Hello Hive and Deep Divians!
I've an exciting development on correspondence with the Prime Minister of Australia to share with you today. I received a response regarding a legal notice I sent him reserving my rights to not receive a mandatory vaccine.
It's likely an automated response for all such things but this 'letter' also wreaks of juicy propaganda craving a breakdown!
I've decided I will write it as an open letter to the Honorary Prime Minister of Australia, Scott Morrison himself.
Thank you so much for taking the time to respond to my declaration and reservation of rights despite your attempts at implied consent via the media. I've decided to repost your letter right here on an uncensorable blockchain for all to see. I will now proceed to analyze each sentence and give you my most calculated and well researched feedback on your response.
I will provide the sentences that you have written in indented quotation and large titling and then provide my analyses.
Thank you for writing to me regarding a COVID-19 vaccine. COVID-19 is a threat to lives and livelihoods."
No... thank YOU for responding dear Scott! I'm so excited to be engaging in this very personal dialogue with you, and so grateful that my needs will be met and heard as a direct result of this consultation! 🙃
I did indeed write to you regarding the COVID-19 vaccine (I'm glad you acknowledged this) - a threat to my rights as a man - when you openly state it may be mandatory - but oops! That was a slip of the tongue wasn't it? Now you're saying it won't be - well which is it Scott? I'd like clarification. Simply slathering words out in public - rights impinging words like 'mandatory' - is not such a slip, now is it Scott?
I've not got a whole lot of trust in you and the way you do things - it could have something to do with your holiday to Hawaii when Australia was going through a major bush fire crisis just a few months prior to this whole Covid-19 debacle. It's so good you said sorry though because that makes it all better. As a suggestion - alternatively you could have actually stayed in Australia and served the Australian people when they needed the assistance. Just to jog your memory of how much people lost respect for you - a firefighter even embarrassed you by refusing to shake your hand on camera!
Covid-19 like other Corona viruses which have been around for centuries are indeed a threat to lives and livelihoods as they have always been. Let's look at the stats on the CDC's Website (Center for Disease Control) in America - a geographic area that is one of the most impacted in the world by the novel corona virus. At present these are the survival rates, IF infected:
If you fail to translate the figures on the site to percentages let me help you along - go to the first table on the link I provided and find the 'current best estimate' - you find these figures which represent the fatality ratio:
0-19 years: 0.00003
20-49 years: 0.0002
50-69 years: 0.005
70+ years: 0.054
These figures translated into percentages, are the previous figures I provided. I decided to work it out for you because that's just the nice person I am!
There are a large many things within society that far outweigh the risks of fatality involved in walking outside and contracting Covid-19; things that we participate in on a daily basis in modern society. Not to mention the significant number of indirect fatalities and societal issues caused by the lock-downs themselves including:
“We’re seeing, sadly, far greater suicides now than we are deaths from COVID.” - Dr. Robert Redfield (CDC in July) link
The COVID-19 pandemic creates a perfect storm for exacerbating domestic violence, foremost by forcing family members into close contact with their abusers.
"When you increase exposure, you increase beatings," Post said. "Whenever a family spends more time together, the violence will increase."
Being forced to shelter in place removes many of the coping strategies that victims use to avoid exposure to their abuser, said Barbara Paradiso, director of Center on Domestic Violence at the University of Colorado Denver. link
The Melbourne virus lockdown has "weaponised" domestic violence against women and children and cries for help have "gone through the roof", family crisis workers say. link
Patients with fatal illnesses not making it to hospital or denied regular care 1
Patients that will die in the future for not being diagnosed with cancer at a crucial period in its development due to avoiding the hospital, or being denied healthcare 1
add your own reasons here... I'm sure you've got a couple - how about you brainstorm!
Here's a great interview by Dr Scott Atlas who gives a decent synopsis on how much more issues the effects of lock-downs have caused than the virus itself: https://peakd.com/hive-181335/@nonewabnormal/zcqgixlq
This interview was removed from youtube for violating guidelines - that of speaking against the official Covid-19 narrative. Lucky! Uncensorable blockchain to the rescue! You can still get the facts, even when those pesky big pharma partial corporate media owners are getting in the way of you getting the data you need to make good governing decisions!
Much of the data on the side effects of lock-downs are things that cannot really be known until in months to come we get some solid stats - something you seem to not need in order to justify further measures of lock-down and denial of rights - when all original lock-downs with COVID-19 have now been proven to have been based on grievously failed projections. Here's a great article for you to read entitled: Modelers Were ‘Astronomically Wrong’ in COVID-19 Predictions, Says Leading Epidemiologist—and the World Is Paying the Price
As leading epidemiologist Dr. John Ioannidis of Stanford University stated in his interview here:
0.05% to 1% is a reasonable range for what the data tell us now for the infection fatality rate, with a median of about 0.25%. The death rate in a given country depends a lot on the age-structure, who are the people infected, and how they are managed. For people younger than 45, the infection fatality rate is almost 0%. For 45 to 70, it is probably about 0.05-0.3%. For those above 70, it escalates substantially, to 1% or higher for those over 85. For frail, debilitated elderly people with multiple health problems who are infected in nursing homes, it can go up to 25% during major outbreaks in these facilities.
He goes on to state:
COVID-19 has become a notifiable disease so it is readily recorded in death certificates. What we do know, however, is that the vast majority of people who die with a COVID-19 label have at least one and typically many other comorbidities. This means that often they have other reasons that would lead them to death. The relative contribution of COVID-19 needs very careful audit and evaluation of medical records.
Also, it's great that COVID-19 has already been around for a while so we've already largely built an immunity towards it! So no vaccine required! You can tell those people at AstraZeneca you won't be needing to give them millions of dollars - because we're simply going through the same rises and falls of a respiratory related flu like virus like we always have - every year. Phew! I highly suggest you watch this video with Professor Knutt Wittkowski also banned by those pesky media owning jokers - again, lucky we saved it for you so you can continue to make legitimate and well informed decisions in the governing of this beautiful country (at least attempt to (at least attempt to make it look like you are attempting to aka. no more holidays to Hawaii! Nah ah... ☝️)).
"Already the virus has claimed more than 800,000 fatalities worldwide, including many hundreds in Australia."
Let's analyze this 'data' shall we and consider how these 'deaths' were recorded:
For 6% of the deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death. The number of deaths with each condition or cause is shown for all deaths and by age groups.
While this doesn't mean that ALL deaths recorded were not attributable to Covid-19 in America that were put down on paper as Covid-19 - it highlights a major discrepancy and it invalidates the fear tactics used and lockdown measures justified by using such figures. False international figures and projections have been used to gird the Australian people into compliance with a fear based media approach so it's important to address these discrepancies internationally - because they affect us on a local scale.
All around the world these discrepancies exist. Let's look at the UK for example.
Here's a great article called Revising UK COVID-19 Death Counts as Oxford Researchers Point to Huge Flaw in Counting Process
More than 99% of Italy’s coronavirus fatalities were people who suffered from previous medical conditions, according to a study by the country’s national health authority.
As a quick comparison, seeing as 'death death death' (the new media mantra) is touted in our faces with Covid-19 like it's the first time death has ever happened - let's take look at hunger:
Hunger and malnutrition are the biggest risks to health worldwide - greater than AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis combined.
Starvation still claims a child's life every three seconds. Let's count those seconds together shall we? 31557600 seconds in a year divided by 3 equals - Ten million, Five Hundred and Nineteen thousand, two hundred - 10,519,200.
These are preventable deaths that cost relatively little to remedy in comparison to the yearly military budget of any given first world country; and when you have some first worlders selling rights to a gif as 'art' for the equivalent of $100,000 - it could be said our priorities are a little askew. 😳
This article regarding a recent study on the risk of actually dieing from COVID-19 also has some interesting things to say:
The risk study by Dr. Rajiv Bhatia, clinical assistant professor of primary care and population health at Stanford, and Dr. Jeffrey Klauser, adjunct professor of epidemiology at UCLA, looked at publicly available case incidence data for the week ending May 30 in the 100 largest U.S. counties as states began to reopen.
“The thing we are looking for is to start a discussion of risk,” Bhatia said. “We’re bombarded with data on death and cases.”
The study found a person in a typical medium to large U.S. county who has a single random contact with another person has, on average, a 1 in 3,836 chance of being infected without social distancing, hand-washing or mask-wearing.
If that sounds like a tolerable risk, consider the odds of being hospitalized. The study found a 50-to-64-year-old person who has a single random contact has, on average, a 1 in 852,000 chance of being hospitalized or a 1 in 19.1 million chance of dying based on rates as of the last week of May.
“We were surprised how low the relative risk was,” Klausner said.
The study assumes the same risk for every individual, even though it is known to be higher in certain regions, occupations and residential settings where there have been repeated outbreaks — meat-packing plants, nursing homes, health care jobs, jails and prisons. The study also did not account for a person’s pre-existing health conditions.
And the report did not attempt to compare the risk levels for infection, hospitalization and death from COVID-19 to other infectious diseases or potential dangers such as automobile accidents, which the authors acknowledged is a more difficult exercise. A 2017 report from the National Safety Council calculated the odds of a person dying in a motor vehicle crash at 1-in-114 and dying from a lightning strike at 1-in-161,856. But that’s over a lifetime, not just a single week.
To finish addressing the point of fear over threat, here's a quote from an article I wrote here:
This article is not intended to cause you to lose empathy for the dead or dying. The point is not that we should lose our humanity and disrespect those affected. It is to see how the fear of death, disproportionate to its possible causes, is controlling the behaviours of the westernized human.
It could be said that fears have mental jurisdiction and it is important to keep those fears within their jurisdiction not to give them full rights over the entirety of our souls, effectively locking us down in a system of absolute control within the self.
To the inner, to the outer - so mote it be. If we change and we open up inwardly, standing up for our rights within our own selves - reserving the right to have control of our own lives and our own emotions - we affect the physical world outwardly allowing more and more for people to do the same.
Reserve the right for yourself against the fear so you can live the fullest potential your life deserves. Set the jurisdiction of freedom above the jurisdiction of fear of death within your own being first.
Fear has a purpose, it is a tool of the self to avoid danger - but it can also take over like a demon and be used by powerful people that understand the tendencies of human morality.
Let us know ourselves enough to divide realistic enabling boundaries from irrational boundless fears.
"It has been estimated that the pandemic has cost 500 million jobs worldwide."
The lock-downs and reactionary governments - NOT the virus - has caused these job losses and the catastrophic effects to the economies of the world.
This is based largely on the idea that the boogey-man of the asymptomatic carrier of the virus is real - is an enemy within each one of us - and could infect and kill anyone at any moment!
Let's look at what the WHO has to say on this today -
And let's look at this medical study published in August which states there were no transmissions onto 455 people an asymptomatic patient came into contact with. Zero - that's right 0.
We've based the entire lock-down on the idea that even people that think they might have this virus might have it and could be spreading it and killing people by having something that they only think they have - but can't know conclusively. The lunacy of what's been done to society based on this fear propaganda is a grievous crime against humanity. In the short-term and long-term, the fatalities of the fallout effects of the lock-down measures far exceed the threat of a virus with no gold standard in testing.
PCR testing is a failure - PCR tests were never intended to be used to diagnose a virus and in some studies has had up to a 90% false positive rating. That means that of the less than 15% of people diagnosed as positive of which approx 80% of those are asymptomatic there is up to a 90% chance those tests will show up as negative the next day. While in America 77 football players were diagnosed as positive and the very next day all were diagnosed as negative - you have New Zealand justifying lock-down with just four of these cases using the very same tests. This is lunacy!
The New Zealand Prime minister states -
We're asking people in Auckland to stay home to stop the spread. Act as if you have COVID, and as though people around you have COVID."
Sound familiar? 'If you think you have it, act as if you have it even if you don't, nor can it be conclusively proven you have it,' - fear this thing that can't be proven and that can't be seen and then enforce the equivalent of martial law on those around you because 'we're doing this together'. Will the thought crime of going outside be punished next? We have to put a stop to the limits of this unseen threat based on wishy-washy data and wishy-washy projections.
"A vaccine is vital to keeping people safe and restoring our way of life."
Vaccines are not the be all and end all of anything regarding human health. A healthy immune system is vital to keeping people safe and restoring our way of life. A government that is not corrupted by the interests of big pharma is vital for keeping people safe and restoring our way of life.
I highly suggest reading this article here regarding a polio vaccine propagated by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation that is now causing new outbreaks of polio in a strain of virus that is only in the vaccine. This is not a conspiracy as Bill might have us believe, it's a-a-happening!
Without 2-4 years of clinical trials, vaccines cannot be proven to be safe - regardless of how fast a country wants to place an order for a vaccine or how fast a pharmaceutical company wants to sell or pre-sell it. Have a quick look on the history of the H1N1 scare in 2009 to draw some correlations with the mass panic and histeria to create global action caused with Covid-19, paying billions to big pharma for vaccines - for a pandemic that NEVER happened. How quickly we forget the past.
"To this end, we are working towards securing a COVID-19 vaccine for all Australians."
How very kind and generous of you... and who are you paying for this immense and expensive order?
"An agreement with the UK-based drug company AstraZeneca will mean that every Australian will be able to receive the University of Oxford COVID-19 vaccine for free, should trials prove successful, safe and effective."
Let's look at the history of AstraZeneca for a moment shall we?
Big pharmeutical companies have a big track record of doing the dodgy on the people in order to sell more products and AstraZeneca is no different - I'll repost some independent journalism (something you're not so big on as of late) for you to read at your leisure.
The concern here is how uncritically willing government officials are willing to get into the king sized bed that is Big Pharma. Behind every drugs company celebration is a scandal and behind that scandal an entire platoon of lawyers, publicists and regulators. To that end, the field of AstraZeneca’s improprieties, actual and alleged, is vast. Its operations, at times, have resembled those of the most daring privateers and cutthroat mercantilists.
In 2016, AstraZeneca agreed to pay $5.5 million in a settlement over charges they had violated the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Improper payments had been made to health care providers based in Russia and China between 2005 and 2010. Such conduct interested the US Securities and Exchanges commission, which instituted cease-and-desist proceedings which had the effect of inducing an offer of settlement. In the words of the order, AZN “failed to devise and maintain a sufficient system of internal accounting controls relating to the interactions of its China and Russia subsidiaries with government officials, the vast majority of whom were health care providers (‘HCPs’), at state-owned and state-controlled entities in China an Russia.”
The company also has a few stand outs on the product side of things, a salient warning to governments the world over that doing deals with such an entity is potentially harmful and inherently corrupting. Seroquel, AstraZeneca’s second best-selling pharmaceutical, was promoted by the company to physicians and psychiatrists between 2001 and 2006 for mental disorders not covered by US Food and Drug Administration approval. (The approval range spanned the treatment of schizophrenia, short term treatment for certain manic episodes linked to bipolar disorder, and then, in 2006, bipolar depression.)
A whistleblower lawsuit subsequently alleged that the company had marked Seroquel to cover everything from dementia to anger management, post-traumatic stress disorder and sleeplessness. Doctors were also paid to give advice to the company on how best to market the drug for unapproved uses. Resorting to a technique it has come to master over the years, AstraZeneca refused to admit liability for such a marketing strategy while still paying $520 million in the civil suit.
Such short and sharp practice has extended to manipulating the clinical record, something that should make any investors into a COVID-19 vaccine vary. The company has been known to fudge the results of clinical trials, stressing supposedly positive findings while diligently hiding nastier ones. The notorious CAFE (Comparison of Atypicals in First Episode) study on comparing the effectiveness of three “atypical” antipsychotic drugs – Seroquel, Zyprexa and Risperdal – was accused by Cardiff University’s David Healy, a senior psychiatrist, of being “a non-study of the worst kind”, designed as “an entirely marketing-driven exercise” rather than having any scientific value. The criteria of effectiveness – for instance, whether the drugs were taken to the end of the study – suggested that the designers from the AstraZeneca were only interested in one thing: that candidates using them stuck with the programme. This said nothing about effectiveness as such, a point made even more glaring by the study’s omission of older antipsychotics.
The speed of this entire exercise is also a danger. Speed can be fatal in scientific endeavours, be it in terms of the outcome, or in terms of the mission. This is also being prompted by what can politely be described as a paradox. The leader of the Oxford University group and Soriot have one big lament: that declining transmission rates in countries with experimental vaccines may doom the effectiveness of any potential product to combat COVID-19. Adrian Hill, director of the Jenner Institute at Oxford, put it rather curiously to the Sunday Telegraph: his team was facing the prospect that the virus might actually disappear. Good for some; not for others.
The CEO Pascal Zoriot himself states in this article entitled 'Coronavirus vaccine developers have a ‘bizarre’ problem. There’s not enough sick people.' - “Now the problem we will all have, I think, is we are running against time a little bit, because we see already the disease in Europe is declining,” Soriot said. “Pretty soon, the disease’s intensity will be low and it will become difficult” to gauge efficacy in a vaccine trial."
The reason the virus is declining dear Scott is that it is not a pandemic but rather part of a range of viruses that is a regular occurrence in the yearly human cycle - we've already largely built an immunity towards it.
"..should the trials prove successful, safe and effective."
Successful for whom? Safe for whom? And effective for whom? And to what ends I must ask? For the purpose of healing the public? Or killing the public? Because it seems that the US of A is gung-ho about jumping right in before the necessary 2-4 year trial period - they even want to get in before the elections. The title of the campaign is even called something cool - Warp Speed. The nice people at the big pharma companies must have really fast tracked those periods well to make up for all the things that can go wrong with untested vaccines! I don't know about you, I'm just ready to jump right on board and trust them! Good for them! I'm so happy that you have a time machine to skip those necessary trial periods and are confident to risk the lives of the 25 million people living in Australia! 🙃
Back to the rattle you justified as a response:
"The Oxford vaccine is one of the most advanced and promising in the world."
So advanced and promising that there is a 50% chance it will do nothing at all!
Let me quote some of the article for you incase you don't have a subscription to The Telegraph:
This week, the pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca announced a $1.2 billion deal with the US government to produce 400 million doses of the unproven coronavirus vaccine first produced in Prof Hill's Oxford lab.
Meanwhile, the British Government has agreed to pay for up to 100 million doses, adding that 30 million may be ready for UK citizens by September.
That's a lot of mullah! You wouldn't know anything about money and it's ability to manipulate 'facts' now would you Scott!
“It is a race, yes. But it's not a race against the other guys. It's a race against the virus disappearing, and against time,” Professor Hill, 61, told the Telegraph from his university laboratory, long emptied by the lock-down.
“We said earlier in the year that there was an 80 per cent chance of developing an effective vaccine by September.
“But at the moment, there’s a 50 per cent chance that we get no result at all.
If the vaccine clears the trials, it could be available next year.
It goes on:
Until last week, the Oxford vaccine was considered the clear frontrunner in the global race. Last week, however, a widely-reported article in Forbes cast doubt on the results of the monkey trial, suggesting that results actually showed the vaccine did not prevent the animals from catching or spreading the virus because traces were found in the creatures’ noses.
Prof Hill said the article was misleading because the monkeys had been deliberately “overdosed” on coronavirus in order to test for safety.
“The honest truth, I think, is that the author is a long-retired senior Harvard virologist, infectious disease guy. He's not a vaccine developer,” he said.
“We used a really high dose and these guys gave it not just into the lungs and the nose. They gave it into the mouth, and they gave it into the eyes. They gave a huge dose. I mean, seriously, it’s that level of basic.”
Even so, Prof Hill accepts the chances of success still hang firmly in the balance.
“The US government, the UK government, loads of charities and philanthropists are all saying we’ll pay to have it manufactured, before you finish the trial. I mean, it's a huge kind of vote of confidence in what we're doing. It's really flattering,” he said.
Woopee! I'm overjoyed! A vaccine that no one needs, that doesn't work and yet millions of dollars of tax payer dollars will go in for (and I'm sure you're getting a little tip on the side from AstraZeneca over there). [wink wink]
"Australia is also in advanced discussions with other vaccine candidates. These include our very own CSL-University of Queensland molecular clamp vaccine, among others."
I'm so terribly glad you're getting some local research on this one. Kudos to you for keeping industry within Australia! (Sarcasm intended, it's very hard to read sarcasm on the internet and I'm afraid it might actually be amiss on you unless I mention it).
"Vaccination is strongly encouraged to prevent a range of deadly and debilitating diseases in Australia."
Will this 'strong encouragement' include threatening the livelihoods of parents and young families for conscientiously objecting to the use of vaccines to retain their children's rights not to be jabbed? Does this 'strong encouragement' include banning children who have not received this vaccine from attending school?
"Vaccination is not compulsory in Australia and it will not be compulsory to have a COVID-19 vaccine."
That's good to hear. I'm going to hold you to your word on that one. Does that include even when the country or certain states are in a State of Emergency which bypasses most people's rights essentially living in a totalitarian state in all but name? (Like Melbourne and parts of Victoria at the moment).
Do you think it's a good time to let the people know that 'vaccination is not compulsory' when you've got your hands around their throat?
This woman later got an exemption for not wearing a mask because she had a valid reason. Is this the brand of respect of people's rights you'll be pulling from ALL of the public of Australia? Is this the way all of us must stand for our rights in order to keep them?
How is having your hands literally around someone's throat different to denying the livelihoods of families and the education of their children if they do not comply?
How then is your statement of 'vaccination is not compulsory' valid? What other 'strong encouragement' should we expect from you and your corrupt government? You'll need to make some deep strides ahead in regards to the protection of Australian individual freedoms if you're going to retain any semblance of credibility within the Australian people's eyes.
Likelihood of that happening = 0. Zero trust. Zero respect.
*** Edit 11/10/2020: Here is a recent statement that explicitly dictates - 'no jab, no pay' in regards to the Covid-19 vaccine - also included is the possibility of not being able to go into restaurants and have international travel. Some more 'strong encouragement' or rather proverbial hands around your throat from the government -
"However, a COVID-19 vaccine is the best way to protect the Australian community from this virus. As such, we want to achieve the highest rate of vaccination possible. The Government will explore all avenues to achieve this goal, guided by the advice of medical and scientific experts."
However... bah bah bahmmm.. no 'however' - you don't state I have rights and then start the next sentence with 'however'. Not a good move!
You seem to like to state things that are obvious and then continue on with the Covid lie as if the Covid lie is an extension to the obvious truth you just allowed to fall out of that opening between your nose and your chin.
A healthy immune system had through correct lifestyle choices is the best way to combat this virus. The avenue of self-responsibility for our own health of both mind and body is the bane of all big pharma - for if we were all healthy, it would have no business!
But with the highest rate of vaccination you can make the most money! Makes sense to me!
It must be hard when the disease itself is disappearing so quickly - thus why Mr Trump is in such a rush to get those vaccine orders done!
And when you state 'experts', I'm assuming you imply only people you deem trustworthy to further your agenda to destroy this country and appease your industry gods.
Oh, so sincere! Glad to be having this conversation with your automatum!
Are the leaders of the world just looking for a reason to put the economy into a reset and completely change the face of society? ... but that would just be me using my brain...
It's so good 🙃 there are academics trying to limit my ability to do my own research and come to my own rational conclusions then. It certainly suits this new paradigm of information. Will we be burning books tomorrow as well? It all seems good and well to force the people to look at the 'facts' but there let me remind you, there is a reason we have debates and rational discussions, studies and analyses of data - because we wish to make the most rational actions based on the best available data form MULTIPLE INDEPENDENT SOURCES. (Excuse my shouting, it needs an emphasis that one).
When it is proven without a doubt that your own government in cahoots with big media and big pharma is spreading lunacy - what do you do? Bend down and let them tell you 'what is fact' and allow them to remove all our rights, freedoms and livelihood?
NO - we continue to use our right to free speech and we refuse to be controlled by a state that is quite frankly out-of-control.
I suggest you get your experts checked and find not just ones that tell you and your big pharma dick party what you would like to hear.
This PR campaign you have sent me in the form of an email is just another smear on your already derelict history - there is no excuse for this kind of behaviour regarding what the actual facts say and what the actual data says - yet you continue on this 'virus will kill all' charade, quite willing to unlawfully remove our constitutional rights, remove the Australian people's livelihoods and sell the Australian people out.
Thank you Scott for coming on this journey with me. I hope you had the balls to read all of this and also that you might consider the people's interests above the interests of big pharma or big industry for that matter. But seeing that this is just about guaranteed not to be the case, I can say with calm certainty - expect to be deposed by the people.
Lockdowns in Melbourne and greater Australia are a crime against humanity.
'It is high time that we took this into our own hands’, an extra-parliamentary committee of over 500 doctors, virologists and epidemiologists based in Europe are standing up against the mainstream propaganda and the fraudulent actions of the governments acu2020.org. Due to the age of media censorship we live in (the modern day equivalent to the burning of the Library of Alexandria) it is a very precious time to keep information alive - stay well and true to yourselves brothers and sisters of the world!
Here is a speech made at one of two major protests in Berlin against Covid-19 measures attended by hundreds of thousands of people, falsely reported in the international media as being only right wing extremists and only being less than 100,000 people - names and labels are smeared onto activists and the facts of what is actually going on are downplayed to suit the current agenda of a global economic reset (at the sacrifice of middle to lower class people's livelihoods... and lives).