For over twenty years Bill Gates and his Foundation, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) have been vaccinating foremost children by the millions in remote areas of poor countries, mostly Africa and Asia. Most of their vaccination program had disastrous results, causing the very illness (polio, for example in India) and sterilizing young women . Many of the children died. Many of the programs were carried out with the backing of the WHO and – yes – the UN Agency responsible for the Protection of Children, UNICEF. 

Most of these vaccination campaigns were implemented without the informed-consent of the children, parents, guardians or teachers, nor with the informed-consent, or with forged consent, of the respective government authorities. In the aftermath, The Gates Foundation was sued by governments around the world, Kenya, India, the Philippines – and more.

Bill Gates has a strange image of himself. He sees himself as The Messiah who saves the world through vaccination – and through population reduction.

Around the time, when the 2010 Rockefeller Report was issued, with its even more infamous “Lock Step” Scenario, precisely the scenario of which we are living the beginning right now, Bill Gates talked on a TED show in California, “Innovating to Zero” about the use of energy.

He used this TED presentation to promote his vaccination programs, literally saying, “If we are doing a real good job vaccinating childen, we can reduce the world population by 10% to 15%”.

This sounds very much like eugenics.

The video, the first 6’45”, “The Truth about Bill Gates and his Disastrous Vaccination Program”, will tell you all about it.

Robert F Kennedy Jr, an avid Defender of Children’s Rights and anti-vaccination activist, has launched a petition sent to the White House, calling for “Investigations into the ‘Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation’ for Medical Malpractice & Crimes Against Humanity“

“At the forefront of this is Bill Gates, who has publicly stated his interest in “reducing population growth” by 10-15%, by means of vaccination. Gates, UNICEF & WHO have already been credibly accused of intentionally sterilizing Kenyan children through the use of a hidden HCG antigen in tetanus vaccines”. (Excerpt from text of Petition)

Link to the Petition.

(At the time of writing, the petition had over 265,000. It requires 100,000 for an answer from the White House)

Video: Robert F. Kennedy Junior

See also brief video featuring Author Bill Still ( 6 min) entitled The Truth about Bill Gates and his disastrous Vaccination Programs around the World

Robert. F. Kennedy Exposes Bill Gates’ Vaccination Agenda

Now Mr. Gates and his allies, including Big-Pharma, WHO, UNICEF, Dr. Anthony Fauci, Director of NIAID / NIH, a close ally of Mr. Gates  – and of course, Agenda ID2020, are proposing to (force) vaccinate 7 billion people around the globe, with their concoction of a (so far) untested coronavirus vaccine. This is a multi-billion dollar bonanza for  Big Pharma and for all those who support the vaccine. Nobody will really know what the vaccine cocktail will contain. They intend to start with the Global South (Developing Countries) and then gradually move North (Developed Countries).

Mind you, there is no need for a vaccine to cure the corona virus. There are many cures:

French Professor Didier Raoult, who is one of the world’s top 5 scientists on communicable diseases, suggested the use of hydroxychloroquine (Chloroquine or Plaquenil), a well-known, simple, and inexpensive drug, also used to fight Malaria, and that has shown efficacy with previous coronaviruses such as SARS.  By mid-February 2020, clinical trials at his institute and in China already confirmed that the drug could reduce the viral load and bring spectacular improvement. Chinese scientists published their first trials on more than 100 patients and announced that the Chinese National Health Commission would recommend Chloroquine in their new guidelines to treat Covid-19. (Peter Koenig, April 1, 2020)

Be aware, awake, alert and warned.

This presentation PROOVES WITHOUT DOUBT that America is in for a major fight that will put you and your family in the firing line, literally… So make sure you watch this presentation while it’s still online…

What is the infamous ID2020? It is an alliance of public-private partners, including UN agencies and civil society. It’s an electronic ID program that uses generalized vaccination as a platform for digital identity.

It seems, the more there is written about the causes of the Coronavirus – the more the written analyses are overshadowed by a propaganda and fear-mongering hype. Questions for the truth and arguments for where to look for the origins and how the virus may have spread and how to combat it, are lost in the noise of wanton chaos. But isn’t that what the “Powerful financial elites” behind this intended pandemic want – chaos, panic, hopelessness, leading to human vulnerability – a people becoming easy prey for manipulation?

Today WHO declared the coronavirus COVID-19 a “pandemic” – when there is not the slightest trace of a pandemic. A pandemic might be the condition, when the death to infection rate reaches more than 12%. In Europe, the death rate is about 0.4%, or less. Except for Italy which is a special case, where the peak of the death rate was 6% (see below for further analysis).

🚨 BREAKING 🚨

"We have therefore made the assessment that #COVID19 can be characterized as a pandemic"-@DrTedros #coronavirus pic.twitter.com/JqdsM2051A

— World Health Organization (WHO) (@WHO) March 11, 2020

China, where the death rate peaked only a few weeks ago at about 3%, is back to 0.7% – and rapidly declining, while China is taking full control of the disease – and that with the help of a not-spoken-about medication developed 39 years ago by Cuba, called “Interferon Alpha 2B (IFNrec)”, very effective for fighting viruses and other diseases, but is not known and used in the world, because the US under the illegal embargo of Cuba does not allow the medication to be marketed internationally.

WHO has most likely received orders from “above”, from those people who also manage Trump and the “leaders” (sic) of the European Union and her member countries, those who aim to control the world with force – the One World Order.

This has been on the drawing board for years. The final decision to go ahead NOW, was taken in January 2020 at the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos – behind very much closed doors, of course. The Gates, GAVI (an association of vaccination-promoting pharmaceuticals), Rockefellers, Rothschilds et al, they are all behind this decision – the implementation of Agenda ID2020 – see below.

After the pandemic has been officially declared, the next step may be – also at the recommendation either by WHO, or individual countries, “force vaccination”, under police and/or military surveillance. Those who refuse may be penalized (fines and / or jail – and force-vaccinated all the same).

If indeed force-vaccination will happen, another bonanza for Big Pharma, people really don’t know what type of cocktail will be put into the vaccine, maybe a slow killer, that acts-up only in a few years – or a disease that hits only the next generation – or a brain debilitating agent, or a gene that renders women infertile …. all is possible – always with the aim of full population control and population reduction. In a few years’ time, one doesn’t know, of course, where the disease comes from. That’s the level of technology our bio-war labs have reached (US, UK, Israel, Canada, Australia…).

Another hypothesis, at this point only a hypothesis, but a realistic one, is that along with the vaccination – if not with this one, then possibly with a later one, a nano-chip may be injected, unknown to the person being vaccinated. The chip may be remotely charged with all your personal data, including bank accounts – digital money. Yes, digital money that’s what “they” are aiming at, so you really have no control any more over your health and other intimate data, but also over your earnings and spending. Your money could be blocked, or taken away – as a ‘sanction’ for misbehavior, for swimming against the stream. You may become a mere slave of the masters. Comparatively, feudalism may appear like a walk in the park.

It’s not for nothing that Dr. Tedros, DG of WHO, said a few days ago, we must move towards digital money, because physical paper and coin money can spread diseases, especially endemic diseases, like the coronavirus. A precursor for things to come? – Or for things already here? – In many Scandinavian countries cash is largely banned and even a bar of chocalate can be paid only electronically.

We are moving towards a totalitarian state of the world. This is part of Agenda ID2020 – and these steps to be implemented now – prepared since long, including by the coronavirus computer simulation at Johns Hopkins in Baltimore on 18 October 2019, sponsored by the WEF and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Bill Gates, one of the chief advocates of vaccinations for everybody, especially in Africa – is also a huge advocate of population reduction. Population reduction is among the goals of the elite within the WEF, the Rockefellers, Rothschilds, Morgens – and a few more. The objective: fewer people (a small elite) can live longer and better with the reduced and limited resources Mother Earth is generously offering.

This had openly been propagated already in the 1960s and 70s by Henry Kissinger, Foreign Secretary in de Nixon Administration, a co-engineer of the Vietnam war, and main responsible for the semi-clandestine bombing of Cambodia, a genocide of millions of unarmed Cambodian civilians. Along with the CIA-Kissinger engineered coup on 9/11, 1973, in Chile, killing the democratically elected Salvador Allende and putting the military dictator Pinochet in power, Kissinger has committed war crimes. Today, he is a spokesman (so to speak) for Rockefeller and their  “Bilderberger Society”.

Two weeks after the computer simulation at Johns Hopkins Medical Center in Baltimore, Maryland, that “produced” (aka simulated) 65 million deaths (!), the COVID-19 virus first appeared in Wuhan. By now it is almost certain that the virus was brought to Wuhan from outside, most likely from a bio-war lab in the US.

*

What is the infamous ID2020? It is an alliance of public-private partners, including UN agencies and civil society. It’s an electronic ID program that uses generalized vaccination as a platform for digital identity. The program harnesses existing birth registration and vaccination operations to provide newborns with a portable and persistent biometrically-linked digital identity. GAVI, the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization, identifies itself on its website as a global health partnership of public and private sector organizations dedicated to “immunization for all”. GAVI is supported by WHO, and needless to say, its main partners and sponsors are the pharma-industry.

The ID2020 Alliance at their 2019 Summit, entitled “Rising to the Good ID Challenge”, in September 2019 in New York, decided to roll out their program in 2020, a decision confirmed by the WEF in January 2020 in Davos. Their digital identity program will be tested with the government of Bangladesh. GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance, and “partners from academia and humanitarian relief” (as they call it), are part of the pioneer party.

Is it just a coincidence that ID2020 is being rolled out at the onset of what WHO calls a Pandemic? – Or is a pandemic needed to ‘roll out’ the multiple devastating programs of ID2020?

Here is what Anir Chowdhury, policy advisor of the Bangladesh government program, has to say:

“We are implementing a forward-looking approach to digital identity that gives individuals control over their own personal information, while still building off existing systems and programs. The Government of Bangladesh recognizes that the design of digital identity systems carries far-reaching implications for individuals’ access to services and livelihoods, and we are eager to pioneer this approach.”

Wow! Does Mr. Anir Chowdhury know what he is getting into?

Back to the Pandemic and the panic. Geneva, the European seat of the United Nations, including the headquarters of WHO, is basically shot down. Not unlike the lock-down that started in Venice and later expanded to northern Italy until a few days ago – and now the lock-down covers all of Italy. Similar lock-down may soon also be adopted by France – and other European vassal states to the Anglo-Zionist empire.

Numerous memoranda with similar panic-mongering contents from different UN agencies in Geneva are circulating. Their key message is – cancel all mission travel, all events in Geneva, visits to the Palais des Nations, the Geneva Cathedral, other monuments and museums. The latest directives, many agencies instruct their staff to work from home, not to risk contamination from public transportation.

This ambiance of panic and fear – outstrips any sense of reality, when the truth doesn’t matter. People can’t even think any more about the causes and what may be behind it. Nobody believes you (anymore), when you refer to Event 201, the coronavirus simulation, the Wuhan Military Games, the closing last August 7, of the high-security biological war lab at Fort Detrick, Maryland…. what could have at one point been an eye opener for many, today is sheer conspiracy theory. The power of propaganda. A destabilizing power – destabilizing countries and people, destroying economies, creating hardship for people who may lose their jobs, usually the ones who can least afford it.

Also, at this time it becomes increasingly important to remind people that the outbreak in China was targeting the Chinese genome. Did it later mutate to transgress the ‘borders’ of Chinese DNA? When did that happen, if it happened? Because at the beginning it was clear that even the infected victims in other parts of the world, were to 99.9% of Chinese descent.

What happened later, when the virus spread to Italy and Iran, is another issue, and opens the way to a number of speculations.

(i) There were various strains of the virus circulated in sequence – so as to destabilize countries around the world and to confound the populace and media, so that especially nobody of the mainstream may come to the conclusion that the first strain was targeting China in a bio-war.

(ii) In Iran, I have a strong suspicion that the virus was an enhanced form of MERS (Middle East Respiratory Syndrome, man-made, broke out first in Saudi Arabia in 2012 , directed to the Arabic genome) – which was somehow introduced into government circles (by aerosol spray?) – with the goal of “Regime Change” by COVID19-caused death. Its Washington’s wishful thinking for at least the last 30 years.

(iii) In Italy – why Italy? – Maybe because Washington / Brussels wanted to hit Italy hard for having been officially the first country to sign a Belt and Road (BRI) accord with China (actually the first was Greece, but nobody is supposed to know that China came to the rescue of Greece, destroyed by Greece’s brothers, the EU members, mainly Germany and France).

(iv) The hype about the high death to infection rate in Italy, as of the time of this writing: 10,149 infections vs. 631 deaths = death rate of 6.2 (comparatively Iran: 8042 infections vs. 291 deaths = 3.6 death rate). The death rate of Italy is almost double that of Iran and almost ten-fold that of average Europe. (Are these discrepancies the result of failures in the establishing reliable data pertaining to “infections”, see our observations pertaining to Italy below).

Why? – Was is Italy being affected with virus panic? Was there a much stronger strain introduced to Italy?

The common flu in Europe in the 2019 / 2020 season, has apparently so far killed about 16,000 (in the US the death toll is, according to CDC between 14,000 and 32,000, depending on which CDC website you look at).

Could it be that among the Italian coronavirus deaths there were also common flu victims, as the affected victims are mostly elderly with respiratory preconditions? Also, symptoms are very similar between coronavirus and the common flu, and nobody questions and checks the official authorities’ narrative?

Maybe not all the coronavirus strains come from the same laboratory. A journalist from Berlin of Ukrainian origin, told me this morning that Ukraine is host to some 5 high security US bio-war labs. They test regularly new viruses on the population – yet, when strange diseases break out in the surroundings of the labs, nobody is allowed to talk about it. Something similar, she says, is happening in Georgia, where there are even more Pentagon / CIA bio-war labs – and where also new and strange diseases break out.

All of this makes the composite picture even more complicated. Overarching all is this super hype is profit driven, the quest for instant profit, instant benefits from the suffering of the people. This panic making is a hundred-fold of what it’s worth. What these kingpins of the underworld, who pretend to run the upper world, perhaps miscalculated, is that in today’s globalized and vastly outsourced world the west depends massively on China’s supply chain, for consumer goods, and for intermediary merchandise – and, foremost for medication and medical equipment. At least 80% of medication or ingredients for medication, as well as for medical equipment comes from China. The western China dependence for antibiotics is even higher, some 90%.  The potential impacts on health are devastating.

During the height of the COVID-19 epidemic China’s production apparatus for everything was almost shut-down. For deliveries that were still made, merchandise vessels were regularly and categorically turned back from many harbors all around the world. So, the west has tricked itself into a shortage-of-everything mode by waging a  de facto “economic war” on China. How long will it last? – Nobody knows, but China’s economy which was down by about half, has rapidly recovered to above 80% of what it was before the coronavirus hit. How long will it last to catch up with the backlog?

What is behind it all? – A total crackdown with artificially induced panic to the point where people are screaming “help, give us vaccinations, display police and military for our security” – or even if the public despair doesn’t go that far, it would be easy for the EU and US authorities to impose a military stage of siege for “health protection of the people”. In fact, CDC (Center for Disease Control in Atlanta), has already designed harshly dictatorial directives for a “health emergency”.

Along with forced vaccination, who knows what would be contained in the cocktail of ‘’mini-diseases” injected, and what their long-term effects might be. Similar to those of GMOs, where all sorts of germs could be inserted without us, the commons, knowing?

We may indeed be just at the beginning of the implementation of ID2020 – which includes, forced vaccination, population reduction and total digital control of everybody – on the way to One World Order – and global financial hegemony – Full Spectrum Dominance, as the PNAC (Plan for a New American Century) likes to call it.

A windfall for China. China has been purposely targeted for “economic destruction”, because of her rapidly advancing economy, an economy soon to overtake that of the now hegemon, the US of A, and because of China’s strong currency, the Yuan, also potentially overtaking the dollar as the world’s main reserve currency.

Both occurrences would mean the end of US dominance over the world. The coronavirus disease, now in more than 80 countries, has crashed the stock markets, a decline of at least 20% over the last few weeks – and rising; the feared consequences from the virus of an economic slow-down, if not recession, has slashed petrol prices within about two weeks almost in half. However, without China’s central bank interference, the Yuan’s value vis-à-vis the dollar has been rather stable, at around 7 Yuan to the dollar. That means, the Chinese economy, despite COVID-19, is receiving still much trust around the globe.

Advice to China – buy all the US and European corporate shares you can at current rock-bottom prices from the stock markets that collapsed by a fifth or more, plus buy lots of oil futures. When the prices recover, you have not only made billions, probably trillions from the west, but you also may own or hold significant and influence-yielding amounts of shares in most of the largest US and European corporations – and will be able to help call the shots of their future endeavors.

There is however, one little silver lining oscillating at the horizon full of dark clouds. It could miraculously be an awakening of consciousness of a critical mass that could put an end to it all. Although, we seem to be far from such a miracle, somewhere in a hidden corner of our brain, we all have a spark of consciousness left. We have the spiritual capacity to abandon the disaster path of western neoliberal capitalism, and instead espouse solidarity, compassion and love for each other and for our society. That may be the only way to break the gridlock and doom of western egocentric greed.

Connecting dots is neither the trend of our times nor of day-to-day political decision-making. Over the years, time, space and intellectual focus has shrunk. It’s deplorable and dangerous for an increasingly complex world facing increasingly existential challenges.

For instance, during the European refugee crisis the dots between wars and refugee movements were hardly ever made. The focus was on how to limit refugees getting into Europe but hardly ever on the wars from which they fled. Western wars are untouchables.

The lack of connections between the dots of the Corona and security – human security in particular – would be another example. The present author would see the handling of the Corona pandemic as the most fundamental documentation of the fact that not a single government has practised security the right way: billions of taxpayers’ dollars have been spent on weapons (that de-crease security in most cases), while there was nobody who had thought of face masks, thermometers, hospital equipment and facilities – for what must be called a perfectly predictable security challenge.

Instead the Corona crisis has been see as a failure of the health system and other systems – but hardly ever as a fundamental failure of everything termed security politics. There ought to have been a global uproar by citizens against their governments’ de facto contempt for their security.
Another non-connection could be the one between military expenditure levels, on the one hand, and security and peace, on the other. A link is usually made which emphasizes – monotonously and thoughtlessly – that higher expenditures create higher security and more sustainable peace. The truth – that most can see  but not those of the MIMAC (Military-Industrial-Media-Academic Complex) – is that there is no such link; or, rather, there is one but it goes in the exact opposite direction: By and large (but not as a law), the higher the military expenditures, the less secure and peaceful it is – US/NATO being conspicuous examples. (Whether there is a U-curve relation between the two or some other pattern can be discussed but we leave it here).

A final example would be this: The Corona adds a new depth to the global crisis of economic performance, of the science of economics and to economic politics. We knew that the world was in systemic crisis before this – not the least in terms of mal-development (including inequality, poverty, hunger and tremendous, growing class differences) and Man-Nature relations – and the tremendous resources would be need to change the global course. With the Corona as a manifest, added long-term problem – one must ask: Where are the reservoirs of capital that could be channelled and re-directed to solve this complex of global challenges? Yes, you have guessed it: From the global US$ 2000 billion+ de facto military budgets.

But not a single government has connected those two dots: Military expenditure reduction as a way of freeing desperately needed human and other capital and put them to work for genuine global problem-solving, for the common good.

The US Congress recently voted about a proposal to reduce the – perversely high – military expenditures by as little as 10% and move those resources into human needs related activities in the US society. 0 Republicans voted yes, 92 Democrats voted yes and 139 no. Thus, as David Swanson points out, both parties are disasters.

It’s one of many tasks of the intellectual to connect dots, not the least in times when the focus has a very limited space ”me”, ”I”, ”my nation” and time is defined by politicians hardly knowing what they want to achieve next week. (Try and ask a leading Western politician what she or he wants the world to look like in 50 years from now. Prediction is that you would not get anything worth discussing).

Four Major Things to Do

1. Get a vision and a constructive program: Look at solutions first!

Crudely stated, 99% of humanity spends about 99% of their energy on analysing, discussing and criticising what is wrong with the world – and whose fault it is. The vast majority or articles, reports, books and videos today are about Diagnosis and Prognosis (some fake/omission, some genuine) – very little on Treatment or Problem-Solving.

This applies particularly to the West, visions of the good society has vanished, been imprisoned by the foci everywhere on ongoing crisis-management. There are more Dystopias than Eutopias around. That even applies to the peace research and movements which, with few exceptions, are anti-violence/war/weapons rather than pro-peace movements and with a very weak future and problem-solving orientation.

Otherwise with the Chinese. Since the late 1970s, they pursued a vision of a better society and the opening op to a better world. They used eclecticism creatively and combined bits and pieces of socio-economic development that the West thought was either/or, not both/and.

Whether authoritarian or not – and Western concepts will anyhow never help us understand China – it worked. Simply. So, while not imitating, it would be wise of the West in this stage of its decline to stop mastering and threatening and, instead, explore whether it could learn something from China.

Tragically, however, we all know where the US is moving now – self-destructively: Towards yet another Cold War, first with Russia and now with China. It will be suicidal for the US and its allies and friends, NATO and the EU and others – but not even the Corona crisis has caused any Western government to stop and re-think. There is still a Back to Normal wishful thinking and the stubborn idea that the West shall teach and rule and not be a partner among equals.

So, the first thing to do is to recognise that anyone at any level who does not embrace change as the only constant and are also not willing or able to outline long-term vision for itself and the world, is bound to fall.

We have to Reboot Humanity fundamentally – as Beijing-based businessman and thinker, Gordon Dumoulin, has recently stated in two articles – here and here.

2. Take from the military and give it to global civil problem-solution: The Necessary New Normal

As stated, world military expenditures range around US$ 2000 billion dollar, the highest ever. Perhaps this incomprehensible sum would be justified if the world as a whole experienced solid defence, security and peace. But the fact is that there are more tensions, hatred, dominance attempts, new kinds of wars added to old ones, and one country after the other has been destroyed since the end of the First Cold War in 1989-90. The US, in particular, see everybody else as anything from mortal dangers to friends it can’t rely on – while its military is bigger than the ten next military spenders in the world.

Paranoi and self-inflicted threat, autism and exceptionalism coupled with rampant militarism has decades ago substituted analyses and rational decision-making. The US/NATO system seems unable – simply – to live without enemies.

That’s also why there is a new, albeit different, cold war in Europe now and, while writing this, China is the object of yet another Cold War drive – ad absurdum and well coordinated with the media and leading US and other think tanks.

Imagine every country in the world would reduce its military expenditures by 50% and you would have US$ 1000. Is it a large or small sum? That sum was what China in 2013 put behind the Belt and Road Initiative, BRI – a cooperative effort around infrastructure, fast physical and digital communication, sea and land transport, education and cultural exchange, and much more. Today it involves around 80 countries, some of all continents and it is open to everyone.

Beyond any doubt, this is the largest – and most positive – cooperation project in the world and it is the project that will give birth to – if it has not already? – a new multi-polar world order based more on cooperation than confrontation.

There is, in summary, no doubt that a substantial conversation of, say, US$ 1000 billion from the military to the solution of humanity’s common problems would imply a desperately needed boost for the common good. (This argument does not rest on any assumption that money is the main tool to solve problems; that takes lots of non-material qualities. But with economies falling apart at a moment when each and every economy needs funds for ”rebooting humanity,” this is one simple thing to do with a rather large bang for the buck).

Additionally, lots of manpower, resources, knowledge, experience and equipment today owned by the military could be converted and put to civilian tasks. It would not create unemployment, it would boost employment.

Imagine that NATO – a clearly obsolete organisation – could be converted to the world’s most important, largest and fastest civilian emergency and humanitarian aid transport organisation under UN leadership. Take its weapons away and you have thousands of highly qualified people who could be transferred to civilian jobs and do something good for humankind instead of their destructive, wasteful activities today.

Isn’t it reasonable to assume that the far majority of NATO’s staff members do not want war but are only doing their job – and that, like you and me, they would love to contribute to a more peaceful world? Imagine what such an organisation could have done from Day One with its communication, transport and coordination capacities to help when the Corona broke out – or when the huge explosion occurred in Beirut!

3. Implement the old concept of human security – from the individual to the global

The report everybody refers to when it comes to human security is that by Sadako Ogata and Amatya Sen – “Human Security Now” (2003). And: Ten articles on the new Cold War and a reflection

Among that Commission’s members, you find mostly diplomats and former ministers, plus people with a background in the Rockefeller Foundation, Goldman Sachs and the US administration.

This explains to a large extent, one can safely assume, that their concept of human security is what I would call compensatory, or supplementary and does not fundamentally address, challenge or attempt to change the Realpolitik military national security concept.

As far as the present author is aware, the first time ever the term human security is used is in a research report from 1978 entitled “The New International Military Order – The Real Threat to Human Security”. An Essay on Global Armament, Structural Militarism and Alternative Security” and written by me. It was part of a collaborative research project by the Lund University Peace Research Institute, LUPRI, and the Chair in Conflict and Peace Research at Oslo University directed by the holder of that chair, Johan Galtung. (Papers Nr. 65). (And with this mention here, my tribute to him on his upcoming 90th birthday on UN Day this year!)

There we defined human security as increasing freedom from the risk of direct as well as structural violence. As survival, in other words and as security for, by and with the people, the citizens – built into things/production, systems/distribution and structures/transformations and Nature/cyclical utilisation.

It was meant as an alternative to classical Realpolitik ”national security” and not as a supplement to it. Of course, it was much too radical and ”unrealistic.” Now 40 years later, the Corona and other facts tell us that, perhaps, it would have been a good thing to try – in addition it would have reduced military expenditures and made the world more safe today.

4. Common security through alternative civil-military, defensive defence

It was the Palme Commission report of 1982 that stated, for the first time in the domain of politics, what should be the obvious: We can have security only if ’the other’ also feels secure with us.

That’s important even today where we have learnt that all the confrontation and dominance policies based on offensive, long-range weapons – including nuclear ICBMs – have not made the world safer at all.

And to realise this we need to re-conceptualise defence and security in accordance with Article 51 of the UN Charter: as useable only for defence. The present idea is that ”I can kill you with my long-range weapons but I have not intention to” should be scrapped simply because it is a foundation stone of never-ending arms races: How and why should the opponent believe us when we say that – we could change intentions tomorrow. And why do we possess offensive long-range weapons if they would never under any circumstance be used?

The only ones to gain security from this is the mentioned MIMAC elites…

So in post-Corona times, the goals should be human security from the individual to the global accompanied by defensive defence (with a military components to democratically accommodate those who think we need that, but then also defensive, i.e. short-range and limited destruction capacity because only used on one’s own territory).

And the rest would consist in a much needed intellectual and moral armament process: conflict-analyses, conflict-resolution/transformation, reconciliation and forgiveness – closure – so that the same conflict never turns up again.

In this way we would achieve two important things: Having first laid the foundation of peace and then secured it without embedded arms race dynamics. Two, create a guarantee that violence will always be the last resort – when everything else has been tried.

The COVID-19 crisis at a time of deteriorating economic conditions caused what in hindsight may be known as a Greater Depression — exceeding the worst of the 1930s.

For 20 straight weeks, new claims for unemployment insurance exceeded one million.

Prior to March, the highest ever weekly total was 695,000. What’s unfolding in real time in the US is unprecedented and then some.

The Labor Department’s reported 1.2 million new filings was fake news like earlier weekly reports.

According to the Economic Policy Institute (EPI), 1.6 million US workers applied for unemployment benefits in the last week — not seasonally adjusted.

The number includes 984,000 who applied for state unemployment benefits — another 656,000 seeking Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA).

In the past 20 weeks, a previously unimaginable 55 million Americans filed initial claims for unemployment benefits.

Nearly one-third of US working-age Americans currently have no jobs.

Over 30% of laid off US workers who regained employment were furloughed again because of Depression-level economic conditions at a time of zero federal jobs creation programs.

While only Cassandra excelled at predicting future events, what’s going on suggests harder than ever hard times may worsen ahead before improving at an unknown future time.

Federally approved unemployment insurance (UI) benefits of $600 weekly to eligible recipients expired at end of July.

Republicans want benefits slashed to $200 weekly, along with no financial aid to cash-strapped states, no funds for emergency workplace health and safety protections, nothing to prevent landlords from evicting jobless tenants with no ability to pay rent.

Through Thursday, Republicans and Dems failed to agree on a package of vital benefits for unemployed Americans.

According to White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, “(w)e’re still a considerable amount apart.”

Dems expressed “disappoint(ment)” over failure to resolve differences with Republicans.

Treasury Secretary Mnuchin said if stalemated talks continue, Trump will act unilaterally by executive order that surely will fall far short of what’s needed by a president who time and again showed indifference toward public health and welfare — serving privileged interests exclusively throughout his tenure.

Dems said they’ll legally challenge unilateral action by Trump to resolve major differences if he takes this step.

Both sides blame each other for impasse on major issues at a time of unprecedented US unemployment armageddon when vital aid to the needy is essential without delay.

For the past week, jobless Americans got no UI.

EPI called slashing benefits from $600 to $200 weekly, as Senate Republicans demand, “not just cruel, it’s terrible economics,” adding:

“These benefits are supporting a huge amount of spending by people who would otherwise have to cut back dramatically.”

“The spending made possible by the $400 that the Senate wants to cut is supporting 3.4 million jobs.”

“If you cut the $400, you cut those jobs.”

If (now expired) benefits are cut to $400 weekly, $1.7 million jobs will be lost.

May and June employment gains “reversed. Now is not the time to cut benefits that are supporting jobs,” EPI stressed.

GOP leadership claims that UI benefits of $600 disincentivise unemployed Americans from returning to work have no merit.

EPI called the claim “massively overblown,” adding:

“(R)igorous empirical studies show that any theoretical disincentive effect has been so minor that it cannot even be detected.”

Data show that over two-thirds of UI recipients who returned to work in May and June earned more from unemployment benefits than on-the-job pay.

Slashing benefits when most needed amounts to cruel and unusual punishment, an 8th Amendment breach.

In his second (January 1937) inaugural address to the nation, Franklin Roosevelt said the following:

“I see tens of millions of its citizens—a substantial part of its whole population—who at this very moment are denied the greater part of what the very lowest standards of today call the necessities of life.”

“I see millions of families trying to live on incomes so meager that the pall of family disaster hangs over them day by day.”

“I see millions whose daily lives in city and on farm continue under conditions labeled indecent by a so-called polite society half a century ago.”

“I see millions denied education, recreation, and the opportunity to better their lot and the lot of their children.”

“I see millions lacking the means to buy the products of farm and factory and by their poverty denying work and productiveness to many other millions.”

“I see one-third of a nation ill-housed, ill-clad, ill-nourished.”

The state of the nation today for most Americans is more dire than during the 1930s.

No FDR era alphabet soup of jobs creation programs exists to put Americans back to work, none planned by Republicans or Dems.

Will things change for the better if Biden succeeds Trump in January and if Dems control both houses of Congress?

No evidence suggests it other than perhaps some tinkering around the edges when massive relief and jobs creation programs are vitally needed to turn things around — at a time of unprecedented economic and unemployment armageddon.

What’s going on is likely to be protracted and painful for countless millions of Americans — what I call the hardest of hard times in a nation serving privileged interests exclusively, uncaring about the vast majority of ordinary people.

The COVID-19 virus. Does it exist? Is it a novel virus? Is there a Pandemic?

If you ask any doctor or scientist in the world to show you a scientifically-verified proof, they will not be able to show you one.

Given that it has not been scientifically established that the COVID-19 novel virus exists, it is therefore clear that everything being done supposedly in the effort to tackle the ‘virus’ is being done for another purpose and COVID-19 is being used to conceal this fact.

However, with the elite-driven narrative being endlessly promoted by the World Health Organisation, governments, the medical and pharmaceutical industries, along with the corporate media, the truth is being obliterated.

And the reason for this is obvious: Any serious consideration of the underlying evidence, as I have documented previously, clearly indicates that the global elite is conducting a coup against humanity and using the fear it generates around COVID-19 to distract people from paying attention to what is happening in the background. For this reason, the coup continues to gain pace with only an insignificant number of people yet aware of the coup and its ongoing and increasingly devastating impacts.

‘How is the elite doing this?’ you might ask. Far too easily, unfortunately.

In essence, key individuals in the World Health Organisation (WHO), governments, the medical and pharmaceutical industries, as well as the corporate media are lying to you about this. They are lying to you, consciously or unconsciously, for essentially one of three reasons (essentially determined by where the individual fits in relation to the elite’s ongoing execution of its coup):

This presentation PROOVES WITHOUT DOUBT that America is in for a major fight that will put you and your family in the firing line, literally… So make sure you watch this presentation while it’s still online…

1. they are lying as an outcome of their complicity in the coup (given the perceived benefits to them personally, at least in the short term),
2. they are lying as an outcome of their ignorance (by not investigating and considering the evidence for themself and submissively accepting the elite narrative), or
3. they are lying as an outcome of their fear (of the adverse personal repercussions they would expect for resisting the elite narrative that there is indeed a virus).

And, so far, the elite is successfully executing its coup because the many voices contradicting its narrative – such as those individual doctors powerful enough to present the truth about the so-called ‘virus’ – are being denied a forum in any elite-controlled outlet such as the corporate media or they are being censored (including removed from accessible sites on the internet).

If what I have written above sounds incredible given the worldwide response supposedly to tackle the ‘virus’, the evidence presented below, together with the references to further documentation, will give you plenty to consider (provided your own fear will allow you to do so).

But before presenting this evidence, it is worth being aware of some of the existing adverse impacts of the coup:

1. The sudden destruction of the global economy has impoverished tens of millions of people in industrialized societies through unemployment, making them even more vulnerable to homelessness and other misery, as well as precipitating the death of millions of people projected to die of starvation in Africa, Asia and elsewhere because of the disruption of global food production and supply. See ‘WFP chief warns of “hunger pandemic” as Global Food Crises Report launched’and ‘COVID-19 could kill more people through hunger than the disease itself, warns Oxfam’.
2. There has been a dramatic increase in violence against children and women all over the world and particularly in some contexts with a recent United Nations Population Fund report highlighting that an ‘additional 5.6 million child marriages can be expected because of the coronavirus pandemic, which resulted in a short-term increase in poverty and the shutdown of schools’. In addition, the ‘current pandemic is also expected to have a massive impact on the projected growth of harmful practices on women’s bodies’ including female genital mutilation (FGM). See ‘Child Marriage, FGM and Harmful Practices on Women’s Bodies to Increase Because of COVID-19’.
3. The lockdowns have imprisoned people in their homes (with its seriously adverse psychological, social and physical repercussions) and laws have been introduced regarding ‘social distancing’ and other measures (including mask-wearing which I will discuss below) that have eviscerated rights and freedoms it took centuries to win.

In response to growing concerns on a number of points, 600 doctors signed a letter to US President Donald Trump to end the ‘lockdown’ – see ‘“Mass casualty incident”: 600 doctors sign letter to Trump calling for end to lockdowns over health concerns’– which has since been signed by thousands. See ‘Literally Thousands of Doctors and Scientists Have Come Out Against Fauci’s Lockdowns Including a Nobel Prize-Winning Biophysicist. The Media Just Doesn’t Want You to Know’.

4. Despite the ‘diagnostic’ tests for COVID-19 being ‘scientifically meaningless’ – see ‘COVID19 PCR Tests are Scientifically Meaningless’– (how can they not be when there is no virus?) compulsory vaccination (again, against a non-existent virus) is being threatened – in direct violation of Article 6 of the ‘Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights’despite the extensively documented record of vaccines causing devastating harms including massive lethality. For a taste of the vast literature on this point, see ‘Gates’ Globalist Vaccine Agenda: A Win-Win for Pharma and Mandatory Vaccination’.

As Dr Stefan Lanka has explained about vaccines generally:

Only ignorant people who blindly trust in the state authorities who are ‘testing’ and approving the vaccines can regard vaccination as a ‘small harmless prick’. The verifiable facts demonstrate the danger and negligence of these scientists and politicians, who claim that vaccines are safe, have little or no side-effects and would protect from a disease. None of these claims is true and scientific.See‘The Misconception Called “Virus”: Measles as an example’.

Moreover, this vaccination will be used to dramatically expand surveillance both via biometric ID and ‘immunity passes’. See ‘ID2020 and partners launch program to provide digital ID with vaccines’and ‘Mass-Tracking COVI-PASS Immunity Passports Slated to Roll Out in 15 Countries’.

5. Other measures to expand surveillance (apart from through vaccination) are being introduced. These include ‘contact tracing’ despite the fact that even ‘A WHO study on influenza pandemics in 2019 came to the conclusion that contact tracing is not useful from an epidemiological point of view and “is not recommended in any circumstances”.’ See ‘Facts about COVID-19’. But that is precisely the point: Contact tracing is not about epidemiological usefulness; it is about surveillance.
6. Critically, several measures necessary to implement the so-called fourth industrial revolution, including the deployment of 5G, which will reduce human individuals to digitized identities without effective rights and freedoms, are being accelerated. See ‘Techno-Tyranny: How The US National Security State Is Using Coronavirus To Fulfill An Orwellian Vision’.
7. While much human activity has been brought to a standstill, this has not included any of the violence which has not only continued unchecked but has expanded. Apart from the dramatic increase in violence against children and women all over the world noted above, wars, threats of war, sanctions, the military violence of occupations in places such as Palestine, Tibet and West Papua, the structural violence that systematically exploits (that is, loots) countries in Africa, Asia and Central/South America, the ecological violence that destroys lands, oceans and atmosphere have all proceeded as usual with the caveat that there has been a reduction in the emissions of some industrial and other waste products although this is hugely problematic in one critical sense. See ‘Will COVID-19 Trigger Extinction of All Life on Earth?’
8. And four distinct paths to human extinction – nuclear war, the climate catastrophe, the deployment of 5G and biodiversity collapse – have been accelerated, inadvertently or otherwise, by the coup. See ‘The Elite’s COVID-19 Coup to Destroy Humanity that is also Fast-Tracking Four Paths to Human Extinction’.

Does COVID-19 Exist?

Despite these and many other adverse impacts already happening in response to the COVID-19 crisis, as noted at the beginning, it has never been scientifically established that the COVID-19 virus actually exists. More fundamentally, according to Dr Stefan Lanka:

‘Contrary to what most people believe, there are no pathogenic viruses.… All claims about viruses as pathogens are wrong and are based on easily recognisable, understandable and verifiable misinterpretations…. A real and complete virus does not exist anywhere in the entire “scientific” literature.’ See ‘The Misconception Called “Virus”: Measles as an example’.

To reiterate in the words of two other authors: ‘there is no original scientific evidence that definitively demonstrates that any virus is the cause of any disease’. See What Really Makes You Ill? Why everything you thought you knew about disease is wrong. But you can read more in ‘Dismantling the Virus Theory – The “measles virus” as an example’ and watch the video interview ‘The Real Science of Germs: Do Viruses Cause Disease?’

In addition, and specifically in relation to COVID-19, according to Dr Andrew Kaufman, ‘there is no evidence of anyone dying from any novel illness’. See ‘Unmasking the Lies Around COVID-19: Facts vs Fiction of the Coronavirus Pandemic’. So what has happened?

Over the past year over 13,200 families have also already successfully used the very same technique to get over tragic milestones such as hurricanes, snow storms or floods.

in this short video I’ll tell you a life-changing story about how I figured out how to easily create an automated supply of the freshest, high-quality organic foods you’ve ever tasted for pennies on the dollar…

As Dr Kaufman explains: Early scientific papers on the subject suggested an association (not causation) between a novel coronavirus ‘with human to human transmission and severe human infection’ whereas a subsequent key ‘scientific’ paper that made a claim which helped drive the global response to COVID-19 ‘flat out lied’ about their results: ‘Following the first outbreaks of unexplained pneumonia in Wuhan, China, in late 2019, a new coronavirus was identified as the causative agent in January 2020.’ See ‘Identification of Coronavirus Isolated from a Patient in Korea with COVID-19’. In fact, Dr Kaufman points out:

‘they cannot reference any science to back that up whatsoever’.

Moreover, subsequently to this paper, another article – see ‘I study viruses: How our team isolated the new coronavirus to fight the global pandemic’– declared ‘The emergence of a new coronavirus in a market in Wuhan, China, in December 2019 set in motion the pandemic we are now witnessing in 160 countries around the world’. But again, Dr Kaufman counters, ‘no evidence was provided at all’ to support this claim: ‘just flat out lies’. For the details and citation of all the scientific sources for this explanation of how the COVID-19 ‘rumour mill’ got started, see ‘The Rooster in the River of Rats’ or ‘Koch’s Postulates: Have They Been Proven for Viruses?’

Finally on this point, pathologist Dr Stoian Alexov, President of the Bulgarian Pathology Association, has stated that he and his colleagues across Europe:

have not found any evidence of any deaths from the novel coronavirus on that continent.

Dr. Stoian Alexov called the World Health Organization (WHO) a ‘criminal medical organization’ for creating worldwide fear and chaos without providing objectively verifiable proof of a pandemic.See ‘“No one has died from the coronavirus”: Important revelations shared by Dr Stoian Alexov, President of the Bulgarian Pathology Association’.

Fortunately, as awareness of the fact that the COVID-19 virus does not exist gradually spreads, more people are challenging the official response to the engineered crisis on that basis. For example, one group of doctors has written to the British Prime Minister Boris Johnson challenging Public Health England to ‘show proof’ that a virus exists. See ‘Challenge to Public Health England that they must show Proof that a Virus Exists which Causes COVID-19 or Declare there is No Virus and end the Vax and Trax Programmes’.

But it is clear that the engineered crisis and the measures supposedly being taken to combat the non-existent ‘virus’ are being used to mask the truth, including the elite coup, and so actions aimed at elite agents, such as governments, must inevitably fail.

Unscientific Responses to the Non-existent Virus

The unscientific nature of the supposed threat posed by the ‘virus’ is, of course, matched by the unscientific response with countries imposing lockdowns suffering far worse outcomes – measured psychologically, socially, economically and otherwise – than countries, such as Japan, South Korea, Belarus and Sweden which did not follow this course. In any case, countries that did impose lockdowns could only use lies and statistical manipulation to make it appear that COVID-19 has been the cause of death among some of those who are recently deceased. For a taste of the extensive documentation, see ‘Facts about COVID-19: July 2020 Update’ and ‘COVID 19 Is A Statistical Nonsense’.

Given that the negative impacts of the lockdown are extensively documented, there have been many attempts (of many different kinds) occurring all over the world to end them already. See, for example, ‘“Mass casualty incident”: 600 doctors sign letter to Trump calling for end to lockdowns over health concerns’.

But another way in which this unscientific response to the non-existent ‘virus’ is manifesting is immediately obvious if one examines the scientific evidence in relation to the effectiveness of masks in preventing cross infection. As it turns out, as explained in a long series of documented scientific studies, as distinct from the inaccurate claims promulgated by elite agents, the research demonstrates that masks are at best ineffective, and at worst horribly counterproductive; that is, masks cannot achieve the purpose for which they are, supposedly, intended but they can achieve some very unhealthy outcomes. But who among the general population is seeking out and considering this evidence (which the WHO, governments, the medical and pharmaceutical industries, the education systems and the corporate media are not going to present)?

For just a sample of the evidence about the ineffectiveness and dangers of wearing a mask, see the following:

‘Nevertheless, the question of the effectiveness of masks can be asked. In the case of influenza epidemics, the answer is already clear from a scientific point of view: masks in everyday life have no or very little effect. If used improperly, they can even increase the risk of infection.’ See ‘Facts about COVID-19: July 2020 Update’.

In a recent study published in The New England Journal of Medicine, the five co-authors stated ‘We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infect
ion.’ See ‘Universal Masking in Hospitals in the Covid-19 Era’.

In his recent article ‘Masks Don’t Work: A Review of Science Relevant to COVID-19 Social Policy’documenting the results of his research, physics professor Dr Denis G. Rancourt concludes:

No RCT [randomized controlled trial] study with verified outcome shows a benefit for HCW [health care workers] or community members in households to wearing a mask or respirator. There is no such study. There are no exceptions.

Likewise, no study exists that shows a benefit from a broad policy to wear masks in public.

Furthermore, if there were any benefit to wearing a mask, because of the blocking power against droplets and aerosol particles, then there should be more benefit from wearing a respirator (N95) compared to a surgical mask, yet several large meta-analyses, and all the RCT, prove that there is no such relative benefit.

Masks and respirators do not work.

By making mask-wearing recommendations and policies for the general public, or by expressly condoning the practice, governments have both ignored the scientific evidence and done the opposite of following the precautionary principle.

After reviewing more than 50 articles on masks in the medical literature and documenting her case,  concludes as follows:

There are NO randomized, controlled trials (RCT) with verified outcomes that show a benefit to healthcare workers or community members for wearing a mask or a respirator. There is no such definitive study. Likewise, no study exists that shows a benefit from a broad policy to wear masks in public.See ‘Coronavirus Pt 4: Masks Don’t Protect’and, for your convenience, Tenpenny has cited the relevant passage from 35 of the articles she researched in this document: ‘Conclusion Regarding Masks: They Do Not Work’.

But if you want to read more, you can access each of the 50 articles Tenpenny cited or check out these as well: ‘Coronavirus: Face masks could increase risk of infection, medical chief warns’ and ‘Coronavirus Fact-Check #6: Does wearing a mask do anything?’

Or watch this video presentation: ‘Why Face Masks Don’t Work, According to Science’.

So if there is no virus and face masks do not work to prevent infection anyway, why are we being told to wear them and, increasingly, being terrorized into wearing them under threat of punishment if we do not? For just two of many examples, see ‘Soon, You Will Need to Wear a Mask to Enter Virtually Every Major Retail Store in America’ and ‘Total Masking: Victoria’s Coronavirus Response’.

Because the face masks, like other elements of the supposed strategy to tackle COVID-19, are simply being used to terrorize us into not resisting the ongoing elite coup. See ‘The Mask as a Symbol of Subjugation’, ‘The New (Pathologized) Totalitarianism’and ‘The Hidden Agendas of Masks, Distancing, and Tracing’.

And it is largely working with most people projecting their fear onto the non-existent ‘virus’ and then ignorantly endeavouring to ‘protect’ themselves from it by wearing a mask (or going along with other measures supposedly intended to ‘prevent infection’).

So if you are wondering why virtually everyone is being caught up in this, there are very good psychological reasons. One of them is that virtually all humans are terrorized into obedience as children. Consequently, resisting orders from those considered to be ‘in authority’ is virtually unthinkable. I have explained this submissive obedience in the article ‘Contemplating Human Extinction Terrifies Most People: A Strategy for Survival’.

But there is another, more subtle, reason too.

COVID-19 and the Psychology of Projection

For the vast bulk of the human population, considering the fundamental evidence of what is taking place – and acknowledging that the global elite is conducting a coup against us with all that this entails – is truly terrifying. Moreover, recognizing that if we are to resist this coup, we will need to make a courageous and strategically-focused stand to defend ourselves is frightening for most people as well.

And the global elite knows this. It is for this reason that they are terrorizing us in the first place. The elite does not want people resisting the coup and it certainly does not want them resisting the coup effectively.

Hence, the global elite is exploiting our fear – by projecting it onto COVID-19 – so that we submissively go along with its coup. How is the elite doing this? Let me explain the psychology of projection, very simply.

If, when you are a child, you are scared of something but that ‘something’ is truly terrifying and inescapable – that is, you are denied any safe opportunity to feel your terror and to take action in response to it so that you can make yourself safe – your mind will precipitate one response and, if necessary, a second response to defend you in the short term.

The SHTF we all prep for is what folks 150 years ago called daily life: …no electrical power, no refrigerators, no Internet, no computers, no TV, no hyperactive law enforcement, and no Safeway or Walmart

The first response will be to significantly dampen (and possibly completely suppress) your awareness of just how terrifying the ‘something’ that is scaring you actually is so that you are not overwhelmed to such an extent that you become incapacitated. This response is intended to enable you to act powerfully to get yourself out of the terrifying situation and into a context in which you feel safe.

Ideally, following any such incident when you again feel safe, you need time to recover emotionally. Fundamentally, this means that you need time to focus on feeling the terror and other feelings that were raised during the incident so that these feelings are fully felt and expressed, rather than suppressed more deeply into your unconscious.

If, however, there is no opportunity for this emotional recovery, your mind will have no choice but to more deeply suppress your awareness of these feelings so that you can resume functioning more or less as previously. I say ‘more or less’ because you won’t be functioning precisely as previously because the unconscious terror will now be playing a part in your emotional life and, therefore, playing a part in shaping your behaviour.

However, your unconscious mind – which is enormously powerful – has not given up on enabling you to heal from the terrifying incident and, therefore, its second response is to later trick you into believing that something else, that is far less frightening, is what is really scaring you so that you can safely access and feel your terror in relation to the original incident. Your mind does this so that the terror that was initially suppressed, in order to allow you to devise and implement a strategy for immediate survival, can now be released.

By using these two responses, your mind enables you to survive in a terrifying environment so that, hopefully at some point soon, you can devise and implement a strategy to escape that environment. But also by allowing you to subsequently believe that something that is actually quite safe by comparison is what was really scaring you in the first place, it gives you the opportunity to feel your fear and act it out without (or with profoundly reduced) fear of the consequences.

In the short term, this pair of responses by your mind can enable you to survive something truly terrifying: it minimizes the risk that you will be immobilized (frozen) in terror and thus unable to survive a dangerous situation. In essence, in evolutionary terms, these responses have tremendous survival value in the short term.

If, however, you are not able to escape the truly terrifying situation in the short term and you remain trapped in the situation indefinitely, your unconscious mind will continue to both suppress awareness of the terror and ‘trick’ you into subsequently believing that it is something else that is frightening you.

Unfortunately, beyond the very short term, this mental trick is highly dysfunctional. It leads the individual to eventually ‘forget’ (deeply suppress their awareness of) the original and true source of what is terrifying them and to believe that the safe ‘target’ they unconsciously chose subsequently is actually the genuine threat.

In the jargon of psychology, this is called ‘projection’ or ‘transference’ because the victim is now blaming something other than the true cause of their terror.

This has profound societal consequences too for the simple reason that an elite can effectively nominate the ‘something’ onto which our terror is projected. And it can do this very easily by simply parading a target or ‘legitimized victim’ as terrifying which, in effect, gives ‘permission’ for us to feel scared of the target it has nominated. But in directing our fear in a certain direction, they are also invariably intent on manipulating our behaviour in response.

Historically, this has been demonstrated rather endlessly with the manipulation of our fear crucial to the achievement of certain elite ends, politically and otherwise. For example, racism (fear of other far less frightening Africans) exploded to justify the slave trade, Nazism exploited fears to mobilize Germans against far less frightening Jews (among others), Israeli leaders project the fear of Israelis to exploit far less frightening Palestinians and the entire US ‘war on terror’ has been conducted on the basis of projecting people’s unconscious terror at far less frightening Muslims. As I mentioned, however, the list of possible examples is virtually endless.

In each and every case, however, the terror exploited had its origin in something much earlier in the life of these individuals than the current circumstance exploited by elites. It had its origin during early childhood.

And this origin can be traced directly back to the parenting and teaching models virtually universally used by human beings. As I have explained many times previously, but to briefly reiterate here: virtually all human beings are terrified for the same reason: the child-raising process that sociologists like to label ‘socialization’ should be more accurately labeled ‘terrorization’. This is because from the moment of a child’s birth, parents, teachers, religious leaders and adults generally regard themselves as responsible for terrorizing the child into obedience of the commands, rules, conventions and laws that define the nature of permissible behaviour in their society.

But because evolutionary pressures do not predispose any individual to obey the will of another – for the simple reason that obedience has no evolutionary functionality – it takes enormousterrorization during childhood to ensure that the child surrenders their Self-will at the alter of obedience. To achieve this outcome and largely unknowingly, parents, teachers, religious leaders and other adults in the child’s life use a large range of behaviours from the three categories of violence that I have labeled ‘visible’ violence, ‘invisible’ violence and ‘utterly invisible’ violence.

At its most obvious, all children are routinely threatened with violence and actually punished with violence (usually in each of its three forms: ‘visible’, ‘invisible’ and ‘utterly invisible’) for ‘disobedience’ (that is, for following their own Self-will rather than obeying orders to submit). See ‘Punishment is Violent and Counterproductive’.

And, as preposterous as I know this sounds to those reading it for the first time: The fundamental outcome of this process is that all children end up utterly but unconsciously terrified of their parents, teachers, religious figures and other significant adults in their life.

But never given adequate safe opportunities to feel this terror, each child ends up projecting it onto something or a series of targets including those ‘legitimized victims’ approved by an elite, local or otherwise.

Hence, in the current world context, this results in the bulk of the human population submitting to direction by the global elite to project their fear onto COVID-19 and then behave as ordered, rather than pay attention to the elite coup and resist it. For summaries and documentation of the evidence in relation to each of these points.

The elite does this by triggering our unconscious fear through endless reporting of the ‘threat’ posed by COVID-19, issuing warnings, announcing deaths supposedly caused by the ‘virus’ (and concealing that the death rates are not even comparable to deaths caused by a serious influenza), and placing increasingly onerous limits on our rights and freedoms (through such measures as lockdowns and mask-wearing). And because virtually everyone has so much suppressed terror and needs outlets onto which this can be projected, the coup is being conducted virtually without resistance.

As I have explained before, just because the global elite is able to do this does not mean that it is sane. In fact, it is completely insane and that is precisely why it is conducting this coup but unable to see its catastrophic outcome for the elite as well. See ‘The Global Elite is Insane Revisited’.

So what can we do?

Well, if we are to effectively resist the elite coup and fight for human survival, it would be useful to start by giving yourself time to focus on feeling your emotional responses – fear, anger, sadness, pain, dread…. – to whatever is generating an emotional reaction: COVID-19, the elite coup, the imminent threats of extinction or anything else. See ‘Putting Feelings First’.

This is necessary so that you can engage meaningfully and strategically in the effort, whatever issue you choose to fight.

So once you have a clearer sense of your emotional reactions to this knowledge and have allowed yourself time to focus on feeling these feelings, you will be in a far more powerful position to consider your response to the situation. And, depending on your interests and circumstances, there is a range of possible responses that will each make an important difference.

Fundamentally, you might consider making ‘My Promise to Children’ which will include considering what an education for your children means to you, particularly if you want powerful individuals – not ones who are submissively obedient and project their terror – who can perceive reality and resist violence. See ‘Do We Want School or Education?’

You might consider supporting others to become more powerful. See ‘Nisteling: The Art of Deep Listening’.

If you wish to strategically resist the elite coup against humanity, you can read about nonviolent strategy, including strategic goals for doing so, from here: Coup Strategic Aims.

Remaining pages on this website fully explain the twelve components of the strategy, as illustrated by the Nonviolent Strategy Wheel, as well as articles and videos explaining all of the vital points of strategy and tactics, such as those to help you understand ‘Nonviolent Action: Why and How it Works’.

Given the complexity of the configuration of this conflict, however, which involves the need to fight simultaneously to retain our essential humanity, defeat the elite coup and avert near-term human extinction, it is important that our tactical choices are strategically-oriented (as are those listed at the Strategic Aims page nominated above). Hence, three further considerations assume importance.

First, choose/design tactics that have strategic impact, that is, they fundamentally and permanently alter, in our favor, the power relationship between the elite and us.

Second, when tactical choices are made, focus them on undermining the elite coup, not just features of it, such as ‘social distancing’ or the lockdowns. At its most basic, this can be achieved by using tactical choices that mobilize people to act initially, as is happening, but then inviting them to consider taking further, more focused, action as well (such as those nominated in the strategic goals referenced above). This is important because existing actions will have little impact on key underlying measures, such as those being taken by the elite to advance the fourth industrial revolution.

Third, choose/design tactics that also have strategic impact on the greatest threats to human survival, including the collapsing biodiversity on Earth, the threat of nuclear war, the climate catastrophe and the deployment of 5G. Given the incredibly short timeframe in which we are now working to avert human extinction, while people are mobilizing it is important to use this opportunity to give them the chance to perceive the ‘big picture’ of what is taking place – beyond lockdowns and other measures supposedly being used to tackle COVID-19 – and to act powerfully in response.

Fortunately, as more people become aware of the deeper strands of what is taking place, the energy to break the lockdowns, resist other limitations on our rights and freedoms (such as contact tracing, COVID-19 testing/temperature checks, mask-wearing and vaccinations) as well as resist the coup itself will gather pace. As I have previously outlined, using a locally relevant focus, or perhaps several, for which many people would traditionally be together – a cultural, religious or sporting event, a nonviolent action, a community activity such as working to establish a community garden to increase local self-reliance, a celebration and/or a return to work – we can mobilize people to collectively resist.

If you wish to focus on powerfully resisting one of the primary threats to human existence – nuclear war, the deployment of 5G, the collapse of biodiversity and/or the climate catastrophe – you can read about nonviolent strategy, including strategic goals to focus your campaigns, from here: Campaign Strategic Aims.

You might also consider joining those who are powerful enough to recognize the critical importance of reduced consumption and greater self-reliance as essential elements of these strategies by participating in ‘The Flame Tree Project to Save Life on Earth’. While you over-consume or are dependent on the elite for your survival, in any way, you are vulnerable.

In addition, you are welcome to consider signing the online pledge of ‘The People’s Charter to Create a Nonviolent World’.

Conclusion

Under cover of a ‘virus’ that does not exist, the global elite is social engineering a massive restructuring of world society to suit their own ends. If they achieve their aim, your existence as any sort of individual with meaningful rights and freedoms will have been terminated.

Apart from these ongoing disastrous outcomes, the elite coup is also unwittingly accelerating four paths to human extinction: nuclear war, the climate catastrophe, the deployment of 5G and biodiversity collapse.

To have any chance of defeating the elite coup and fighting effectively to avert our own extinction, we must fight strategically.

Fundamentally, this means recognizing that lobbying (that is, begging) elite agents, such as governments, simply reinforces the power of the elite to control us. It is only when we take action ourselves to both build our own power (which includes that of our children and those with whom we work) while campaigning strategically to undermine the power of the global elite itself that we take crucial steps to liberate ourselves from its violence, in all of the forms that this violence takes.

Given that the elite coup is jeopardizing our individuality, our liberty and our future, it is time for us to decide whether we are human beings or a planet of sheep.

If you’re interested in learning more old remedies, you should read The Lost Book Of Remedies.

The physical book has 300 pages, with 3 colored pictures for every plant and for every medicine.It was written by Claude Davis, whose grandfather was one of the greatest healers in America. Claude took his grandfather’s lifelong plant journal, which he used to treat thousands of people, and adapted it into this book.

Learn More…

• According to the CDC, 101 children age 0 to 14 have died from influenza, while 31 children have died from COVID-19.
• No evidence exists to support the theory that children pose a threat to educational professionals in a school or classroom setting, but there is a great deal of evidence to support the safety of in-person education.
• According to the CDC, 131,332 Americans have died from pneumonia and 121,374 from COVID-19 as of July 11^th, 2020.
• Had the CDC used its industry standard, Medical Examiners’ and Coroners’ Handbook on Death Registration and Fetal Death Reporting Revision 2003, as it has for all other causes of death for the last 17 years, the COVID-19 fatality count would be approximately 90.2% lower than it currently is.

Abstract

The CDC has instructed hospitals, medical examiners, coroners and physicians to collect and report COVID-19 data by significantly different standards than all other infectious diseases and causes of death.

These new and unnecessary guidelines were instituted by the CDC in private, and without open discussion among qualified professionals that are free from conflicts of interest.

These new and unnecessary guidelines were additionally instituted despite the existence of effective rules for data collection and reporting, successfully used by all hospitals, medical examiners, coroners, and physicians for more than 17 years.

As a result, elected officials have enacted many questionable policies that have injured our country’s economy, our country’s educational system, our country’s mental and emotional health, and the American citizen’s personal expression of Constitutionally-protected rights to participate in our own governance.

***

This paper will present significant evidence to support the position that if the CDC simply employed their 2003 industry standard for data collection and reporting, which has been successfully used nationwide for 17 years; the total fatalities attributed to COVID-19 would be reduced by an estimated 90.2%, and questions would be non-existent regarding schools reopening and whether or not Americans should be allowed to work.

 Is It Safe for Students & Teachers to Return to School?

While the current question gripping the nation is, ‘Should schools reopen in the fall?’ The crucial data available through the CDC, but not being actively promoted by the CDC, asks a different question, ‘Should schools have ever closed in the first place?’

According to the CDC’s Provisional COVID-19 Death Counts By Sex, Age & State, we know the following data from Feb 1, 2020 through July 11^th, 2020.¹

• Three times as many children in the 0 to 14 age demographic have died from influenza (101) compared to COVID-19 (31).
• In the 0 to 14 age demographic, there have been 11,158 reported fatalities from all causes.
• Thus, COVID-19 fatalities in the 0 to 14 age demographic make up a very small 0.0278% of all fatalities.

There is more data when looking at the 15 to 24 age demographic.

• 41.2% more teens and college age young adults, in the 15 to 24 age demographic, have died from pneumonia (267) compared to COVID-19 (157).
• In the 15 to 24 age demographic, there have been 13,721 reported fatalities from all causes.
• Thus, COVID-19 fatalities in the 15 to 24 age demographic make up only 1.14% of all fatalities.

We would not consider closing in-person educational institutions for typical seasonal flu or pneumonia fatalities, so why did we close them when COVID-19 numbers are even lower?

Some have argued for concern and caution in the 25 to 54 age demographic, which makes logical sense, so let’s look again at the current data available.

• More work force age adults, in the 25 to 54 age demographic, have died from pneumonia (9,268) compared to COVID-19 (9,034).
• In the 25 to 54 age demographic, there have been 146,663 reported fatalities from all causes.
• Thus, COVID-19 fatalities in the 25 to 54 age demographic make up 6.16% of all fatalities. The risk of fatality for COVID-19 is on par with the risk of fatality associated with contracting pneumonia, 6.32% in this age demographic.

As encouraging as this data is, we have concerns regarding data collection and reporting that we will discuss below that potentially lowers current fatality counts by 90.2%. It is very possible that state health departments have been instructed by the CDC to over-count COVID fatalities, cases, and hospitalizations, and we will present that evidence shortly.

As we have demonstrated in our first 2 research articles, ‘Are Children Really Recovering 99.9584% of the Time From COVID-19,’ and ‘COVID-19…Have You Heard? There Is Good News!’ there is a very real concern for Americans over the age 50 and especially over 65 years of age. Risk of fatality increases substantially for Americans over age 50 with at least 1 of the following comorbidities: Hypertension, Diabetes, Elevated Cholesterol, Kidney Disease, Dementia, Heart Disease. For perspective, according to the CDC, is the risk of dying from pneumonia higher than the risk of dying from COVID-19 in the 55 to 64 age demographic?

• Pre-retirement adults, in the 55 to 64 age demographic, had a slightly higher chance of dying from pneumonia (16,469) compared to COVID-19 (14,963).
• In the 55 to 64 age demographic, there have been 178,884 reported fatalities from all causes.
• Since February 1^st, fatalities in the 55 to 64 age demographic had a 12% greater risk of dying from pneumonia than COVID-19. COVID-19 fatalities in the 55 to 64 age demographic make up 8.21% of all fatalities and the risk of fatality due to COVID-19 is on par with the risk of fatality associated with contracting pneumonia, 9.21%.

The reported fatalities from the CDC’s Provisional COVID-19 Death Counts by Sex, Age & State webpage:

• Include ‘Probable’ fatalities, unconfirmed by testing, for COVID but not for influenza or pneumonia;
• Does not have accompanying data to detail how many of the fatalities had significant underlying, pre-existing, or comorbid medical conditions;
• Does not have accompanying data to determine if any of the fatalities were treated in a hospital setting and if the subsequent fatality was a result of the treatment.

What this data does reveal, however, is that there is no more significant risk of fatality from contracting the SARS-CoV-2 virus than from contracting influenza for children & teens. It also reveals that there is no more significant risk of fatality from contracting the SARS-CoV-2 virus than there is for developing pneumonia for teens & young adults.

We would not consider prohibiting in-person education when presented with infection rates and medical conditions at these rates, so why are we considering doing it for an infection that poses even less of a risk?

What this data reveals for adults working with children, teens, and young adults is that COVID-19 has a lower risk of fatality than pneumonia and the data suggests that other options should be created for both parents and educational professionals to allow them to choose which style of education they are currently comfortable with (1) traditional in-person education; (2) hybrid online/in-person education; or (3) virtual online education.

There are many questions that need to be addressed with the current situation.

Should each school district give parents and professionals options for in-person education, hybrid education, and/or online education this fall?

Should parents and professionals be allowed to decide where their comfort level is, and act accordingly given the data presented?

Or, should in-person students and professionals be forced to adhere to guidelines from the CDC that not only compromise the educational experience, but also place undue, unrealistic burdens upon them for something with a lower risk than pneumonia for all and influenza for the 0 to 14 age demographic?

We leave these questions for each American to answer.

More Scientific Evidence that It’s Safe for Children to Go Back to School

A genetic project in Iceland revealed interesting findings about children infecting adults.

“Children under 10 are less likely to get infected than adults and if they get infected, they are less likely to get seriously ill. What is interesting is that even if children do get infected, they are less likely to transmit the disease to others than adults. We have not found a single instance of a child infecting parents.”² See this

Sweden kept schools open with no demonstrative adverse impact upon children in school settings compared to Finland that elected to close in-person education.

“Sweden’s decision to keep schools open during the pandemic resulted in no higher rate of infection among its schoolchildren than in neighboring Finland, where schools did temporarily close, their public health agencies said in a joint report…In conclusion, (the) closure or not of schools had no measurable direct impact on the number of laboratory confirmed cases in school-aged children in Finland or Sweden.” ³ See this

A German study found that children are unlikely vectors of COVID-19.

“Prof Reinhard Berner, the head of pediatric medicine at Dresden University Hospital and leader of the study, said the results suggested the virus does not spread easily in schools. “It is rather the opposite,” Prof Berner told a press conference. “Children act more as a brake on infection. Not every infection that reaches them is passed on.” The study tested 2,045 children and teachers at 13 schools — including some where there have been cases of the virus.” ⁴ See this

No evidence of children infecting teachers in Australia.

“Our investigation found no evidence of children infecting teachers…In contrast to influenza, data from both virus and antibody testing to date suggest that children are not the primary drivers of COVID-19 spread in schools or in the community.” ⁵ See this

School environments are low risk and in-person education resuming should begin.

“Our report includes both the primary and secondary school setting, with no transmission in either setting. The limited evidence of transmission in school settings supports the re-opening of schools as part of the easing of current restrictions. There are no zero risk approaches, but the school environment appears to be low risk.” ⁶ See this

Infected children do not spread the virus to other children, teachers or administrators.

“The main new finding is that the infected children did not spread the virus to other children or to teachers or other school staff…there was no secondary transmission of the virus to other children at the school, or from children to teachers.” ⁷ See this

Why Did the CDC Decide to Create Unique Reporting Rules for COVID-19 When Successful Reporting Rules Already Existed?

A double standard exists for how COVID-19 data is collected and reported versus all other infectious diseases and causes of death. Let’s examine three essential data categories; Fatalities, Cases & Hospitalizations for all infectious diseases because there are significant flaws in what constitutes a COVID-19 case, hospitalization and fatality.

On March 24^th, the CDC decided to ignore universal data collection and reporting guidelines for fatalities in favor of adopting new guidelines unique to COVID-19. The guidelines the CDC decided against using have been used successfully since 2003.

After all, based upon the July 11^th data from the CDC’s Provisional COVID-19 Death Counts by Sex, Age & State webpage, if COVID-19 is an epidemic (122,374 Fatalities), then shouldn’t pneumonia (131,372 Fatalities) also be an epidemic?¹

Fatality Data

It is important to note that COVID-19 data is collected and reported by a much different standard than all other infectious diseases and causes of death data. This unique standard for COVID-19 was used, despite the existence of guidelines that have been successfully used since 2003 for data collection across all infective, comorbid, and injurious situations.

This begs the question, if the CDC already has well established guidelines for reporting fatalities then why make up new guidelines for COVID-19?

COVID-19 data is collected and reported based upon the March 24^th National Vital Statistics Systems (NVSS) Guidelines and the April 14^th CDC adoption of a position paper authored by the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE). ^8,9

However, the data for all other causes of death is based upon the 2003 CDC’s Medical Examiners’ & Coroners’ Handbook on Death Registration and Fetal Death Reporting and the CDC’s Physicians’ Handbook on Medical Certification of Death. ^10,11

On March 24^th, the NVSS, under the direction of the CDC and National Institute of Health (NIH), instructed physicians, medical examiners, and coroners that COVID-19 would:

• be recorded as the underlying cause of death “more often than not;”
• be recorded as the cause of death listed in Part I of the death certificate even in assumed cases;
• be recorded as the primary cause of death even if the decedent had other chronic comorbidities. All comorbidities for COVID-19 would be listed now in Part II, rather than in Part I as they had been since 2003 for all other causes of death.

March 24^th, 2020 – NVSS COVID-19 Alert No. 2

“Will COVID-19 be the underlying cause? The underlying cause depends upon what and where conditions are reported on the death certificate. However, the rules for coding and selection of the underlying cause of death are expected to result in COVID19 being the underlying cause more often than not.”

“Should “COVID-19” be reported on the death certificate only with a confirmed test? COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death. Certifiers should include as much detail as possible based on their knowledge of the case, medical records, laboratory testing, etc. If the decedent had other chronic conditions such as COPD or asthma that may have also contributed, these conditions can be reported in Part II. (See attached Guidance for Certifying COVID-19 Deaths)”

It’s worth noting that Part I of a death certificate is the immediate cause of death listed in sequential order from the official cause on line item (a) to the underlying causes that contributed to death in descending order of importance on line item (d), while Part II is/are the significant conditions NOT relating to the underlying cause(s) in Part I.

As we will demonstrate shortly, comorbid conditions are always listed on Part I of death certificates as causes of death per the 2003 CDC Handbook, so that accurate reporting can be developed. Comorbidities are seldom placed in Part II, as this is typically the place where coroners and medical examiners can list recent infections as underlying factors.

Prior to the March 24^th and April 14^th decisions, any comorbidities would have been listed in Part I rather than Part II and initiating factors, like recent infections, would have been listed on the last line in Part I or in Part II.

Why does this matter?

This matters because the Part I causes of death are statistically recorded for public health reporting, while Part II does not hold nearly the same statistical significance in reporting. This March 24^th NVSS guideline essentially allows COVID-19 to be the cause of death when the actual cause of death should be the comorbidity according to the industry-standard 2003 CDC Handbook. It can be a bit confusing, so we will present an example shortly for clarity.

On April 14^th, the CDC in conjunctions with approval from the National Institute of Health (NIH), adopted the CSTE position paper that authorized the following guidelines for data collection and reporting which are completely unique for COVID-19 and had never been done before which:

• allowed for ‘Probable’ cases, hospitalizations, and fatalities [section A5];
• created a pathway for the minimum standards of evidence to be a single cough [section A1];
• created a pathway for completely bypassing laboratory testing in order to classify a COVID-19 case as positive [section A5];
• created a pathway for the minimum standard of evidence necessary for determining a COVID-19 case to be positive as being within 6 feet of a ‘Probable’ case for 10 minutes or traveling to an area with outbreaks [section A3];
• declined to create any methodology for ensuring the same COVID-19 positive person would not be counted multiple times as a new case upon being tested multiple times [section B].

April 14^th, 2020 – CDC Adopts CSTE Interim-20-ID-01

Title: Standardized surveillance case definition and national notification for 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19)

“VII. Case Definition for Case Classification

1. Narrative: Description of criteria to determine how a case should be classified.

A1. Clinical Criteria At least two of the following symptoms:

• fever (measured or subjective), chills, rigors, myalgia, headache, sore throat, new olfactory and taste disorder(s) OR
• At least one of the following symptoms: cough, shortness of breath, or difficulty breathing OR
• Severe respiratory illness with at least one of the following:
  • Clinical or radiographic evidence of pneumonia, or
  • Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). AND
  • No alternative more likely diagnosis

A2. Laboratory Criteria Laboratory evidence using a method approved or authorized by the FDA or designated authority:

Confirmatory laboratory evidence:

• Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in a clinical specimen using a molecular amplification detection test

Presumptive laboratory evidence:

• Detection of specific antigen in a clinical specimen
• Detection of specific antibody in serum, plasma, or whole blood indicative of a new or recent infection*

*serologic methods for diagnosis are currently being defined

A3. Epidemiologic Linkage One or more of the following exposures in the 14 days before onset of symptoms:

• Close contact** with a confirmed or probable case of COVID-19 disease; or
• Close contact** with a person with:
  • clinically compatible illness AND
  • linkage to a confirmed case of COVID-19 disease.
• Travel to or residence in an area with sustained, ongoing community transmission of SARS-CoV2.
• Member of a risk cohort as defined by public health authorities during an outbreak.

**Close contact is defined as being within 6 feet for at least a period of 10 minutes to 30 minutes or more depending upon the exposure. In healthcare settings, this may be defined as exposures of greater than a few minutes or more. Data are insufficient to precisely define the duration of exposure that constitutes prolonged exposure and thus a close contact.

A4. Vital Records Criteria A death certificate that lists COVID-19 disease or SARS-CoV-2 as a cause of death or a significant condition contributing to death.

A5. Case Classifications

Confirmed:

• Meets confirmatory laboratory evidence.

Probable:

• Meets clinical criteria AND epidemiologic evidence with no confirmatory laboratory testing performed for COVID-19.
• Meets presumptive laboratory evidence AND either clinical criteria OR epidemiologic evidence.
• Meets vital records criteria with no confirmatory laboratory testing performed for COVID19.

1. Criteria to distinguish a new case of this disease or condition from reports or notifications which should not be enumerated as a new case for surveillance

• N/A until more virologic data are available”

Additionally, the CSTE position paper gave no definition as to what constitutes a COVID-19 recovery for all state and country health departments to follow.

While the, seemingly independent, CSTE position paper was authored by five accomplished professionals from the Idaho, Alabama, Michigan, Hawaii, and Iowa state health departments; 5 of the 7 Subject Matter Experts who contributed to the position paper were directly employed by the CDC which raises ethical concerns about conflicts of interest.

It stands to reason that each of the professionals who contributed to the CSTE position paper were aware of the existence of the 2003 guidelines for reporting fatalities.Additionally, no subject matter experts from universities, medical examiners, coroners or private industry appear to have been consulted on the production of this highly questionable document.

So, why does all of this matter?

It matters for several reasons:

• The minimum standards defy accepted professional standards for differential diagnosis in medical practice;
• Section A3 empowers contact tracers, who are unlikely to have any medical training, to illegally diagnose patients without even examining them, which is a violation of medical law in every state and constitutes practicing medicine without a license;
• The CSTE position paper opens the door for any fatality to be listed as COVID-19 without any reasonable standard of evidence, while mandating that comorbidities simultaneously be deemphasized and moved to Part II, so as not to appear as a cause of death;
• Simultaneous testing for all other infectious diseases, with similar respiratory symptom profiles like Coccidioidomycosis for Valley Fever, is not required. We therefore have no clinical or statistical means of knowing if a co-infection was present along with a positive finding of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in the differential diagnosis process.

Why was all of this necessary with a successful methodology for physicians, medical examiners, and coroners already in place since 2003?

The CDC’s 2003 Handbook suggests that COVID-19 should be listed either at the bottom of Part I or in Part II of a death certificate, rather than as the top line item in Part I, despite Dr. Fauci’s describing in multiple press interviews, that medical examiners and coroners would not be doing this, which disregards any knowledge of the March 24^th orders by the NVSS to do so.

Let’s review what would have happened had the CDC decided to use their 2003 Handbook rather than adopting new rules for COVID-19 reporting.

2003 – CDC Medical Examiners’ and Coroners’ Handbook on Death Registration

“Because statistical data derived from death certificates can be no more accurate than the information provided on the certificate, it is very important that all persons concerned with the registration of deaths strive not only for complete registration, but also for accuracy and promptness in reporting these events.”.

“The principal responsibility of the medical examiner or coroner in death registration is to complete the medical part of the death certificate.”

“The cause-of-death section consists of two parts. Part I is for reporting a chain of events leading directly to death, with the immediate cause of death (the final disease, injury, or complication directly causing death) online (a) and the underlying cause of death (the disease or injury that initiated the chain of events [SARS-CoV-2 in this case] that led directly and inevitably to death) on the lowest used line. Part II is for reporting all other significant diseases, conditions, or injuries that contributed to death but which did not result in the underlying cause of death given in Part I.”

Under these guidelines, the highest COVID-19 could be listed in the presence of an established comorbidity would be Part I, line item (d) or lower, or in Part II.

“The cause-of-death information should be the medical examiner’s or coroner’s best medical OPINION. Report each disease, abnormality, in-jury, or poisoning that the medical examiner or coroner believe adversely affected the decedent.”

The ability for medical examiners and coroners to register their best medical opinion was neutered by the March 24^th NVSS guidelines.

“If an organ system failure (such as congestive heart failure, hepatic failure, renal failure, or respiratory failure) is listed as a cause of death, always report its etiology on the line(s) beneath it (for example, renal failure due to Type I diabetes mellitus or renal failure due to ethylene glycol poisoning).”

Based upon the 2003 CDC Handbook, Part I for COVID-19 fatalities should contain any comorbidities first. Under these guidelines, COVID-19 would only be listed as a cause of death in Part I if there were no comorbidities and therefore the fatality counts for COVID-19 would be much lower than they currently are.

Here is the comorbidity data we have compiled from the only 7 states currently publishing this data in a manner that can be analyzed statistically. Note that 90.2% of fatalities had at least 1 comorbidity and therefore these fatalities would not be counted as COVID-19 fatalities under the 2003 CDC Handbook, but instead are counted based upon the NVSS guidelines and CSTE position paper adopted by the CDC on March 24^th and April 14^th respectively.

Keep in mind that while the number of fatalities with published comorbidity data is significant (N=44,562), we were unable to obtain comorbidity information on all fatalities from all states because the majority of states have not been publishing this data, if they are collecting it at all.

If each state were publishing comorbidity data, and if each state used the CDC’s 2003 Revision Handbook as they do for all other death certificates, the actual COVID-19 fatality totals would be approximately 90.2% LOWER than they currently are based upon an extrapolation of the data that is available.

2003 – CDC Medical Examiners’ and Coroners’ Handbook on Death Registration [continued]

“Only one cause is to be entered on each line of Part I. Additional lines should be added between the printed lines when necessary. For each cause, indicate in the space provided the approximate interval between the date of onset (not necessarily the date of diagnosis) and the date of death. For clarity, do not use parenthetical statements and abbreviations when reporting the cause of death. The underlying cause of death should be entered on the LOWEST LINE USED IN PART I. The underlying cause of death is the disease or injury that started the sequence of events leading directly to death or the circumstances of the accident or violence that produced the fatal injury. In the case of a violent death, the form of external violence or accident is antecedent to an injury entered, although the two events may be almost simultaneous.”

These clear guidelines from the CDC’s 2003 Handbook state that the highest COVID-19 would be able to be placed for comorbid conditions is on the lowest line in Part I without the March 24^th NVSS guidelines and April 14^th CSTE position paper. This means that while the SARS-CoV-2 virus may have initiated the process of death, the cause was actually the comorbidity as it should always be.

Additionally…

Without the March 24^th NVSS guidelines or the April 14^th CSTE position paper adoption, COVID-19 would NOT be allowed to be listed on a death certificate at all WITHOUT A POSITIVE LAB TEST or confirmatory pathologic autopsy findings.

Let’s take a look at how different the cause of death reporting can be for similar situations.

If we have a person who died from renal failure due to type 1 diabetes mellitus, but in scenario 1 the initiating factor was the H1N1 influenza virus while in scenario 2 the initiating factor was the SARS-CoV-2 virus, how would that look?

Here are 2 visuals of just how different these 2 very similar situations are to be recorded based upon March 24^th NVSS guidelines.

Scenario 1 – H1N1 Influenza as Initiating Factor

Scenario 2 – COVID-19 as Initiating Factor

As you can see, these similar situations are reported dramatically different. As a result, the statistical reporting for fatalities will be dramatically different as well, for all people with known comorbidities, which makes up approximately 90.2% of all reported fatalities due to COVID-19 according to the US State Health Departments reporting this data.

Why is all of this important?

The CDC knew in early March that the vast majority of fatalities would be in people over 60 with comorbidities according to Dr. Nancy Messonnier, director of the CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases and reported by CNBC on March 9^th, 2020.⁶

“This seems to be a disease that affects adults and most seriously older adults. Starting at age 60, there is an increasing risk of disease and the risk increases with age. People with diabetes, heart disease, lung disease and other serious underlying conditions are more likely to develop “serious outcomes, including death.”

Why would the CDC adopt new rules for reporting fatalities when they already had successful guidelines?

Was the CDC and Dr. Fauci, the head of the NIAID (a division of the NIH), aware of the potential implications that adopting these guidelines would create in terms of fatality reporting?

And perhaps the most important question of them all… Is SARS-CoV-2 a naturally evolved microorganism or is it the result of gain of function experiments?

These are questions Americans deserve answers to, for hopefully obvious reasons.

Why does this matter for schools reopening?

The fatality data being reporting has clearly been inflated in multiple ways due to the adoption of recording and reporting rules that were unnecessary. As a result, this has greatly skewed public perception of this crisis, cost more than 50 million Americans their jobs, and created a tremendous amount of undue fear regarding the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Even with the March 24^th NVSS guidelines and the April 14^th adoption of the CSTE position paper, COVID-19 has a lower risk of fatality than pneumonia in all age demographics and a lower risk of fatality than influenza in the 0 to 14 age demographic according to the CDC.

If the fatality data reporting guidelines inflate COVID-19 fatalities while holding all other causes of death to a different and higher standard, then why are we even considering forcing children to study from home?

That is a question every American must answer for themselves as well.

So Why Are Cases & Hospitalizations Continuing to Rise?

It is important to understand the difference between SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19. The scientific name of the new strain of coronavirus is SARS-CoV-2.  After much naming instability, the disease caused by this new strain is called Coronavirus Disease 2019 or COVID-19.

Thus, it is important to realize that once testing is done to determine whether a person is positive for SARS-CoV-2, the patient must then have symptoms consistent with COVID-19 before being counted as a COVID case.

Professional medical training and practice dictates that for a person to be diagnosed with an infection, they must have lab evidence of the infection AND symptoms to support the diagnosis.

This distinction is very important as a person can have detectable levels of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and NOT present with any symptoms. This is possible in the case of a person who had contracted the virus as much as 6 weeks prior, gone through natural adaptive immunity processes to defeat the infection, and now has harmless remnant proteins still present in their body.

For example, an individual may test positive for Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) and not have AIDS. Similarly, an individual may test positive for SARS-CoV-2 and not have COVID-19.

In order for a case to be classified as COVID-19 there must be symptoms to support the diagnosis by a licensed professional. Lab testing alone and symptom evaluation alone violates accepted professional standards for differential diagnosis in medical practice.¹³

In addition to what is stated above, there are several factors to consider regarding why we are seeing increases in cases and hospitalizations in addition to what was stated above:

• The dramatic increase in testing;
• Contact Tracers diagnosing Americans as COVID-19 positive without examination, evidence, or even being required to speak to a patient as allowed for by the CDC’s April 14^th adoption of the CSTE’s position paper;
• June 13^th CDC changes to hospital guidelines for testing in hospitals that creates the opportunity for the same patient being counted multiple times as a new case;
• Confirmed & Probable COVID-19 hospitalized cases being counted as COVID-19 cases regardless of the reason for their admission into the hospital.

Increases in Testing

This graph shows how the number of PCR molecular tests processed continues to increase almost daily. Monthly Testing Averages:

• April – 167,477 people tested per day;
• May – 345,361 people tested per day;
• June – 547,480 people tested per day;
• July – 696,396 people tested per day thru July 12^th.

More people are testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 per day, and thousands more people are being tested per day. Due to the significant increase in number of people being tested, the overall percentage of people testing positive dropped from a peak of 19.6% on April 12^th to 7.8% on July 12^th.

Contact Tracers Can Diagnose Without Contact

During our investigation, one of the most concerning pieces of information our team has come across is the empowerment of Contact Tracers (CTs) to diagnose without medical training, medical licensure, medical examination, or even being required to make physical or verbal contact with the prospective patient as allowed for by the CDC’s April 14^th adoption of the CSTE position paper [section VII.A3].⁹

The CDC followed up this dubious authorization with guidance issued on June 17^th, 2020.¹⁴

“The development and implementation of a robust data management infrastructure will be critical for assigning and managing investigations, linking clients with confirmed and probable COVID-19 to their contacts, and evaluating success and opportunities for improvement in a case investigation and contact tracing program. COVID-19 case investigations will likely be triggered by one of three events:

1. A positive SARS-CoV-2 laboratory test or
2. A provider report of a confirmed or probable COVID-19 diagnosis or
3. Identification of a contact as having COVID-19 through contact tracing

If testing is not available [or declined], symptomatic close contacts should be advised to self-isolate and be managed as a probable case. Self-isolation is recommended for people with probable or confirmed COVID-19 who have mild illness and are able to recover at home.”

What this reveals is that CTs are authorized to diagnose a New COVID-19 case without being medically trained or legally licensed to do so. Even more concerning is that CTs are empowered to do this without needing to examine or take a health history from a prospective patient.

If a person does not answer the call from a CT, then they are able to list that person as a Probable COVID-19 case and report their findings to their state health department for inclusion in reporting data.

This explains why Probable Cases have been rising daily since June 17^th despite the dramatic increases in testing.¹⁵

Changes In Hospital Testing Protocols & The Inclusion Of COVID-19 Probable Hospitalizations

With the abundant availability of PCR molecular testing, most hospitals in the country have adopted the policy of testing all hospital admissions for the SARS-CoV-2 virus upon admission to the hospital regardless of why that person is being admitted.

People admitted for elective surgeries are required to be tested. People admitted for injuries or accidents are being tested. People in need of care for chronic comorbid conditions are being tested, and so forth.

If a person tests positive for presence of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, regardless of symptom presentation or reason for admission, they are now officially counted as a COVID-19 hospitalized case. This change in policy, never undertaken before, makes it now almost impossible to distinguish between people being admitted for COVID-19 symptoms and people being admitted who simply tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, but are being admitted for reasons other than COVID-19 symptomatology.

As a result, under this methodology of data categorization, hospital numbers have risen and will continue to rise until there are substantive changes to how data is being reported that allows everyone to clearly distinguish between the two vastly different new patient scenarios.

Even worse is the reality that an unacceptable percentage of hospital admissions are ‘Probable’ (‘Suspected’) and not lab confirmed. This is exemplified in this graphic provided by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health on July 12^th that shows roughly 70-80% of COVID-19 Hospital Admissions are not lab confirmed. Be aware that the Massachusetts Department of Public Health is doing one of the best jobs in reporting among all state health departments despite the highly questionable CDC guidelines they are being confined to adhere to.

These severe breakdowns in accurate, clear data collection and reporting were initiated by the CDC on March 24^th, reinforced again in their adoption of the CSTE’s April 14^th position paper, and then reinforced yet again with a June 13^th update of hospital testing guidelines for the safe discharge of COVID-19 positive patients.^16,17

Per the CDC June 13^th Update:

“Recommended testing to determine resolution of infection with SARS-CoV-2

A test-based strategy, which requires serial tests and improvement of symptoms, can be used, as an alternative to a symptom-based or time-based strategy, to determine when a person with SARS-CoV-2 infection no longer requires isolation or work exclusion.  This strategy could be considered in three situations: Discontinuation of Transmission-Based Precautions and Disposition of Patients with COVID-19 in Healthcare Settings

Test-based strategy

• Resolution of fever without the use of fever-reducing medications and
• Improvement in respiratory symptoms (e.g., cough, shortness of breath), and
• Negative results of an FDA Emergency Use Authorized COVID-19 molecular assay for detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA from at least two consecutive respiratory specimens collected ≥24 hours apart (total of two negative specimens)”

What this reveals is that if a person is admitted to a hospital, they must be tested every 24 hours until they produce 2 consecutive negative PCR tests regardless of whether they have the serologic presence of antibodies or there is no serologic detection of the virus in the bloodstream.

 Why is this important?

This is important because the PCR test has been reported to be inaccurate 50% of the time it is used according to Dr. Lee as reported in the International Journal of Geriatrics and Rehabilitation published on July 17^th, 2020. In this study, up to 30% of PCR tests resulted in false positives and up to 20% resulted in false negatives, which means that PCR may only be accurate for detection 50% of the time it is used.¹⁸

The generally accepted medical standard for lab test accuracy is 95% and above, but in a situation like this 70 to 80% would likely be deemed as acceptable by most medical professionals.

Additionally, the mere presence of viral nucleic acids does not necessarily indicate active viral infection nor viral replication. Nucleic acid fragments from a viral entity may exist in patient tissues because of immunological destruction of the virus, which is supposed to happen and potentially occurred several weeks prior to specimen collection. What PCR testing may be discovering is not evidence of a current infection, but rather the remnants of a prior infection that the patient has already recovered from.

Conclusion

Clearly, we have to make significant changes to our case, hospitalization, and fatality definitions, data collection and reporting as a country, if the ultimate goal is accuracy in reporting for policy-level decision making in the best interests of all Americans.

Had the CDC used the well-established and successful methodology for recording COVID-19 related fatalities, as it does for all other causes of death, the fatality counts would be significantly lower.

How much lower?

We may never know. However, when we base our estimates upon the comorbidity data being published by New York, Massachusetts, Georgia, Oklahoma, Utah, Pennsylvania and Iowa the data suggests that accurate fatality rates could drop by approximately 90.2%.

How much would using the Medical Examiners’ and Coroners’ Handbook on Death Registration and Fetal Death Reporting rather than the March 24^th NVSS guidelines and the April 14^th CSTE position paper completely reshape the way we see COVID-19?

How much would it address the fear of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and the implications, which so many media outlets have attempted to instilled within us?

And would any objective American have any worry for our children’s safety if they knew that pneumonia and influenza have each claimed more lives in the 0 to 14 age demographic than COVID-19?

We have serious professional and ethical concerns with empowering people with limited medical training to diagnose any medical condition without examining the prospective patient and reviewing a full health history with them as Contact Tracers are doing.

We have serious professional and ethical concerns with hospitals admitting patients as COVID-19 case without definitive evidence.

We have serious professional and ethical concerns with licensed physicians and nurses being required to classify all hospitalizations as COVID-19, regardless of reason for admission, or if the patient tests positive or is suspected to have contracted the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Making this a requirement prevents trained medical professionals from using their best judgment in determining diagnosis.

We have serious professional and ethical concerns with COVID-19 having much lower standards of evidence and much broader categories for inclusion into reports as Probable compared to reporting for all other infectious diseases.

In medicine, we are taught not to guess when we can know, but that basic ethos for safe practice and the sharing of accurate information has not been applied to COVID-19 in our professional opinions.

And we have serious professional and ethical concerns with medical examiners and coroners being required to list COVID-19 on Part I line item (a) as the cause of death in the clear presence of comorbid conditions with verifiable medical history, rather than trusting our healthcare professionals to do the job they are trained to do and have done so well, for so many years.

Medical examiners and coroners play a crucial role in saving lives by producing accurate data licensed healthcare professionals to use in clinical settings.

There is something to be learned in every loss of life. Sadly, what we are learning with COVID-19 is that accuracy in reporting does not matter as much as inflating the data and fanning the flame of fear.

Should American children, educational professionals, small business owners, workers and our country as a whole have to suffer because critical mistakes were made in the adoption of unnecessary new reporting rules?

Should public health officials, with no expertise in public education and economic policy, be given unchecked power to create policies that adversely impact the mental, emotional, and social development of our children, suppress small-business economic opportunity, and threaten to destroy the livelihoods of tens of millions of Americans in the name of safety?

These are questions all Americans deserve an answer to and questions we all must answer for ourselves…our collective future depends upon it.

***

Updated Probability of Recovery & Age Demographics Data

Probability of Recovery continues to improve for all age demographics from our initial June 21^stresearch article.

While the relative percentages of Fatalities with 1+ Comorbidity and age demographics for Fatalities, Hospitalizations, and Cases remains relatively unchanged, there has been a slight redistribution of age demographic percentages for cases, as more children in the Age 0 to 19 demographic are being tested for COVID-19.

Funding & Conflict of Interest Statement

This statistical research paper has been developed, composed and published without any funding, and thanks in part to a strictly, 100% volunteer community effort made by a diverse array of qualified professionals who care deeply about children and the health of every American. The authors of this paper confirm no conflicts of interest, financial, political or otherwise.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Notes

1. CDC: Provisional COVID-19 Death Counts By Sex, Age, & State https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Death-Counts-by-Sex-Age-and-S/9bhg-hcku
2. Highfield, Roger; Coronavirus: Hunting Down COVID-19; Science Museum, 4-27-20: https://www.sciencemuseumgroup.org.uk/blog/hunting-down-covid-19/
3. Soderpalm, Helena: Sweden’s health agency says open schools did not spur pandemic spread among children; Reuters: 7-15-20: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-sweden-schools-idUSKCN24G2IS
4. Huggler, Justin; German Study Finds no Evidence Coronavirus Spreads in Schools; The Telegraph; 7-13-20: https://news.yahoo.com/german-study-finds-no-evidence-164704005.html
5. National Centre for Immunisation Research and Surveillance (NCIRS) COVID-19 in schools – the experience in NSW; 26 April 2020: http://ncirs.org.au/sites/default/files/2020-04/NCIRS%20NSW%20Schools%20COVID_Summary_FINAL%20public_26%20April%202020.pdf
6. Laura Heavey, Geraldine Casey, Ciara Kelly, David Kelly, Geraldine McDarby; No evidence of secondary transmission of COVID-19 from children attending school in Ireland, 2020; EuroSurveillance, Volume 25, Issue 21, 28/May/2020; https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.21.2000903#html_fulltext
7. COVID-19 IN PRIMARY SCHOOLS: NO SIGNIFICANT TRANSMISSION AMONG CHILDREN OR FROM STUDENTS TO TEACHERS; 6-23-20; https://www.pasteur.fr/en/press-area/press-documents/covid-19-primary-schools-no-significant-transmission-among-children-students-teachers
8. NVSS: National Vital Statistics System COVID-19 Alert No. 2 https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/coronavirus/Alert-2-New-ICD-code-introduced-for-COVID-19-deaths.pdf
9. CSTE: Council of State & Territorial Epidemiologists; Standardized surveillance case definition and national notification for 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19); Interim-20-ID-01; https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.cste.org/resource/resmgr/2020ps/Interim-20-ID-01_COVID-19.pdf
10. CDC: Medical Examiners’ and Coroners’ Handbook on Death Registration and Fetal Death Reporting, 2003 Revision https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/misc/hb_me.pdf
11. CDC: Physicians’ Handbook on Medical Certification of Death, 2003 Revision https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/misc/hb_cod.pdf
12. Kopecki, Higgins-Dunn, Miller; CDC tells people over 60 or who have chronic illnesses like diabetes to stock up on goods and buckle down for a lengthy stay at home; CNBC, March 9, 2020, https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/09/many-americans-will-be-exposed-to-coronavirus-through-2021-cdc-says.html
13. World Health Organization; Naming the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and the virus that causes it; https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/technical-guidance/naming-the-coronavirus-disease-(covid-2019)-and-the-virus-that-causes-it
14. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC); Data Management for Assigning and Managing Investigations; https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/php/contact-tracing/contact-tracing-plan/data-management.html
15. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC); Cases in the U.S.; https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/cases-in-us.html
16. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC); Overview of Testing for SARS-CoV-2; https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/testing-overview.html
17. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC); Discontinuation of Transmission-Based Precautions and Disposition of Patients with COVID-19 in Healthcare Settings (Interim Guidance); https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/disposition-hospitalized-patients.html
18. Sin Hang Lee; Testing for SARS-CoV-2 in cellular components by routine nested RT-PCR followed by DNA sequencing; International Journal of Geriatrics and Rehabilitation 2(1):69- 96, July 17, 2020 http://www.int-soc-clin-geriat.com/info/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Dr.-Lees-paper-on-testing-for-SARS-CoV-2.pdf

State & Territory Health Departments

19. Alaska Department of Health & Social Services Coronavirus Response: https://coronavirus-response-alaska-dhss.hub.arcgis.com/
20. Alabama’s COVID-19 Data and Surveillance Dashboard: https://alpublichealth.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/6d2771faa9da4a2786a509d82c8cf0f7
21. https://www.healthy.arkansas.gov/programs-services/topics/novel-coronavirus
22. Arkansas Department of Health: https://azdhs.gov/preparedness/epidemiology-disease-control/infectious-disease-epidemiology/covid-19/dashboards/index.php
23. California COVID-19 Dashboard: https://public.tableau.com/views/COVID-19PublicDashboard/Covid-19Hospitals?:embed=y&:display_count=no&:showVizHome=no
24. Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment, Case Data: https://covid19.colorado.gov/data/case-data
25. Connecticut COVID-19 Response: https://portal.ct.gov/Coronavirus
26. Government of the District of Columbia, Coronavirus Data: https://coronavirus.dc.gov/page/coronavirus-data
27. State of Delaware COVID-19 Data Dashboard: https://myhealthycommunity.dhss.delaware.gov/locations/state
28. Florida COVID-19 Response: https://floridahealthcovid19.gov/
29. Georgia Department of Public Health: https://dph.georgia.gov/covid-19-daily-status-report
30. State of Hawaii Department of Health, Disease Outbreak Division: https://health.hawaii.gov/coronavirusdisease2019/
31. Iowa Department of Public Health https://idph.iowa.gov/Emerging-Health-Issues/Novel-Coronavirus
32. Idaho Department of Public Health Dashboard: https://public.tableau.com/profile/idaho.division.of.public.health#!/vizhome/DPHIdahoCOVID-19Dashboard_V2/Story1
33. Illinois Department of Public Health COVID-19 Statistics: http://www.dph.illinois.gov/covid19/covid19-statistics
34. Indiana COVID-19 Dashboard: https://www.coronavirus.in.gov/
35. Kansas Department of Health & Environment, COVID-19 Cases in Kansas: https://www.coronavirus.kdheks.gov/160/COVID-19-in-Kansas
36. Kentucky Cabinet for Health & Family Services: https://govstatus.egov.com/kycovid19
37. Louisiana Department of Health: http://ldh.la.gov/Coronavirus/
38. Massachusetts Department of Public Health COVID-19 Dashboard -Dashboard of Public Health Indicators: https://www.mass.gov/info-details/covid-19-response-reporting
39. Maryland Department of Health: https://coronavirus.maryland.gov/
40. Maine Center for Disease Control & Prevention: https://www.maine.gov/dhhs/mecdc/infectious-disease/epi/airborne/coronavirus/index.shtml
41. Michigan Coronavirus Data: https://www.michigan.gov/coronavirus/0,9753,7-406-98163_98173—,00.html
42. Minnesota Department of Health: https://www.health.state.mn.us/diseases/coronavirus/situation.html
43. Missouri COVID-19 Dashboard: http://mophep.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=8e01a5d8d8bd4b4f85add006f9e14a9d
44. Mississippi State Department of Health: https://msdh.ms.gov/msdhsite/_static/14,0,420.html#caseTable
45. MONTANA RESPONSE: COVID-19 – Coronavirus – Global, National, and State Information Resources: https://montana.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=7c34f3412536439491adcc2103421d4b
46. North Carolina NCDHHS COVID-19 Response: https://covid19.ncdhhs.gov/https://www.health.nd.gov/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/north-dakota-coronavirus-cases
47. Coronavirus COVID-19 Nebraska Cases by the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS): https://nebraska.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/4213f719a45647bc873ffb58783ffef3
48. New Hampshire Department of Health & Human Services: https://www.nh.gov/covid19/
49. New Jersey COVID-19 information Hub: https://covid19.nj.gov/#live-updates
50. https://cv.nmhealth.org/
51. State of Nevada Department of Health & Human Services, Office of Analytics: https://app.powerbigov.us/view?r=eyJrIjoiMjA2ZThiOWUtM2FlNS00MGY5LWFmYjUtNmQwNTQ3Nzg5N2I2IiwidCI6ImU0YTM0MGU2LWI4OWUtNGU2OC04ZWFhLTE1NDRkMjcwMzk4MCJ9
52. New York Department of Health, NYSDOH COVID-19 Tracker: https://covid19tracker.health.ny.gov/views/NYS-COVID19-Tracker/NYSDOHCOVID-19Tracker-Map?%3Aembed=yes&%3Atoolbar=no&%3Atabs=n
53. New York City Coronavirus Data: https://github.com/nychealth/coronavirus-data
54. https://www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/covid/covid-19-data.page
55. Ohio Department of Health: https://coronavirus.ohio.gov/wps/portal/gov/covid-19/home
56. Oklahoma State Department of Health: https://coronavirus.health.ok.gov/
57. Oregon Health Authority: https://govstatus.egov.com/OR-OHA-COVID-19
58. COVID-19 Data for Pennsylvania: https://www.health.pa.gov/topics/disease/coronavirus/Pages/Cases.aspx
59. Puerto Rico Health Statistics: https://estadisticas.pr/en/covid-19
60. Rhode Island COVID-19 Response Data: https://ri-department-of-health-covid-19-data-rihealth.hub.arcgis.com/
61. South Carolina Testing Data & Projections (COVID-19): https://scdhec.gov/infectious-diseases/viruses/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19/sc-testing-data-projections-covid-19
62. South Dakota Department of Health: https://doh.sd.gov/news/Coronavirus.aspx
63. Tennessee Department of Health: https://www.tn.gov/health/cedep/ncov.html
64. Texas Health & Human Services: https://txdshs.maps.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/ed483ecd702b4298ab01e8b9cafc8b83
65. Utah Department of Health: COVID-19 Surveillance: https://coronavirus-dashboard.utah.gov/
66. Virginia Department of Health: https://public.tableau.com/views/VirginiaCOVID-19Dashboard/VirginiaCOVID-19Dashboard?:embed=yes&:display_count=yes&:showVizHome=no&:toolbar=no
67. S Virgin Islands Department of Health: https://doh.vi.gov/
68. Vermont Current Activity Dashboard: https://www.healthvermont.gov/response/coronavirus-covid-19/current-activity-vermont
69. Washington State Department of Health: https://www.doh.wa.gov/Emergencies/Coronavirus
70. Wisconsin Department of Health Services: https://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/covid-19/data.htm
71. West Virginia Health & Human Resources: https://dhhr.wv.gov/COVID-19/Pages/default.aspx
72. Wyoming Department of Health: https://health.wyo.gov/publichealth/infectious-disease-epidemiology-unit/disease/novel-coronavirus/covid-19-map-and-statistics/

Sociologist  C. Wright Mills wrote a book in 1956 that (sadly) still resonates today. In his book ‘The Power Elite’ Mills focused on groups and individuals who help to control this Republic for countless generations:

• the “Metropolitan 400”: members of historically notable local families in the principal American cities, generally represented on the Social Register
• “Celebrities”: prominent entertainers and media personalities
• the “Chief Executives”: presidents and CEOs of the most important companies within each industrial sector
• the “Corporate Rich”: major landowners and corporate shareholders
• the “Warlords”: senior military officers, most importantly the Joint Chiefs of Staff
• the “Political Directorate”: “fifty-odd men of the executive branch” of the U.S. federal government, including the senior leadership in the Executive Office of the President, sometimes variously drawn from elected officials of the Democratic and Republican parties but usually professional government bureaucrats

Mills formulated a very short summary of his book:

“Who, after all, runs America? No one runs it altogether, but in so far as any group does, the power elite.”

Now, this was in 1956, but look how what this man indicated is still part of our problem. The Super Rich are  bundled into what many have referred to as ‘The Deep State’. Well, contrary to what Trump has ascertained, and what actually helped him win the election in 2016, is  this ‘ he Deep State’.  Most of our presidents since FDR, excluding the one they knocked off, were either owned, run or influenced by such a grouping of people and organizations. Trump was able to use the actual and honest fears of the ‘Deep State’ to his advantage. Many working stiffs (usually white) saw this phony populist demagogue as the answer to their prayers: A release from that tight grip on their quality of life that this empire has successfully achieved for generations. Of course, this ‘Long Con’ as I call it has been used by the Two Party/One Party system forever it seems. Trump was just the latest, and most lethal I might add, of these devices. He, along with his minions and hidden handlers, is on the verge of finally destroying any memory of a vibrant republican democracy…. a democracy that has been a joke for decades. Getting this gang out of power will perhaps stop the bleeding a bit, but…. the Power Elite march on!

Here’s the kicker: Without an army of lackeys no empire can continue to rule so unfairly.

The Power Elite, categorized by the late C. Wright Mills, are but a few thousand people at most. They always need the ‘boots on the ground’ to maintain control. We see this occurring every day. Those who own the electronic media need a myriad of field reporters, producers, editors, writers, newscasters, hosts and their guests to keep churning out the spin. The corporate world needs top and lower level executives and managers to continue to ‘Sell their shit’ to the public.

Schools of higher learning need compliant school administrators, department heads and teachers to toe the company line of this empire. A few years ago this writer was part of a grass roots movement, The 25% Solution, advocating an immediate 25% cut in military spending, with the savings going back to the states and their localities. I was asked by a sympathetic college professor to give a presentation to a group of three sociology classes. The presentation went very well, and the three teachers were so glad that I came by. I wanted to make this a regular thing, speaking with new classes each semester. They never called or returned my calls! Somebody upstairs got to them, yes? A dear friend of mine, a NYC talk radio host, about 15 years ago had requested to his producer that they get a representative of ‘Physicians for National Health Care’ (forerunner to ‘ Medicare for All’) as a guest. He got the guest on air, and was conducting a comprehensive interview. They were covering things that Senator Sanders was, years later, passionately advocating. At the first commercial break, his producer told him, ear to ear, that he did not want the interview to run any longer. My friend argued for keeping the guest on as the phone lines were lit up with callers wishing to speak to the doctor. No dice! Over!

How powerful is this ‘Power Elite’? Ask yourself this: If you still believe that

A) Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK with that single rifle;

B) The North Vietnamese attacked the USS Maddox in the Gulf of Tonkin, giving LBJ  license for increasing our presence in South Vietnam;

C) James Earl Ray killed MLK and then conveniently escaped to Canada on his own;

D) Sirhan Sirhan killed RFK, though never standing close enough to him, as the autopsy revealed the bullet had to come from inches away;

E) Reagan achieved the release of hostages held by Iran right after being elected in 1980, though Carter could not negotiate it before the election;

F) Saddam Hussein was NOT suckered into his 1990 invasion of Kuwait by Bush Sr. when US ambassador April Glaspie assured him “We do not get involved in territorial  disputes between two nations” (check out two facts: Kuwait was ‘Angle drilling’ oil from Iraqi waters even though Kuwait had supported Iraq’s 10 year war with Iran, their enemy as well, and then wouldn’t erase Iraqi loans owed to Kuwait);

G) We did NOT know in advance of Al Qaeda’s attack on us on 9/11, and it was NOT a false flag operation (seek out the many researched books on 9/11, showing how the government synopsis of it is hogwash);

H) Iraq did have WMDs and was planning on using them on us (despite the actual UN weapons inspections proving the opposite) and our attack, invasion and subsequent occupation was legal and moral;

I) This pandemic is a hoax and a scam, perpetrated to make sure Trump loses the election (despite a mountain of evidence revealing just how contagious and deadly this virus is)….need I go on?

It is simply just not all about politics, as the Two Party/One Party hucksters will allege. No, as much as we working stiffs and the poor and indigent need Trump and his crew to go, that is but the ‘Tip of the Iceberg’. As alluded to earlier in this column, it is urgent that working stiffs being **** by this empire  stand up and say ‘Enough is enough!’

We should stop asking that the Super Rich give back more to us, and that Land Lords do the right thing by their tenants. No, we need to demand that the Mega Millionaires be taxed a Flat 50% on anything they earn over one million dollars each year, with NO deductions!

We need to demand that our local governments take over absentee landlord rental properties through legal eminent domain (at market prices) and then run them nonprofit, with the tenant having an opportunity to one day own the dwelling. With even 20% of each month’s rent going into escrow towards a future down payment, this can be accomplished. Strike Three of demands should be that this obscene military budget, accounting for 50% of our federal taxes, be cut drastically (as explained above), and the majority of our 1000+ foreign military bases be shut down, sending our military personnel home. Why not? The last time I looked it was the politicians who were our ‘Public Servants’, not the Power Elite’s.

This respirator does not protect against the risk of contracting disease or infection. —Warning with a box of N-95 respirators.

You have no right not to be vaccinated. You have no right not to wear a mask. You have no right to open up your business …. If you refuse to be vaccinated, the state has the power to literally take you to a doctor’s office and plunge a needle into your arm. — Alan Dershowitz 

The lockdown, along with the fear campaign with its daily doses of death statistics and warnings of impending spikes, is a full assault being advanced stepwise toward a dystopia of globalist design. The masks that now dominate on faces everywhere place wearers and non wearers into one or the other of two sharply defined categories, each category carrying a list of traits in the minds of those in the opposite category. What a perfect, visible way to split The People into competing teams. Wearers are sheep!; the maskless are public hazards!

Corporate media is pushing the division with all of its corporate gusto, and if one is looking for a stark example of MSM divisiveness, it would be hard to beat this from Politico: “Wearing a mask is for smug liberals. Refusing to is for reckless Republicans”. Simple, no? In such an either-or world, fine distinctions within complex issues are not to be entertained, with the result that life-long leftists, if contending against the mask, are assumed to be solidly in the hardcore, rightwing Trump camp, fit for a MAGA hat.

There are different motives for wearing a “respirator”. It is no secret that some people are so terrified of death that they fear the remotest risk. What a helluva a way to live! Others, despite history’s countless lessons, blindly trust any governmental claim. A huge fraction, though, perhaps a majority, wear them simply to avoid the public shaming program and so opt to go along. As Lewis Lapham wrote in Gag Rule, “The willingness to go along to get along is as American as the Salem witch trials and apple pie.” But when “everybody does it”, the spectacle psychologically reinforces the perception of legitimacy of even the fraudulent. In the current environment, just going along — which is not unrelated to apathy — lends support to an unelected global elite now attending to details of an impending Great Reset that will form the basis of the New Normal.

One commentator states, “The only way to survive in Gates’s ‘new normal’ will be to develop a network of service providers who work off the surveillance grid of Big Brother. These will be small mom and pops and sole proprietors.” Alas, small businesses that might serve an underground economy are, as an objective of the lockdown, failing by the tens of thousands monthly. And now, as authorities with endless financial resources can persuade the upper managements of surviving chains and big box stores, what began as a guideline is hardening into an ironclad policy of “no mask, no entry, no exception” that is enforced throughout a company, all the way down to the minimum-wage guards who see that you get masked, or you are barred from buying food. Checkmate!

The screws tighten every week now as Orwell’s vision plays out in plain sight in workplaces and neighborhoods and on TV. Given the impact of masking on those with respiratory diseases, the “no exception” mandate seems a clear violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and regulations of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), but during the Covid-19 offensive neither agency is enforcing directives. Besides, how many citizens concern themselves with such details when the specter of impending death dominates daily news cycles? And how many will see conformity to governmental demands as the only logical option when the coming global digital currency makes “off the surveillance grid” a quaint concept of a past era?

The thesis of mask versus the antithesis of anti-mask will be settled, one way or another. If the public obediently accepts, as a resolution of the conflict, that we must be masked or be hit with fines and imprisonment, the self-appointed global elite will see that the masses yielded, conclude that they will yield again, and understand that the road is clear to their world of mandated vaccinations. Refusal to wear a mask is now being framed as making oneself a danger to others. That deception appears to have been a success, and it indicates that those in the future who take a militant stand against mass vaccination will be depicted by the Alan Dershowitz’s of the New World as walking bioweapons.

In the the final analysis, the choice to be vaccinated or not, like the choice to be masked or not, will be based less on one’s political or social views than on the understanding and trust one has gained in a powerful government, and by extension, on a willingness to face down a government grown tyrannical. Benjamin Franklyn, when asked what kind of government we were going to get, answered “A republic, if you can keep it”. Given his response, one suspects that he had doubts. If so, it appears his doubts were justified.

Postscript: Catherine Austin Fitts, former bank president, Wall Street investor, and Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, has the history, the connections and the fine eye to make observations worth one’s serious attention. Having “left the establishment” (her words), she explains the history of vaccines vis-à-vis the law, the freedom from liability that is gained for anything that can be labeled a “vaccine”, and the prospect of what might be incorporated into injectables. If you read anything today, make sure it’s this!