provided:
The protocol was changed mid-trial. The original two-dose schedule exhibited poor immunogenicity with efficacy far below the required standard. A third dose was added by which time many of the original placebo recipients had been vaccinated.
There was no statistically significant difference between the placebo and vaccinated groups in either the 6–23-month age group or the 2-4-year-olds, even after the third dose. Astonishingly, the results were based on just three participants in the younger age group (one vaccinated and two placebo) and just seven participants in the older 2–4-year-olds (two vaccinated and five placebo). Indeed, for the younger age group the confidence intervals ranged from minus-367% to plus-99%. The manufacturer stated that the numbers were too low to draw any confident conclusions. Moreover, these limited numbers come only from children infected more than seven days after the third dose.
Over the whole period from the first dose onwards (see page 39 Tables 19 and 20), there were a total of 225 infected children in the vaccinated arm and 150 in the placebo arm, giving a calculated vaccine efficacy of only 25% (14% for the 6-23 months, and 33% for 2-4s).
The additional immunogenicity studies against Omicron, requested by the FDA, only involved a total of 66 children tested one month after the third dose (see page 35).
It is incomprehensible that the FDA considered that this represents sufficient evidence on which to base a decision to vaccinate healthy children. When it comes to safety, the data are even thinner: only 1,057 children, some already unblinded, were followed for just two months. It is noteworthy that Sweden and Norway are not recommending the vaccine for 5-11s and Holland is not recommending it for children who have already had COVID-19. The director of the Danish Health and Medicines Authority stated recently that with what is now known, the decision to vaccinate children was a mistake.
We summarize below the overwhelming arguments against this vaccination.
A. The extremely low risk from COVID-19 in young children
In the whole of 2020 and 2021, not a single child aged 1-9 died where COVID-19 was the sole diagnosis on the death certificate, according to ONS data.
A detailed study in England from March 1st 2020 to March 1st 2021 found only six children under 18 years died with no co-morbidities. There were no deaths aged 1-4 years.
Children mount effective, robust, and sustained immune responses.
Since the arrival of the Omicron variant, infections have been generally much milder. That is also true for unvaccinated under-5s.
By June 2022 it is now estimated that 89% of 1-4-year-olds had already had SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Recent data from Israel show excellent long-lasting immunity following infection in children, especially in 5-11s.
B. Poor vaccine efficacy
In adults, it has become apparent that vaccine efficacy wanes steadily over time, necessitating boosters at regular intervals. Specifically, vaccine efficacy has waned more rapidly against the latest Omicron variants.
In children, vaccine efficacy has waned more rapidly in 5-11s than in 12-17s, possibly related to the lower dose used in the pediatric formulation. One study from New York showed efficacy against Omicron falling to only 12% by 4-5 weeks and to negative values by 5-6 weeks post the second dose.
In the Pfizer 0-4s trial, the efficacy after two doses fell to negative values, necessitating a change to the trial protocol. After a third dose there was a suggestion of efficacy from 7-30 days but there is no data beyond 30 days to see how quickly this will wane.
C. Potential harms of COVID-19 vaccines for children
There has been great concern about myocarditis in adolescents and young adults, especially in males after the second dose, estimated at one per 2,600 in active post-marketing surveillance in Hong Kong. The emerging evidence of persistent cardiac abnormalities in adolescents with post-mRNA vaccine myopericarditis, as demonstrated by cardiac MRI at 3-8 months follow-up, suggests this is far from ‘mild and short-lived’. The potential for longer-term effects requires further study and calls for the strictest application of the precautionary principle in respect of the youngest and most vulnerable children.
Although post-vaccination myocarditis appears to be less common in 5-11-year-olds than in older children, it is, nonetheless, increased over baseline.
In the Pfizer study, 50% of vaccinated children had systemic adverse events, including irritability and fever. Diagnosis of myocarditis is much more difficult in younger children. No troponin levels or ECG studies were documented. Even a vaccinated child in the trial, hospitalized with fever, calf pain and a raised CPK, had no report of D-dimers, anti-platelet antibodies or troponin levels.
In Pfizer’s 5-11s post-authorization conditions, it is required to conduct studies looking for myocarditis and is not due to report results until 2027.
Of equal concern are, as yet unknown, negative effects on the immune system. In the 0-4s trial, only seven children were described as having “severe” COVID-19 – six vaccinated and one given placebo. Similarly, for the 12 children with recurrent episodes of infection, 10 were vaccinated against only two who received placebo. These are all tiny figures and much too small to rule out any adverse impacts such as antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) and other impacts on the immune system.
Also unanswered is the question of Original Antigenic Sin. It is of note that in a large Israeli study, those infected after vaccination had poorer cover than those vaccinated after infection. In the Moderna trial, N-antibodies were seen in only 40% of those infected after vaccination, compared with 93% of those infected after placebo.
There is evidence of vaccine-induced disruption of both innate and adaptive immune responses. The possibility of developing an impaired immune function would be disastrous for children, who have the most competent innate immunity, which by now has been effectively trained by the circulating virus.
The unknown is whether there will be any adverse effect on T-cell function leading to an increase in cancers.
Also, in terms of reproductive function, limited animal bio-distribution studies showed lipid nanoparticles concentrate in ovaries and testes. Adult sperm donors have shown a reduction in sperm counts particularly of motile sperm, falling by three months post-vaccination and remaining depressed at four to five months.
Even for adults, concerns are rising that serious adverse events are more than hospitalizations from COVID-19.
D. Informed consent
For 5-11s, the JCVI, in recommending a “non-urgent offer” of vaccination, specifically noted the importance of fully informed consent with no coercion.
The complete omission of information explaining to the public the different and novel technology used in COVID-19 vaccines compared to standard vaccines, and the failure to inform of the lack of any long-term safety data, borders on misinformation.
E. Effect on public confidence
Vaccines against much more serious diseases, such as polio and measles, need to be prioritized. Pushing an unnecessary and novel, gene-based vaccine onto young children risks seriously undermining parental confidence in the whole immunization program.
The poor quality of the data presented by Pfizer risks bringing the pharmaceutical industry into disrepute and the regulators if this product is authorized.
In summary, young healthy children are at minimal risk from COVID-19, especially since the arrival of the Omicron variant. Most have been repeatedly exposed to SARS-CoV-2 virus, yet have remained well, or have had short, mild illness. As detailed above, the vaccines are of brief efficacy, have known short- to medium-term risks and unknown long-term safety. Data for clinically useful efficacy in small children are scant or absent. In older children, for whom the vaccines are already licensed, they have been promoted via ethically dubious schemes to the potential detriment of other, and vital, parts of the childhood vaccination program.
For a tiny minority of children for whom the potential for benefit clearly and unequivocally outweighed the potential for harm, vaccination could have been facilitated by restrictive licenses. Whether following the precautionary principle or the instruction to First Do No Harm, such vaccines have no place in a routine childhood immunization program.
(Signed):
Professor Angus Dalgleish, MD, FRCP, FRACP, FRCPath, FMed Sci, Principal, Institute for Cancer Vaccines & Immunotherapy (ICVI) Professor Anthony Fryer, PhD, FRCPath, Professor of Clinical Biochemistry, Keele University Professor David Livermore, BSc, PhD, Retired Professor of Medical Microbiology, UEA Professor John Fairclough FRCS FFSEM retired Honorary Consultant Surgeon Lord Moonie, MBChB, MRCPsych, MFCM, MSc, House of Lords, former Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State 2001-2003, formerCconsultant in Public Health Medicine Dr Abby Astle, MA(Cantab), MBBChir, GP Principal, GP Trainer, GP Examiner Dr Michael D Bell, MBChB, MRCGP, retired General Practitioner Dr Alan Black, MBBS, MSc, DipPharmMed, Retired Pharmaceutical Physician Dr David Bramble, MBChB, MRCPsych, MD, Consultant Psychiatrist Dr Emma Brierly, MBBS, MRCGP, General Practitioner Dr David Cartland, MBChB, BMedSci, General practitioner Dr Peter Chan, BM, MRCS, MRCGP, NLP, General Practitioner, Functional medicine practitioner Michael Cockayne, MSc, PGDip, SCPHNOH, BA, RN, Occupational Health Practitioner Julie Coffey, MBChB, General Practitioner John Collis, RN, Specialist Nurse Practitioner, retired Mr Ian F Comaish, MA, BM BCh, FRCOphth, FRANZCO, Consultant Ophthalmologist James Cook, NHS Registered Nurse, Bachelor of Nursing (Hons), Master of Public Health Dr Clare Craig, BMBCh, FRCPath, Pathologist Dr David Critchley, BSc, PhD in Pharmacology, 32 years experience in Pharmaceutical R&D Dr Jonathan Engler, MBChB, LLB (Hons), DipPharmMedDr Elizabeth Evans, MA (Cantab), MBBS, DRCOG, Retired Doctor Dr John Flack, BPharm, PhD, retired Director of Safety Evaluation at Beecham Pharmaceuticals and retired Senior Vice-president for Drug Discovery SmithKline Beecham Dr Simon Fox, BSc, BMBCh, FRCP, Consultant in Infectious Diseases and Internal Medicine Dr Ali Haggett, Mental health community work, 3rd sector, former lecturer in the history of medicine David Halpin, MB BS FRCS, Orthopaedic and trauma surgeon (retired) Dr Renée Hoenderkampf, General Practitioner Dr Andrew Isaac, MB BCh, Physician, retired Dr Steve James, Consultant Intensive Care Dr Keith Johnson, BA, DPhil (Oxon), IP Consultant for Diagnostic Testing Dr Rosamond Jones, MBBS, MD, FRCPCH, retired consultant paediatrician Dr Tanya Klymenko, PhD, FHEA, FIBMS, Senior Lecturer in Biomedical Sciences Dr Charles Lane, MA, DPhil, Molecular Biologist Dr Branko Latinkic, BSc, PhD, Molecular Biologist Dr Felicity Lillingstone, IMD DHS PhD ANP, Doctor, Urgent Care, Research Fellow Dr Theresa Lawrie, MBBCh, PhD, Director, Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy Ltd, Bath Katherine MacGilchrist, BSc (Hons), MSc, CEO/Systematic Review Director, Epidemica Ltd. Dr Geoffrey Maidment, MBBS, MD, FRCP, Consultant Physician, retired Ahmad K Malik FRCS (Tr & Orth) Dip Med Sport, Consultant Trauma & Orthopaedic Surgeon Dr Kulvinder Singh Manik, MBBS, General Practitioner Dr Fiona Martindale, MBChB, MRCGP, General Practitioner Dr S McBride, BSc (Hons) Medical Microbiology & Immunobiology, MBBCh BAO, MSc in Clinical Gerontology, MRCP(UK), FRCEM, FRCP (Edinburgh). NHS Emergency Medicine & Geriatrics Mr Ian McDermott, MBBS, MS, FRCS(Tr&Orth), FFSEM(UK), Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon Dr Franziska Meuschel, MD, ND, PhD, LFHom, BSEM, Nutritional, Environmental and Integrated Medicine Dr Scott Mitchell, MBChB, MRCS, Emergency Medicine Physician Dr Alan Mordue, MBChB, FFPH. Retired Consultant in Public Health Medicine & Epidemiology Dr David Morris, MBChB, MRCP(UK), General Practitioner Margaret Moss, MA (Cantab), CBiol, MRSB, Director, The Nutrition and Allergy Clinic, Cheshire Dr Alice Murkies, MD FRACGP MBBS, General Practitioner Dr Greta Mushet, MBChB, MRCPsych, retired Consultant Psychiatrist in Psychotherapy Dr Sarah Myhill, MBBS, retired GP and Naturopathic Physician Dr Rachel Nicholl, PhD, Medical researcher Dr Christina Peers, MBBS, DRCOG, DFSRH, FFSRH, Menopause specialist Rev Dr William J U Philip MB ChB, MRCP, BD, Senior Minister The Tron Church, Glasgow, formerly physician specialising in cardiology Dr Angharad Powell, MBChB, BSc (hons), DFRSH, DCP (Ireland), DRCOG, DipOccMed, MRCGP, General Practitioner Dr Gerry Quinn, PhD. Postdoctoral researcher in microbiology and immunology Dr Johanna Reilly, MBBS, General Practitioner Jessica Righart, MSc, MIBMS, Senior Critical Care Scientist Mr Angus Robertson, BSc, MB ChB, FRCSEd (Tr & Orth), Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon Dr Jessica Robinson, BSc(Hons), MBBS, MRCPsych, MFHom, Psychiatrist and Integrative Medicine Doctor Dr Jon Rogers, MB ChB (Bristol), Retired General Practitioner Mr James Royle, MBChB, FRCS, MMedEd, Colorectal surgeon Dr Roland Salmon, MB BS, MRCGP, FFPH, Former Director, Communicable Disease Surveillance Centre Wales Sorrel Scott, Grad Dip Phys, Specialist Physiotherapist in Neurology, 30 years in NHS Dr Rohaan Seth, BSc (hons), MBChB (hons), MRCGP, Retired General Practitioner Dr Gary Sidley, retired NHS Consultant Clinical Psychologist Dr Annabel Smart, MBBS, retired General Practitioner Natalie Stephenson, BSc (Hons) Paediatric Audiologist Dr Zenobia Storah,MA (Oxon), Dip Psych, DClinPsy, Senior Clinical Psychologist (Child and Adolescent) Dr Julian Tompkinson, MBChB MRCGP, General Practitioner GP trainer PCME Dr Noel Thomas, MA, MBChB, DCH, DObsRCOG, DTM&H, MFHom, retired doctor Dr Stephen Ting, MB CHB, MRCP, PhD, Consultant Physician Dr Livia Tossici-Bolt, PhD, Clinical Scientist Dr Carmen Wheatley, DPhil, Orthomolecular Oncology Dr Helen Westwood MBChB MRCGP DCH DRCOG, General Practitioner Mr Lasantha Wijesinghe, FRCS, Consultant Vascular Surgeon Dr Damian Wilde, PhD, (Chartered) Specialist Clinical Psychologist Dr Ruth Wilde, MB BCh, MRCEM, AFMCP, Integrative & Functional Medicine Doctor
“Despite the statistics and mathematical models dramatically overrating the risk of the virus, and the obvious side effects of the vaccine, many are not capable of seeing it. The most salient characteristic of this psychological trend is that it makes people radically blind to everything that goes against the narrative in which they believe.”
Despite the statistics and mathematical models dramatically overrating the risk of the virus, and the obvious side effects of the vaccine, many are not capable of seeing it. The most salient characteristic of this psychological trend is that it makes people radically blind to everything that goes against the narrative in which they believe.
İsmail Eren Yalçın/Getty Images
Note from LifeSiteNews co-founder Steve Jalsevac: LifeSite has published several articles and interviews referring to “mass formation” psychology facilitating the mindless acceptance of deadly COVID propaganda.This article and video provide perhaps the best and most practically useful summary of the phenomenon that we have seen to date. There is a great need for the informed to push back against this phenomenon and end its influence. The following paragraph is perhaps the most significant:
“The glimmer of hope is this: Everyone who has studied mass formation and totalitarianism has concluded that both are intrinsically self-destructive. They cannot survive. And, the more means it has at its disposal to control the population, the sooner it might destroy itself, because totalitarianism destroys the core of the human being.”
Resisting mass formation first requires understanding. Please read this article and watch the included video. Then pass on this invaluable information to many others.
STORY AT-A-GLANCE
“Mass formation” is a form of mass hypnosis that emerges when specific conditions are met, and almost always precede the rise of totalitarian systems.
Four central conditions that need to exist in order for mass formation to arise are widespread loneliness and lack of social bonding, which leads to experiencing life as meaningless, which leads to widespread free-floating anxiety and discontent, which leads to widespread free-floating frustration and aggression, which results in feeling out of control.
Under mass formation, a population enters a hypnotic-type trance that makes them willing to sacrifice anything, including their lives and their freedom.
Key strategies to disrupt the mass formation process are to speak out against it and to practice non-violent resistance. Dissenting voices keep totalitarian systems from deteriorating into abject inhumanity where people are willing to commit heinous atrocities.
Ultimately, “totalitarianism” refers to the ambition of the system. It wants to eliminate the ability of individual choice, and in so doing, it destroys the core of what it is to be human. The quicker a system destroys the individual, the sooner the system collapses.
(Mercola) – Professor Mattias Desmet, a Belgian psychologist with a master’s degree in statistics, gained worldwide recognition toward the end of 2021, when he presented the concept of “mass formation” as an explanation for the absurd and irrational behavior we were seeing with regard to the COVID pandemic and its countermeasures.
He also warned that mass formation gives rise to totalitarianism, which is the topic of his new book, “The Psychology of Totalitarianism.” Desmet’s work was further popularized by Dr. Robert Malone, whose appearance on the Joe Rogan podcast was viewed by about 50 million people.
But as the search term “mass formation” exploded in popularity, Google responded by manipulating the search engine results in an attempt to discredit Desmet and show people in their search results information that would cause them to discount the importance of this work. Why? Because Google is at the core of the global cabal and movement toward totalitarianism.
Understanding the psychology of the times is crucial
Those who refuse to learn from history are bound to repeat it, they say, and this appears particularly pertinent in the present day because, as explained by Desmet, if we don’t understand how mass formation occurs and what it leads to, we cannot prevent it. How did Desmet reach the conclusion that we were in the process of mass formation? He explains:
“In the beginning of the corona crisis, back in February 2020, I started to study the statistics on the mortality rates of the virus, the infection fatality rates, the case fatality rate and so on, and immediately, I got the impression – and with me, several world-famous statisticians, such as John Ioannidis of Stanford, for instance – that the statistics and mathematical models used dramatically overrated the danger of the virus.
Immediately, I wrote an opinion paper trying to bring some of the mistakes to people’s attention. But I noticed immediately that people just didn’t want to know. It was as if they didn’t see even the most blatant mistakes at the level of the statistics that were used. People just were not capable of seeing it.”
This early experience made him decide to focus on the psychological mechanisms at play in society, and he became convinced that what we were seeing were in fact the effects of a large-scale process of mass formation, because the most salient characteristic of this psychological trend is that it makes people radically blind to everything that goes against the narrative in which they believe.
They basically become incapable of distancing themselves from their beliefs, and therefore cannot take in or evaluate new data. Desmet continues:
“Another very specific characteristic is that this process of mass formation makes people willing to radically sacrifice everything that is important to them – even their health, their wealth, the health of their children, the future of their children.
When someone is in the grip of a process of mass formation, he becomes radically willing to sacrifice all his individual interest. A third characteristic, to name only a few, is that once people are in the grip of a process of mass formation, they typically show a tendency of cruelty towards people who do not buy into the narrative, or do not go along with the narrative. They typically do so as if it is an ethical duty.
In the end, they are typically inclined, first, to stigmatize, and then, to eliminate, to destroy, the people who do not go along with the masses.
And that’s why it is so extremely important to understand the psychological mechanisms at work, because if you understand the mechanisms at work, you can avoid the mass formation to become so deep that people reach this critical point in which they really are fanatically convinced that they should destroy everyone that does not go along with them.
So, it’s extremely important to understand the mechanism. If you understand it, you can make sure that the crowd, the mass, will first destroy itself, or will exhaust itself, before it starts to destroy the people that do not go along with the mass.
So, it’s of crucial importance, and that’s what my book describes. It describes how a mass, a crowd, emerges in a society, under which conditions it emerges, what the mechanisms of the process of mass formation are, and what you can do about it. That’s extremely important. I will mention this from the beginning.
Usually, it is impossible to wake up the masses. Once a process of mass formation emerges in a society, it’s extremely difficult to wake the masses up. But [waking them up is] important, [because] you can avoid the masses and their leaders becoming so fanatically convinced of their narrative that they start to destroy the people who do not go along with them.”
Indeed, to those of us who did not fall under the spell of the irrational COVID narrative, the cruelty with which political leadership, media and people at large tried to force compliance was shockingly abhorrent. Many were physically attacked, and some even killed, simply for not wearing a face mask, which we knew was a useless prevention strategy.
Historical context for mass hypnosis
It is easier to understand what mass formation is if you consider it as mass hypnosis, because they’re not merely similar, they’re identical, Desmet says. Mass formation is a kind of hypnosis that emerges when specific conditions are met. And, disturbingly, these conditions, and the hypnotic trance that emerges, almost always precede the rise of totalitarian systems.
While totalitarianism and a classical dictatorship share certain features, there are distinct differences at the psychological level. According to Desmet, a classical dictatorship, at the psychological level, is very primitive. It’s a society that is frightened of a small group, a dictatorial regime, because of its aggressive potential.
Totalitarianism, on the other hand, arises from a very different psychological mechanism. Interestingly, the totalitarian state didn’t actually exist before the twentieth century. It’s a relatively new phenomenon, and it’s based on mass formation or mass hypnosis.
The conditions for this mass hypnotic state (listed below) were first met just before the emergence of the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, so that’s our historical context. These conditions were again met just before the COVID crisis. What we’re seeing now is a different kind of totalitarianism, largely due to technological advancements that have created extremely effective tools to subconsciously influence the public.
We now have very sophisticated tools with which to hypnotize far larger masses of people than they could in earlier times. But while our current-day totalitarianism is global rather than regional, and the information war more sophisticated than anything the Soviets or Nazi’s could muster, the basic psychological dynamics are still identical.
Understanding hypnosis
So, what are those psychological dynamics? “Mass formation” is a clinical term that in layman’s jargon could simply be translated as a kind of mass hypnosis, which can occur once certain conditions are fulfilled.
When you are being hypnotized, the first thing the hypnotist will do is to detach or withdraw your attention from the reality or environment around you. Then, through his hypnotic suggestion – usually a very simple narrative or sentence stated out loud – the hypnotist will focus your full attention on a single point, for instance, a moving pendulum or just his voice.
From the perspective of the hypnotized person, it will seem as though reality has vanished. An extreme example of this is the use of hypnosis to make people insensitive to pain during surgery. In that situation, the patient’s mental focus is so narrow and intense, that they don’t notice that their body is being cut into.
In the same way, it doesn’t matter how many people are injured by the COVID measures, because the focus is on COVID and everything else has vanished, in psychological terms.
People can be killed for not wearing a mask and the hypnotized won’t raise an eyebrow. Children can die from starvation and friends can commit suicide from financial desperation – none of it will have a psychological impact on the hypnotized because to them, the plight of others doesn’t register. A perfect example of this psychological blinding to reality is how COVID jab deaths and injuries are simply unrecognized and not even considered to be causal.
People will get the shot, suffer massive injuries, and say, “Thank goodness I got the shot or it would have been so much worse.” They cannot conceive the possibility that they were injured by the shot. I’ve even seen people express gratitude for the shot when someone they supposedly loved died within hours or days of getting it! It’s just mind-boggling. The psychological dynamics of hypnosis does explain this irrational and otherwise incomprehensible behavior, but it’s still quite surreal.
“Even while I know the mechanisms at work, I’m still baffled every time it happens,” Desmet said. “I almost can’t believe what I see. I know someone whose husband died a few days after the vaccine, during his sleep, from a heart attack.”
“And I thought, ‘Now she will open her eyes and wake up.’ Not at all,” he added. “She just continued in the same fanatic way – even more fanatic – talking about how happy we should be because we have this vaccine. Unbelievable, yes.”
The psychological roots of mass formation
As mentioned, mass formation, or mass hypnosis, can occur when certain psychological conditions are present in a large-enough portion of society. The four central conditions that need to exist in order for mass formation to arise are:
Widespread loneliness and lack of social bonding, which leads to:
Experiencing life as meaningless, purposeless, and senseless, and/or being faced with persistent circumstances that don’t make rational sense, which leads to:
Widespread free-floating anxiety and discontent (anxiety/discontent that has no apparent or distinct cause), which leads to:
Widespread free-floating frustration and aggression (frustration and aggression have no discernible cause), which results in feeling out of control.
How mass formation emerges in a society
Once a large-enough portion of society feels anxious and out of control, that society becomes highly vulnerable to mass hypnosis. Desmet explains:
“Social isolation, lack of meaning, free-floating anxiety, frustration and aggression are highly aversive because if people feel anxious, without knowing what they feel anxious for, they typically feel out of control. They feel they cannot protect themselves from their anxiety.
And, if under these conditions a narrative is distributed through the mass media, indicating an object of anxiety, and at the same time, providing a strategy to deal with the object of anxiety, then all this free-floating anxiety might connect to the object of anxiety.
And there might be a huge willingness to participate in a strategy to deal with the object of anxiety, no matter how absurd the strategy is. So, even if it is clear from the beginning – for everyone who wants to see it – that the strategy to deal with the object of anxiety might claim many more victims than the object of anxiety itself … even then, there might be this huge willingness to participate in a strategy to deal with the object of anxiety.
That is the first step of every major mechanism of mass formation. Whether it concerned the Crusades, or the witch hunts, or the French Revolution, or the beginning of the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany, we see the same mechanism, time and time again.
There is a lot of free-floating anxiety. Someone provides a narrative that indicates an object of anxiety and a strategy to deal with it. And then all the anxiety connects to the [proposed] object of anxiety.
People participate in a strategy to deal with the object of anxiety that yields a first important psychological advantage, and from then on people have the impression that they can control their anxiety. It’s connected to an object and they have a strategy to deal with it.”
The problematic social bonding of mass formation
Once people who used to feel lonely, anxious and out of control start to participate in the strategy presented to them as the solution to their anxiety, a brand-new social bond emerges. This, then, reinforces the mass hypnosis, as they now no longer feel isolated and lonely.
This reinforcement is a kind of mental intoxication, and is the real reason why people buy into the narrative, no matter how absurd. “They’ll continue to buy into the narrative, because it creates this new social bond,” Desmet says.
While social bonding is a good thing, in this instance it becomes extremely destructive, because the free-floating frustration and aggression are still there, and need an outlet. These emotions need to be directed at someone. What’s worse, under the spell of mass formation, people lose their inhibitions and sense of proportion.
So, as we’ve seen during the COVID pandemic, people will attack and lash out in the most irrational ways against anyone who doesn’t buy into the narrative. The underlying aggression will always be directed at the part of the population that isn’t hypnotized.
Speaking in generalized terms, typically, once mass formation is taking place, about 30 percent of the population will be hypnotized – and this typically includes the leaders who pronounce the hypnotizing narrative to the public – 10 percent remain unhypnotized and do not buy into the narrative, and the majority, 60 percent, feel there’s something wrong with the narrative, but go along with it simply because they don’t want to stick out or cause trouble.
Another problem with the social bonding that emerges is that the bond is not between individuals, but rather a bond between the individual and the collective. This gives rise to a feeling of fanatic solidarity with the collective, but there’s no solidarity toward any given individual. So, individuals are remorselessly sacrificed for the “greater good” of the faceless collective.
“This explains, for instance, why during the corona crisis, everybody was talking about solidarity, but people accepted that if someone got into an accident on the street, you were no longer allowed to help that person unless you had a surgical mask and gloves at your disposal,” Desmet said.
“That also explains why, while everybody was talking about solidarity, people accepted that if their father or mother was dying, they were not allowed to visit them.”
In the end, you end up with a radical, paranoid atmosphere in which people do not trust each other anymore, and in which people are willing to report their loved ones to the government.
“So, that’s the problem with mass formation,” Desmet stated. “It’s solidarity of the individual with the collective, and never with other individuals.”
“That explains what happened during the revolution in Iran,” he continued. “I talked with a woman who lived in Iran during the revolution, which was actually the beginning of a totalitarian regime in Iran.”
“She witnessed, with her own eyes, how a mother reported her son to the government, and how she hung the rope around his neck just before he died, and how she claimed to be a heroine for doing so. That’s the dramatic effects of mass formation.”
With no external enemy, what happens?
We’re now facing a situation that is more complicated than at any previous time, because the totalitarianism that is now arising has no external enemies, with the exception of citizens that aren’t hypnotized and don’t buy into the false narratives. Nazi Germany, for example, was destroyed by external enemies that rose against it.
On the other hand, there’s advantage to this, because totalitarian states always need an enemy. That’s something that was very well described by George Orwell in his book “1984.” In order for the process of mass formation to continue to exist, there must be an external enemy onto which the state can focus the aggression of the hypnotized masses.
Non-violent resistance and outspokenness are crucial
This brings us to a key point, and that is the need for non-violent resistance and speaking out against the narrative. Violent resistance automatically makes you a target for aggression, so “resistance from within a totalitarian system always has to stick to the principles of non-violent resistance,” Desmet said. But you must also continue to speak out in a clear, rational and non-abusive way. Desmet explains:
“The first and foremost principle the resistance has to stick to during a process of mass formation and emerging totalitarianism, is that people who do not go along with the masses have to continue to speak out. That’s the most crucial thing.
As totalitarianism is based on mass formation, and mass formation is a kind of hypnosis, the mass formation is always provoked by the voice of the leader, which keeps the population in a process of hypnosis. And when dissonant voices continue to speak out, they will not be able to wake the masses up, but they will constantly disturb the process of mass formation.
They will constantly interfere with the hypnosis. If there are people who continue to speak out, the mass formation will usually not become so deep that there is a willingness in the population to destroy the people who do not go along with the masses. That’s crucial.
Historically speaking, if you look at what happened in the Soviet Union and in Nazi Germany, it’s clear that it was exactly at the moment when the opposition stopped to speak out in public that the totalitarian system started to become cruel.
In 1930, in the Soviet Union, the opposition stopped to speak out, and within six to eight months, Stalin started his large purges, which claimed tens of millions of victims. And then, in 1935, exactly the same happened in Nazi Germany.
The opposition was silenced or stopped to speak out. They preferred to go underground. They were thinking that they were dealing with a classical dictatorship, but they were not. They were dealing with something completely different. They were dealing with a totalitarian state.
And by deciding to go underground, it was a fatal decision for themselves. So, also in Nazi Germany, within a period of one year after the opposition stopped to speak out in public, the cruelty started, and the system started to destroy first its opponents. That’s always the same.
In the first stage, totalitarian systems or the masses start to attack those who do not go along with them. But, after a while, they just start to attack and to destroy everyone, group after group.
And, in the Soviet Union, where the process of mass formation went very far, much further than in Nazi Germany, Stalin started to eliminate the aristocracy, the small farmers, the large farmers, the goldsmiths, the Jews, all people who according to him would never become good communists.
But after a while, he just started to eliminate group after group without any logic. Just everyone. That’s why Hannah Arendt said that a totalitarian state is always a monster that devours its own children. And that destructive process starts when people stop to speak out.
That’s probably the reason why, in the beginning of the twentieth century, there were several countries where there was mass formation, but where there was never a full-fledged totalitarian state.
Probably, there were enough people who didn’t shut up, who continued to speak out. That’s something that is so crucial to understand. When mass formation emerges, people typically feel that it doesn’t make sense to speak out because people don’t wake up. People don’t seem sensitive to their rational counter arguments.
But we should never forget that speaking out has an immediate effect. Maybe not that it wakes the masses up, but that it disturbs the process of mass formation and the hypnosis. And in that way, prevents the masses from becoming highly destructive towards the people who do not go along with them.
Something else also happens. The masses start to exhaust themselves. They start to destroy themselves before they start to destroy the people who do not go along with them. So, that’s the strategy to be used for internal resistance towards totalitarian regimes.”
Push back against transhumanism and technocracy
As mentioned earlier, the leaders who declare the narratives are also always hypnotized. They are fanatics in that sense. However, while today’s world leaders are fanatics about transhumanism and technocracy, they may not necessarily believe what they’re saying about COVID.
Many know that they’re telling lies, but they justify those lies as necessary in order to bring the ideologies of transhumanism and technocracy to fruition. The ridiculous COVID agenda is a means to an end. This is another reason why we must continue to push back and speak out, because once the counter arguments disappear, these leaders will become even more fanatic in their ideological quest.
“In the end, the ultimate challenge is not so much to show people that the coronavirus was not as dangerous as we expected, or that the COVID narrative is wrong, but rather that this ideology is problematic – this transhumanist and this technocratic ideology is a disaster for humanity; this mechanistic thinking, this belief that the universe and man is a kind of material mechanistic system, which should be steered and manipulated in a mechanistic technocratic transhumanist way.
That’s the ultimate challenge: to show people that in the end, a transhumanist view on man and the world will entail radical dehumanization of our society. So, I think that’s the real challenge we are facing. Showing people, ‘Look, forget for a moment about the corona narrative.’
What we are heading for if we continue in the same way, is a radically, technologically controlled transhumanist society, which will leave no space whatsoever for life for a human being.”
It’ll get worse before it gets better
Like me, Desmet is convinced that we’re rapidly headed toward global totalitarianism and that things will get far worse before they get better. Why? Because we’re only in the initial stages of the process of totalitarianism. On the horizon, digital identity still looms large, and with that comes an unfathomably powerful control grid capable of breaking just about anyone.
The glimmer of hope is this: everyone who has studied mass formation and totalitarianism has concluded that both are intrinsically self-destructive. They cannot survive. And the more means it has at its disposal to control the population, the sooner it might destroy itself, because totalitarianism destroys the core of the human being.
Ultimately, “totalitarianism” refers to the ambition of the system. It wants to eliminate the ability of individual choice, and in so doing, it destroys the core of what it is to be human, “because psychological energy in a human being emerges at every moment a human being can make a choice that is really its own choice,” Desmet says. The quicker a system destroys the individual, the sooner the system collapses.
Again, the only weapon against the brutal destruction of humanity is to push back, to speak out, to non-violently resist. It may not stop totalitarianism in its tracks, but it can keep the most heinous atrocities at bay. It will also provide a small space where the resistant can try to survive together and thrive in the midst of the totalitarian landscape.
“Then, if we want to succeed, we will have to think about parallel structures which can allow us to be a little bit self-sufficient. We can try to make sure that we don’t need the system too much anymore. But even these parallel structures would be destroyed in a moment if the people do not continue to speak out. So, that’s crucial.
I try to bring this to the attention of everyone. We can build parallel structures as much as we want, but if the system becomes too destructive and decides to use it’s full aggressive potential, then the parallel structures will be destroyed. But the system will never reach this level of depth of the hypnosis if there are dissonant voices that continue to speak out. So, I’m very dedicated myself to continue to speak out.”
While it’s impossible to make accurate predictions, Desmet’s gut feeling is that it’ll probably be at least seven or eight years before the totalitarian system currently emerging with burn itself out and self-destruct. Could be more, could be less. Society is a complex dynamic system, and even simple dynamic systems cannot be predicted even one second in advance. This is known as the deterministic unpredictability of complex dynamic ecosystems.
More information
Regardless of how long it takes, the key will be to survive it all and do what we can to minimize the carnage. A key challenge on an individual level will be to maintain elementary principles of humanity. In the interview, Desmet discussed Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s book, “The Gulag Archipelago,” which highlights the importance of holding on to your humanity in the midst of an inhumane situation.
“That, maybe, is the one and only thing that can guarantee us of a good outcome of the entire process – which is a necessary process, I think. This crisis is not meaningless. It’s not meaningless. It’s a process in which society can give birth to something new, something much better than exists up until now,” he said.
New England Journal of Medicine: Global Warming Causes Stillbirths, Birth Defects, Infant Heart Problems
Why is the birth rate in Germany dropping? What is going on with a 23% drop in live births in Taiwan? Why are births dropping 10% in Switzerland this year? Why is the UKHSA vaccine surveillance report not reporting live births since February, for which it showed a 10% year-to-year drop in live births and nothing since?
Fortunately, science has an answer for us. These baby problems have a known cause. It is climate change. Here’s an amazing article. It came out just in time for the birth rate scandal, which is obviously just a coincidence. 🤷♂️
This article refers to a study, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, a prestigious bellwether of medical science and a guide to all doctors worldwide.
It claims that global warming may cause many problems in developing and unborn children. “All children are at risk,” says the study.
Susceptibilities in Fetuses, Infants, and Children Associated with Climate Change and Exposures. Adapted from Haines and Ebi.12 Shown are examples of potential exposure pathways, susceptibilities, and potential health outcomes linking climate change with children’s health. PTSD denotes post-traumatic stress disorder. Credit: New England Journal of Medicine(2022). DOI: 10.1056/NEJMra2117706
Since the vaccine injuries by the millions, they are trying to find alternate causes for the injuries like myocarditis etc. They have come up with something for many of the injuries but this… This takes a certain type of person to believe this one.
What sort of person does it take? Generally, anyone is ready for their 4th 5th and 6th booster. If they still believe that they work, they will believe this. Climate Change is not really in the way we are told it is.
And even if it was, it would not be causing problems in anyone’s body. It’s just as outrageous as the “New has discovered in the atmosphere causing heart problems “
I have images in my mind of these idiots sitting around a table sniffing cocaine and coming up with these stupid excuses to cover up the vaccine injuries. I am almost waiting for “ Dolly mixtures cause blood clots, Scientists say “ Well here is the article they have released. We need to stop people from thinking what the TV says is true.
What I can’t understand is why after millions of us have told people that these things are happening ( which they don’t believe ) they won’t think “ oh we were told this, it must be true and it’s a cover-up, instead they forget we told them and they believe the most impossible things.
A pair of researchers from Columbia University and Stanford University, respectively, have found that children around the world are at increased risk of health problems due to air pollution and climate change. In their paper published in the New England Journal of Medicine, Frederica Perera and Dr Kari Nadeau outline the increased risks of pollution and climate change to children from before birth until adulthood.
Climate change impacts everyone. But unfortunately, it impacts some more than others. Rising oceans, for example, are flooding island nations. And those with limited incomes are finding it harder to survive extreme weather events, including heat waves. In this new study, the researchers found evidence that climate change and the pollution behind it harm children more than adults. They note that because their bodies are smaller and still growing, as are their minds, they are more susceptible to environmental conditions, particularly pollutants and heat.
To better understand how pollution and climate change are impacting children, the researchers studied research papers from a host of sources that described the impacts that pollution and climate change can have on them. They found what they describe as direct harm, such as damaged lungs and reduction in intellectual abilities. And they note that today’s children will also have to face changes to the climate that have not yet occurred.
In their paper, the researchers note that mothers breathing polluted air during pregnancy impacts children before they are even born. Prior studies have shown it can lead to low birth weights, early births and also stillbirths. Some research has also shown a link to inflammation later on in life. And sadly, some research has shown that chemicals in the air and other types of pollution can cause birth defects, including problems with brain development.
The researchers also found that climate change is resulting in the production of less nutritious food, and less food in general for people in some parts of the world. They also found climate change is making the world a more dangerous place for children to grow up in—more hurricanes, typhoons, tornadoes, heat waves and floods make it more difficult for children to survive to adulthood. Climate change is also expected to lead to more wars and other types of trauma, such as abuse from adults as tensions at home rise, and increases in the incidence of diseases. They suggest that some entities, such as those caring for children, may need to alter their practices to more adequately address the health problems of children now and in the future.
FM Sergey Lavrov’s interview with the BBC TV channel
🔹 We announced a special military operation after being left with no other means to make it clear to the West that it is engaging in criminal activity by dragging Ukraine into NATO, by coddling and doting on a neo-Nazi regime, whose president Vladimir Zelensky said in September 2021 (you didn’t tell your viewers about it, did you?) that, if someone in Ukraine feels Russian, they should leave for Russia.
🔹 Today, the Ukrainian regime is attacking civilians with your Western weapons just like they did in 2014 when the putschists came to power when the centre of Lugansk was bombed by aircraft and 50 people were burned alive in Odesa.
🔹 I think that NATO is a threat. We are told not to worry, that Ukraine’s accession to NATO wouldn’t pose a threat to the Russian Federation. With all due respect for our colleagues from the North Atlantic Alliance, I must say that Russia has the right to decide for itself what threatens its security and what does not.
An American mercenary called the situation in the Armed Forces of Ukraine “a circus” and “a madhouse”
Report by DPR
The Commander of the German Air Force called on NATO to be ready to use nuclear weapons against Russia because of Ukraine
“If we want to have a secure position, then we need the means of destruction and the political will to implement nuclear deterrence, if necessary,” Ingo Gerhartz said at a NATO maritime symposium in Kiel.
Also, the commander of the Luftwaffe of the Bundeswehr urged Putin “not to compete with Germany.”
Militiaman from the Pyatnashka Brigade, Ervan Castel: “To fire heavy artillery at Donetsk,
when it is not one or two shells, but 100, 200, 300 shells a day, is a war crime, state terrorism.”
“There are no military facilities in Donetsk, there are no hostilities here. When a military facility in a city is bombed, unfortunately there may be civilian casualties around that facility. But now we are not in such conditions.
There is not a single mitigating circumstance that could justify what Kyiv has been doing for the past eight years.”
The Ministry of Emergency Situations in the Rostov region reports a fire at the Novoshakhtinsk oil refinery
Meanwhile, the media are publishing footage of an alleged strike on an oil refinery in the Rostov region.
According to them, the attack on the plant was carried out with the help of a drone.
DONBAS REPORT
Donetsk is under shelling again since the very morning
From 5 a.m., the Nazis began shelling the Petrovsky and Kievsky districts of the city.
By 10 a.m., towards Donetsk Ukrainian side fired
✔️ 7 152-mm calibre shells
✔️ 14 120-mm calibre mines
✔️ 56 155-mm calibre shells
“We have our own national interests, economic challenges.
As the head of state, I have to think about the security of the people,” Prime Minister Irakli Garibashvili stressed, speaking at the economic forum in Qatar.
The Prime Minister also added that Georgia is not the only country that refused to impose economic sanctions against Russia
German journalist on Nazism in Ukraine
‘Ukraine is clearly being ‘turned fascist.’ Mark Bartalmai is a German journalist whose opinion contradicts statements of the West. As a result, he is under investigation in Germany. This is what people like me are up against.
Trying to show that the Western mediaand governments are lying to you is hard and dangerous work which we do for free.
Watch his video below and see what this “ non-existent “ Naziism in Ukraine looks like. English subtitles.
The square of the Donetsk Republic appeared in Moscow
The corresponding decree was signed by Sobyanin today.
The square named after the DPR appeared in front of the US Embassy, on June 22 – the day the Great Patriotic War began.
The Commander of the German Air Force called on NATO to be ready to use nuclear weapons against Russia because of Ukraine
It looks like Europe want nuclear war. Russia has the biggest nuclear power on earth.
“If we want to have a secure position, then we need the means of destruction and the political will to implement nuclear deterrence, if necessary,” Ingo Gerhartz said at a NATO maritime symposium in Kiel.
Also, the commander of the Luftwaffe of the Bundeswehr urged Putin “not to compete with Germany.”
Turkish cargo ship leaves Ukraine’s Mariupol after grain talks with Moscow: Ankara
A Turkish cargo ship on Wednesday left Ukraine’s Russian-occupied port of Mariupol after a round of “constructive” grain talks with Moscow, the Turkish defence ministry said, without specifying if it was carrying wheat.
“The meeting in Moscow gave its first concrete result,” the Turkish ministry said in a statement.
“Just a few hours after the end of the long meeting, the Turkish dry cargo ship, which had been waiting for days, left the Ukrainian port.”
Denmark offers fourth Covid vaccine dose to over-50s
Denmark’s government said Wednesday the country will begin offering a fourth dose of the Covid-19 vaccine to risk groups next week and all over-50s after the summer, amid the emergence of a new variant.
“Authorities believe the new variant is more infectious than the previous one, which is why we are acting now… to protect the most vulnerable and the elderly”, Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen told reporters.
She said those most at risk would be able to receive a fourth dose starting next week.
The Omicron subvariant BA.5 now accounts for 59 per cent of new cases in Denmark, which has registered more than 3.1 million infections since the beginning of the pandemic in a country of 5.8 million people.
Denmark, which paused its vaccination campaign at the end of April, said the campaign would scale up after the summer.
“Health authorities have recommended a revaccination of 2.5 million Danes in the autumn”, Fredriksen said.
The fourth dose will be offered to all over-50s as of October 1. Around 62 per cent of Danes have already received the third dose.
The Scandinavian country lifted all of its corona restrictions in February and has no plans to reintroduce them.
“Our strategy is a society without restrictions, that is why we need to prevent the illness” more than the spread of the infection, the head of Denmark’s National Board of Health, Soren Brostrom, told reporters at the same press conference.
He urged people with symptoms to test themselves and isolate if their test is positive.
This will be an endless Cash cow for the pharmaceutical companies.
Why monkeypox may soon get a new name
Monkeypox may soon have a new name after scientists called for a change to dispel stereotypes of Africa is seen as a crucible of disease.
The World Health Organization announced last week that it is “working with partners and experts from around the world on changing the name of monkeypox virus, its clades and the disease it causes.”
Monkeypox’s clades, which are different branches of the virus’ family tree, have been particularly controversial because they are named after African regions.
Last year the WHO officially named Covid-19 variants after Greek letters to avoid stigmatising the places where they were first detected.
Just days before the WHO announced it would change monkeypox’s name, a group of 29 scientists wrote a letter saying there is an “urgent need for a non-discriminatory and non-stigmatising nomenclature” for the virus.
The letter, signed by several prominent African scientists, called for the names of the “West African” and the “Central African” or “Congo Basin” monkeypox clades to be changed.
Until a few months ago, monkeypox had largely been confined to West and Central Africa.
But since May, a new version has spread across much of the world. The letter’s signatories suggested naming this version as a new clade, giving it “the placeholder label hMPXV” — for human monkeypox virus.
Out of the more than 2,100 monkeypox cases recorded globally this year, 84 per cent were in Europe, 12 per cent in the Americas and just three per cent in Africa, according to the WHO’s latest update last week.
‘Not a monkey disease’
Oyewale Tomori, a virologist at Redeemer’s University in Nigeria, said he supported changing the name of monkeypox’s clades.
“But even the name monkeypox is aberrant. It is not the right name,” he told AFP.
“If I were a monkey, I would protest because it’s not a monkey disease.”
The virus was named after it was first discovered among monkeys in a Danish lab in 1958, but humans have mostly contracted the virus from rodents.
The letter pointed out that “nearly all” outbreaks in Africa were sparked by people catching the virus from animals — not from other people.
But the current outbreak “is unusual in that it is purely spreading through human to human transmission,” said Olivier Restif, an epidemiologist at the University of Cambridge.
“So, it is fair to say that the current outbreak has very little to do with Africa, in the same way, that the Covid-19 waves and variants we’re still being battered by have little to do with the Asian bats from which the virus originally came a few years ago.”
– ‘Stigmatisation of Africa’ –
Moses John Bockarie of Sierra Leone’s Njala University said he agreed with the call to change monkeypox’s name.
“Monkeys are usually associated with the global south, especially Africa,” he wrote in The Conversation.
“In addition, there is a long dark history of black people being compared to monkeys. No disease nomenclature should provide a trigger for this.”
Restif said it was “important to highlight that this debate is part of a larger issue with the stigmatisation of Africa as a source of disease.”
“We’ve seen it most strikingly with HIV in the 1980s, with Ebola during the 2013 outbreak and again with Covid-19 and the reactions to the so-called ‘South African variants’,” he told AFP.
An African press group has also expressed “its displeasure against media outlets using images of black people alongside stories of the monkeypox outbreak in North America and the United Kingdom.
“We condemn the perpetuation of this negative stereotype that assigns calamity to the African race and privilege or immunity to other races,” The Foreign Press Association, Africa tweeted last month.
Restif pointed out that the “old stock photographs of African patients” used by Western media usually depict severe symptoms.
But the monkeypox spreading around the world “is much milder, which partly explains how easily it gets transmitted,” he said.
The WHO will announce the new monkeypox names “as soon as possible”, its chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said.
The UN agency is also holding an emergency committee meeting on Thursday to assess whether the outbreak represents a public health emergency of international concern — the highest alarm it can sound.
Don’t call him Boris – he’s not your pal, he’s a cult
I WASN’T particularly interested in ‘Partygate’, save as a symptom of the more pernicious evil of lockdown.
Nor am I anything other than amused by the typical and everyday Westminster self-indulgences, examples of which have recently included confidence votes, expense accounts, leg-crossing, the resignation of an ‘ethics adviser’ (which is sort of an oxymoron) and leadership speculation.
It’s all the usual political navel-gazing in which the protagonists don’t seem to appreciate that they are not political leaders, but bad actors in a particularly tedious soap opera. Albeit one which they force the rest of us to watch.
The last two years have seen the Establishment sew a patchwork of trivia. The UK political to-and-fro has confirmed a disengagement from a wider global agenda. From the globalist perspective, the obsessions of the UK political classes amount to little more than a concatenation of useful, localised distractions. Some of us see that as obvious; many are inhaling the sand.
The Field Generals and puppeteers of the World Economic Forum and the World Health Organisation smirk with condescension at the Captain Mainwaring manoeuvres of Johnson and his cohort of Cabinet mediocrity.
But there is one question – a significant one – which has been a constant throughout the miserable tyranny of the last two years: By what dark alchemy has Prime Minister Johnson suckered the country into calling him ‘Boris’? How has he managed to generate this expedient and fake familiarity with the UK public?
It’s all in the name.
Names – in particular Christian names – have an intrinsic philosophical resonance and etiquette which governs (or is used to govern) their application.
In the second chapter of his beautiful intellectual autobiography Gentle Regrets, Roger Scruton writes about ‘how I found my name, which he recounts as a genuine voyage of intellectual discovery.
He notices that your name doesn’t just allow you to be picked out in the world, but can shape both your response to that world and the world’s response to you. To change your name, to write under a pseudonym, to anonymise yourself – all of these involve subtle manipulations of how you wish the world to see you. Your name is a matter of constant review, he suggests.
To fiddle with your name verges on pride. It’s a form of manipulation. Manipulations seldom come without moral and ethical consequences.
You need look no further than the cesspool of social media to see this. People who can be perfectly engaging in ‘real life’ become proficient in the construction of alternative selves. The Clark Kent who sits benignly at the breakfast table consults, making sure the kids have completed the homework, his Twitter feed and is transformed into a malign online Superman.
Your name is precious because it is a gift.
And like all jewels, it requires constant protection. We now inhabit a world in which strangers feel free to help themselves to that gift. How many times have you met the following? A stranger, often in a position of some authority, reaches into your private life and plucks out your Christian name. Uninvited.
A civil society is one based on civility. Civility is a complicated thing. It involves varieties of intangible attachments. It requires manners. These are not matters easily defined, but because they are beyond the scope of language it does not mean that they are unimportant.
The point about manners is that they are felt, not codified.
The casual appropriation of the forename by a stranger is an act of aggression. It serves to unpick the settled order. Not because your name is private, but because it is personal. And it’s up to me to offer it, not you to grab it.
Johnson has reversed the etiquette and has made of the entire country a vulgar familiarity. That we call him ‘Boris’ (not that I do) has allowed him to develop a cult of personality, one which masks what I suspect is a deeper dysfunctionality. It suits him that you pretend you know him.
But you don’t know him. And every time you call him ‘Boris’, you distance yourself from the real Johnson and facilitate his slow-motion coup against the rest of us.
So next time you find yourself calling him that, I urge you, as we Irish say, to ‘catch yourself on’.
Our politicians should never be familiars. They need holding at arm’s length.
Officials in France banned people from attending concerts, outdoor gatherings, and events due to safety concerns over a heatwave.
“Everyone now faces a health risk,” official Fabienne Buccio told France Bleu radio, after announcing the regional restrictions around Bordeaux.
Outdoor events – including, ironically, annual ‘Resistance’ celebrations – are banned until the officials declare the heatwave is over. They’re even restricting some indoor events that don’t have air conditioning.
However, private weddings are still allowed.
Temperatures reportedly hit 40 degrees Celsius on Thursday, and the heatwave is expected to peak on Saturday.
Nonetheless, rather than let people take responsibility for themselves – to hydrate or stay home – French officials are comfortable deciding for them.
Indeed, democratic governments seem comfortable stripping citizens’ freedoms for safety as of late. From COVID lockdowns to climate.
Recently, The Counter Signal reported that climate change lockdowns were likely on the horizon.
For example, unelected IGOs recently advised the British government to outright ban driving on Sundays to curb rising gas prices and address an energy crisis.
The advisement came from the International Energy Agency (IEA) as part of a 10-point plan, central to which is achieving net-zero carbon emissions by 2050.
And this isn’t as conspiratorial as it might sound.
For example, while speaking on behalf of the World Health Organization (WHO), International Council of Nurses CEO Howard Catton claimed that climate change is the “grandmother of all health threats,” suggesting that the WHO may get involved with climate change-related health risks, like heatwaves, in the future.
Canada hasn’t even dropped its COVID travel restrictions, and already the government has elevated monkeypox to Level 2 status
, which means travellers may be subject to “isolation,” i.e., mandatory quarantine.
As per a Health Canada announcement, “In the current outbreak, those at risk of infection are those who have had close or intimate contact with a person who has monkeypox.”
“During your travel, you may be subject to procedures at your destination put in place to limit the spread of monkeypox, such as isolation, should you become infected. You may have limited access to timely and appropriate health care should you become ill, and may experience delays in returning home.”
This announcement also suggests that, much like COVID, the Canadian government plans on utilizing COVID infrastructure to track individuals suspected of having contacted those with confirmed monkeypox infections.
Health Canada continues, saying the federal government is now working with provincial and international governments to monitor the spread of monkeypox, even though cases remain low and monkeypox isn’t transmitted easily.
They are also recommending the use of personal protective equipment while travelling, which may mean additional mask mandates down the road.
Besides being one of the first countries to jump the gun on quarantining those who come down with a case of monkeypox, Canada is also one of the first countries (if not the first) to begin vaccinating people for monkeypox using the smallpox vaccine following the recent outbreak.
Quebec was the first to begin vaccinating for monkeypox, despite having only 25 cases in the province at the time.
As of yesterday (half a month later), there are now supposedly 85 cases, and over 500 Quebecers have received the smallpox vaccine.
Health officials also appear to be focused almost exclusively on monitoring gay men due to the spread believed to be occurring during sexual intercourse between individuals who attended a Spanish Pride festival — though monkeypox isn’t classified as a sexually-transmitted disease.
“We’re seeing the chain of transmission mainly in social networks in men who have sex with men,” said Montreal’s medical officer, Genevieve Bergeron.
It isn’t clear whether the government plans on tracking heterosexuals, too, or if it’s just gay men being targeted during Pride month.
Yet another food processing plant has spontaneously caught fire
— this time it’s a frozen pizza factory in Portage County, Wisconsin.
An American Red Cross report says they rushed to provide food and water for the more than 70 firefighters from nearly two dozen departments that were required to put out the fire early Monday morning.
According to Stevens Point Journal, the fire was first reported at roughly 9 am, with billowing smoke spreading out several kilometres east and northwest. Some departments cleared the scene at 4:30 pm, but the fire wasn’t completely extinguished until 8:45 pm, nearly 12 hours later.
The Fire District says the fire began in the compressor room for the refrigeration and stemmed from a problem that arose during maintenance. No employees were injured.
This isn’t the first — and likely won’t be the last fire at a food processing plant. Indeed, there have been several in just the last few months.
But it’s not just food processing plants catching fire that’s troubling, especially during a time of food inflation. Poultry at meat producers is being destroyed at an alarming rate, usually due to barn and factory fires or avian flu.
In early April, 46,000 turkeys had to be killed in Barron, Wisconsin, due to an avian flu outbreak.
Another flock of 53,000 in Beadle County, South Dakota, had to be killed that same month.
On May 3, 13,800 chickens had to be destroyed at an Oklahoma farm for the same reason.
72,300 chickens had to be killed in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, just a week later.
A report commissioned by the United Kingdom (UK) government says the entire country will need to ban most air travel within ten years
and all air travel by 2050 to abide by impossibly lofty climate change laws.
“In her last significant act as Prime Minister, Theresa May changed the UK’s Climate Change Act to commit us to eliminating all greenhouse gas emissions in the UK by 2050. This decision is based on good climate science, was a response to a great wave of social protest and has been replicated in 60 other countries already,” the Absolute Zero report commissioned by the UK government explains.
According to the authors of the report, the only way that the UK government can meet their Absolute Zero obligations is to phase out all air travel, implementing an outright ban in 2050 until such a time as the government can conceive of a means of producing planes that produce zero greenhouse gases at any point during an aircraft’s production or use.
It shouldn’t need to be stated, but this is impossible.
Nonetheless, the authors say that “All airports except Heathrow, Glasgow and Belfast [will] close” between 2020-2029 and “All remaining airports [will] close” by 2050.
The authors continue, saying that under the current legislation, the following changes to daily life will need to be taken as all will be illegal in 2050: stop using aeroplanes; end all shipping; take the train, not the car; rideshare; use an electric vehicle; reduce energy consumption, including and especially heating; reduce fertilizer use; reduce cement and steel use and imports, etc.
The authors say that progressively limiting red meat consumption will also be necessary, as lamb and beef will be outlawed in the UK by 2050.
“In addition, obeying the law of our Climate Change Act requires that we stop doing anything that causes emissions regardless of its energy source. This requires that we stop eating beef and lamb – ruminants who release methane as they digest grass – and already many people have started to switch to more vegetarian diets,” the report reads.
This is quite an astounding proposal, as the authors say that under the climate change legislation, all fertilizer use will need to be “greatly reduced,” as will all processed foods, and the total energy required to cook or transport food must be reduced by 60 per cent of today’s levels.
So, the UK will not produce meat, will not use fertilizer to produce vegetables, will reduce other food imports to avoid greenhouse gas emissions, and will not produce or import processed food as a substitute.
It isn’t clear what, if anything, the authors and the government expect the people of the United Kingdom will eat in 2050. By all accounts, this appears to be a policy of misery and death.
French President Emmanuel Macron and his allies were scrambling for a way out of political deadlock Monday
after losing their parliamentary majority in a stunning blow to the president and his reform plans.
Macron’s Ensemble (Together) coalition emerged as the largest party in Sunday’s National Assembly vote but was dozens of seats short of keeping the parliamentary majority it had enjoyed for the last five years.
Surges on the left and the far right destroyed the dominant position of Macron’s deputies who, for the past five years, had backed the president’s policies without fail.
Turnout was low, with the abstention rate recorded at 53.77 per cent.
– ‘A slap’ –
The left-leaning Liberation daily called the result a “slap in the face” for Macron, while the conservative Le Figaro said he was now “faced with an ungovernable France“.
Macron’s allies may now seek a majority by forming deals with other parties on the right, stirring up turmoil not seen in French politics for decades.
The election saw the new left-wing alliance NUPES make gains to become the main opposition force with 127 seats, according to the Interior Ministry.
But it is unclear if the coalition of Socialists, Communists, Greens and the hard-left France Unbowed will remain a united bloc in the National Assembly.
Meanwhile the far-right under Marine Le Pen posted the best legislative performance in its history, becoming the strongest single opposition party with 89 seats, up from eight in the outgoing chamber.
A confident Le Pen said her party would demand to chair the National Assembly’s powerful finance commission, as is tradition for the biggest opposition party.
“The country is not ungovernable, but it’s not going to be governed the way Emmanuel Macron wanted,” Le Pen told reporters Monday.
Hard-left firebrand Jean-Luc Melenchon, who leads the NUPES alliance, said he would bring a motion of no confidence against Macron’s Prime Minister Elisabeth Borne as soon as parliament convenes in July.
Borne, who was elected to parliament in her first-ever political race, was nonetheless seen as vulnerable as Macron faces a new cabinet shake-up after several of his top allies lost their seats.
His health and environment ministers lost their seats and by tradition will have to resign, as did the parliament speaker and the head of Macron’s parliament group.
“We will see in the coming hours, but for now the prime minister remains the prime minister,” government spokeswoman Olivia Gregoire told France Inter radio Monday.
“I fear that the country is paralysed,” she added.
– ‘Turning point’ –
The outcome severely tarnished Macron’s April presidential election victory when he defeated Le Pen, becoming the first French president to win a second term in over two decades.
“It’s a turning point for his image of invincibility,” said Bruno Castres, a researcher at the Centre for Political Research of Sciences Po.
The options available to Macron, who has yet to publicly comment on the result, range from seeking to form a new coalition alliance, passing legislation based on ad hoc agreements to even calling new elections.
His Together alliance won 244 seats, far short of the 289 needed for an overall majority.
“The root of the presidential party is total,” Melenchon told supporters.
A prominent MP from Melenchon’s party, Alexis Corbiere, said Macron’s plan to raise the French retirement age to 65 had now been “sunk”.
Macron had hoped to stamp his second term with an ambitious programme of tax cuts, welfare reform and raising the retirement age. All that is now in question.
“It will be much more difficult to govern,” said Dominique Rousseau, professor of law at Paris Pantheon-Sorbonne University.
– ‘Imagination needed’ –
There could now potentially be weeks of political deadlock as the president seeks to reach out to new parties.
The most likely option would be an alliance with the Republicans, the traditional party of the French right, which has 61 MPs.
LR president Christian Jacob however made clear there would be no easy partnership, saying his party intended to “stay in opposition”.
Economy Minister Bruno Le Maire admitted “a lot of imagination will be needed” from the Macron’s party in what Le Figaro said was “a jump into the unknown”.
In a rare spot of good news for the president, Europe Minister Clement Beaune and Public Service Minister Stanislas Guerini — both young pillars of his party — won tight battles for their seats.
On the left, Rachel Keke, a former cleaning lady who campaigned for better working conditions at her hotel, was also elected, defeating Macron’s former sports minister Roxana Maracineanu.
JUST IN 🚨 Bitcoin price falls below $20,000 for the first time since 2020. Ethereum down under $1,000
Again and again, this minister insisted the police asked for the Emergencies Act.
We now know that is false.
He must resign. Now.
Male blood donor 66 was turned away for not answering if he was pregnant or not.
66-year-old man who’s been donating blood since he was 18 was told by staff they cannot accept his blood because he refused to answer if he was pregnant. The question was added to promote inclusivity.
What is this world coming to when people start believing that men can physically get pregnant. What sort of mental health problems do these people have? There must be something broken inside.
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.
The Truth Hurts News Share blog 