On a day when world experts from the medical, scientific, legal and financial sectors brought knowledge, insight and hope to the world, Bill Gates was still riding the vaccine waggon from which the wheels long ago came off. Gates’ latest message is just more of the same with a statement that is as ludicrous as it is false.
Had he said that the body’s immune system was a better defence than any vaccine he would have been much closer to the truth. That message is something that Sucharit Bhakdi has been saying for two years, and long before, together with other intelligent and caring people. Friday night (18 February 2021) Dr. Bhakdi opened and closed the Doctors for Covid Ethics’ third Symposium, appositely entitled “The Truth Shall Set You Free”. It was hosted again by UKColumn.
It is a privilege for this blog, to be able once more to publish Dr. Bhakdi’s closing message of intent in this world of despair. After the incomparable journalist, and co-moderator of D4CE meetings, Taylor Hudak, outlined the evening’s events Dr. Bhakdi opened the conference by pointing out how suspicions were raised when the European Medicines Agency (EMA) failed to address concerns raised by Doctors for Covid Ethics (D4CE) that the “vaccines” “had the “potential to cause illness and death”. A plan to engender fear was orchestrated “by an elite group of perpetrators”.
A second symposium was called when the work of pathologist, Arne Burkhardt (Germany), and Dr. Ryan Cole (USA) “had uncovered irrefutable evidence that the gene-based agents had the potential to cause damage to blood vessels and surrounding tissues.” The much-touted lie was exposed that the benefits of the “vaccines” far outweighed the risks.
The findings of Burkhardt and Cole were endorsed when Peter Doshi, editor of the BMJ, revealed “that the data of the Pfizer trials were fraudulent and, by definition, thus non-existent.” [As well as editor, Peter Doshi’s revelation, outgoing Editor-in-Chief, Fiona Godlee, and incoming Editor-in-Chief, Kamram Abbassi, of the BMJ have produced an open letter to Mark Zuckerberg about the competency of Facebook “fact checkers” for being “inaccurate, incompetent and irresponsible”. It is published in the current edition of The Light, page 4].
While Dr. Bhakdi found some hope in countries like England and Scandinavia he pointed to countries like “Germany, Austria, France, Italy, Greece” where “vaccination continues to be aggressively promoted and enforced – in the face of tragedies whose numbers increase with every booster. Now, infants and children are joining the ranks of the dead and dying – under the pitiless, soulless eyes of the watching rulers.”
Before introducing the first speaker Dr Bhakdi made the following points.
- Vaccination affords no protection and is senseless
- Evidence has accrued that gene-based vaccines are dangerous, and they have maimed and killed. Instigators and propagators of the vaccination programs must be forced to produce evidence that this conclusion is incorrect. Until such evidence is provided, their use must be stopped.
- Vaccine casualties must be assiduously documented and studied
- The possibility of transfer of mRNA and spikes by blood transfusions must be addressed.
- Authorization for emergency use of gene-based vaccines must be forbidden forever. Dire dangers will emanate from each and all of them. Authorization of other vaccines for emergency use must similarly be prohibited. There is no reason to assume that Novavax should differ from Pfizer/Moderna and provide protection, and there is no excuse to repeat the fatal error.
- The case is closed: vaccination MUST be halted.
Dr Thomas Binder, MD, (Switzerland) began (19 minutes) by comparing how medical practice used to behave before the arrival of the SARS-COV-2 virus, how there had never been a pandemic and people had been forced to take extraordinary and unnecessary measures imposed from the World Health Organisation (WHO), measures like testing for a virus when they were not ill, like being confined to their homes, and all the other peculiar instructions that were issued across the globe simultaneously.
Professor Michael Palmer, MD, (Canada) gave a presentation of slides (43 minutes) first explaining the difference between the two types of gene therapies, mRNA (Pfizer and Moderna) and vector-based DNA injections (AstraZeneca, Janssen and Sputnik) how mRNA vaccines work, what kind of toxic side effects can be expected from the gene therapies, what the life expectancy of the spike protein might be, how fragments of the spike (S1) can swim around and attach to ACE2 receptors of other cells, and the outcome of this process in the form of blood-clotting. Sadly adverse events from these therapies, and others like them, are likely to be more dangerous than the diseases they treat, to the joy of pharmaceutical profiteers and the chagrin of recipients.
Dr Bhakdi introduced the next speaker by explaining how the cells and the bodies organs are coming under attack from these vaccines and I urge you to watch his presentation (1.00 approx).
The session was rounded off (1.10) by pathologist Dr. Arne Burkhardt (Germany) who presented 60 slides from 20 cases where relatives suspected “vaccines” were the cause of death. There was so much damage to so many organs it is not possible in a summary to do justice to Dr. Burkhardt’s presentation. This image from his presentation shows vaccine damage to a venule compared with a healthy one, and those wishing to learn more should watch the presentation.
To start round two, in an enlightening presentation, pharmacist, Kati Schepis, (2.00 hours) addressed the very serious issue of the developing technology of self amplifying mRNA “vaccines”. From this presentation we learn what is planned in the future, from how the first RNA shots tested on humans were approved by the FDA in 2008 in what “looks like a perfect plan” to the ongoing trials. Imperial College, London, has just completed a Phase II trial on one self-amplifying RNA vaccine (saRNA). The only ongoing trial, funded by BioNTech, is currently operational in Germany and is due to finish in April 2023, after which time, “if everything goes smoothly” it will be approved by the various governing health agencies. So you know what’s coming. The spike will self-replicate in the bodies of recipients with unforeseen consequences. Critically the WHO has given the drug companies a free hand in what they bring to market and my own view is that the health authorities, FDA, EMA and MHRA, rubber stamp what their
The legal team
Four women, with substantial experience in dealing with the legal aspects of vaccine damage, and in confronting the obstacles Big Pharma uses to prevent their intervention, were a shining light in this troubled sea. Hosted by Polly Tommey it begins at 2.20 hours, with the big question: How is this legal at all?”
Astrid Stuckelberger, (2.21.20 hours) with her experience coming from Geneva, having several times been invited to the World Health Organisation, and having worked on the Covid Preparedness Plan, ran viewers through the various articles of the WHO constitution which empowered that organisation to take some of the actions they have taken. She particularly cited articles 2, 19, 20 and 21 with the last of these possibly raising the most concern.
The Health Assembly shall have authority to adopt regulations concerning:
(a) sanitary and quarantine requirements and other procedures designed to prevent the international spread of disease;
(b) nomenclatures with respect to diseases, causes of death and public health practices;
(c) standards with respect to diagnostic procedures for international use;
(d) standards with respect to the safety, purity and potency of biological, pharmaceutical and similar products moving in international commerce;
(e) advertising and labelling of biological, pharmaceutical and similar products moving in international commerce.
She explained how following an extraordinary meeting the role of member states has been diminished in favour of commercial entities, the WHO can override individual countries health policies, and did so in 2020, member states are now registered as enterprises, with what they are calling inter-governmental members, and this includes non-state actors. Only a Russian NGO has called WHO out on this so far. She urges everyone to contact their representatives before March.
As Astrid Stuckelberger suggested it is of significant note that the original guidelines of WHO Treaty of 1948 are hard to find online these days.
The baton was taken up by the indomitable Dr. Meryl Nass, who straight away pointed out that in 2008 the WHO removed any responsibility on vaccine companies if they would agree to produce vaccines should a pandemic occur. Only Poland objected to this measure.
In her presentation Dr. Nass (2.46 hours), who does sterling work on behalf of Robert Kennedy Jr,, and Children’s Health Defense, explained how the CDC changed the definition of the word vaccine to include mRNA and other gene therapies. The US government is breaking the law. What is the real purpose when it is ignoring its own Emergency Use Authorization benefits and risks. Without the shields on non-liability the vaccine manufacturers would be reluctant to proceed with selling their products.
What is criminal is that the authorities knew from 2004 that chloroquine drugs worked against SARS-COV viruses, with subsequent supporting papers. Our government did everything to prevent the use of these cheap and effective treatments, she said. A taste of things to come can be seen by the way Canada has started restricting access to people’s finances over the Truckers’ Freedom Convoy.
Mary Holland, another CHD advocate (2.53), had the same message, there must be prior, free and informed consent as the Nuremberg protocol states. Like Dr. Nass, she also talked about the freezing of bank accounts in Canada and how “they can do that indefinitely”, observing how free speech, free assembly and the democratic process are no longer being recognised.
Lawyer, Renate Holzeisen, (2.57) had some good news from Italy. A case tried the day of the symposium, 18 February, found for the father who wanted to protect his daughters from the “vaccines” and against the mother, who wanted the children to take the jabs. The judge concluded that these substances were experimental and for the first time Italy has taken the correct legal decision. Similarly Austria, which was about to introduce mandatory vaccination on March 15 is “stepping back” thanks to the establishment of a new party which is garnering support and the historical parties “are losing a lot of voters”. On the downside as well as intervention from the WHO there is also intervention from the European Commission.
In moving forward the message should be “Do not comply”, work towards the deconstruction of bodies like WHO and other organisations that no longer work on behalf of people, and rebuild from the bottom, find your friends, and do not bow to evil.
The Economic Session
In the chair was former US government financial advisor, Catherine Austin Fitts, and she wasted no time in introducing Dr. Michael Yeadon, who like herself hardly needs any introduction, since he was a vice president of Pfizer, set up in partnership an advisory pharmaceutical company later “successfully sold”, and as a research scientist he was asked to talk about “his evolution from understanding the lies to seeing the danger of the control-grid.”
Dr. Yeadon PhD (3.13.20) immediately stressed the dangers of any digital ID, likening it to the vaccine passports governments wanted to introduce. If we do not do something about it in the future we will not be able to buy anything, go anywhere, do anything without our digital identities recording such actions. He believes the principal objective is to install a control mechanism. He agrees that there could be some useful features to carrying a digital ID but to have them monitoring us “at all times” is intrusive and we know democratic systems will not save us.
Even if the existing financial system survives for another year or more they will double-down and double-down again, they will use violence, at which point people will have to take sides, and although Dr. Yeadon does not want violence he is aware that the WEF alumni, having passed through Klaus Schwab’s educational programming, and will be aware of Mussolini’s end-game that may well be in the offing, forcing these super-rich to push on with their aims.
If you want to avoid lack of freedom, privacy and constrained choices the answer is “unified non-compliance” coupled with the philosophy of “use cash” to stop the control grid. Otherwise you will be at the mercy of those pulling the strings, many of whom are eugenicists.
Catherine Austin Fitts, (3.29) in addressing the facing problems suggests a solution would be to move our money out of the large banks that are running the agenda into smaller local community banks, then to engage with these banks as to how we build local food systems and energy systems, using cash locally and across networks outside of the system.
Dr. Yeadon went on to say that if we complied with what the authorities wish us to comply with we would eventually be micro-chipped like our pets.
Catherine Austin Fitts
Next came economist, Professor Mark Skidmore, (3.38) who is probably the first of any academics to perform data analysis from people-surveyed information on SARS-COV-2, the jabs, and how many died from them. From 3,000 surveys respondents were asked about their personal experiences with the illness and the “vaccine”, their social backgrounds, and social circle experiences.
Importantly, in response to inoculation status it was lower than what we have been officially told, and indeed only 48% had been jabbed. There are interesting findings in this study, especially regarding ethnic groups who are less likely to take the jab whereas Independents, Democrats and Caucasians and higher-educated groups were more likely to take it.
Another interesting comparison is the US government claim that there have been 9 fatalities from the inoculations whereas the survey suggests it is in the region of 200 to 300 thousand. Here are Professor Skidmore’s conclusions.
Banker, government advisor, economist and professor of banking and economics at de Montfort University, Leicester, Richard A. Werner, spoke next (4.10). He explained what Dr. Yeadon had said earlier about the central bankers global desire to introduce a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC). We already have bank digital currencies and have had them for decades. Now the central bank regulator is competing with the bank it regulates with all kinds of spin as to why this is necessary. What it could mean to me and you is that all our bank accounts may end up in the same bank. As Professor Werner put it, it is like the umpire [or referee] in a match deciding to take part.
Banks are already operating negative interest rates [you get less than you deposit] but are reluctant to pass this on. Professor Werner also thinks that community banks, which already exist in the US, are a way forward, and we should all be using cash and acquiring gold. He mentioned how what has happened in Canada is an example of what would happen with a central digital-currency but much worse.
At the end of his presentation he questioned whether we actually need Central banks?
The final discussion came from two Canadian doctors, Charles Hoffe, MD, and Stephen Malthouse, MD. together with Dr Emad Guirguis who went to see the demonstration in Ottowa for himself.
These doctors, (4.33) have been at the front-end of the fight against Canadian restrictive measures from the start, and as Dr. Hoffe said Canadian truckers have been enduring these restrictions for two years before saying enough was enough over the forced “vaccinations”. He questioned why somebody sitting in a truck all day was likely to contract or spread a virus. Extra quarantine restrictions were placed on truckers who get Covid-19 to the rest of society (14 days as opposed to 5 days for others). While support for the Truckers reached mammoth amounts from the “Go Fund Me” fundraising site, Trudeau went into hiding prompting the classic “Go Find Me” meme.
Dr. Stephen Malthouse was concerned about the way this story was presented on MSM and the recent Emergencies Act being invoked. As he pointed out this still needs ratifying and people should contact their representatives letting them know just how they felt about it. The protests have been peaceful and friendly and as Dr. Malthouse says: “Love trumps violence”.
Dr. Emad Guirguis was there on the scene and it was “very peaceful”. The truckers just wanted to have their voices heard, But he recognised the “fingerprint” of totalitarian control promoted by MSM propaganda and it was horrific to see the authorities use of force that very day. The truckers exposed the entire agenda and a lot of people are joining the Freedom Movement.
Hopefully this summary will be sufficient to encourage you to watch the full session, or at least those sections in which you have a special interest.