Page 18 of 31
How Much of the Covid-19 Narrative Was True? Additional Reflections
Introduction
The purpose of this document is to demonstrate that all of the key narrative points about the SARS-CoV-2 virus said to cause the disease Covid-19 and the measures
imposed to control it are incorrect. Given that the sources of these points are scientists, doctors, and public health officials, it is evident that they were not simply mistaken. Instead, they have lied in order to mislead. I believe the motivations of those who I call "the perpetrators" become clear, once it is internalised that the entire event is based on lies.
In recent days, breaking news indicates that coronavirus antibodies are present in blood stored in European blood banks from 2019.1 The implications are momentous.
Unprecedented Pronouncements
In the first three months of the Covid event, I started noticing senior scientific and medical advisors on UK television saying things that I found disturbing. It was hard to
put my finger on the specifics, but they included remarks like:
"Because this is a new virus, there won't be any immunity in the population". "Everyone is vulnerable".
"In view of the very high lethality of the virus, we are exploring how best to protect the population".
I had been reading extensively about the apparent spread of SARS-CoV-2 in China and beyond, and had already arrived at a number of important conclusions. Essentially, I
was sure that, objectively, we weren't going to experience a major event. I based some of my conclusions on the Diamond Princess cruise ship experience. Note that no crew members died, and only a minority on the ship even got infected, suggesting substantial prior immunity, a steep age-lethality relationship, and an infection fatality ratio (IFR) not much different, if at all, from prior respiratory virus infections. But what was happening was that, in my view, senior people were acting a lot more frightened than seemed appropriate.
It was with this heightened interest that I began to closely examine all aspects of the alleged pandemic. I suspected something very bad was happening when the Imperial College released its modelling paper by Neff Ferguson. This claimed that over 500,000 people in the UK would die unless severe "measures" were put in place. Ferguson had over-projected all of the last five disease-related emergencies in the UK and had been responsible for the destruction of the beef herd through his modelling of the spread of foot-and-mouth disease.
I had also been reading about all sorts of"non-pharmaceutical interventions" (NPIs), and what this had taught me was that there was absolutely no experimental literature around any of the NPIs being spoken of, except masks--which were clearly ineffective in blocking respiratory virus transmission. Moreover, the non-experts in the
Page 19 of 31
mainstream media drew on a very limited group of experts, and I noticed that none were immunologists.
I had, in parallel, watched the evolving scene in Sweden and was pleased to note that the Swedes' chief epidemiologist, Anders Tegnell, seemed to know what he was doing and had dismissed the panic. I knew he had been the deputy of his predecessor, ]ohan Gieseke, who was still around in an emeritus role. Gieseke was also reassuringly calm.
The final straw was when on March 23, 2020, the British prime minister initiated the first "lockdown". This was wholly without precedent. I knew Sweden had rejected
lockdown measures as wholly unnecessary and extremely damaging.
Instigating Fear
From that day forward, the team from the UK Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) put up one or more members every day to appear alongside the
prime minister or the health minister. These press conferences were meandering affairs, and it wasn't clear what their purpose was. The questions asked never sought to place things in context, but instead seemed to always explore the outer edges of possible outcomes and then follow up with remarks that didn't seem adequately prepared.
In retrospect, I think the aim was to make the press conferences the only "must watch" thing on TV, and with such a large, captive audience, a form of fear-based hypnosis was instigated. Much later, Belgian professor and clinical psychologist Mattias Desmet informed us that this was indeed the aim, calling the process "mass formation".2 This process can become malignant, as have past beliefs in events that were later conceded to have been episodes of societal madness, like the Salem witch trials, satanic abuse of children, and other delusions.
Some experts believe that modern societies are more--and not less--susceptible to mass panics because of the ubiquity of easily-controlled messaging (properly termed "propaganda" since it was completely deliberate and carefully planned). An August
2021 animated video titled "Mass Psychosis - How an Entire Population Becomes Mentally Ill" illustrates this phenomenon; despite the animation format, the film leans heavily on academic research from luminaries such as Gustave Le Bon, Sigmund Freud, Edward Bernays, Stanley Milgram, and Solomon Asch, as well as later researchers and studies.3
It is important to be cautious about the purported importance of "mass formation" however. In a sense, it might be seen as wholly impersonal and something that is thrown at the population and lands more or less effectively on people at random. Worse, it comes with the notion that, if you are susceptible, it cannot be resisted. There is a contrasting school of thought that holds that information technology (IT), data, and artificial intelligence (AI) are capable of assembling a "digital prison" that is tailored to each individual and shaped over time by choices that we each make.4 The outcome isn't in any way preordained. However, incentives and deterrents are associated with innumerable decisions we make, such as how to pay for something, whether we sell our data for tiny rewards, whether we consciously decide to open links suggested for us, whether we leave location services running permanently, and more.5
Page 20 of 31
Using Mass Testing to Promote Fear
As soon as the UK lockdown was initiated, the focus turned full force onto mass testing, and especially on testing people without symptoms. I knew this didn't make any sense, because if a large enough number of people are tested daily, without knowledge of the
false-positive rate, it could certainly very quickly panic people into thinking there were lots of people walking around with the virus, unaware they had it and allegedly spreading it to others.
Once the lockdown was in place, in addition to testing, the press conferences focused
on numbers in hospital, numbers on ventilators, and ultimately, the daffy deaths "with Covid". Early treatments and improved lifestyle were never spoken of. The first lockdown lasted 12 weeks, with most office staff told to work from home while being paid "furlough" (a word never before used in Britain). The "fear porn" continued all the way into high summer, long after daily Covid deaths had reached approximately zero.
The introduction of mandatory masking in all public areas in the heat of summer, when they had never been required before, was the last straw for me. It was all theatre.
At that point, I set out to investigate a couple of core concepts: the "PCR test" and "asymptomatic transmission". I'm embarrassed to say, however, that it wasn't until the autumn of 2020 that I had clear in my mind, with mounting horror, that the entire event, if not completely manufactured, was being grossly exaggerated, with the intent of deceiving the entire "liberal democratic West". Scores of countries were economically being squeezed to death. I knew that from a financial perspective, borrowing or printing enough money to subsidize tens of millions to remain at home could not be long sustained without destroying the sovereign currency. Strangely, exchange rates didn't move much--another clue that powerful forces were managing this event as well as its consequences. Around this time, country leaders started talking about "Build Back Better" and Klaus Schwab's book, COVID-19: The Great Reset, appeared.
All of this contributed to my developing the idea of"The Covid lies". It seemed to me that everything we had been told about the virus wasn't true, and also that all the NPIs imposed upon us couldn't work, and so were for nothing more than show.
One Dominant Narrative
As already mentioned, repetition and fear were key to instigating "mass formation" as described by Mattias Desmet.2 This narrowing of focus, according to Desmet, means those "in the mass" (crowd) literally are incapable of hearing anything that challenges
the narrative of which they've been convinced. Any explanation other than the truth is marshalled to dismiss rational counter-arguments. And indeed we saw that anyone challenging the dominant narrative was attacked, smeared, censored, and cancelled on social media, and no reasonable and independent voices were ever seen or heard on TV or radio.
Desmet argues that mass formation, to be successful, requires that certain conditions be in place: high levels of free-floating anxiety; a strong degree of social isolation (where devices replace real human interactions); and finally, low levels of "sense-making" that is, many things do not make sense to many people. When a crisis is dropped into a population where these conditions obtain and is repeated ad nauseam, it is possible in effect to hypnotise them.
Page 21 of 31
When the narrative has taken hold, what happens next?
Now, the population's anxiety has an obvious focus, which is felt as a relief.
The routines--masking, lockdowns, testing, hand sanitizing--become for some a ritual, which provides daily meaning.
Finally, so many people are acting the same way and echoing the same lines (the lines they've heard time and again on TV, radio, newspapers, and their devices), that people can feel part of a national effort in a way they've not felt before.
This combination, coupled with visible and strong punishment for anyone who questions the narrative or simply refuses to comply, reinforces the groupthink.
It is, according to crowd psychology experts, nearly impossible to extract those who are this deeply "in the mass". However, there is always another group of individuals who never fall for such tricks. Outwardly pleasant and easygoing, these individuals typically are sceptical and go along with things only if they make sense to them personally, and not because an authority figure tells them to.
There is also a third group in the middle--individuals who often sense that something is wrong but lack the courage of their own convictions and tend to side with whatever they're told to do, rather passively. They are not hypnotised, but to third parties, they
can seem to be.
Crowd psychology experts encourage those who've seen through the lies (the second group) to speak out and continue to do so. This legitimises speaking out by all others not persuaded by the narrative and might even extract some from the middle group. Even those in the "mass" group will be prevented from sinking yet more deeply into the narrative, from where those orchestrating events can otherwise prompt such people to commit atrocities.
Vaccine Lies
In the second half of 2020, the conversation turned to the oncoming vaccines. Having spent 32 years in pharmaceutical research and development (R&D), I knew that what we were being told about vaccines was )ust lies. It's not possible to bypass a dozen years of careful work or to compress it into a few months. The product that was to emerge was almost certain, to my mind, to be very dangerous. And after I began reading my way into this area, I grew more concerned still.
In my "Covid Lies" comments, I isolate ONLY the ma)or narrative points themselves
and show that none of them are true. In other words, this was not )ust a little lying here and there--no, the entire construct was false. After I describe all the main lies, I show how the perpetrators were able to get away with it. At the conclusion, I believe the reader will share my view that the whole event was manufactured or exaggerated from a mild situation.
Remember, no alternative views were permitted in the "public square". In fact, in July 2019--well before the declared pandemic--a group of powerful media organisations
had already assembled and founded the Trusted News Initiative (TNI). The purpose of TNI was both to control mass media messages and crush alternative voices from any direction.6
Page 22 of 31
Again, all of the Covid narrative was lies. Not mistakes. Many of the politicians who repeated others' lines might try to offer as defence that they relied on experts to inform them. U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) director Rochelle Walensky recently did )ust that when she said that the CDC made vaccination recommendations because CNN published Pfizer's press release saying that their Covid-19 vaccine was 95% effective. (You can't make this up.) However, the true sub)ect matter experts who promoted the false narrative from the public health departments-- such as Chief Scientific Advisor Sir Patrick Vallance in the UK and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) director Dr. Anthony Fauci in the U.S.--knew their statements were untrue.
The Question of Motive
The question of motive has to arise. What possible motive might there have been to create this state of fear? Who must have been involved to have granted authorisation to do it?
I have tried to find benign explanations and have failed to do so. The logical conclusions I'm drawn to make for very disturbing reading. I look forward to discussing them with you and indeed with anyone. Although it's unlikely I am correct on every point, what I
am sure of is that the overall picture is one of extreme deception and a highly-organised fraud. Moreover, I am not alone in reaching this view. For example, in an essay titled "if
I were going to conquer you" one author walks us through what the perpetrators would do in order to take over the world through a simultaneous "coup d~tat" of the liberal democracies.7 Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. summarised a plausible explanation in a speech in Milan in November 2021.8
I appear to be the ONLY former executive-level scientist from big pharma anywhere in the world speaking out. I have invested two years pro bono in identifying the key elements of the fraud, in the sincere hope I can connect with upright individuals who can help bring this to wider attention and, ultimately, to a halt and to )ustice. As a result of these efforts, I can describe a global fraud operating for two years at tremendous cost in lives, the economy, and the very structure of human societies, which could only have been undertaken by powerful people, organised for a purpose that is not to the benefit of ordinary people.
Additional Observations
Though not all central, there are a large number of ancillary points that reinforce my conclusions. I have assembled some of them below. This list is not exhaustive and may
be added to.
Fraud Assessed
In a series of five short videos,9 you will find remarkable similarities in a Canadian team's interpretation of the same fraud. Note, in particular, the second film (3.5 minutes) on non-pharmaceutical interventions.1°
Page 23 of 31
Fraud Rehearsed
German investigative journalist Patti Schreyer shows that this fraud was rehearsed for many years, increasingly, with all the stakeholders now running the alleged Covid-19 fraud,n
Autopsies
Why were autopsies strongly discouraged worldwide in 2020 and still today? My conclusion is that this was to cover up the lack of Covid-19 deaths. After vaccination, a
large fraction of deaths have been judged to be due to the vaccines, and the lack of autopsies covers them up, too.12
PCR Test
The Nobel-prize-winning inventor of the PCR test, Dr. Kary Mullis, stated definitively that PCR must not be used to diagnose viral illnesses.13 On what basis, therefore, were "cases" determined purely by the restflts of this one test, much disputed as to its appropriateness?
Cause of Death
A death from any cause, within 28 days of a positive test for SARS-CoV-2, is recorded
as a "Covid death". It's absurd--we have never assigned cause of death like this before, ever. The effect of untrustworthy PCR tests and the arbitrary assignment of a dubious "positive" as somehow causative of death has been a very effective way to fool and frighten people. Most do not know that there are literally scores of viruses, even
common cold viruses, which can infect human airways, some of which--in elderly and infirm people--can give rise to severe illness.
Hospital Protocols
Hospital treatment protocols, where I have explored them, look designed to kill:
In the UK, the pathway starts with everyone being tested with untrustworthy PCR tests, which are applied repeatedly for an inpatient. Given that 2% of hospital admissions end in a hospital death, repeated poor testing guarantees a lot of"Covid deaths".
A patient "diagnosed" as "positive" Covid is then placed in isolation, and visitors are not allowed until the patient is moribund.
A standard treatment involves intravenous midazolam (a benzodiazepine used for sedation) and morphine from a syringe driver, at doses up to 10 times greater than advisable for a patient capable of breathing unaided. This often results in respiratory failure and either immediate death or mechanical ventilation, accompanied by withdrawal of an care; of course, these patients then expire. It's murder.
In the UK, we have documentary evidence that the UK National Health Service (NHS) stockpiled a year's supply of midazolam by ordering it normally but banning 2019 prescriptions. By April 2020--over no more than two months--the entire supply was exhausted. Another year's supply was then bulk-purchased from a generics company in France, cleaning out their stock.
Page 24 of 31
Something similar occurred in U.S. hospitals, with ramped-up cash bonuses for each stage passed, up to and including mechanical ventilation.
Mechanical ventilation is rarely appropriate, because Covid-19 is NOT an obstructive lung disorder. Blood oxygen desaturation is best addressed using non-invasive masks with elevated oxygen levels. When hospitals tried this in Italy in February 2020, they ceased mechanical ventilation within a week, so stark were the differences in outcomes; that is, most ventilated patients died, while most masked patients survived. Apparently, the method of treatment the Italian health care providers had been given from "colleagues in Wuhan" was what they called "the Wuhan protocol". In this, the guidance given was that the sooner they sedated and ventilated an agitated patient, the better the patient's chances. This was a lie. Panicked patients needed anxiolytics (anti-anxiety drugs) and an oxygen mask, but instead, they were killed.
Experimental Vaccines
I have been incensed by the misuse of novel, experimental "vaccines" particularly in Covid-recovered individuals, pregnant women, and children.
Recovered individuals are immune, and the risks of adverse events are greatly increased because the body is already poised to attack any cells expressing spike protein.
Pregnant women are not at greatly elevated risks from Covid-19 because they tend
to be young and healthy. NEVER, since thalidomide (1956-1962), have we approved the use of experimental agents in pregnant women, and certainly not without reproductive toxicology studies. None of the vaccines have a completed "Reprotox" package (summaries on the reproductive effects of chemicals, medications, physical agents, or biologics). I filed a short expert opinion in court with America's Frontline Doctors (AFLDS) on this topic.14 The vaccine makers also didn't complete something called an ADME-Tox (Absorption Distribution Metabolism Excretion- Toxicity) package. Documents obtained in March 2022 through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests show that Pfizer was "planning to study" vaccination in maternity as of April 30, 2021--that is, after they had already manufactured and shipped close to 100 million doses.
The misuse of these agents in healthy children has, without question, reverse risk/ benefit: the injections kill far more children than the virus could.
The whole thing stinks of a purpose different from public health, because if it was a legitimate public health effort, we definitely would NOT do any of these things. When I co-authored the world's first treatise explaining some of these concerns, officials lied on the nationally broadcast BBC and other media outlets, smearing me and others like me who were raising questions. Note that the petition in question, filed with the European Medicines Agency (EMA), was co-authored by Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, the public health doctor and minor politician from Germany who stopped the fraudulent "swine flu pandemic" in 2009.15
Revised Definitions
I observed two strange occurrences. First, the WHO altered the definition of "immunity" from "that obtained after natural infection or vaccination" only mentioning vaccination and excluding "natural immunity". 16 That meant that only
Page 25 of 31
vaccination could accomplish the goal. They eventually changed this back, but for many, the damage was done, leaving non-experts not trusting natural immunity, even though it is superior to that from vaccination because the body has been exposed to all parts of the virus and will, therefore, respond to any part of it if reinfected. The definition of a "vaccine" was also changed, so that it wasn't necessary to prevent infection or transmission, whereas traditional vaccines almost always do this. They do so because they prevent the development of clinical illness and, in the case of respiratory viruses at least, lack of symptoms renders the person all but incapable of infecting anyone else.
In addition, the WHO changed the definition of "pandemic:' Previously, "pandemic" meant the simultaneous spreading across many countries of a pathogen, causing many cases and deaths. The definition was changed to eliminate the need for many deaths. (See Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg [at 45 min, 50 sec], interviewed on UK TV in 2010 after the exaggerated swine flu pandemic, which I now believe was something of a rehearsal for the 2020 Covid-19 pandemic.)17
This is a critical point, because PCR can be designed against any pathogen, and protocols can be adopted such that a large number of false positives appear. This grants bad actors the ability, relatively easily, to create the illusion of a pandemic, almost to order. Dr. Wodarg recaps his 2009 experiences and shows interesting similarities with recent events in an January 2021 interview,is
Many people simply don't believe experts when they talk of a "very high fraction of positive test results being false positives". I assure you, however, there have genuinely been a number of events where the entire suspected epidemic was an illusion, and 100% of positives were false positives. In 2007, the New York Times reported on an example of "an epidemic that wasn't" which, when I first read it, gave me a crawling sensation.19 I wonder if it was this genuine event--a false alarm in which experts admitted placing
"too much faith in a quick and highly sensitive molecular test that led them astray"-- that birthed the method for exaggerating (or even fully faking) a pandemic such as the one we are currently living?
Bizarre Statements
I noticed early on that Bill Gates said, "We won't return to normal until pretty much the whole planet has been vaccinated". This is a bizarre statement from a person with no
medical or scientific training (or indeed a college degree in anything). It is never necessary to vaccinate the entire population, when only the elderly and infirm are at serious risk of death if infected. Note, too, that the median age of deaths from/with Covid was the same or even older than the median age of death due to all causes.
For his part, former UK prime minister Tony Blair insisted that vaccine passports would be essential to restore confidence. Again, this was absurd, especially once we learned that these vaccines do not prevent transmission. Once this became clear, the case for coerced vaccination vanished, and this is still the present position. Yet, my unvaccinated relatives may not enter the U.S. If you fear infection, the safest person to be around isn't a vaccinated person but a person who is fit and well, with no respiratory symptoms.
Page 26 of 31
Boosters and Antibodies
The practise of"boosting"--giving people dose after dose of poorly-designed agent, ostensibly to reinforce their immunity--has no immunological basis. No genuine immunity wanes in a few months, or sometimes even in a few weeks. The perpetrators have exploited the public's understanding of the annual influenza vaccine to somehow normalise something that is both dangerous and ineffective.
I also noticed that early on, in discussing immunity, antibodies were the discussion
topic, whereas T-cells were an "extremist plot". This is another absurdity. I can assemble expert witnesses who will attest alongside me that blood-based antibodies are relatively unimportant, potentially irrelevant to infection by respiratory viruses. This is because the virus infects the air side of the airways and blood-based antibodies cannot leave the blood and enter this "compartment". Blood antibodies and respiratory viruses never meet except under unusual circumstances. On the contrary, T-cells leave the blood and migrate through infected airway tissue, removing infected cells.
Ferguson Track Record
Professor Neff Ferguson at Imperial College has a poor record of modelling and predictions.2°
Prescient Testimony
A former WHO staffer, lane Bfirgermeister, shared frighteningly prescient testimony in 2010. Her understanding was that respiratory virus pandemics will be used to force
near universal vaccination and that this had sinister motives.21 1 dismissed this the first time I saw it. Many of us turn away instinctively from evil because we cannot or do not want to believe that other humans are capable of that which our logic tells us is happening. I now no longer reject it. It fits far too well with the totally independent Paul Schreyer documentary. 11
More Prescient Testimony
Another doctor, Dr. Rima Laibow, made similar claims.22 This testimony speaks of population rejection, and like lane Biirgermeister, locates the fraud in a conceptual world government. Again, one can reject it, or consider it alongside other pieces of information.
Conclusions
I think it's worth developing the theme of turning away from evidence of sheer evil, and I have to say more, because it is THE pressing issue today. The evidence I set forth
makes it perfectly plain that the entire world is being lied to in ways that led-- predictably--to huge suffering and death. Given that none of the "measures" imposed could have mitigated illness and death from a respiratory virus, the only outcome was to be the fracturing of civil society and damage, potentially fatal, to the economy and financial system. I emphasise again here that WHO scientists had conducted a detailed review of control measures for respiratory virus epidemics and pandemics as recently as 2019, and they concluded that no imposed NPI measures make any difference at all.23 The claims made for control in Wuhan are not credible.
Page 27 of 31
The stakeholders who must have approved this action own or control the majority of the world's capital and assets. Their motivation cannot be for money, for they stand astride the money-creating apparatus in the central and private banks. Equally, it cannot be to obtain gross control over the population, since they already demonstrably have that. This is what leads me inexorably to propose that the motives behind this are terrible--at the very least, to secure totalitarian control through mandatory, digital IDs (in the guise of useless "vaccine passports" useless because none of these so-called vaccines reduce transmission, the only possible justification for them). Add to this a "financial great reset" with withdrawal of cash and introduction of central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), and we have a wholly controlled population, controlled automatically without human intervention on the ground. All that's needed is to require the population to show their health passport or else they will not be allowed to cross a regulated threshold, like accessing a food store, or make a transaction using digital money unless the AI algorithm permits it. If those operating this takeover of humanity wished then to eliminate a portion of the population, with plausible deniability, I doubt a more propitious starting point could be had.
I do not believe it's a fault in those who fall for the narrative that they cannot see the lies. People want to believe that governments and experts, for all their well-known flaws and occasionally uncovered corruption, are trying to do the best they can. They cannot accept the truth, that there is a group of powerful people who regard the ordinary members of the public as surplus to requirements. They want to deny evil because it makes them feel bad, sad, and uncomfortable to think about the world this way. They want to deny reality; that's their coping mechanism, which is being exploited by the perpetrators of evil. It gives a cloak of invisibility to those who want to commit mass murder, quite literally, since so many people are so willing to imagine that it is not happening.
It is not clear to me what to do with the information I've gathered here. I believe that a calm review of the summary that I call "The Covid Lies" will result in any open-minded person agreeing that we all have been subjected to a monstrous fraud with lethal consequences, and that there is overwhelming evidence of long-term planning and deliberately injurious acts. There is no easy way to say that, but it could be represented objectively and taught, in the manner of a workshop, so that participants get to derive their own conclusions (albeit being led by the evidence).
I doubt just talking to a group of people who hold the dominant narrative view as "true" would respond at all well to this, delivered as a lecture. Nobody wants to accept that they've been fooled, even if the blow is softened by telling them that this has been brought about by highly experienced professionals in the covert services and has required huge amounts of money to buy off several groups. On the positive side, an increasing number of people have detected that fraud is ongoing. A particularly good example comes from the financial analyst community and refers to life insurance claims among many other pieces of evidence of wrong-doing. 24 Ignoring this and hoping it will go away is naive and very dangerous for us all. The perpetrators have not gone away and will likely return in the fall. I expect this year or the next will see them assume totalitarian tyranny, if we have not, before then, "inoculated" important stakeholder groups to understand what has happened so far and cautioned them to be alert to the many potential presentations of the next fear- provoking episode.
