Plandemic II: Indoctornation (FULL MOVIE)

Source: Brighteon Search Page – Brighteon

Natural News
Published at 2020-08-18
Guided by the meticulous work of Dr. David E. Martin, Plandemic II: Indoctornation, tracks a three decade-long money trail that leads directly to the key players behind the COVID 19 pandemic. Plandemic II connects the dots between all forms of media, the medical industry, politics and the financial industry to unmask the major conflicts of interests with the decision makers that are currently managing this crisis.For more information, please visit https://www.plandemicseries.com

 

MEDICAL FASCISM: Australian Prime Minister says everyone will have to get vaccinated for coronavirus, whether they like it or not – NaturalNews.com

Image: MEDICAL FASCISM: Australian Prime Minister says everyone will have to get vaccinated for coronavirus, whether they like it or not

Source: MEDICAL FASCISM: Australian Prime Minister says everyone will have to get vaccinated for coronavirus, whether they like it or not – NaturalNews.com

(Natural News) Scott Morrison, the obese, vaccine-loving prime minister of Australia, has decided that all Australians will need to be vaccinated for the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) once one becomes available, save for those with medical exemptions.

Citing the few hundred deaths total throughout Australia that were supposedly linked to Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) infections, Morrison says it is critical that all Aussies be forced to line up and get jabbed for the safety of the general public.

“I would expect it to be as mandatory as you could possibly make it,” Morrison told Melbourne radio station 3AW, as reported by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation earlier in the week.

“There are always exceptions for any vaccine on medical grounds, but that should be the only basis. We are talking about a pandemic that has destroyed the global economy and taken the lives of hundreds of thousands all around the world, and over 430 Australians here.”

The Australian government has reportedly secured an international deal with Swedish-British pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca to purchase a Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccine candidate currently under development in partnership with the University of Oxford.

As soon as this vaccine breezes through clinical trials, it will be made “free” for all Aussies – meaning taxpayers are footing the bill for a chemical jab that will soon be forced on them at gunpoint.

It really does seem like we are now entering the final stages of the total extermination of humanity, using the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) plandemic as cover. Check out the following episode of The Health Ranger Report with Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, to learn more:

Do NOT let this happen here, America!

Morrison’s announcement comes as Melbourne is already facing some of the strictest lockdown measures in the entire world.

Area residents are already prohibited from leaving their homes after 8pm, and are barely even allowed to exercise except within strict confines. Now they will soon face a “no jab, no play” policy with an upcoming Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccine, which will presumably be a requirement to attend school or hold a job.

Mandatory face masks, by the way, are a prelude to mandatory vaccinations. The “no mask, no service” policies being implemented by grocery stores, airlines, and even state governors, in some cases, are priming the public for facing similar requirements once a vaccine is released.

If the general public, including here in the United States, does not stand up to this tyranny now while there is still time, then you can expect mandatory Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines to eventually go global.

According to Zero Hedge, similar forced vaccination efforts are likely to occur in the United Kingdom, as well as in Canada and some parts of Europe. Americans should likewise be on-guard against similar efforts here, which are sure to manifest once President Donald Trump’s “Operation Warp Speed” program comes to full fruition.

“Such is the gist of their made-up ‘no jab, no play’ rule,” wrote one Zero Hedge commenter.

“The idea being to divide society between conformists and anti-vaxxers, the latter being treated as persona non grata, i.e. being denied basic freedoms. IOW, government instituted discrimination. Over a fake pandemic.”

Another, quoting Frank Zappa, wrote:

“The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it’s profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater.”

More up-to-the-minute news about the globalist plot to vaccinate the entire world for the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) is available at Pandemic.news.

SCAMDEMIC SCIENCE: Coronavirus “cases” are medically meaningless, yet being used to justify weaponized lockdowns to destroy humanity

Image: SCAMDEMIC SCIENCE: Coronavirus “cases” are medically meaningless, yet being used to justify weaponized lockdowns to destroy humanity

https://www.naturalnews.com/2020-08-20-scamdemic-science-coronavirus-cases-medically-meaningless.html

(Natural News) Notice how the mainstream media has stopped talking about coronavirus “deaths” and shifted to coronavirus “cases?” That’s because the term “cases” is a misnomer. Any person who tests positive for the coronavirus is now considered a “case.” So as more testing is being conducted, more “cases” are emerging.

But I’ve got news for the corrupt medical establishment: Testing positive for a virus does not create a “case” of illness.

As every doctor and virologist knows, a “case” is only established when a person has:

1) A symptomatic expression of illness
2) The presence of an identified pathogen that is known to cause such symptoms

Merely carrying a virus is not a “case.” If that were true, then the vast majority of Americans would right now be diagnosed with “cases” of influenza, and we would be in a media-declared influenza pandemic panic.

Merely carrying a virus without showing symptoms of sickness doesn’t make a “case”

The viral strains that people carry without symptoms don’t matter much, it turns out. Most carriers aren’t contagious, and most pathogens are harmless or latent unless the carrier suddenly experiences immune suppression (from something like the extreme stress of losing their job, for example, or being locked in their own homes).

Running around the country with covid-19 tests and finding more and more people who carry the virus without symptoms is not legitimate medicine. It’s a scam. Or a “scamdemic” to be more precise. It does nothing for public health and is primarily used by the corrupt Big Pharma industrial complex to scam billions of dollars out of taxpayers by pretending everybody needs to be injected with high-profit vaccines.

There was a time, in mid-April, when the weaponized coronavirus was killing 1 in 10 people it infected, but as the virus lost many of its “gain of function” properties, it became far less lethal. This is called “host adaptation” and it’s a well-known phenomenon in virology.

Now, the coronavirus is probably at least two orders of magnitude less fatal, which means most people who carry it won’t be harmed by it. The vast majority won’t even be symptomatic. The coronavirus circulating in the wild is rapidly approaching flu-like levels of coexistence with human hosts. And that means testing asymptomatic people for the presence of the virus achieves nothing other than spreading irrational panic about a disease that’s no longer much of a threat to the masses. (But don’t put it past evil globalists to release a whole new strain that’s weaponized in a whole new way, as that seems to be their model for global domination and anti-human genocide.)

There was a time, early in the pandemic, when testing everyone made sense. It was necessary to identify “asymptomatic carriers” who were able to pass the pathogen to others. We saw so-called “super spreaders” in early 2020, including people in South Korea who infected hundreds of others without even knowing it.

But as the lethality of the virus has now plummeted, the justification for testing asymptomatic people for the mere presence of the virus has evaporated. It’s no longer medically justifiable to conduct such tests unless a person is showing obvious symptoms of sickness.

The CDC always chooses whatever course of action makes the most money for vaccine companies

I find it interesting that when asymptomatic testing was necessary, the CDC opposed it, arguing that only symptomatic people should be tested. This led to an explosion in the number of people infected in February, March and April. But now that asymptomatic testing is no longer necessary, the CDC wants everyone tested, in order to perpetuate the scamdemic “case” numbers and generate more demand for high-profit vaccines.

In other words, the CDC can always be counted on to take whatever action promotes the spread of the pandemic and therefore promotes the financial interests of vaccine makers.

The simple truth in all this is that the CDC and Big Pharma are criminal cartels that exploit this engineered “plandemic” to enslave humanity and extract insane profits from taxpayers.

That’s what this has always been about from the very start. That’s why you also need to see the bombshell new documentary film, “Plandemic II: inDOCTORnation.”

The full-length film is available at this link on Brighteon.com:
Brighteon.com/d6412bff-0421-4190-a7bf-3e5e1f52559d

This next link is usually more censorship-resistant for sharing:
Brlghteon.com/d6412bff-0421-4190-a7bf-3e5e1f52559d

Consider this film to be a “must-see” documentary that will absolutely blow your mind and forever change your understanding of the total corruption of the “science” establishment and the for-profit medical system. In essence, a group of evil people built this virus and released it onto the world so they could crush humanity and earn billions in profits. Even more shockingly, this isn’t the first time they’ve tried this.

this new information, the Covid-19 death rate can be reduced to less than the seasonal flu

Dear Friends, Students & Practitioners,

Dr Klinghardt has asked me to share this vitally important information from Lee Cowden: Benjamin Franklin once said: “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

Since Covid-19 arrived a few months ago, Americans have given up MANY liberties for which our ancestors died to attain from the dictatorial king of England.  We have been receiving tremendous push-back about Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) for Covid-19 treatment from most of the media and a sizeable percentage of the allopathic medical community for several months.

A few days ago, researchers published online (www.c19study.com) a controlled meta-analysis of 68 published studies (41 peer-reviewed) involving 2.66 billion people, showing a 79% reduction in death rate from Covid-19 in those countries which allowed early use of Hydroxychloroquine for treating Covid-19 compared to those countries which allowed very limited or no early use of HCQ. Most of the studies were using fairly low doses of HCQ. Research over the last 60 years have proven such low doses to be VERY unlikely to cause cardiac arrhythmias or other serious side effects. In fact, HCQ has been safely used in treatment of malaria, systemic Lupus and rheumatoid arthritis in pregnant women, children and fragile elderly patients for about 60 years.

The death rate from Covid-19 in the USA is presently 506 people per million. If early use of HCQ can reduce the death rate from Covid by 79%, as the new research confirms, then the death rate from Covid-19 should become 106 per million people with the widespread early outpatient use of HCQ for symptomatic Covid-19. According to the CDC website, the death rate for flu in the 2017-2018 “flu” (winter) season was 185 deaths per million (which would represent 75% more deaths from a moderately bad flu season than from the present Covid-19).

One of the main reasons that people in the USA and around the globe were petrified with fear (and were willing to allow the economy to be shut down) was because of perceived risk of death from Covid-19. With this new information, the Covid-19 death rate can be reduced to less than the seasonal flu. And, because of this study, the corrupt mainstream media will be losing its ability to keep the people of this country controlled by fear of dying from Covid-19. Please be in prayer that this new information will spread rapidly throughout the USA and that this can help start a figurative “tidal wave” of truths that can push-back against all of the lies!
Lee Cowden MD
Warm regards,
Annika

Annika Rutlin
On behalf of,
Dr Dietrich Klinghardt & Daniela Deiosso

Plandemic – Indoctornation

Created by the team behind the game-changing Plandemic video segment from Mikki Willis featuring Dr. Judy Mikovits that went viral and was banned on every major social media platform for exposing the truth about Covid-19, this new FEATURE LENGTH PIECE which is the most revelatory film on what is driving the vaccine agenda, the various roles of the WHO, Bill Gates, Tedros Adhanom, Anthony Fauci and more.

Going deep into what is really happening with mainstream media, Silicon Valley tech giants, big pharma and our health protection agencies, Mikki’s new film finally connects the dots…

… And we are excited to be able to share this with you…

We believe that this film will fundamentally shift the discourse around Coronavirus, the lockdown and the vested interests involved.

Shadow Gate https://qanon.video/q-videos/shadow-gate/

August 15, 2020 anon 

Q News

The material presented in this documentary should concern people of all political affiliations given elected officials are not the shadow government. This is about real players whose names never come up but should. Corrupt career politicians are definitely part of the beltway swamp, even aspects of the deep state, but they are not the shadow government. Two whistleblowers (@Tore_says / @TweetWordz and Patrick Bergy) who worked extensively within the Shadow Government as contractors have come forward with revelations that may be the biggest whistleblowing event to date.

SHADOW GATE TEASER (4:10)
https://banned.video/watch?id=5f28394268370e02f2ab7b2d

RUNDOWN OF SHADOWGATE
https://wearethene.ws/notable/130563

THE SHADOWNET and its relational database component, iPSY
https://indiegogo.com/projects/shadownet-the-american-awakening
http://www.victimoftheswamp.com/home/awakening

Mandatory Masks Can Cause Considerable Harm and Are Not Proven Effective

Mandatory Masks Can Cause Considerable Harm and Are Not Proven Effective

Evidence that face masks reduce the transmission of viral respiratory infections within community settings is equivocal at best.[4],[5],[6]A recent meta-analysis of scientific literature, including 11 randomized, controlled trials and 10 observational studies, found that there was no clear clinical or laboratory-confirmed evidence that masks prevent infection.[7]

To the contrary, the study warned that facemasks “…may even increase transmission if they act as fomites [objects or materials that are likely to carry infection] or prompt other behaviours that transmit the virus such as face touching.”

This echoes World Health Organization (WHO) guidance published on January 29, 2020 titled, “Advice on the use of masks in the community, during home care and in healthcare settings in the context of the novel coronavirus (‎‎‎‎‎2019-nCoV)‎‎‎‎‎ outbreak.”[8]In it, the WHO says, “Wearing medical masks when not indicated may cause unnecessary cost, procurement burden and create a false sense of security that can lead to neglecting other essential measures such as hand hygiene practices.” Furthermore, the January 2020 WHO guidance stated, “Cloth (e.g., cotton or gauze) masks are not recommended under any circumstance.”

Cloth masks have been found to be particularly problematic,[9],[10],[11] and some masks have raised concerns because they’ve been treated with a registered pesticide.[12],[13]A British Medical Journal (BMJ) study published in April 2020 cautions against the use of cloth masks, citing “Moisture retention, reuse of cloth masks and poor filtration may result in increased risk of infection.”[14]The WHO affirms increased infection risk with cloth masks in its latest June 5, 2020 guidance.[15]It based its guidance on an earlier BMJ study that found the penetration of particles to be 97% in the cloth mask group, with significantly higher rates of infection and influenza-like illness.[16]

A study on the CDC website that reviewed 10 different randomized clinical trials worldwide on highly infectious respiratory virus transmission found “no significant reduction” in “transmission with the use of face masks.”[17]

Given the lack of evidence for their use,[18],[19],[20],[21],[22],[23]and flip-flopping advice both against[24][25]and for their use by authoritative health agencies like the WHO, the increasing pressure to wear masks in public – and to be able to access basic services required to maintain one’s health, liberty and livelihood – constitutes an unnecessary power grab and means of controlling the population.

Fear Is Driving Violence and Aggression

Nonstop media and social media coverage of coronavirus has generated unprecedented levels of fear, panic and anxiety.[26],[27],[28]On June 30, Dr. Anthony Fauci warned lawmakers that we could easily see 100,000 new cases of coronavirus each day.[29],[30]Fauci stated that he is unable to accurately predict the incidence and mortality that the US will eventually see, but he declared, “It’s going to be very disturbing, I will guarantee you that.”[31],[32]

Some individuals are now fraught with so much panic and worry[33]that they are becoming violent toward family members[34]and anyone they believe is a threat to their personal safety. Aggression toward those who don’t wear masks is becoming is increasingly common and ranges from verbal threats, to assault and battery, to murder.

In March, an 86-year-old dementia patient was killed in a Brooklyn emergency room after she lost her bearings and grabbed onto another patient’s IV pole to steady herself.[35]The patient, 32-year-old Cassandra Lundy, became irate that the elderly woman, Janie Marshall, had broken social distancing guidelines and then knocked her to the floor.[36]

Ms. Marshall – who initially went to the ER for severe abdominal pains – struck her head on the floor, lost consciousness and died hours later. According to reports, Ms. Lundy, who has been charged with manslaughter, told detectives that she shoved Ms. Marshall because the elderly woman “got into the defendant’s space.”[37]

The Great Mask Divide

Masks have become one of the most controversial issues of our time.[38],[39],[40]Those who are seen in public without a mask are often judged and discriminated against,[41],[42]even if they have a condition that precludes compliance. Harassment and discrimination have become rampant,[43],[44]and fellow citizens are policing each other with very little to no knowledge of why someone may or may not be wearing a mask.[45],[46]

Even in communities that have mask exceptions for certain members of the population, those individuals are no longer allowed to fully participate in society because businesses are barring them or won’t provide services to them without a mask.It’s a breach of an individual’s privacy and autonomy to not be able to go into public without being discriminated against, and banning people from entering or participating in society because they don’t wear a mask violates their constitutional rights.[47]

These types of breaches have sparked lawsuits nationwide from individuals claiming they have been personally or financially harmed from mandatory mask measures.[48],[49],[50]Some also contend that forcing people with medical conditions to wear masks violates Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act,[51]which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability of “enjoyment of services, facilities, privileges, advantages or accommodations by any person who … operates a place of public accommodation.”[52]

Individual Health Is the Responsibility of the Individual, Not the State

With unbridled governmental control throughout much of 2020 – under the guise of emergency orders needed to curb coronavirus – citizens from coast to coast have seen their civil, constitutional and religious rights trampled upon.[53],[54]An onslaught of executive orders have shaped nearly every aspect of our personal lives, from where we can go and what activities we’re allowed to engage in, to how we educate our children, to how we earn a living, to how we worship.[55]

They have also dictated which medical philosophies we embrace and which medical treatments we can receive. In doing so, we’ve been extremely restricted in how we’ve been able to care for ourselves and support our immune systems – and we’ve been asked to follow guidelines that are not evidence-based “for the greater good.”

Although the government plays a role in controlling the spread of infectious illness, adults are responsible for their own health;[56]each person has the right to responsibly make choices about what precautions and perceived risks they take. It’s not incumbent on government officials to direct individual health decisions, and granting them this power is dangerous. Individuals are much more qualified than public servants to weigh the risks and benefits of their own personal actions.

Public officials should not impose mandates to seek compliance. Mandates perpetuate the idea that individuals lack the moral or intellectual capacity to make sound decisions for themselves and their children, so the state needs to do it for them.[57]Individuals are capable of making responsible decisions,[58]and those decisions must take a person’s whole health into account.

The health of the individual cannot be forsaken or sacrificed for the collective. We can only have a healthy society when that society is made up of healthy individuals.[59]Health is a personal right and responsibility. It is not something that we should look to the government to bestow on us or guarantee.

Masks as “Submission Signaling”

There is no compelling scientific evidence to justify the widespread push to mandate universal mask-wearing.[60]The demonstrated risks[61],[62],[63]far outweigh the purported benefits. Whereas those who wear masks believe they are “virtue signaling” their concern for the weakest and most vulnerable among us, those who refuse to submit to authoritarian decrees do so because they believe that health is a personal responsibility – and that it is up to them to decide what precautionary measures they implement to avoid a virus with an estimated case fatality rate of .1% to .26%.[64]

At-risk populations and those who are sick can self-isolate, and society should take the best care of them possible. However,healthy, law-abiding citizens should not be forced to take any precaution that can result in physical[65]and emotional harm[66]and that impinges on their constitutional rights; this includes the right to bodily autonomy, the right to move about freely, the right to participate in society and connect with others, and the right to be free from unreasonable government intrusion.[67]

It’s Time to Stand – Urge Your Lawmakers to Make Face Coverings Voluntary

Never before has it been so important for you to stand up for your rights! Mandatory medicine and mandated interventions such as social distancing and mask-wearing have no place in a free society;[68],[69]citizens have the right to make responsible decisions about what is best for themselves and their children based on their own unique circumstances.

Please stand up against medical tyranny by sending your state and local officials a pre-drafted email and tweet urging them to protect everyone in the community by ensuring that masks are voluntary, not mandatory.When you’re finished, please share this vital campaign with your friends, family, neighbors and co-workers. Remind them that constitutional rights don’t stop being important in times of emergency;[70],[71]they become more important. 

References

[1]https://www.littler.com/publication-press/publication/facing-your-face-mask-duties-list-statewide-orders

2]https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-the-17-states-requiring-people-to-wear-masks-public-2020-6

[3]https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2020/07/03/covid-face-masks-states-require-public/5371503002/

4]Med Hypotheses. 2020 May 19;143:109855.doi: 10.1016/j.mehy.2020.109855. Online ahead of print.

[5]Ann Intern Med. 2020 Jun 24;M20-3213. doi: 10.7326/M20-3213. Online ahead of print.

[6]medRxiv – April 6, 2020

[7]https://www.qeios.com/read/1SC5L4

[8]https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/330987

[9]https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577

[10]Cardiol J. 2020;27(2):218-219. doi: 10.5603/CJ.a2020.0054. Epub 2020 Apr 14.

[11]The Epoch Times

[12]https://www.newschannel5.com/news/newschannel-5-investigates/tennessee-governors-free-sock-masks-treated-with-registered-pesticide

[13]https://beyondpesticides.org/dailynewsblog/2020/06/face-masks-that-contain-toxic-pesticide-distributed-in-tennessee-for-coronavirus-then-recalled/

[14]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4420971/#__ffn_sectitle

[15]https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/advice-on-the-use-of-masks-in-the-community-during-home-care-and-in-healthcare-settings-in-the-context-of-the-novel-coronavirus-(2019-ncov)-outbreak

[16]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4420971/#__ffn_sectitle

[17]https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article

[18]BMJ April 7, 2020; 369:m1422 doi: 10.1136/bmj.m1422

[19]https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/04/commentary-masks-all-covid-19-not-based-sound-data

[20]https://www.infectioncontroltoday.com/view/cloth-masks-are-useless-against-covid-19

[21]American Thinker

[22]https://www.rcreader.com/commentary/masks-dont-work-covid-a-review-of-science-relevant-to-covide-19-social-policy?fbclid=IwAR3XrEyWaRxO8qWOqsySq_wPutL4JGx00FKV5VwL8O8P9X5Z156n_qoWSC8

[23]https://jennifermargulis.net/healthy-people-wearing-masks-during-covid19/

[24]https://www.novushealth.com/2020/04/face-masks-in-a-covid-19-world-to-wear-or-not-to-wear/

[25]Twitter, U.S. Surgeon General, February 29, 2020

[26]Cureus. 2020 May 2;12(5):e7923. doi: 10.7759/cureus.7923.

[27]J Med Internet Res. 2020 May 19;22(5):e19556. doi: 10.2196/19556.

[28]https://qz.com/1812664/the-psychology-of-coronavirus-fear-and-how-to-overcome-it/

[29]https://www.c-span.org/video/?473393-1/covid-19-response-reopening-schools

[30]https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/30/us/politics/fauci-coronavirus.html

[31]https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/30/politics/fauci-redford-testimony-senate-coronavirus/index.html

[32]https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/30/fauci-says-us-coronavirus-outbreak-is-going-to-be-very-disturbing-could-top-100000-cases-a-day.html

[33]Int J Soc Psychiatry. 2020 May 21;20764020925835. doi: 10.1177/0020764020925835.

[34]Psychiatry Res. 2020 Apr 30;289:113046. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113046.

[35]https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/08/nyregion/coronavirus-brooklyn-janie-marshall-cassandra-lundy.html

[36]https://bklyner.com/86-year-old-killed-coronavirus/

[37]https://patch.com/new-york/bed-stuy/social-distancing-death-suspect-held-coronavirus-packed-rikers

[38]BMJ 2020;369:m2005

[39]https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/06/controversy-covid-19-mask-study-spotlights-messiness-science-during

[40]https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/think-act-be/202005/why-are-masks-triggering-conflict-and-rage

[41]BMJ 2020;369:m2009

[42]Disability Rights UK June 18, 2020

[43]https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2020/07/01/many-black-and-asian-americans-say-they-have-experienced-discrimination-amid-the-covid-19-outbreak/

[44]https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1143163319383637&set=gm.4087336354647037&type=3&theater

[45]https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/04/us/social-distancing-rules-coronavirus.html

[46]https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/think-act-be/202005/why-are-masks-triggering-conflict-and-rage

[47]Cornell Law

[48]https://www.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article243643797.html

[49]https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/04/us/social-distancing-rules-coronavirus.html

[50]https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/07/10/889691823/more-than-20-u-s-states-now-require-face-masks-in-public

[51]https://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2020/06/22/lawsuits-against-giant-eagle-mask-policy/

[52]ADA Gov

[53]https://www.aclu.org/news/civil-liberties/civil-liberties-never-sleep-the-aclu-in-the-pandemic/

[54]https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/judge-andrew-napolitano-coronavirus-crisis-constitution

[55]Ballotpedia

[56]https://jennifermargulis.net/science-shows-coronavirus-covid19-treatments-without-masks-lockdowns-isolation/

[57]https://standforhealthfreedom.com/blog/why-states-are-getting-it-wrong-with-medical-mandates/

[58]https://www.mercatus.org/bridge/commentary/beware-government-overreach-protect-our-health

[59]https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/01/5-ways-to-build-healthier-societies/

[60]https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2006372

[61]Neurocirugia (Astur).2008 Apr;19(2):121-6.

[62]Ann Occup Hyg. 2012 Jan;56(1):102-12.doi: 10.1093/annhyg/mer069. Epub 2011 Sep13.

[63]Acta Neurologica Scandinavica February 28, 2006.

[64]https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMe2002387?articleTools=true

[65]BMJ 2020;369:m2003

[66]BMC Family Practice, 2013;Published online Dec. 24, 2013. DOI:10.1186/1471-2296-14-200.

[67]DanPatrick.org – April 22, 2020.

[68]https://ahrp.org/beware-of-medicine-marching-in-lockstep-with-government-personal-reflections/

[69]https://freedomwire.com/masks-safety-or-control/

[70]https://www.heritage.org/the-constitution/commentary/constitution-isnt-suspended-covid-19-attorney-general-barr-warns-public

[71]https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/04/23/opinion-wheres-the-line-on-constitutional-rights-in-a-pandemic/

1. Are Masks Effective?

A meta-analysis found that face masks had no detectable effect against transmission of viral infections. (1) It found: “Compared to no masks, there was no reduction of influenza-like illness cases or influenza for masks in the general population, nor in healthcare workers.”

This 2020 meta-analysis found that evidence from randomized controlled trials of face masks did not support a substantial effect on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza, either when worn by infected persons (source control) or by persons in the general community to reduce their susceptibility. (2)

Another recent review found that masks had no effect specifically against Covid-19, although facemask use seemed linked to, in 3 of 31 studies, “very slightly reduced” odds of developing influenza-like illness. (3)

This 2019 study of 2,862 participants showed that both N95 respirators and surgical masks “resulted in no significant difference in the incidence of laboratory confirmed influenza.” (4)

This 2016 meta-analysis found that both randomized controlled trials and observational studies of N95 respirators and surgical masks used by healthcare workers did not show benefit against transmission of acute respiratory infections. It was also found that acute respiratory infection transmission “may have occurred via contamination of provided respiratory protective equipment during storage and reuse of masks and respirators throughout the workday.” (5)

A 2011 meta-analysis of 17 studies regarding masks and effect on transmission of influenza found that “none of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask/respirator use and protection against influenza infection.” (6) However, authors speculated that effectiveness of masks may be linked to early, consistent and correct usage.

Face mask use was likewise found to be not protective against the common cold, compared to controls without face masks among healthcare workers. (7)

Airflow around masks

Masks have been assumed to be effective in obstructing forward travel of viral particles. Considering those positioned next to or behind a mask wearer, there have been farther transmission of virus-laden fluid particles from masked individuals than from unmasked individuals, by means of “several leakage jets, including intense backward and downwards jets that may present major hazards,” and a “potentially dangerous leakage jet of up to several meters.” (8) All masks were thought to reduce forward airflow by 90% or more over wearing no mask. However, Schlieren imaging showed that both surgical masks and cloth masks had farther brow jets (unfiltered upward airflow past eyebrows) than not wearing any mask at all, 182 mm and 203 mm respectively, vs none discernible with no mask. Backward unfiltered airflow was found to be strong with all masks compared to not masking.

For both N95 and surgical masks, it was found that expelled particles from 0.03 to 1 micron were deflected around the edges of each mask, and that there was measurable penetration of particles through the filter of each mask. (9)

Penetration through masks

A study of 44 mask brands found mean 35.6% penetration (+ 34.7%). Most medical masks had over 20% penetration, while “general masks and handkerchiefs had no protective function in terms of the aerosol filtration efficiency.” The study found that “Medical masks, general masks, and handkerchiefs were found to provide little protection against respiratory aerosols.” (10)

It may be helpful to remember that an aerosol is a colloidal suspension of liquid or solid particles in a gas. In respiration, the relevant aerosol is the suspension of bacterial or viral particles in inhaled or exhaled breath.

In another study, penetration of cloth masks by particles was almost 97% and medical masks 44%. (11)

N95 respirators

Honeywell is a manufacturer of N95 respirators. These are made with a 0.3 micron filter. (12) N95 respirators are so named, because 95% of particles having a diameter of 0.3 microns are filtered by the mask forward of the wearer, by use of an electrostatic mechanism. Coronaviruses are approximately 0.125 microns in diameter.

This meta-analysis found that N95 respirators did not provide superior protection to facemasks against viral infections or influenza-like infections. (13) This study did find superior protection by N95 respirators when they were fit-tested compared to surgical masks. (14)

This study found that 624 out of 714 people wearing N95 masks left visible gaps when putting on their own masks. (15)

Surgical masks

This study found that surgical masks offered no protection at all against influenza. (16) Another study found that surgical masks had about 85% penetration ratio of aerosolized inactivated influenza particles and about 90% of Staphylococcus aureus bacteria, although S aureus particles were about 6x the diameter of influenza particles. (17)

Use of masks in surgery were found to slightlyincreaseincidence of infection over not masking in a study of 3,088 surgeries. (18) The surgeons’ masks were found to give no protective effect to the patients.

Other studies found no difference in wound infection rates with and without surgical masks. (19) (20)

This study found that “there is a lack of substantial evidence to support claims that facemasks protect either patient or surgeon from infectious contamination.” (21)

This study found that medical masks have a wide range of filtration efficiency, with most showing a 30% to 50% efficiency. (22)

Specifically, are surgical masks effective in stopping human transmission of coronaviruses? Both experimental and control groups, masked and unmasked respectively, were found to “not shed detectable virus in respiratory droplets or aerosols.” (23) In that study, they “did not confirm the infectivity of coronavirus” as found in exhaled breath.

A study of aerosol penetration showed that two of the five surgical masks studied had 51% to 89% penetration of polydisperse aerosols. (24)

In another study, that observed subjects while coughing, “neither surgical nor cotton masks effectively filtered SARS-CoV-2 during coughs by infected patients.” And more viral particles were found on the outside than on the inside of masks tested. (25)

Cloth masks

Cloth masks were found to have low efficiency for blocking particles of 0.3 microns and smaller. Aerosol penetration through the various cloth masks examined in this study were between 74 and 90%. Likewise, the filtration efficiency of fabric materials was 3% to 33% (26)

Healthcare workers wearing cloth masks were found to have 13 times the risk of influenza-like illness than those wearing medical masks. (27)

This 1920 analysis of cloth mask use during the 1918 pandemic examines the failure of masks to impede or stop flu transmission at that time, and concluded that the number of layers of fabric required to prevent pathogen penetration would have required a suffocating number of layers, and could not be used for that reason, as well as the problem of leakage vents around the edges of cloth masks. (28)

Masks against Covid-19

The New England Journal of Medicine editorial on the topic of mask use versus Covid-19 assesses the matter as follows:

“We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. Public health authorities define a significant exposure to Covid-19 as face-to-face contact within 6 feet with a patient with symptomatic Covid-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and some say more than 10 minutes or even 20 minutes). The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal. In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic.” (29)

2. Are masks safe?

During walking or other exercise

Surgical mask wearers hadsignificantly increased dyspneaafter a 6-minute walk than non-mask wearers. (30)

Researchers are concerned about possible burden of facemasks during physical activity on pulmonary, circulatory and immune systems, due to oxygen reduction and air trapping reducing substantial carbon dioxide exchange.As a result of hypercapnia, there may be cardiac overload, renal overload, and a shift to metabolic acidosis.(31)

Risks of N95 respirators

Pregnant healthcare workers were found to have a loss in volume of oxygen consumption by 13.8%compared to controls when wearing N95 respirators. 17.7% less carbon dioxide was exhaled. (32) Patients with end-stage renal disease were studied during use of N95 respirators. Their partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2) decreased significantly compared to controls and increased respiratory adverse effects. (33) 19% of the patients developed various degrees ofhypoxemiawhile wearing the masks.

Healthcare workers’ N95 respirators were measured by personal bioaerosol samplers to harbor influenza virus. (34) And 25% of healthcare workers’ facepiece respirators were found to contain influenza in an emergency department during the 2015 flu season. (35)

Risks of surgical masks

Healthcare workers’ surgical masks also were measured by personal bioaerosol samplers toharbor influenzavirus. (36)

Various respiratory pathogens were found on the outer surface of used medical masks, which could result inself-contamination. The risk was found to behigherwith longer duration of mask use. (37)

Surgical masks were also found to be a repository ofbacterialcontamination. The source of the bacteria was determined to be the body surface of the surgeons, rather than the operating room environment. (38) Given that surgeons are gowned from head to foot for surgery, this finding should be especially concerning for laypeople who wear masks. Without the protective garb of surgeons, laypeople generally have even more exposed body surface to serve as a source for bacteria to collect on their masks.

Risks of cloth masks

Healthcare workers wearing cloth masks had significantlyhigher rates of influenza-like illnessafter four weeks of continuous on-the-job use, when compared to controls. (39)

The increased rate of infection in mask-wearers may be due to aweakening ofimmune functionduring mask use. Surgeons have been found to havelower oxygen saturation after surgerieseven as short as 30 minutes. (40) Low oxygen induces hypoxia-inducible factor 1 alpha (HIF-1). (41) This in turn down-regulates CD4+ T-cells. CD4+ T-cells, in turn, are necessary for viral immunity. (42)

?Please click HERE to send the form NOW. Time is of the essence.


REFERENCES


1. T Jefferson, M Jones, et al. Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses. MedRxiv. 2020 Apr 7.https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.30.20047217v2

2. J Xiao, E Shiu, et al. Nonpharmaceutical measures for pandemic influenza in non-healthcare settings – personal protective and environmental measures. Centers for Disease Control. 26(5); 2020 May.https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article

3. J Brainard, N Jones, et al. Facemasks and similar barriers to prevent respiratory illness such as COVID19: A rapid systematic review. MedRxiv. 2020 Apr 1.https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.01.20049528v1.full.pdf

4. L Radonovich M Simberkoff, et al. N95 respirators vs medical masks for preventing influenza among health care personnel: a randomized clinic trial. JAMA. 2019 Sep 3. 322(9): 824-833.https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2749214

5. J Smith, C MacDougall. CMAJ. 2016 May 17. 188(8); 567-574.https://www.cmaj.ca/content/188/8/567

6. F bin-Reza, V Lopez, et al. The use of masks and respirators to prevent transmission of influenza: a systematic review of the scientific evidence. 2012 Jul; 6(4): 257-267.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5779801/

7. J Jacobs, S Ohde, et al. Use of surgical face masks to reduce the incidence of the common cold among health care workers in Japan: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Infect Control. 2009 Jun; 37(5): 417-419.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19216002/

8. M Viola, B Peterson, et al. Face coverings, aerosol dispersion and mitigation of virus transmission risk.https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.10720, https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2005/2005.10720.pdf

9. S Grinshpun, H Haruta, et al. Performance of an N95 filtering facepiece particular respirator and a surgical mask during human breathing: two pathways for particle penetration. J Occup Env Hygiene. 2009; 6(10):593-603.https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/15459620903120086

10. H Jung, J Kim, et al. Comparison of filtration efficiency and pressure drop in anti-yellow sand masks, quarantine masks, medical masks, general masks, and handkerchiefs. Aerosol Air Qual Res. 2013 Jun. 14:991-1002.https://aaqr.org/articles/aaqr-13-06-oa-0201.pdf

11. C MacIntyre, H Seale, et al. A cluster randomized trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers. BMJ Open. 2015; 5(4)https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577.long

12. N95 masks explained.https://www.honeywell.com/en-us/newsroom/news/2020/03/n95-masks-explained

13. V Offeddu, C Yung, et al. Effectiveness of masks and respirators against infections in healthcare workers: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Inf Dis. 65(11), 2017 Dec 1; 1934-1942.https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/65/11/1934/4068747

14. C MacIntyre, Q Wang, et al. A cluster randomized clinical trial comparing fit-tested and non-fit-tested N95 respirators to medical masks to prevent respiratory virus infection in health care workers. Influenza J. 2010 Dec 3.https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1750-2659.2011.00198.x?fbclid=IwAR3kRYVYDKb0aR-su9_me9_vY6a8KVR4HZ17J2A_80f_fXUABRQdhQlc8Wo

15. M Walker. Study casts doubt on N95 masks for the public. MedPage Today. 2020 May 20.https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/publichealth/86601

16. C MacIntyre, Q Wang, et al. A cluster randomized clinical trial comparing fit-tested and non-fit-tested N95 respirators to medical masks to prevent respiratory virus infection in health care workers. Influenza J. 2010 Dec 3.https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1750-2659.2011.00198.x?fbclid=IwAR3kRYVYDKb0aR-su9_me9_vY6a8KVR4HZ17J2A_80f_fXUABRQdhQlc8Wo

17. N Shimasaki, A Okaue, et al. Comparison of the filter efficiency of medical nonwoven fabrics against three different microbe aerosols. Biocontrol Sci. 2018; 23(2). 61-69.https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/bio/23/2/23_61/_pdf/-char/en

18. T Tunevall. Postoperative wound infections and surgical face masks: A controlled study. World J Surg. 1991 May; 15: 383-387.https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF01658736

19. N Orr. Is a mask necessary in the operating theatre? Ann Royal Coll Surg Eng 1981: 63: 390-392.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2493952/pdf/annrcse01509-0009.pdf

20. N Mitchell, S Hunt. Surgical face masks in modern operating rooms – a costly and unnecessary ritual? J Hosp Infection. 18(3); 1991 Jul 1. 239-242.https://www.journalofhospitalinfection.com/article/0195-6701(91)90148-2/pdf

21. C DaZhou, P Sivathondan, et al. Unmasking the surgeons: the evidence base behind the use of facemasks in surgery. JR Soc Med. 2015 Jun; 108(6): 223-228.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4480558/

22. L Brosseau, M Sietsema. Commentary: Masks for all for Covid-19 not based on sound data. U Minn Ctr Inf Dis Res Pol. 2020 Apr 1.https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/04/commentary-masks-all-covid-19-not-based-sound-data

23. N Leung, D Chu, et al. Respiratory virus shedding in exhaled breath and efficacy of face masks. Nature Research. 2020 Mar 7. 26,676-680 (2020).https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-16836/v1

24. S Rengasamy, B Eimer, et al. Simple respiratory protection – evaluation of the filtration performance of cloth masks and common fabric materials against 20-1000 nm size particles. Ann Occup Hyg. 2010 Oct; 54(7): 789-798.https://academic.oup.com/annweh/article/54/7/789/202744

25. S Bae, M Kim, et al. Effectiveness of surgical and cotton masks in blocking SARS-CoV-2: A controlled comparison in 4 patients. Ann Int Med. 2020 Apr 6.https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-1342

26. S Rengasamy, B Eimer, et al. Simple respiratory protection – evaluation of the filtration performance of cloth masks and common fabric materials against 20-1000 nm size particles. Ann Occup Hyg. 2010 Oct; 54(7): 789-798.https://academic.oup.com/annweh/article/54/7/789/202744

27. C MacIntyre, H Seale, et al. A cluster randomized trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers. BMJ Open. 2015; 5(4)https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577.long

28. W Kellogg. An experimental study of the efficacy of gauze face masks. Am J Pub Health. 1920. 34-42.https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/pdf/10.2105/AJPH.10.1.34

29. M Klompas, C Morris, et al. Universal masking in hospitals in the Covid-19 era. N Eng J Med. 2020; 382 e63.https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2006372

30. E Person, C Lemercier et al. Effect of a surgical mask on six minute walking distance. Rev Mal Respir. 2018 Mar; 35(3):264-268.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29395560/

31. B Chandrasekaran, S Fernandes. Exercise with facemask; are we handling a devil’s sword – a physiological hypothesis. Med Hypothese. 2020 Jun 22. 144:110002.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32590322/
32. P Shuang Ye Tong, A Sugam Kale, et al. Respiratory consequences of N95-type mask usage in pregnant healthcare workers – A controlled clinical study. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2015 Nov 16; 4:48.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26579222/
33. T Kao, K Huang, et al. The physiological impact of wearing an N95 mask during hemodialysis as a precaution against SARS in patients with end-stage renal disease. J Formos Med Assoc. 2004 Aug; 103(8):624-628.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15340662/
34. F Blachere, W Lindsley et al. Assessment of influenza virus exposure and recovery from contaminated surgical masks and N95 respirators. J Viro Methods. 2018 Oct; 260:98-106.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30029810/
35. A Rule, O Apau, et al. Healthcare personnel exposure in an emergency department during influenza season. PLoS One. 2018 Aug 31; 13(8): e0203223.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30169507/
36. F Blachere, W Lindsley et al. Assessment of influenza virus exposure and recovery from contaminated surgical masks and N95 respirators. J Viro Methods. 2018 Oct; 260:98-106.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30029810/
37. A Chughtai, S Stelzer-Braid, et al. Contamination by respiratory viruses on our surface of medical masks used by hospital healthcare workers. BMC Infect Dis. 2019 Jun 3; 19(1): 491.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31159777/
38. L Zhiqing, C Yongyun, et al. J Orthop Translat. 2018 Jun 27; 14:57-62.https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30035033/
39. C MacIntyre, H Seale, et al. A cluster randomized trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers. BMJ Open. 2015; 5(4)https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577
40. A Beder, U Buyukkocak, et al. Preliminary report on surgical mask induced deoxygenation during major surgery. Neurocirugia. 2008; 19: 121-126.https://scielo.isciii.es/pdf/neuro/v19n2/3.pdf
41. D Lukashev, B Klebanov, et al. Cutting edge: Hypoxia-inducible factor 1-alpha and its activation-inducible short isoform negatively regulate functions of CD4+ and CD8+ T lymphocytes. J Immunol. 2006 Oct 15; 177(8) 4962-4965.https://www.jimmunol.org/content/177/8/4962
42. A Sant, A McMichael. Revealing the role of CD4+ T-cells in viral immunity. J Exper Med. 2012 Jun 30; 209(8):1391-1395.https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/3420330

Plandemic II: inDOCTORnation film released – here are the most damning outtakes that expose the criminal fraud of Fauci, the WHO and the CDC – NaturalNews.com

Image: Plandemic II: inDOCTORnation film released – here are the most damning outtakes that expose the criminal fraud of Fauci, the WHO and the CDC

Source: Plandemic II: inDOCTORnation film released – here are the most damning outtakes that expose the criminal fraud of Fauci, the WHO and the CDC – NaturalNews.com

(Natural News) The bombshell new film, “Plandemic II: inDOCTORnation” was released yesterday, and this film unleashes bombshell after bombshell about Dr. Fauci, the CDC, the WHO, the corrupt vaccine industry, the NIH under Obama, and the whole pandemic scam that was deliberately engineered using a real virus to enslave humanity and earn billions in profits for Big Pharma.

Amazingly, the entire film has been released for free by its creator Mikki Willis, who you can find at PlandemicSeries.com (which appears to be under attack and not functioning at press time).

The full-length film is available at this link on Brighteon.com:
Brighteon.com/d6412bff-0421-4190-a7bf-3e5e1f52559d

This next link is usually more censorship-resistant for sharing:
Brlghteon.com/d6412bff-0421-4190-a7bf-3e5e1f52559d

Consider this film to be a “must-see” documentary that will absolutely blow your mind and forever change your understanding of the total corruption of the “science” establishment and the for-profit medical system. In essence, a group of evil people built this virus and released it onto the world so they could crush humanity and earn billions in profits. Even more shockingly, this isn’t the first time they’ve tried this.

See these amazing snippets / outtakes from the film

Another channel on Brighteon called “Sharing for Humanity” has been posting snippets from the film that are incredibly powerful. Each snippet shows a particular issue in just 2-3 minutes, making these “bite-sized” episodes to share with others. These are powerful snippets that you’ve got to see.

Here’s the link to the channel:
https://www.brighteon.com/channels/sasho1

And here are a few of the snippets:

How Big Tech controls the narrative:

How the media targets whistleblowers:

The shocking truth about Bill Gates:

Share these snippets everywhere, and share the full film. Humanity must awaken to these vaccine criminals and bioweapons engineers who are literally destroying human civilization for power and profit.

If we don’t wake up now, we will be exterminated en masse.

PlandemicINDOCTORNATION WORLD PREMIERE

https://freedomplatform.tv/plandemic-indoctornation-world-premiere/

 

 

TRUMP Issues SEALED INDICTMENT On DR FAUCHI – YouTube

James Munder

 

Sealed Indictment Issued on Dr. Fauci | Dr. Fauci will face a military tribunal to answer for his crimes against America

 

Dr. Rashid ButtarTHE CORONAVIRUS AGENDA – WHAT THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA DON’T WANT YOU TO KNOW

https://londonreal.tv/digital-freedom-platform-interview-1-dr-rashid-buttar/?utm_source=drip&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2020-04-27+Dr.+Rashid+Buttar+LIVE+(reschedule)&utm_content=RESCHEDULED%3A+Dr+Rashid+Buttar+at+8.30pm

 

 

Yes, Democrats DO want to take our guns away and Kamala Harris admits she will violate the Constitution to do it – NaturalNews.com

Source: Yes, Democrats DO want to take our guns away and Kamala Harris admits she will violate the Constitution to do it – NaturalNews.com

(Natural News) It can’t be stressed enough: Democrats hate the Second Amendment because armed Americans prevent them from fully implementing their liberty-stealing, Marxist, counter-cultural revolution.

In fact, Democrats hate the Constitution, period, because it empowers American citizens with rights not ‘bestowed by government’ but endowed by the divine providence of human existence.

However, they will use portions of it to eliminate all of it, including the First Amendment to justify riots and looting as “speech and expression,” and presidential authorities under Article II to implement executive actions that bypass the rule of law and other branches of government.

Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) is no different. As president — and that is what she will become if Joe Biden wins because he is obviously mentally incapable of running America (or a lemonade stand, for that matter) — she will work tirelessly to take away our gun rights and our guns, and make it look like it’s just ‘sound public policy’ that ‘most Americans agree with.’

But don’t take our word for it. Harris has said as much. 

In fact, Fox News host Tucker Carlson documented as much on his program last week.

“Kamala Harris has plans for your guns, but more than that, she’s willing to threaten Congress if they don’t make a law that matches her desires immediately,” he said.

Carlson then played a couple of video clips in which Harris laid out her plans.

In response to an audience member’s question during an appearance on “The Tonight Show” with Jimmy Fallon about whether she supports gun ‘buybacks,’ Harris said:

I do believe that we need to do buybacks and I’ll tell you why. They are weapons of war with no place on the streets for the civil society.

Meanwhile, Harris hasn’t said squat about what Antifa, Black Lives Matter, and other Left-wing anarchists are doing to ‘the civil society’ in large cities around the country without using ‘assault weapons.’

 

 

MANDATORY “quarantine camps” were just rolled out in New Zealand, a globalist testing ground for the mass extermination of humanity – NaturalNews.com

Image: MANDATORY “quarantine camps” were just rolled out in New Zealand, a globalist testing ground for the mass extermination of humanity

Source: MANDATORY “quarantine camps” were just rolled out in New Zealand, a globalist testing ground for the mass extermination of humanity – NaturalNews.com

(Natural News) After outlawing firearms possession by citizens, New Zealand’s government is now exploiting its power monopoly to roll out mandatory quarantine camps for people who might be infected with COVID-19. And some people will never be allowed to leave those camps, the NZ Prime Minister insists.

The new medical fascism rules will ensnare family members of people who test positive for COVID-19, even though nearly all the testing being conducted around the world is unreliable and routinely produces false positives. It’s now clear that the coronavirus pandemic is being weaponized by globalist-minded bureaucrats to enslave the masses in preparation for a global vaccine depopulation initiative.

“Dr Askley Bloomfield says the mandatory quarantine will apply to both new cases and, if necessary, close family members who might be at risk,” reports Great Game India. “New Zealand’s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern in a Facebook live video explained in detail how each and every activity will be monitored in these camps and those that refuse to be tested would be forced to stay in the camps for a longer duration.”

Ardern explains that if you refuse to be tested, you will be indefinitely imprisoned and never allowed to leave the quarantine camp:

We are quarantining everyone. Now we are also mandating testing. That makes us the most stringent in the world. There are countries that are requiring self-isolation; we’re taking it a bit further.

If anyone moves into a common area or is getting some fresh air, which is all monitored no one can do that on their own. They can only leave or be in a space to get a little bit of fresh air if they are supervised, because of course it’s a quarantine facility.

We have put in millions of dollars into supporting that to happen.

I have a number of questions about people refusing – what do we do if someone refuses to be tested. Well they can’t now. If someone refuses in our facilities to be tested, they have to keep staying. So they won’t be allowed to leave after 14 days. They have to stay on for another 14 days.

Behold the face of an evil tyrant who imprisons people over fake COVID-19 tests:

“Quarantine camps” are actually death camps in the making

 

Read the fine print, part two – Nearly 400 adverse reactions listed in vaccine package inserts – NaturalNews.com

Image: Read the fine print, part two – Nearly 400 adverse reactions listed in vaccine package inserts

Source: Read the fine print, part two – Nearly 400 adverse reactions listed in vaccine package inserts – NaturalNews.com

(Natural News) Package inserts are available online for all vaccines licensed in the U.S. In addition to containing bits of practical information for the clinicians who administer the vaccines, the inserts provide members of the public with one of their only opportunities to learn about a vaccine’s contraindications, warnings, precautions and—perhaps most importantly—potential adverse reactions.

(Article republished from ChildrensHealthDefense.org)

The inserts communicate the information about adverse reactions in two distinct sections: “Clinical trials experience” (Section 6.1) and “Data from postmarketing experience” from the U.S. or other countries (Section 6.2). In April, 2020, Children’s Health Defense summarized the postmarketing data for over three dozen vaccines given routinely to American infants, children and adolescents. That tally showed that vaccines touted for the prevention of 13 illnesses (Table 1) have been linked to at least 217 adverse medical outcomes reported post-licensure, including serious infections, autoimmune conditions, life-threatening allergies and death.

Table 1. Vaccine package inserts reviewed

Type
of Vaccine

Brand Name

Manufacturer

Vaccines containing
diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis components
Adacel (Tdap) Sanofi Pasteur
Boostrix (Tdap) GlaxoSmithKline
(GSK)
Daptacel (DTaP) Sanofi
Diphtheria
and Tetanus Toxoids Adsorbed (DT)
Sanofi
Infanrix (DTaP) GSK
Kinrix (DTaP-IPV) GSK
Pediarix (DTaP-HepB-IPV) GSK
Pentacel (DTaP-IPV/Hib) Sanofi
Quadracel (DTaP-IPV) Sanofi
Tdvax (Td) MassBiologics
Tenivac (Td) Sanofi
Haemophilus
influenzae type b (Hib)
ActHIB Sanofi
Hiberix GSK
PedvaxHIB Merck
Hepatitis A and/or B Engerix-B (HepB) GSK
Havrix (HepA) GSK
Recombivax HB (HepB) Merck
Twinrix (HepA/HepB) GSK
Vaqta (HepA) Merck
Human papillomavirus (HPV) Gardasil Merck
Gardasil 9 Merck
Influenza Afluria Quadrivalent Sequirus
Fluarix GSK
Flublok
Quadrivalent (age 18 and older)
Protein Sciences
Corporation
Flucelvax Sequirus
Flulaval Quadrivalent GSK
FluMist AstraZeneca
Fluzone Quadrivalent Sanofi
Meningococcal A, C, W and/or Y Menactra Sanofi
Menomune Sanofi
Menveo GSK
Meningococcal B Bexero GSK
Trumenba Pfizer
Measles-mumps-rubella
(MMR) and MMR+varicella (MMRV)
MMR-II Merck
Proquad Merck
Pneumococcal Prevnar-13 Pfizer
Pneumovax-23 Merck
Inactivated polio (IPV) IPOL Sanofi
Rotavirus vaccines Rotarix GSK
RotaTeq Merck
Varicella Varivax Merck