THE COVID CRISIS
No Vaccine for Tyranny

The COVID-19 crisis is a story of how the United Nations, through their agency the World Health Organization, and in lockstep cooperation with Governments around the world, and with the full support of mainstream news agencies, attempted to convince humanity of the existence of an invisible virus supposedly carried by people who have no symptoms whatsoever, for which the only way to detect it was from a Government-approved lab test and Government-appointed-officials' data, and from which the only way to save ourselves was supposedly to:
1) allow Government to take up dictatorial powers (renewable at its discretion indefinitely),
2) suspend basic human rights (which were thought to be inalienable)
3) offer voluntarily and later mandate injection, through many areas of society, with Government-approved so-called 'vaccines', despite the risks known and unknown including death
4) authorize no limit of Government spending for these aim, even when far less money than this would have ended world hunger.

Essentially, the same Governments which promote abortion and euthanasia tried to convince us that they consider human life so precious that they will do literally anything to save it, and that COVID-19 is the only disease worth declaring an emergency for.

The majoriy of the Public wholeheartedly agreed, calling trust in government-appointed medical officials a trust in 'science', accusing experts of opposing opinion of putting others in danger, and supporting literally any manner of punishments for dissenters which Government invented, such as exclusions: from visitation of loved ones in institutional care, from travel by commercial carriers, and from employment and licenses they already had.

With media and majority public support, Government implemented unprecedented social (human rights) restrictions designed to keep people in their homes, while many other activities the Government favoured, such as certain protests, air travel, public transit, or living in apartment buildings, were allowed to continue. People weren't even allowed to visit their own mother (in a nursing home) or their own child (in a hospital). The Public was told to wear masks, but not medical-grade ones, and keep an (arbitrary) 6' distance from each other, even though the virus was airborne. Gloves were ignored. Even going out into the back country alone was considered too high risk of spreading disease to allow.

The vast majority accepted the vaccines either on a promise that it would end the crisis and they would be granted their human rights back, or simply because they were told it was mandatory (the same thing which Jim Jones told his congregation to win their willingness to drink poison in Jonestown, Guyana in 1978). The risks of the vaccine itself were muted; officials adamantly promoted the vaccines as 'safe and effective' while publishing data on vaccine deaths and harms, and while admitting that it neither prevents contracting the disease nor transmitting the virus.

None of the health orders made any medical sense. The PCR tests were not calibrated to the virus, only a positive test was used to declare someone as infected no matter how physically healthy they presented, the mandated non-medical masks were much too porus to filter out a virus, the social distancing was much too short to prevent spread of this airborne (areosol transmission, not just droplet, according to the WHO) virus, the lockdowns arbitrarily excluded many close-contact services of convenience (like air travel), the experts refused to acknowledge any other fortification of our immune systems (like prior infection) but vaccination, and the vaccines are admitted to not stop contraction or transmission of the virus so could in no way end the pandemic and should not have been promoted as an end to the pandemic.

Aug 08, 2023: Kids Almost Never Transmitted COVID In Schools; Major New Study Finds

Yet sense was not required. Our society demanded that we all follow 'the rules' no matter how invalid they were. People actually believed that 5 foot distance was absolute danger and 6 foot distance was absolute safety, because that's how it was presented. Anyone who didn't obey was deemed a threat to society, rather than those who instituted these nonsense and harmful rules, or those who created the virus. Those who knew the rules were nonsense but complied anyway usually gave one master excuse: "What can you do" (a rhetorical question, not followed with a question mark, not seeking an answer, but seeking only to make a statement of excuse). And on that excuse they not only accepted all medical recommendations, against our human rights, but re-elected the same leaders who oppressed us.

The more the people complied, the worse the crisis and the more severe the social restrictions became. Officials announced the continuance of the pandemic in successive invisible waves of variants and sub-variants for which there was no end. Somehow this problem was twisted to provide both an excuse for why the vaccine didn't work (as though we should not expect it to work on variants it was not formulated for), as well as an argument of why more vaccination of the same formulation was required (as though we should expect the original formulation to work on variants it was not formulated for).

Due to this mindless compliance, we now live in a world where it's set as precedent, even in so-called democracies, that Government can award themselves all emergency (dictatorial) powers, suspend all human rights, and order us around in any way they want (even how we breathe) at any time they want on any excuse they want, for as long as they want, without beling obligated to heed our will in the matter. In this way the crisis was a big success for a tremendous increase in Government social power. We surrendered human rights for an invisible scare which generations fought to win for us with their blood. Now instead of inalienable human rights we have transient grace periods of rights allowed us by Government and retractable at any time (usually on their next announcement of a virus 'wave'). Having utterly failed our species, we have nothing to pass on to future generations, whom we have left to restart the struggle for human rights again from nothing.

OVERVIEW: Why you should care:

The crisis is not about a virus. The choice of virus or disease to focus on is arbitrary; pathogens are ubiquitus on our world and we have more dangerous ones continually living inside us (especially in our intestine). We shouldn't expect to live in a bubble free of all germs.

It's not about medical protection. The restrictions the Government ordered for COVID-19 were medical nonsense. All of them. But the medical establishment was making too much money off it to object.

It's not about concern for life: there are much bigger killers in our society than COVID-19; we could have used a small fraction of the money we spent on COVID-19 to end much more certain killers (like world hunger). Many of the same governments pretending to care so much about human life that no measure is too far against COVID-19, promote abortion and/or euthanasia.

COVID-19 is about Government testing to see if the People will accept a medical excuse to turn democracy into dictatorship, even to the point of: dictating how we breathe, mandating new and irreversible medical treatments,ordering people out of work for disobedience, and creating a 2-tiered society based on obedience. They instituted so many orders of complete medical nonsense that it seemed they were also testing the degree of nonsense we will tolerate before we object.

So far the answer is 'yes', ie. our society has accepted medical excuses to be used to justify converting our government into totalitarian dictatorship.

This could be the greatest undoing of human rights in history.

More than that, the reason why the Government pushed so hard for as many people as possible vaccinated is unclear. How hard did they push? Hard enough that in many regions, the Public was told they would not be allowed out of 'lockdown' until a certain (high) percentage were vaccinated.

OVERVIEW: Emotional Understanding

Academic arguments aside, what is the human impact? Video: Shot Dead the movie.

Chapter 1: Mindset:

Correct perspective on the COVID crisis requires us to challenge some of our deepest beliefs so that we can receive the information fairly. This chapter is dedicated to clearing out those problems.

Myth: COVID-19 is a serious threat.

Unclear. We should not lose sight of the fact that the COVID crisis is based on a threat (virus) which is not directly perceptible without advanced equipment, so that our belief in its existence requires us to trust in something else which testifies to its existence, such as: Government, certain medical officers, or certain tests. It is worth asking the question, that if we were mislead on the threat of the COVID virus, how would we know, without needing to trust someone else's view? In medicine this issue often arises, because the patient often cannot see what is happening inside their body. One defense is to seek a 'second opinion' from another expert totally unrelated to the first one. We should at least be open to physicans who oppose the mainstream narrative.
Myth: It is wise to trust 'science'.
Wrong. The COVID-19 crisis may appear to be about who trusts ‘science’ and who doesn’t, but it’s important to realize that:
1. ’science’ is about using a method of finding truth, the ‘scientific method’ of repeatable well-constructed experimentation, not about trusting anyone or anything
2. moreover, since the scientific method is an attempt to disprove, rather than prove, hypotheses, it relies on distrust, rather than trust. This means that distrust of any official narrative is more scientific than trust.
3. it is unreasonable and unscientific religion to believe anyone without checking the facts yourself from the original sources, as well as other sources of information on the topic. Unfortunately it is just so much easier to believe anyone who tells you to ‘trust the science’ rather than reading the ‘science’ for yourself.
4. anyone who tells you to ‘trust the science’ who isn’t clearly leading you to read if not reproduce specific research, is actually encouraging you to trust them with the same trust that you trust ‘science’.
Myth: It is wise to always folllow the advice of Experts.

Wrong for 2 reasons:
1. If they're not responsible for the results, the value of their advice drops dramatically. For example, if they've already secured immunity in advance for vaccine harms, as many did in the COVID crisis, it makes the value of their vaccine advice suspect. In the COVID crisis, the Public majority followed expert advice religiously, and punishing resistors, only to be told years later by the experts, even the same experts, that it was a mistake.
2. Also, before we trust people, they must have not only have the right knowledge, but the right intent. A used car salesman tends to have superior knowledge about cars, but it doesn’t mean that they will sacrifice their profit to give you the best vehicle for the lowest price. We must be careful about worshipping experts with excessive trust, especially when there are profit incentives involved.
Did you know that industry once used physicians to promote smoking to the Public?: When Cigarette Companies Used Doctors to Push Smoking. It makes sense: when you realize that a group of people trust experts to guide their decisions, then compliance is only a matter of paying those experts to say whatever you want.

What if the experts have made themselves legally immune for their advice?
Myth: We should only listen to Experts on important topics; we should not accept information from individuals.

No. Inspiration doesn't follow certification. It is possible for someone to have worthwhile evidence or ideas who is not an expert.

We may think that listening only to appointed experts, and refusing to hear others, is a wise defensive path, but it is actually a danger, because in that case:
1. That would be prejudice, which we should know is wrong. It is dehumanizing to dismiss the chance that someone can have a good idea or insight just because they don't have certification, and it is diefication to embrace every idea of certified experts as infallible.
2. We'd are morally responsible for both the information we know and the information we refuse to be informed of. It is much easier to serve this responsibility when you've heard all the information.
3. We'd be mistreating someone who approaches us in love. Refusing to hear someone out who is trying to share information for free and only for your good is a cruel degrading way to treat someone.
In the Bible it says: Now there was found in it a poor wise man, and he by his wisdom delivered the city; yet no man remembered that same poor man. (Holy Bible, KJV, Ecclesiastes 9:15)
Myth: It is wise to trust mainstream news Media the most:
Wrong. Similar to the problem of trusting experts, we shouldn't trust news agencies because we don't know their intent, and the larger they are doens't mean they are more trustworthy or independent but simply suggests they are more profitable or supported. Rather we should hear what all sides have to say, but verify through our own research. In particular, media objectivity could be compromised in one of the following ways:

Government or Consolidated ownership: While seeming independent, most large news agencies today are owned by Government or a very few corporations, and we would be extremely naive to think that this doesn't influence what they report to the Public, especially when there is tremendous potential power and profit to lead the Public a direction of your choice. For example, in this article published on the Harvard University website, a study of 97 countries found that major news agencies were almost always owned by Government or private families, adding that the data suggested a compromise of social freedoms. Another example article is: These 6 Corporations Control 90% Of The Media In America).

This may explain, among other things, the observed phenomenon of many seemingly different mainstream news agencies parroting the exact same script on certain issues (example video: News Anchors Reading From the EXACT Same Script.
Government subsidies: If not outright owned by Government, many other agencies are Government-subsidized. An example article: How Trudeau bought the media: in particular don't miss the 'Press Freedom in Canada' image in that article which quickly shows some of the influences in table form.
Explicit bias: Sometimes news sources will admit that they support one political party. You can expect their news to be biased along those lines.

Myth: that truth is fairly obvious and isn't as important as action.

ABSOLUTELY NOT. If you don't understand the truth correctly, and you act, you may act on the wrong side or for the wrong reason to the wrong ends to remedy the situation, and you are responsible for that. Finding the most correct truth is crucial to intervening towards a truly good end result. Finding the truth tends to require active effort if there are evil forces involved, as evil tends to try either to be denied to exist or to be portrayed as good. If the majority doesn't make a meticulous effort for truth first, they could give majority support to horrible things, such as human rights suspensions.
Myth: Conventional medicine is practiced only for the wellbeing of patients.

No that's not its purpose. Actually, in our society, conventional medicine is a (for-profit) business and it's run like a (for-profit) business. That's why, for example, medical services are often the most expensive services of all (except if paid for and priced by Government), due to business-minded for-profit exploitation of needy people in a very poor position to negotiate. This is presumably why modern medical treatments tend to lead to dependence, either by permanent ongoing medication, or surgically-induced dependency, rather than cure people to their total medical independence. Why cure someone’s when you manage it into a permanent revenue stream?
Myth: Trusting Vaccine Companies is Exactly the same thing as Trusting Science:

No it's not:

Trust in profit-purposed pharmaceutical companies (vaccine manufacturers) cannot be the same thing as trusting the scientific method of finding truth: one is an organization of people and the other is a method, and one pursues profit and the other truth. They are completely different.
Myth: Vaccine adverse events, are always reported to the Government because it's legally required to be.

No, although theoretically possible it is not a realistic belief because:

As humans, we don't always do things just because they're 'required'. For example, people speed on the freeway, despite the posted speed limit, and so much so that, from consistent personal experience, they are often visibly angry (road rage) with you if you won't also speed if you're in the leftmost lane.
Legal, Credibility, and Relationship Risks: There is an obvious shame for the physician who recommended a vaccine to then have to tell the same person, after the fact, that they are worse off for it. They lose credibility in the community, they might get a lawsuit, and the family might never forgive them.
Similarly, if the same hospital is promoting the vaccine, it would be natural for staff to feel pressure to downplay, including fail to report, adverse events. For example, see Defense of the COVID-19 vaccines by the medical community:
There's no money, a loss of time, and not always a patient benefit in filling out the forms to report vaccine adverse events. Sometimes incentive matters when making decisions.
Since vaccine harm isn't its own disease, but manifests through a myriad of many other medical conditions, it's difficult to prove a vaccine reaction and cheaper, faster, easier, and politically safer diagnose and treat the medical event presented without digging for deeper causes. When you have a heart attack, do they tell you it's beause of your diet? That's a lot easier to correlate than a vaccine for which there is no clear test to show the relationship, and which is politically defended.

Let's take an example. Let's say that a patient has a weak heart but they've been stable for a long while. Then they get vaccinated. Then two days later they have a noticable worsening in their heart health. How does even a physician know what role, if any, the vaccine caused in that? What test do they order and who would pay for it? What if the same thing instead happened two months or two years after the vaccine: would the vaccine even be suspected? Are they going to put their license on the line, against political pressure, to say it was definitely a vaccine-related event?
Adverse Events following Vaccination are Known to be Underreported: We can see from this official document from the USA's Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), that "fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported" (page 6, here's an article on the story). Therefore, trusting in officials, we can safely multiply all vaccine adverse events officially reported by 100x to arrive at a conservative number of the total number of vaccine adverse events which actually happened. (It's good of them to provide us with a specific means to calculate it, rather than we just argue about what it might be. Hopefully mainstream news has reported this to you already.)

Myth: Medical Opinion Given by Physicians is Out of their Own Analysis & Experience:

No, that's a naive belief. Most physicians don't formulate pharmaceuticals and don’t do clinical research, so most of what they say about medical theory and safety, especially about something new, must be just parroting information from an authority (such as Government or pharmaceutical company).
Myth: Vaccines, Health care, and Reproductive Health services promote human life.

No. If this were true, why would Mr. Bill Gates (who has become extremely influential worldwide in the realm of vaccination) say, during a TED talk in 21 Feb 2010, that if we did "a really great job" with these three things we could lower world population (which he promotes as a worthy goal to decrease global CO2). Shouldn't these things increase population, if they promote life? Rather they must be surrepticiously purposed to destroy life.
Video clip here: Bill Gates on Population Control and 'NEW VACCINES';
full video here: 2010 FEB 21 Bill Gates TED Zero CO2 by depopulating 10-15% using Vaccines, Health Care, Reproductive Health Services.
Myth: All deaths are always investigated by the coroner to absolute determination of the true cause before it's declared on a death certificate.

Implausable. It simply works against time and costs to do this. Also cause of death is usually just an educated guess rather than any test directly showing what caused the heart to stop.
Myth: Even if it were possible for Government to give any evil order, the people will refuse to obey it or carry it out.

Unfortunately not. History shows that when the Government insititutes an evil order, people have not only obeyed it, and consented to it, but helped enforced it. For example:

In the world-famous Milgram experiment, it was shown that people tend to obey authority even if they believe it will cause certain harm to an innocent person.
‘One Child Nation’ documentary on China reveals how humanity bends under the pressure of institutionalized evil

Myth: There is no way that top decision-makers in government, mainstream media, industry, academia, and organized religion would or could all cooperate on a narrative unless it was the truth because they are all independent.

Actually there is a way. They're not necessarily independent, but only appear to be. They can have powerful personal and professional incentives to go along with even things they know are false. In addition, they could have a secret association which organizes their cooperation, even in lockstep; an example of a secret society is Freemasony: Altiyan Childs Exposes Freemasonry. As an example from a non-medical industry, you might have noticed that virtually all gas stations raise and lower their prices at the same time, and in particular, two gas stations across the street from each other tend to have exactly the same price.
Myth: It’s OK to refuse to hear people out on important issues, even if they offer evidence, because we whould only listen to authorities.

No. What you don't know, or misunderstand, can actually kill you, even if someone else recommended it, and, morally speaking, you are just as responsible for information you refuse to be informed of as information you know well. Regarding this, it says in the Bible (in Hosea 4:6 KJV), as a warning against ignorance and refusing presentations of truth: My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee.
Myth: Vaccines are safe, effective, and are above reproach.

No. Only God our Creator and Parent is so infallible that we can dispense with distrust.

Vaccines have risks: More proof that vaccines are bad for you: Getting vaccinated makes you MORE likely to infect others

If vaccines were safe, Government would not have granted legal immunity to vaccine manufacturers for vaccine harms. The basic idea behind the demand for this immunity was that since vaccines cannot be made safe, either the Government awards immunity or vaccines don't get made.

Myth: Really most of the Official Narrative was a Myth: Top 10 myths told by covid “experts” that are now completely debunked
Truth on our Immune System: We are born equipped with an innate immune system so amazingly powerful and complex that it's second only to our brains in our inabiltiy to understand it all, as this video explains. It succeeds far more often than not to protect us, and it should be respected.

Chapter 2: The Situation:

Chapter 2, Section 1: Scope & Timeline

Scope: Through runaway social response, a new but low-fatality virus was able to cause catastrophic damage to most every sector of society and many basic functions of living.

Here is an interactive official WHO chart showing the monstrously widespread social effects.

Publicly available timelines include:

Totality of Evidence: COVID-19 Pandemic Timeline
CDC:CDC Museum COVID-19 Timeline
Wikipedia: Timeline of the COVID-19 pandemic

Essentially a new virus was reported to have broken out in Wuhan, Hubei, China in December 2019. From there it slowly spread around the world until the United Nations World Health Organization declared it a 'pandemic' on 11 March 2020. World governments did little before that, but after that reacted at approximately the same time with similar measures, and they were unprecedented and severe social restrictions, implemented against human rights and without Public referendum.
Initial reports were:

Received 7 January 2020, Published online 3 February 2020: A new coronavirus associated with human respiratory disease in China, published in Nature.
Published Online January 24, 2020: Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China

Despite not hesitating to impose severe restrictions on their populations domestically, they were extremely reluctant to block fligths including those from China. In other words, world governments tended to wage war against the virus only when it was shown in the domestic population, but not to stop it arriving.

First and most severely effected were the elderly, especially in long-term care homes. It is alleged that many of these elderly deaths attributed to COVID were actually killed by deliberate administration of lethal drug doses.

A UK funeral director John O'Looney speaks out.

It's reported that Mr. John O'Looney was subsequently imprisoned in hospital and had to be broken out: HOSPITAL 'PRISON' BREAK Whistle Blower John O'Looney Narrowly Escapes With His Life From UK Hospital
January 26, 2023: It was all a Lie: How the Establishment tricked the World into a Deadly Experiment that killed Millions through Midazolam Poisoning & COVID Vaccination

Chapter 2, Section 2: COVID-19 Disease & Virus

The COVID-19 Virus:

The COVID-19 Virus Name

The WHO declared two names related to this pandemic: 'COVID-19' is the new disease caused by the 'SARS-CoV-2' (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 ) virus.
What this Virus Is:

It's a kind of 'coronavirus', which is an RNA-based virus which attacks the respiratory system, named for the spike proteins sticking out of its spherical shell. Most of these viruses do not infect humans. According to Wikipedia, its diameter rangers from 60–140 nanometres.
How is the virus spread?
It's airborne, though this is downplayed presumably to not expose the mask mandates too obviously as nonsense. Researchers were concerned about this reality since April 2020 and the WHO finally admitted it publicly in May 2021 (supporting article here). An updated offical page on COVID-19 transmission by the WHO is here: Coronavirus disease (COVID-19): How is it transmitted?. Under the subheading, 'How does COVID-19 Spread Between People?', it says that the COVID-19 virus can spread by any one of: droplets, short-range aerosol, and long-range aerosol.

That means the particles would linger in the air for hours: Airborne transmission of respiratory viruses

That means short-range social distancing (eg. 6 feet / 2 meters) still leaves you in great danger: a false security.
Where did it come from?

SARS-COV-2 Origin Theory 1: Humans contracted it from bats. In the early days of the pandemic, the dominant story on the virus origin was that it emerged from bats and passed to humans where humans bought these creatures live for use in food, specifically at the 'Wet' (live animals for food) Market in Wuhan, some of these allegations even going to the point of alleging bat soup as the vector. As the pandemic went on, however, this story lost credibiltiy and Government and mainstream media showed little or no interest in discussing the source of the virus, content to call the origin 'unknown'. Some example articles include:

This 24 January, 2020 official Lancet article was one of the first references to both a possible origin from the market and the fatality rate: A novel coronavirus outbreak of global health concern
January 27, 2020: Don’t Blame Bat Soup for the Coronavirus
Feb 26, 2020: Both the new coronavirus and SARS outbreaks likely started in Chinese 'wet markets.' Historic photos show what the markets looked like.
12 May 2020: Coronavirus: Bryan Adams attacks China as 'bat eating, virus making' source
May 13, 2020: Why Blaming COVID-19 On 'Bat Eating' And Wet Markets Is Racist And Inaccurate

SARS-COV-2 Origin Theory 2: It escaped or was released from a virus lab, after likely being created by gain-of-function genetic engineering.

Why does it matter where it came from?

Despite an official narrative leading the Public to believe the only people responsible for the pandemic are those who resist social restrictions and vaccines, obviously if the virus was created, deliberately or accidentally, by humans, they bear primary responsibiltiy and they MUST be prevented from doing so again before something EVEN WORSE happens. We must NOT simply 'move on' from the issue before fixing it.

If it did originate in a lab, although whether the virus was created deliberately or accidentally is important morally, legally the lab would be responsible even for accidental harms, and we'd still have the same need to radically change the way we do virus research: to ensure that more dangerous threats than already exist are never created by humans or are immediately destroyed if somehow accidentally created by human activities. They are not to be kept as a someone's property, toy, or bioweapon.

As an aside, anyone who advocates for gun or nuclear weapons restrictions should note that viruses are even more dangerous than these because, unlike most other weapons, they can escape unintentionally through the smallest crack, and once in the population, they take on a life of their own. Humanity has no physical control over viruses once they enter the population, and they don't stop killing in one person or even one area, but expand through the population exponentially. After they've done that they can mutate into other variants which resist whatever natural and pharmaceutical defenses we developed for the first strain, creating a similar problem again and again, to presumably no end.

Despite that a new virus could be created and escape accidentally, no lab admitted that the virus subsequently ravaging the world matched the virus they already had in their lab.

Would scientists actually do something so recklessly endangering of humanity as artificially creating new types of viruses?

Howevermuch we are encouraged to trust the scientific community, scientists actually have been doing gain-of-function research on viruses, which is to deliberately make types of viruses more dangerous than natural. Sources include:

NaturalNews.com:
1. January 01, 2023: Gain-of-function means bioweapon: Musk blasts Fauci for overseeing creation of COVID-19
2. per Scott Gottlieb
3. per Sharri Markson
4. Sen. Josh Hawley
SkyNews: Sharri Markson

What reasons are there to think SARS-COV-2 came from a lab?

This virus which the Public was lead to believe didn't exist before the late 2019 first case, actually is documented to have existed since at least as far back as 2006 in the scientific literature (see the right side of the image below from this article by Chinese scientists):

So straightaway we have a problem with the integrity of the scientists we trust to handle these dangerous viruses: a big problem. They should have admitted that this is not a new virus but something they've been working on for many years already.

Other sources supporting that the 'lab leak' theory on COVID-19 virus origin:

Jan 18, 2024: SARS2 was in a UNC freezer back in 2018
December 20, 2022: House Republicans link COVID-19 origins to a “lab-related incident” in Wuhan
December 5, 2022: 'BIGGEST COVER-UP IN HISTORY' I worked with the Wuhan lab – I tried to warn them & I KNOW Covid was a lab leak
November 28, 2022: Newly Unredacted Emails Confirm Fauci’s Efforts to Conceal COVID Lab Leak Possibility
November 08, 2022: New study shows chances that COVID-19 has a natural origin are less than 1 in 100 million. It's worth nothing that a 1 in 20 chance is considered statistically significant in science.
November 02, 2022: Senate report concludes covid “most likely” leaked from Chinese lab
October 27, 2022: ‘Substantial Evidence’ COVID-19 Result of Wuhan Laboratory ‘Incident’: Senate Report
Senator Rand Paul discusses the evidence that COVID-19 came from a lab in China in this video, including (among other things) that despite testing many thousands of animals, an animal source of COVID-19 was never found.
The theory that the virus emerged directly from a laboratory is one of two official theories presented by the US Intelligence Community at the order of President of the United States, in an unclassified report, on the origin of COVID-19.
1. Here’s a related news article: US Intelligence Submits Report on COVID-19 Origins, Beijing Spreads Propaganda
2. Here’s a copy of the summary document: https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/Unclassified-Summary-of-Assessment-on-COVID-19-Origins.pdf
It's not unheard of for viruses to escape from the labs which do research on them. For example, a COVID-19 variant was shown to escape from a lab in Taiwan on 19 November, 2021, this lab being much more secure (BSL 3) than the one in Wuhan (BSL 2), according to this article: Taiwanese Lab Leak Sharpens Debate on Pandemic Origin
A key supporting article of the animal-original theory was written by scientists who some of which subsequently received millions of dollars in funding from the NIAID, the first draft of which was written on the same day they voiced concerns that it probably did have a lab origin: article January 19, 2022 Scientists Who Were Instrumental to COVID-19 ‘Natural Origin’ Narrative Received Over $50 Million in NIAID Funding in 2020–21. Interesting the same key article actually proposes that the virus could have escaped from a lab (see under its subheading 'Selection during passage').
September 16, 2022: New Lancet report suggests coronavirus may have leaked from US lab
15 Sep, 2022: US impeded independent research into Covid origins – Lancet
DR. RICHARD M. FLEMING,MD.JD TESTIFIES: COVID-19 IS A BIOWEAPON
INCRIMINATING: Moderna, NIAID, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation helped develop SARS-CoV-2 and launched predatory vaccine experiments long before COVID-19
March 21, 2022: NEW: ‘My name is Spartacus’: COVID-19 Deep Dive Part III: Criminal Conspiracy
It’s official: Moderna created Covid-19 in order to grift billions from “vaccine” sales
Jan 26, 2022 Video: COVID origin response has been detrimental to science: Former CDC director
Fauci Caught Paying Off Doctors To Cover Up Wuhan Lab Leak

Proof of deliberate lab creation: Genetic enginering is not accidental, and can be evidenced by analyzing the sequence of the virus and comparing it to wild forms. Regarding that analysis:

November 01, 2022: Enzymatic “fingerprint” proves synthetic origin of covid: STUDY
23 Oct, 2022: New study claims to have determined Covid-19 origin
This article, ‘Damning’ science shows COVID-19 likely engineered in lab: experts, discusses compelling evidence that the virus was engineered, because of a unique 'CGG-CGG' sequence found in it which is not found this virus family in nature but is common in genetic engineering, and because only a lab-engineered virus first appears in natural populations a highly contageous form.

Proof of Pre-COVID Lab Existence: The existence of the SARS-CoV-2 virus before 2019 can be verified or at least evidenced through patents going back many years, allegedly even to 2002. Related sources:

October 30, 2022 : Moderna patented a 19-nucleotide sequence in 2013 that matches the most infectious sequence of SARS-CoV-2
here. Original patent is Patent number:7279327, and detailed article: Patents related to the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus have been filed in the United States since 2002.
February 27th 2022: Watch: Moderna CEO Struggles To Answer Why COVID-19 Contains Patented Gene Sequence
Article 25 Feb 2022: SMOKING GUN: Genetic sequence in COVID-19 spike protein was patented by Moderna three years earlier

The Most Likely Lab Source: The Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV)

There is a virology research center in Wuhan, Hubei, China.

It’s called the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV, located in Jiangxia District, Wuhan, Hubei, China).

Here’s it’s official address showing on its official website:
http://english.whiov.cas.cn/About_Us2016/Contact2016/

Here are pictures of it:
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=institute+of+virology+wuhan&iax=images&ia=images

Here’s its Wikipedia page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wuhan_Institute_of_Virology

Here is an article on how it got started:
https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/how-france-helped-build-chinese-biolab-linked-to-covid-19-and-then-got-burned-by-the-communists/
What kind of research was going on at WIV?
1. Chimera research on Coronaviruses was conducted at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (and perhaps still is).
  
  Here is a link to a public journal article published in 2008 mentioning the ‘Wuhan Institute of Virology’ and ‘chimera’ research on coronaviruses. You won’t have to read farther down than the abstract to confirm those three things (ie. chimera, coronavirus, and Wuhan Institute of Virology):
  
  https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/JVI.01085-07
  Interestingly, the top of that webpage seems to show it as published ‘December 2020’, but if you go to the PDF link you will see the 2008 date as Volume 82, Issue 4, 15 February 2008, Pages 1899-1907; as extra proof you’ll notice that none of the endnote references are dated before 2008.
2. Chimeras are biological beings with tissues or parts from different biological beings combined together.
3. Although certain kinds of subtle chimerism can arise in nature, typically by a fusion of twin zygotes during pregnancy, it is not natural for different species to mix into one being. In fact, the inability of species to interbreen is the very thing which separates species by definition.
Regarding Chinese coronavirus research possibly related to the origin of SARS-CoV-2:

28 September, 2021: Wuhan Institute of Virology Had Plans for Developing Covid-Like Virus | Truth Over News
September 14, 2021: Evidence Points to a Lab Leak; Why Have the Media and Government Ignored It?
8 July 2021Wuhan Lab Hid COVID-19 Relative for Seven Years
This article, The Mysterious Case of the COVID-19 Lab-Leak Theory, provides many details about the kind of virus research done at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, including that not only were they doing chimeric-virus coronavirus experiments there, but, because it was only a Biosafety Level 2 lab, they didn't even wear full PPE when doing it.
A Chinese virologist has come forward to insist that COVID-19 was made in a lab (see here), and it's very interesting to consider what motivation she would have to lie considering that the WHO, the USA (maybe due to allegations of funding), and especially China don't want a story like that.
August 12, 2022: REPORT: Baylor Medicine dean Peter Hotez funded gain-of-function bat coronavirus research in Wuhan
Aug 10, 2022: New book by China expert exposes origins of COVID-19, slams global pandemic response
August 10, 2022: Research group says covid is “biological warfare” by the CCP
July 23, 2022: LAB ORIGIN THEORY CONFIRMED: Trump adviser Deborah Birx says COVID “came out of the box ready to infect” after being released from Chinese lab
03/08/2021: In 2018, Diplomats Warned of Risky Coronavirus Experiments in a Wuhan Lab. No One Listened. . Among other things, this article points out that the WIV had the largest collection of coronaviruses, including the closest related coronavirus to the COVID-19 virus SARS-CoV-2, RaTG13, and had serious operational safety concerns.
Federal health official admits gov’t hid data on COVID origins at request of Chinese scientists
Federal health official admits gov’t hid data on COVID origins at request of Chinese scientists
‘New Details Emerge About Coronavirus Research at Chinese Lab’
NIH Documents Provide New Evidence U.S. Funded Gain-of-Function Research in Wuhan
December 14, 2021 Article: Documents obtained by Judicial Watch blow the lid on Fauci’s illicit bioweapons research schemes
Article: Revealed: Fauci’s office continued to fund Chinese coronavirus research AFTER the COVID-19 pandemic ravaged the globe and killed millions
Video: Military Documents about Gain of Function contradict Fauci testimony under oath
September 07, 2022: Col. Lawrence Sellin: Lab-created COVID-19 is part of China’s biowarfare program
Article: 18 months before the pandemic, scientists in Wuhan, China submitted a proposal to release enhanced airborne coronaviruses into the wild
Article: SM Finally Reports What Everyone Already Knew: ‘Wuhan Lab Leak Theory’ is Now the ‘Most Likely Origin of Covid’ & Covid-19 ‘is an Engineered Virus’
Article: U.S. intel report identified 3 Wuhan lab researchers who fell ill in November 2019
Article: 'I remember it very well': Dr. Fauci describes a secret 2020 meeting to talk about COVID origins
Jan 18, 2022 Article:COVID scientists ignored lab-leak theory to protect ‘international harmony,’ emails reveal
'Early version of Covid-19' is discovered in Chinese lab, fuelling fears that scientists were studying the virus prior to outbreak

Documents Proving Research Agreements:
1. Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence
2. Understanding Risk of Zoonotic Virus Emergence in Emerging Infectious Disease Hotspots of Southeast Asia
Similarly, there are indications that the Omicron variant came from mice, which hints at a lab environment origin, since they are common laboratory experimentation animals. Article: New research appears to confirm that Omicron came from MICE, indicating likely laboratory origins

Allegations of Deliberate Bioweapon Release:

Is COVID-19 a real virus?

Shockingly, and as a discussion which is a departure from the rest of this presentation, there is evidence that the existence of the virus could be a hoax:

Opportunity: The virus is imperceptible to the average person who must remain totally dependent on officals for its detection.
Motive: It's worth noting that Government has a tremendous incentive, by way of dictatorial emergency powers they give themselves, to keep the crisis going, pharmaceutical companies have extreme profit incentive to keep the crisis going for their vaccines and drugs which are mandated by Government and news media without any need to market them, and researchers who depend on grant money being mostly dependent on these two factions..

Why might conspirators perpetrate a false threat rather than a real one? A false threat, or hoax, is far more easy to control, since it is only a question of controlling the public narrative. A real threat, on the other hand, could spin out of anyone's control.
Means: Really the crisis didn't require a real virus:

Re-branding of influenza as COVID-19:

At the same time as COVID-19 diagnoses were skyrocketing, influenza detections plummeted. For example, here are official numbers of influenza detections, per flu season, for Canada, from official Government of Canada 'FluWatch' data:

2018-2019 Laboratory-Confirmed Influenza Detections: 48,818
2019-2020 Laboratory-Confirmed Influenza Detections: 55,379
2020–2021 Laboratory-Confirmed Influenza Detections (height of COVID-19 'pandemic'): 69
2021–2022 Laboratory-Confirmed Influenza Detections (tail end of COVID-19 'pandemic'): 16,126
2022-2023 Laboratory-Confirmed Influenza Detections: (no annual report available at time of this writing)

The official reason for the almost complete absence of detections of flu in 2020-2021 is 'The decreased influenza activity seen in Canada and globally is concurrent with the implementation of non-pharmaceutical public health measures to mitigate the spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).'. Notice that this explanation implies an explnation for the low numbers, ie. public health measures, without actually saying it, so that they technically aren't lying.

It should be fairlly obvious to any thinking person that the almost complete erradication of flu during the height of the COVID-19 'pandemic' was likely due to mere reclassification of influenza cases as COVID-19 cases, especially since: the supposed symptoms are similar, and a diagnosis could be made without a test (not that the test was reliable, anyway). As for the official express or implied explanation, that increased public health measures nearly erradicated the flu, that is not reasonable because if that was true then:

It's a major medical breakthrough worthy of widespread public attention that hygiene alone is so powerful.
It would mean vaccines are unnecesary, at the very least, for flu, good hygiene working far better and without cost or risk.

Other resources on this flu-called-covid nonsense:

Other evidence or testimony supporting the agrument that the COVID-19 pandemic was a hoax:

It's out. Let a scientist speak.
Here is the 10-minute presentation I gave at the Christine Anderson @AndersonAfDMdEP and Eva Vlaardingerbroek @EvaVlaar "Make It Your Business" event in Ottawa on November 29, 2023. @StaceyKauder
Source: https://t.co/HPmbgCKFyd pic.twitter.com/F4uUR9zwnY
— Denis Rancourt (@denisrancourt) December 29, 2023

Jan 13, 2024: EXPOSED: FAUCI LIED, PEOPLE DIED! It Was All A Hoax! - Meanwhile MSM Fearmongers Over Fake "X" Virus
Jan 11, 2024: 17 Million Murdered By COVID Vaccines and Voodoo Death
Dr. Sam Bailey exposes the general fraud of the profession of virology in the context of COVID-19: Proof That Covid-19 Is A Massive Worldwide Hoax
Allegations that the COVID-19 virus has never been isolated, which is an obviously required step to reliably sequence it and correctly identify it as a new virus:

Newsbreak 105 | Frances Leader on UK MHRA Info:COVID Vaccine Uses Computer-Generated Codes, No Virus

In this video, Dr. Andrew Kaufman discusses those findings, exposing the slipshod science used to discover COVID-19 and he's correct: according to the original study he discusses (downloadable here), the researchers took a sample of lung fluid from only ONE patient, and didn't bother to PURIFY the virus out of the lung fluid before sequencing.

Here he is in a subsequent video on the topic: VIRUS ISOLATION...IS IT REAL? - DR. ANDREW KAUFMAN RESPONDS TO JEREMY HAMMOND
Allegation that the S-protein doesn't exist, either: video Dr. Luis Marcelo Martínez: The Spike Protein Has Never Existed. Really whatever the 'spike protein' of the COVID-19 vaccines is, it didn't come from a COVID-19 virus.
Proof that the COVID PCR test wasn't based on (calibrated to) the virus in its design. It is totally unprofessional for the FDA to have developed the COVID PCR test without calibrating it to the actual virus. Instead they used a biological soup as a ridiculous substitute, as discussed in this article with CDC reference document downloadable here. The key passage, on page 40 of the document, reads (with our emphasis in bold),
"Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV were available for CDC use at the time the test was developed and this study conducted, assays designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA (N gene; GenBank accession: MN908947.2) of known titer (RNA copies/μL) spiked into a diluent consisting of a suspension of human A549 cells and viral transport medium (VTM) to mimic clinical specimen."
An outbreak hoax was perpetrated on the public before, complete with employment/social restrictions and medical treatments, by the misuse of PCR tests: The epidemic that wasn’t: In 2006, doctors used PCR testing to cause mass hysteria over a “whooping cough” outbreak that didn’t even exist

Question: If there was no COVID-19 virus, what were so many COVID-19 cases?

Explanations include:

Most of the COVID-19 cases are not sick people but only a faulty test. This would explain why most people testing positive for COVID-19 have no symptoms.

Article: German microbiologist calls coronavirus pandemic a “fake”. It includes the quote, "People who are not ill are tested with a test that is lying most of the time.”

The 5G Rollout: Before the COVID-19 crisis, many people were concerened about health effects of the coming 5G rollout, and wondering what that would look like. Then those concerns were largely forgotten during the declared COVID-19 emergency, and 5G installations were reported to take place during the lockdowns whereas normally they would have been protested. Maybe there is a relationship between 5G implementation and sudden reports of illncess called COVID-19 symptoms? Is it possible that new technology might exceed the general Public's understanding of the risks?

Some references are:

Bombshell study confirms link between 5G wireless exposure and COVID disease
The Graphene Oxide & 5G Connection (Part 2): This allegation is that graphene absorbs endergy in the 5G frequency band and it causes the graphene to generate free radicals in the body, for which NAC (N-Acetyl-Cysteine, which is a precursor of glutathione in the body) supplementation may help to partially antidote.

La Quinta Columna: Graphene oxide + 5G = COVID-19
Study Shows Direct Correlation Between 5G Networks and “Coronavirus” Outbreaks
5G Technology and induction of coronavirus in skin cells – US National Library of Medicine (what David Icke has been saying for months)
Evidence for a connection between coronavirus disease-19 and exposure to radiofrequency radiation from wireless communications including 5G

This might explain:

Why COVID-19 was declared as not only existing but responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic, despite being never isolated.
Why 5G rollout location has been correrlated with supposed COVID-19 outbreaks. Study: 5G exposure a “significant factor” in higher covid cases, deaths
A video clip supposedly from a 5G tower technician showing a chip on the board labelled as 'cov-19': Shocking! 5G Cell Tower Components Labeled ‘COV-19’
The alleged graphene inclusion reported in the vaccines: in theory it should make people much more succeptible to 5G radiation.
Why tests were designed which would detect positives in anyone, not requiring any real virus to match with.
Alleged weaker immunity in areas following 5g rollout. During lockdown, 5G being installed internationally, hinders immunity. This one contains the line "Wuhan province has the most complete highest density implementation of 5G networking anywhere in the world."

Question: IF COVID-19 is a hoax, ie. doesn't exist, then what's in the COVID-19 vaccine? These possible explanations have emerged:

The vaccines have nothing in them? This would be the most profitable option (for the vaccine manufacturers), so it's worth mentioning, but the examination of the vaccine solutions as well as the harms produced following vaccination don't support this explanation.
Spike protein instructions: In this explanation, the genetic vaccines supply code for the spike protein, but not because spike protein is part of COVID-19, but because spike protein is a patented computer sequence known to be harmful (as a molecule in vivo). In other words, this is deliberate introduction of a bioweapon into the human body, aimed even mandated for everyone in the world all at once. This video and this one explain.
Venom instructions: There is a mysterious relationship evidenced between COVID-19, or its vaccine, and a diversity of exotic animal especially snake toxins. The COVID-19 spike protein, and the vaccines' code for the spike protein, may be related to venom and/or rabies peptides. This explanation seems to fit data such as crippled respiration with COVID-19, why smokers fared better than non-smokers against it, and why antivenom treatments have been showing promise with treatment:

Nov 19, 2022: FULL INTERVIEW: Could Nicotine Gum be the answer to the Whole Covid Pandemic? with Dr. Bryan Ardis.
November 07, 2022: Dr. Bryan Ardis: Engineered COVID virus contains DOZENS of synthetic animal venoms
October 30, 2022: Dr. Bryan Ardis Updates With New Mindblowing Info on the Covid-19 Vaccinations and the Snake/Sea Creature Venom Contents!
April 19, 2022: CLAIM: COVID-19 mRNA vaccines contain snake venom substrate
April 19, 2022: Dr. Bryan Ardis tells Stew Peters: COVID-19 is not a respiratory virus, it is SNAKE VENOM poisoning
April 15, 2022: 13 Irrefutable FACTS About Snake Venom, Big Pharma And Biological Weapons
April 13, 2022: The very enzyme that is associated with increased covid-19 mortality is blocked by an ANTI-VENOM compound
April 13, 2022: Dr Ardis 'Snake Venom' Covid Bombshell
PDF from BMJ 13 October 2021: Snakebites and COVID-19: two crises, one research and development opportunity
September 10, 2021: Like Venom Coursing Through the Body: Researchers Identify Mechanism Driving COVID-19 Mortality
August 26th, 2021: Snake venom-related enzyme may drive COVID-19 mortality
PubMed article 2021 Jul 8: Toxin-like peptides in plasma, urine and faecal samples from COVID-19 patients
January 22, 2020: “Snake Pneumonia” – Coronavirus Outbreak in China Traced to Snakes by Genetic Analysis
Synthetic Snake Venom The Novel Creation of Crotalid Phospholipase A2 Using Genetic Engineering
US Patent for Conotoxin peptides Patent (Patent # 5,969,096)

Nothing but Nanotech?

The following November 08, 2022 article reports a Canadian physician, Dr. Daniel Nagase, finding nothing in the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccine injections which was biological, not even genetic material (eg. mRNA), but only strange inorganic particles: Spanish scientists find graphene oxide, nanotechnology in COVID-19 injections.

Question: If it was all a hoax, why would mainstream news outlets inform us of the truth? Mainstream news outlets have no legal obligation to inform the Public about all parts of the truth, might be run by those who have secret pacts with Government leaders, and definitely their incentive is to please advertisers. Once an advertiser starts spending a significant amount of the revenue of the news agency, they can directly influence conentent by demanding certain news not be given or else they pull their advertising.

In this crisis, Government and pharmaceutical companies were known to advertise and had so much Public money at their disposal that they were likely in a position to dictate content in their favour. In fact, numerous reports were shown as 'brought to you by Pfizer' for example.

Mar 10, 2022: To promote Covid shot propaganda, Biden administration paid $1 billion to media, says report

NB: For purposes of discussion, most of this webpage assumes that the COVID-19 causing SARS-CoV-2 virus is real, since that is how nearly everyone on both sides has publicly framed the issue in public discussion.

COVID-19 Disease:

COVID-19 (Acute): This is a disease characterized by unspecific (eg. cough, tiredness) or no symptoms (over 40% of those infected) and diagnosed with a PCR test result. Incubation period (time from infection to symptoms) is 5-14 days.

Post-COVID-19 Condition, also known as 'Long COVID'. Even for people who have biologically recovered from COVID-19, virtually any new symptoms of ailment are still assumed to be due to COVID-19 (which is said to have over 200 symptoms), rather than looking for any other cause or giving a more satisfying explanation why a virus erradicated from the body is still causing symptoms. Conincidientally, the phenomenon of 'long COVID' only emerged after the vaccine rollout, and may be a misdiagnosis of vaccine harm.

How Lethal Is It? Even by official data, we see that COVID isn't a big threat compared to many many others:
1. Regarding Severity: The proportions of severity of illness in those infected with COVID-19 follows a pyramid distribution, with approximately 85% having no more than mild symptoms, including 30% of those infected with COVID-19 experience no symptoms at all.
2. Regarding the Actual Mortality of COVID for the general population:
3. Regarding the relationship between COVID mortality and age:
4. Regarding the mortality of COVID-19 disease compared to other human infectious diseases: it is less than most other contagious diseases, including measles, as shown here.
5. Regarding the death count from COVID-19 disease during the pandemic compared to other diseases or causes:

COVID-19 Fear

COVID-19 became a political when Government announcemd it, reporting infection and death counts daily, for years, and mainstream news outlets have been pinning it up as topmost headline news. The public was simply not allowed to forget about the virus as the utmost priority and emergency. For example, in their usually headline format every single day the same (every day the COVID numbers are 'breaking news' all day), here is a news website headline as of this writing:

On top of that, there were frequent regular and irregular Government announcements and heavy media coverage keeping attention on the virus, what it's doing, what experts recommend, and what Government has decided.

The type of attention was fear. At first, COVID-19 was touted as a serious and invisible threat for which there is no defense except social restrictions and our only awareness and remedy is from our scientists. Later, a vaccine was promoted as our only defense, along with the social restrictions. Good health and even provable immunity were dismissed as defenses.

Fear of the virus, and not the virus, was the reason for the forced effects of the pandemic: lockdowns, mandates, closure of places of worship, and other human rights forefeitures, though all of them are popularly described as not being due to government order but due to 'COVID'. The narrative offered no limits to which we should not yield to fear. Ultimately, for fear of the virus, the Public was lead to surrender completely: their jobs, their bodies, and their humanity.

Public fear of the virus, being heavily stoked by Government experts and mainstream media, was so great that some people were not only surrendering their human rights but actually attempting suicide.

January 25, 2023: BREAKING – NHS Doctor confirms young Children were Hospitalised after attempting Suicide due to Propaganda-Fueled COVID Fears & Lockdowns

Even if we decided to ignore the case numbers, there were major social changes announced suddenly by Government and often with very little notice to the time they take effect, and they always referenced the recent case or death numbers. This meant that one could not ignore the focus nor the case numbers.
The reported numbers didn't usually say how many people were tested (which should be relevant), and did't distinguish between asymptomatic and symptomatic people. The positive test results were considered to be cases, which some physicians have protested, saying that a positive test result is not a 'case' but only if the patient is symptomatic.
Besides the threat to public health, a major theme in the pandemic story, as promoted by Government and mainstream media, is how burdened our healthcare system supposedly is and how we need to restrict freedoms before our health care system is totally overwhelmed. For example, here is one such article from early 2021 in Ontario.
Between the World Health Organization, Government-appointed medical officials, and Government officials, the danger of the virus was portrayed as such an emergency that temporarily restricting our social freedoms (also known as suspending our human rights but that language was not used) is an absolute necessity to save lives.
Anyone critical of these measures was portrayed as either a foolish science-denier or a selfish person deliberately endangering other people.

Some related issues include:

Experts of Their Choosing: The first thing Governments did was to quickly introduce their own health experts, whom society was encouraged to trust absolutely, as expert opinion, as though these experts were independent of Government. The word of these Government-chosen experts would soon be used as the justification for Government to do whatever these health experts recommended (starting with declaring a state of emergency).

The most famous such celebrity was Dr. Anthony Fauci, whose track background has recently come under criticism. Article September 08, 2022: Dr. Anthony Fauci: Mass murderer
Terror of the Line: Imagine a horror movie where the villain terrorizes a town by simply drawing a line on a page, and drawing it going higher and higher, while the townspeople shriek in terror, pleading for mercy, until eventually they surrender everything in exchange for his promise to draw the line downward.

That is what the political side of the COVID crisis has been like. Government agencies collected data, and appointed officials presented that data to us in their supposedly expert interpretation, ultimately in the form of 'modelling' showing that the COVID case, hospitalization, and/or death numbers would go up in the future if we didn't impose more social restrictions now. Our society immediately agreed that it was worth suspending our human rights to avoid the line going up,

So direct was the fear of a graph attempting to predict the future, that the justification given for the initial lockdown, was literally "to flatten the curve".

To make matters worse, the modelling, ie. forcasts by experts of the future of COVID cases, ICU bed occupancy, and deaths, was proven horribly wrong as time went on, but by the time we realized it, the time period in question had passed, and we continued to trust the same modellers.
Of course we didn't accuse the experts for misleading us, forgiving them as though even though they are experts in virology, COVID is somehow different and they should be excused for failed predictions on what it would do, as though this is as new for them as it is for the Public.
SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19 Virus) Variants and Sub-Variants: Eventually fear started to wane as the crisis dragged on, especially after widespread acceptance of the touted defense: the vaccine. Presumably to maintain the fear, it conveniently emerged at this time a new issue of 'variants' of the virus emerging for which the vaccine was of little use and on which fear, social restrictions, and more vaccines must continue. In other words, the announcement of any new variant discovery could be and was used to:
1) excuse the ineffectiveness of the vaccines by claiming they weren't designed for the new variants,
2) explain why we never achieved 'herd immunity',
3) justify the renewal of Government emergency powers,
4) justify the re-imposing or extensions of social restrictions,
5) justify the supposed need for more vaccines and related mandates.

Example articles are:

We were even taught to fear variants which don't even exist yet:

Later, scientists started to award COVID-19 variants sensational names, such as the 'Kraken' variant, the name referring to a huge and legendary sea monster. This sensationalism is uncharacteristic of science and an obvious and pathetic attempt to stoke fear in an already weary Public. Articles

20 January, 2023: Increase in 'Kraken' COVID-19 subvariant renews calls for booster shots
7 January, 2023: Why the new omicron variant is being called ‘Kraken’

Chapter 2, Section 5: The Medical Reaction:

A Policy of Hypochondria: The Medical industry promoted public terror at the danger of COVID-19, and to some extent other environmental pathogens, with an attitude that no measures to protect ourselves are too severe, and the attitude that the spread of disease is only caused by disobedience to public health guidelines.

In reality, the attitude that no measures are too severe to protect us from environmental pathogens used to be called the disorder of hypochondria, and as far as public health advice went, at least on COVID-19, it's said that we would have been better off doing the exact opposite of what the public experts advised (video clip: 🚨INVERSION 👏🏼DO THE OPPOSITE 💭 Why Most People Don't Trust Big Pharma & Government‼️Learn ).

This is despite the medical industry actually engineering viruses, such as one COVID strain far more lethal than COVID-19 (Article GERM WARFARE: Boston University claims to have developed new covid strain that kills eight out of 10 victims), but this not being portrayed as a threat: just people who don't wear a mask or who refuse a vaccine.
Suspicion of the Sick:
Direct tests for COVID were not the first line of suspicion, but screening looking for any one of a very wide range of unadmittedly extremely common illness symptoms (especially in winter) were considered suspicious for COVID-19 infection. Even admitting to a runny nose or a headache could mean you were barred entry to any business and ordered to stay home alone. Here is an example of such a Government-provided warning poster for building entrances still in effect two years after the pandemic began: Symptom screening poster for building entrances. In other variations, such as this one from the Government of Toronto, Ontario, Canada, having some of these symptoms meant that your entire household was expected to stay home in isolation.

December 4, 2020: Keep children home and get tested even if it’s a runny nose: new Toronto and Peel guidance
January 7, 2022: Ontario adds runny noses and sore throats to screening guidance for schools and child care centres

Isolation/Quarantine:
Compulsory isolation was enforced for anyone seemingly at risk for contracting the COVID-19 virus, such as having been in contact with someone who tested positive or returning from travel abroad (example here for Canada). Typical isolation period was 14 days, but it was eventually reduced to 10 or 5 days in some situations. In some systems, people were forced to self-isolate, even prime ministers, even if they felt fine and tested negative: Canada's Trudeau in isolation after COVID exposure; says test negative.
Contact Tracing:
Many establishments were required to keep logs of their visitors, and people who contracted COVID-19 were asked to reveal to the Government who they came in contact with recently. There were also phone apps released by the Governments, such as AB Trace or Canada Alert, to automatically record who you came in contact with, using bluetooth technology between phones, so that the Government knows who to alert of COVID-19 exposure if a case is detected within their contacts.
Hand Sanitizer:
Although not Government-mandated, frequent use by the Public of hand santizer was strongly encouraged by medical officials. The Public mostly complied and hand sanitizer became an expected feature of desks which serve the Public.

Unfortunately there are some reports of it containing what appears to be graphene: Graphene Found In Hand Sanitizer - Grafeno en Desinfectante para Manos
The PCR Test: An Erroneous Foundation for Pandemic Management

This test was used as the primary detection and even confirmation of COVID-19-causing virus (SARS-CoV-2) in the population, the whole-genome-sequencing method being very time consuming and impractical for widespread use.

Unfortunately using PCR to diagnose COVID-19 had many problems (if an accurate assessment of the situation was desired):
1. As already revealed in this article, the PCR test used for the COVID-19 virus wasn't even calibrated to that virus, which means presenting that PCR test as a means to detect that virus was fraud.
2. The inventor of PCR, the late Mr. Kary Mullis, revealed that it can find almost anything in anyone, if you turn it up (the number of cycles) high enough (COVID PCR tests have been widespread reported to be run at too high a number of cycles to be meaningful: example article here). Since it's been revealed that the cycle setting in most COVID testing is in that 'too high' range, the chance of false positives is a certainty, or at least certain whenever the scientists turn the cycle setting high enough.
  
  Conversely, samples from vaccinated individuals were reportedly tested at too low a number of cycles, which creates false negatives. Perhaps this gave a false portrayal of vaccine efficacy?
3. The inventor of PCR also said that the test was never designed to detect infections disease; it doesn't tell you if a person is sick, which is exactly how it was used in the COVID-19 crisis.
  In the same article we see that Mr. Mullis was a vocal critic of Dr. Anthony Fauci; it is suspicious that Mr. Mullis died in August 2019, shortly before the first appearance of COVID-19 in China and before the PCR test would be used as the gold standard to diagnose COVID-19 worldwide.
4. Positive PCR test results, however asymptomatic the patient, were inaccurately declared to be 'cases' of COVID-19. The test is for SARS-CoV-2 virus and COVID-19 is the associated disease, so anyone asymptomatic should not have been designated as a 'case' of COVID-19.
5. At best PCR can detect whether a fragment of DNA is there (qualitative analysis), but not how much of it is there (quantitative analysis). Some would say that if you can tell if something is there but no how much, you have nothing worth saying.
6. PCR can detect presence of viral DNA but not whether the virus is viable or already disintegrated.
7. All tests have some degree of false positive and false negative rate, but Government completely and medical industry largely ignored that in the COVID-19 crisis, such as when they insisted on 'zero COVID' social restrictions.
Other sources include:
1. This article discusses the uselessness of PCR to diagnose COVID-19 in detail: COVID19 PCR Tests are Scientifically Meaningless
2. March 18, 2022: After YEARS of insisting they work, researchers FINALLY acknowledge PCR tests are faulty
3. February 23, 2022: CDC, WHO admit RT-PCR tests ineffective in detecting COVID-19 virus
4. June 09, 2021: News outlet says up to 90% of Canadian COVID-19 cases could be false positives
5. PCR Test Fraud Documentary
6. December 28, 2020: High-cycle PCR tests do not properly diagnose covid-19, were weaponized to terrorize nations and deprive personal liberties
7. Portuguese court rules PCR tests are unreliable, unlawful
8. The presence of a virus does NOT mean “disease:” PCR testing scheme EXPOSED as total science fraud
9. Smoking gun: Lord Fauci states COVID PCR test has fatal flaw; confession from the “beloved” expert of experts
10. November 13, 2020: Elon Musk took 4 COVID-19 tests in one day, but half were positive and half were negative
11. December 02, 2020: After mounting evidence, FDA, CDC now admit that coronavirus tests are faulty
12. January 02, 2022: FDA admits that covid-19 antigen tests DO NOT detect Omicron, yet labs routinely commit fraud to push “casedemic” hysteria
13. January 04, 2022: CDC admits PCR tests are a fraud… so what about the last two years, then?
14. Former Tanzanian President John Magufuli Exposes The Fraudulent PCR Test For COVID-19 or related article President queries Tanzania coronavirus kits after goat test
Therefore the PCR test was inappropriate at best and fraudulent at worst as relied on for medical industry reporting and Government intervenion during the COVID-19 crisis.

Why use a faulty test? There's no reason to deliberately choose a test well known to be inappropriate to diagnose, and with results very sensitive to arbitrary parameters in how the test is run, unless one wanted to control the results for some purpose. For example, simply by changing the number of cycles of the test and nothing else, the number of COVID-19 virus PCR positive results, called COVID-19 'cases', would change dramatically in whatever direction the tester wanted, and could be used to generate medical justification on demand to support social restrictions whenever Government wanted to start or end them. Seen another way, the PCR test was so totally unreliable for COVID-19 diagnosis that any Government using it this way could keep a pandemic going on paper simply by keeping the PCR testing going.

Is there evidence to support such wild suspicions (that Government might simply increase or decrease PCR testing levels to support or end social restrictions)? Yes. For example, in Ontario, Canada, we see that the Government tinkered with types of people to be tested or not: restricting access to testing as time went on, until social restrictions were lifted a few months before the 2 June 2022 Ontario election (just in time for campaigning). Similarly China suddenly ended it's 'Zero COVID' policy among rising protesting by quickly reducing testing.
- 13 Dec 2022: Chinese struggle to ‘summon the courage’ to live with COVID-19. This article contains the line, In the span of a week, the government dropped PCR testing requirements for entry to most public places.
- March 2, 2022: Is Ontario ready to ‘live with COVID-19’?
- Dec 30, 2021: Ontario overhauls COVID policies, restricting testing and cutting isolation periods. The article includes the line, Those who receive a positive rapid test result will no longer be encouraged to confirm it with a PCR test.
- Feb 12, 2021: Ontario stepping up the COVID-19 testing strategy to reduce virus spread
- September 24, 2020: Ontario now discouraging asymptomatic COVID-19 testing at assessment centres
The pattern seems to be to maximize testing at the beginning of a pandemic, but if political reasons are strong enough, to end the pandemic by suddenly reducing testing and telling the Public to just live with whatever positive results remain (why didn't we live with it before?).

There is allegation that the PCR test, which sample was collected by a strange method of a special swab deep inside the nasal cavity to just underneath the brain (which no other medical test requires) may have been done that way to deliver nanotechnology there for the harm of humanity. Video: Mark Steele - 5G Weapons Expert on Oct 4 FEMA EBS, Smart City Kill Weapons
Rapid Antigen Tests

These were tests for SARS-CoV-2 antigen which were usable in the field, even by consumers, offer results in 30 minutes or less, and are much cheaper than lab-based PCR testing.

Unfortunately they are prone to errors.
However since the PCR tests are also prone to error, at least these tests are faster, cheaper, and the sample collected with less intrusion.

Nevertheless some of them are said to include toxins such as sodium azide, and for which the Government has issued warnings:
1. Corruption: The Known Dangers of Rapid Tests. This audio exposes that end-users are not permitted to know the ingredients: just the Government.
2. Health Canada issues advisory about rapid antigen tests after calls to poison control centres
3. Poison Control Issues Warning About Covid-19 Rapid Antigen Tests
Of course, public exposure to the poison is considered the consumers' fault if using the test incorrectly, not the manufacturers' fault for incluing such an ingredient.
Swab Method of Sample Collection
The prescribed way to collect a sample for COVID testing has been to push a long swab very deep through the nose, even to the back of the nasopharynx cavity just under the brain, and then rotate it there to grind it against the cavity wall, before pulling it back out.

There are problems with this:

No other medical test collects samples this way. Isn't that strange. See video discussing it here.
We're not designed to have anything an intrusion go back there, nevermind twisted there, which means extreme discomfort.
Tests should do no harm, which is why they are usually not resisted by those seeking truth in our society.

If they do harm that's a different matter, starting with the fact that nothing which does harm should be mandated.
This video discusses general risks with the nasal swabs.
The test is painful.

If the virus is in our saliva, why do the test swabs need to go deep into our nasal cavities to the base of the brain? This video discusses this point.
The swab does come extremely close to the brain: so close that brain damage or at least leaks of cerebral spinal fluid, from the brain, as a result of this test are rare but known.
Video: WARNING: The Nasal Swabs Can Really Hurt People: Causing Bleeding & Rupturing Brain Linings)
If any kind of rupture or bleeding does result, it's virtually impossible for anyone who's not a medical professional to apply pressure or anything to stop the bleeding/leaking.
It is completely unreasonable to need to go so deep into the head to collect a sample of something supposedly so contageous that other people supposedly will contract it from us if they come within 6 feet distance even if we are both wearing masks.
This test is performed by so many technicians with such a need for haste in so many non-ideal environments (such as from outside a car window while the patient is in their car seat: because there's just no time to ask them to come out and sit down), and there is enough individual variability in the nasal cavity anatomy, that it's unreasonable to assume that they are done with great precision as to the correct form, without which there is risk of injury. For clarity:

Here is the precision with which the test is supposed to be done, including measuring the correct length to the ear before going in, holding the head to prevent (dangerous) movement, and going in at the perfect angle (dorsal: parallel to the nasal cavity floor).
Unfortunately it's just not feasible for them to have a specialist physician do your swab test. Here is how the test is actually done by technicians: no measurement to the ear, no holding the head, incorrect angles of penetration. See how easy it is to get someone poking around in your head who doesn't know what they are doing. But if they can't tell the difference, then most of us can't either.

There are reports that the swab fibers themselves are relatively hard with glass or metallic components, enough that they could seriously damage the mucous lining (such as when rotated around while pushing against the membrane, which is the swabbing procedure), and break off and become lodged, at a time when you depend on that lining especially in that area to defend your body from the virus. Due to this, the swabs are suspected to be more of a material-delivery system than a material-collection system.

There are concerns that the swab tests are supporting the deliberate collection and sequencing of human DNA. Article: CDC finally admits, casually, that covid nasal “testing” swabs were used to sequence people’s genomes for analysis
There are reports of mysterious black fibers on the swab, which perhaps are carbon nanotubes, which sometimes twitch. See here, here, and here
There is report of a magnetic effect after swab testing, as per this video: Magnetic effect from nasal swab
The swabs are allegedly reported with a carcinogen, ethylene oxide (see this video).
The swabs are reported to illuminate under UV light: IN YOUR FOREHEAD ? / MARK OF THE BEAST
The swabs are reported to be radioactive (video: Test shows the radiation levels of the PCR Test.
Insering a long object this way is said to have been a punishment for slaves in Egypt and a very slowly killing mortal wound: Nose Swab Anyone
As though there are no limits to the humiliation, China has made anal swabbing mandatory for foreigners arriving there (see article here). Does making something mandatory make it right?

What Happens if you Test Positive or are considered High Risk?:

Anyone who tested positive, or was considered high risk for testing positive, normally had their human rights restricted immediately, and often it extended to their close contacts, all contacts, and even pets. Potential for false positives of the test was ignored. Having no symptoms was ignored for this purpose. A positive test also had a dominant effect on what kind of treatment you got for any medical condition.
Forced COVID Quarantine by Self-Isolation: these Government-ordered requirements were very common, such as for anyone entering the country or province, or suspected of having had 'contact' with a person who tested positive for COVID. Period ranged from 5 to 14 days at Government whim. Too bad it didn't work: Self-Isolation Doesn’t Stop SARS-CoV-2 From Spreading: Study
Forced COVID Quarantine/Detention in Government Camps, though strictly worded as 'Detention Camps' rather than 'Concentration Camps'.:

Discussion about the COVID detainment camps:
1. Oct 17, 2020: MPP Questions Doug Ford on Liberal Government's COVID-19 'Quarantine Camps' from Ontario (Canada) Provincial Parliament.
2. Scottish Newspaper Asks Readers if ‘COVID Internment Camps’ Should be Introduced
Canada:

An internment camp practice is in effect in Canada for people entering or returning to Canada without all the right vaccinations/tests. See here.
Article: Germans, Australians dragged to government ‘quarantine centers’ for COVID-19
Article: Brave Australian teenagers captured by police and forced into “quarantine” camp ESCAPE
Article: Fully vaccinated Canadian mother and her children subjected to DRACONIAN protocols upon returning home
Canada: Footage from Covid Concentration Camp (A Peak Into the NWO)

Australia:

Article: Australia Is Throwing People Who Don't Even Have Covid-19 Into Internment Camps
December 16, 2021: Inside Australia’s COVID Concentration Camps
Article: Disturbing video: Australian covid camp police threaten to “gas” covid prisoner instead of releasing him after 14 days
December 3, 2021 Article: Australia’s COVID concentration camps: A quick rundown

Video: Terrifying footage of a new Detention Camp with a crematorium in the UK!

Elsewhere:

China's Zero Covid Rule, and
Video: Chinese COVID-19 patients confined to metal boxes in quarantine camps and
BRUTAL CRACKDOWN Chinese authorities ‘raid homes at midnight & put people on buses to quarantine camps’ in world’s strictest lockdown

It was as if the lesson we learned from the history of the Jewish Holocaust was that concentration camps are OK as long as they care called something else. How terrible!

Not only is this an extreme human rights violation, but even if the virus was so deadly, concentrating people suspected of having it would only ensure their demise (by being in close proximity). For this reason, these are unofficially called 'COVID Death Camps'.

Other COVID Detention Issues:

In some cases, the there was a backlog to even get into the required quarantine, such that you were effectively blocked even from returning to your home country, even if that put you in obvious danger in the foreign country. For example: Pregnant New Zealand journalist stranded by quarantine rules says she turned to Taliban
Or people where detained where they stood, for example: Over 34,000 people trapped at Shanghai Disneyland after ONE person tested positive for COVID-19

Pets Killed or Considerd to be Killed by Government:

March 3, 2023: UK’s Covid Pandemic Industry plotted to kill 11 million Cats
April 7, 2022: Authorities in Chinese city round up and KILL pets of COVID patients

The COVID-19 'Vaccines':

From early on in the pandemic, Governments around the world were insistent that we must wait on the development of a vaccine, as our only hope to stop the pandemic, even though it didn't exist yet, and was estimated to take 18 months to develop, for which development might not even succeed, while people were already dying, and while ignoring or even attacking all other possible prophylactics and treatments, both natural and pharmaceutical, which were already available. It was a strange and apparently unnecessary gamble.
The vaccines are declared to use radical technology not used in humans before, including:

gene therapy (article: Is the Associated Press Lying About Gene Therapy Shots?
technology so exotic that some of the vaccines needed to be stored at extremely cold temperatuers such as -70 degrees celsius (eg. as mentioned in articles here, and here)

One Way Out: The Public was lead to believe that a vaccine, was the only protection from the COVID-19 virus (SARS-CoV-2), even that vaccines and their mandates are the "only way out of the pandemic".

Vaccine expert describes ‘only way we’re going to get out of this pandemic’, which includes the quote, "The only way we're going to get out of this pandemic is to vaccinate our way out." This denies all other tools, such as: the natural power of our immune system, factors which support it, nutrition, herbal medicine, other pharmadeuticals, and God.
'Vaccination only way out of COVID-19 pandemic'
Vaccine only way out of pandemic, says Gareth Southgate

Makes you think, doesn’t it? #London29thMay #NoVaccinePassports #UniteForFreedom pic.twitter.com/8AQ5iSIX4m
— Patrick Henningsen (@21WIRE) May 29, 2021

No Self-Sufficiency Allowed: Even naturally acquired immunity, ie. immunity gained from someone recovering from the virus, a fundamental principle of medicine, was officially and popularly dismissed as practically useless compared to the vaccines. The narrative was that we must have this external product, at any cost as soon as possible, to be safe. For example:

Fortunately this has since been challenged:

September 16, 2022: Senator Rand Paul goes head-to-head with Anthony Fauci over COVID-19 vaccines

Vaccine Types Available: The diversity of technologies used in these 'vaccines' is astounding, many of them quite new, and few of them based on the traditional 'attenuated virus' vaccine technology. Despite the tremendous differences in technology, once they are approved, they have been promoted nearly equally by Governments, with officials quiet on if there is any difference between them in safety or effectiveness. The approvals vary by country, but some of the major brands are:

mRNA (Genetic) Vaccine

Adenovirus Vector (DNA, Genetic) Vaccine

AstraZeneca Vaxzevria COVID-19 vaccine
Janssen (Johnson & Johnson) COVID-19 vaccine
Sputnik V COVID-19 vaccine
Convidecia

Protein or 'Subunit' based:

Novavax Nuvaxovid COVID-19 vaccine

plant based virus-like particle

Medicago Covifenz COVID-19 vaccine

Inactivated Virus (only this one is the traditional type of 'vaccine'):

Sinopharm [Vero Cell]- Inactivated, COVID-19 vaccine (also here)
CoronaVac
Covaxin
CoviVac (Russia COVID-19 vaccine)
QazCovid-in
COVIran Barekat
Valneva COVID-19 vaccine

Stated Mechanism of Action:

The COVID-19 mRNA 'vaccines' aim to reprogram patients' cells at the geneteic level with ‘software’ as designed by the 'vaccine' manufacturer, which they call hacking the software of life. This is similar to Yuval Harari's claim that humans are hackable animals.

The strategy with these 'gene therapy or ‘software’ vaccines, is to reprogram our own cells using genetic code in the form of mRNA or even DNA (the adenovirus ones are reported to have DNA), to force our cells to translate the foreign genetic code to produce one of the virus's exterior proteins, specifically 'spike protein', in the hope that our immune system will learn to recognize it, and destroy it along with our cell which produces it.
the Adenovirus COVID-19 vaccines actually insert DNA into your cells and deliver it right into the nucleus. From there the idea is similar to the mRNA vaccines: the supplied code is for COVID-19 spike protein, which the cell is therefore directed to produce, in hopes the immune system will recognize those proteins and destroy the cells producing it.
The virus-like particle mimics the entire outer shell of the virus, without any kind of genetic information: not even the genetic information the real virus would need to operate. The idea is for the immune system to learn its shape.
The inactivated virus type is supposed to present dead virus to the body for it to recognize the shape of in case it meets live virus.
Protein subunit type is suppoed to present parts of the virus, or parts exactly like it though they may have been produced synthetically, for presentation to the body's immune system to be recognized, learned, and attacked if they show up again (such as from the real live virus).

Protecting the Establishment with Legal Immunity:

Through various mechanisms, COVID-19 'vaccine' manufactures, and to some extend the rest of the medical industry, are protected from legal liability for harms caused by the vaccine rollout. Some references include:

Pfizer Demanding Bank Reserves, Military Bases And Embassy Buildings As Collateral For COVID-19 Vaccines
In fact, it's reported that if they can't secure legal immunity or collateral against liability risk for potential harm, they won't issue the vaccine (is this the real reason for shortage of vaccines in some countries?): Refugees lack COVID shots because drugmakers fear lawsuits, documents show
Legal immunity seems to be why in some cases the vaccine actually issued, in some cases, is not the one that's approved: Pfizer using children as legal human shields to protect itself from covid vaccine lawsuits

Problems with COVID-19 Vaccine Development/Approval:

Speed:

The COVID vaccines were developed with maximum speed, bending or circumventing usual protocols, on the claim that they were our only hope to protect humanity against the virus.

One such circumvention was using a 'emergency use' authorization (or similar fast-tracking mechanism, depending on the government): a kind of short-cut regulatory approval based on the thinking that there is such an emergency need that there's no time to clearly define all the risks in using whatever seems likely to help.
Government made heavy financial donations to the pharmaceutical industry as though accelerating medical discovery was only a question of money, or as if these companies are charities which depend on donations.

Ultimately, within 1 year of the discovery of COVID-19, a vaccine was developed and approved.

This speed is far faster than any vaccine ever previously developed. Before COVID-19, the fastest vaccine every produced was in 4 years for mumps.

Even more shocking was the fact that it wasn't just one company which was able to field a product in a miraculous timeframe, but many major pharmaceutical complanies around the world were able to do it with their own products in a similar timeframe.

The development also somehow avoided the problem that vaccines to many viruses completely failed to be developed regardless of time, specifically: malaria, tuberculosis, HIV, as well as the most related viruses to SARS-CoV-2, which are SARS-CoV-1 (the cause of the SARS pandemic), and MERS.

Despite the tremendously fast speed with which so many vaccine manufacturers successfully fielded these products, Governments (with mainstream media in support) were adamant to insist that they've passed the same thorough safety tests only they did it much faster due to exceptional good work under pressure, as though the traditional vaccine approval process was merely inefficient.

Despite all assurances, especially their supposed '95%' effectiveness to reduce risk, there were some risk-related problems which should have been obvious but were glossed over:
Human trials were skipped, fasttracked, misrepresented, misinterpreted, or falsifed in favour of vaccine approval for distribution. Example articles:

A closely related vaccine already failed development (as lethal) in SARS, in the sense of causing liver damage to the ferrets it was tested on. Article October 02, 2022: 16 YEAR LIE: Evidence of liver damage from SARS vaccine dates back to 2004
Fraud. Article: Pfizer petitions court to dismiss whistleblower lawsuit because government was fully aware of fraud when agreeing to work with company
There was leeway to declare any vaccine related reactions in the trial studies as 'unrelated' to the vaccines. Our society simply doesn't have the technology to prove that vaccine harm was caused by a vaccine, and it is not standard to even look for that in an autopsy, and the industry has been exploiting this to deny the link throughout this pandemic. Article July 7, 2022: Pfizer classified nearly every severe adverse reaction during covid vaccine trials as “not related to shots”
An impossibility to detect long-term harms with short-term studies: No matter any assurances, one simply can't know, for example, 10 year effects yet in a vaccine which hasn't even existed for a year. The traditional vaccine approval process was not long merely due to inefficiency, but long-term studies are necessary to know long-term harms.
The normal vaccine approval process was circumvented, or 'fast-tracked', on the argument that the need was urgent and substitutes were not available. For example, this is the rationale behind giving them 'emergency use authorization'.
As for how long the new mRNA vaccine technology has been used (approved for national use) in humans: actually the COVID vaccine is the first time and should have warranted more caution than usual, not less. Please see here for the official entry in the Guiness World Records.
COVID-19 Vaccination for Children: Similarly, there was an aggressive push to approve and distribute vaccines for children, even though children are virtually immune to COVID-19 and the most vulnerable to their growing bodies being harmed by any potential adverse effects of the vaccine.

Problems with Marketing the Vaccine to the Public:

The risk reduction was popularly misinterpreted. Although the '95% efficacy' was widely interpreted as the absolute risk reduction (the increase of your resistance to the disease if you get vaccinated), it was actually relative risk reduction (the ratio of unvaccinated to vaccinated in the study, ignoring the size of the study group): calculation in this case was 162/(162+8) = 95.3%. The difference is that for some diseases, like COVID-19, even though the vaccine may make the size of the number of people who would get infected significantly smaller (relative risk reduction), the number of people who get infected is so small in the first place that it doesn't make much advantage to be vaccinated. The absolute risk reduction was less than 1%, meaning that for being vaccinated you only won yourself less than 1% less chance of contracting that disease (calculation (162-8)/30000 = 0.5%).

Article November 26, 2020: Peter Doshi: Pfizer and Moderna’s “95% effective” vaccines—let’s be cautious and first see the full data. The 95% was relative risk reduction, which compares cases in the vaccinated and unvaccinated while ignoring the (huge) size of the study group. A more meaningful measure is absolute risk reduction, which shows the vaccines give a person less than 1% additional immunity to COVID-19.
November 18, 2020: Pfizer and BioNTech Conclude Phase 3 Study of COVID-19 Vaccine Candidate, Meeting All Primary Efficacy Endpoints. This is a press release from Pfizer promoting the 'BNT162b2 to be 95% effective against COVID-19'.

Despite being marketed on a promise of ending the COVID-19 pandemic, there was no scientific reason to believe that they blocked transmission of the virus at all.

Pfizer hadn't even tested to see if the vaccine blocks transmission of the disease, despite this claim, ie. of ending the pandemic by stopping transmission, and of protecting others, being the main premise of its promotion to the Public. Article Oct 12, 2022: Dutch MEP to Tucker Carlson: Pfizer’s admission on COVID jab testing ‘one of the biggest scandals of our time’
Jan 25, 2023: Bill Gates admits COVID shots don’t prevent infection, protect vulnerable groups
Jan 24, 2023: Maxime Bernier reminds Canadians not to forget that COVID jabs ‘never’ prevented transmission
Oct 15, 2022: Associated Press ‘fact-checkers’ admit Pfizer never provided evidence COVID vaccines stop transmission

The vaccines were marketed as an end to the pandemic, originally without mention of any further shot.
Sometimes the vaccine which was approved was not the same one which was offered to the Public. Example articles:

Supposedly No Significant Difference Between the Vaccines: Officials promoted the idea that although different vaccines were approved for the Public, there was little or no difference between them to the patient (rarely there was a very temporary hold on one type or for the first dose of one type for one age group). They literally said that the best vaccine for us to take is the "first one offered to you":

Government and pharmaceutical officials worldwide, along with some (not all!) physicians, have been publicly proclaiming the vaccines as "safe" or "safe and effective”, even long after many harms and deaths following COVID-19 vaccination, as well as 'breakthrough' infections by SARS-CoV-2 despite vaccination, are well documented.

Examples of that claim are:

Pfizer says its Covid vaccine is safe and effective for children ages 5 to 11
John Hopkins article: January 4, 2022: Is the COVID-19 Vaccine Safe?: says they are "very safe".
CDC article Oct. 17, 2022: Safety of COVID-19 Vaccines

No Corporate Morality or Political Will to Stop the Vaccination Program No Matter the Problems Detected: Of course, anything under experimental use should closely monitored for and immediately stopped on notice of any serious harms or strange inclusions, even in the middle of an experiment, according to the Nuremberg Code, such as argued by Dr. Bhakdi in the following video (which also contains many other revelations on the COVID vaccines): Prof Sucharit Bhakdi -Details of the Vaccines [Clip]. Despite that moral experiment limitation, and despite even the same governments publishing data on serious COVID-19 vaccine harms, Governments have admitted no amount of harm at which they will stop the vaccine program.

AS FOR COVID-19 VACCINE SAFETY:

As for defining the word ‘safe’:
1. The dictionary definition of word ‘safe’ is that there is no risk of harm (not relatively less risk).
2. Obviously, no injection can be without medical risk, because even the needle pricking the skin alone does some harm and introduces a chance of infection, and that’s before even considering how deep the needle goes, what it punctures, and especially what is being injected.
3. If anyone has died from it, it cannot be safe (meaning risk-free), and that’s ignoring other adverse effects. To illustrate the point, if there was a popular roller-coaster, and even just one child died because of it, no one could call it ‘safe’ no matter how many other people were not harmed. It would need to be closed down until it could be made safe.
4. Of course it is permissible to use the term ‘relatively safe’, ie. even if there is risk, where the relative risk is explicitly revealed, but where no risk is mentioned, the word ‘safe’ cannot be interpreted but meaning risk-free as per the dictionary definition, and that is very misleading to the Public.
The COVID-19 vaccines are NOT 'safe':

OVERVIEW Impression:

May 12, 2022: Extensive survey finds half a million Germans experienced severe COVID-19 vaccine injuries
Overview article & video by Dr. Joseph Mercola published on the Epoch Times August 2, 2022: The Aftermath of the COVID Shots
This video gives a good introduction from Dr. Vernon Coleman (of vernoncoleman.org)
A TERRIFYING FIRST LOOK AT VACCINE-INJURED CHILDREN

Official and Publicly Published Data on COVID Vaccine Harm

Please see this official page of the CDC discussing adverse effects of the 'vaccine':

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/'vaccines'/safety/adverse-events.html

As of Updated Nov. 24, 2021 , near the top it says, " COVID-19 'vaccines' are safe and effective. [emphasis theirs, ie. they put it in bold text] . Near the bottom, however, it says, " 10,014 reports of death (0022%) among people who received a COVID-19 'vaccine'. "

Similarly, as reported in this article for data between Dec. 14, 2020, and Dec. 10, 2021, the American Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting Service (VAERS) disclosed 965,843 reports of adverse events from all age groups following COVID vaccines, including 20,244 deaths and 155,506 serious injuries.

Similarly the Canadian COVID vaccine adverse event system reports under the heading 'Adverse events of special interest' on this webpage, up to and including 17 December, 2021, there were numerous life-changing side effects, including: 39 cardiac arrest, 93 heart attack, 11 cerebral thrombosis, 28 liver injury, and 679 facial paralysis, among many other effects. The proportion of these events compared to the total number of vaccinations is small, but it's certainly big enough that we shouldn't be calling the vaccines 'safe'.

Really every government adverse reporting system should have data like this if one cares to look. After all, no vaccine is truly 'safe': not even the traditional ones. That vaccines are 'inherently unsafe' is the original reason vaccine manufacturers were able to win legal immunity for vaccines long before the COVID crisis. Risks must be weighed and there must be informed patient choice on vaccines free of coercion.

If so many people are dying or otherwise harmed, even by the Government agency numbers, Government should not tell the Public the vaccines are 'safe' unless they are bringing the dead back to life and otherwise healing these people, or unless death is somehow their definition of 'safe'.
FDA's court-ordered release of documents related to their review of Pfizer-BioNTech's COVID-19 vaccine: story here and here, documents here, including one entitled 5.3.6 CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS OF POST-AUTHORIZATION ADVERSE EVENT REPORTS OF PF-07302048 (BNT162B2) RECEIVED THROUGH 28-FEB-2021, which lists all the adverse events 'of special interest' for the first three months in Appendix 1 (the list is over 2000 words long, which is approximately 16-17 pages double spaced 12-point font and 2cm margins).
Related article: Recently released Pfizer document shows mRNA COVID-19 vaccine can cause 1,291 different adverse events
Related video: BOMBSHELL!! Pfizer Vaccine Study's Massive List Of Adverse Events Of Interest!!
Related to this topic, comparing the headlines of the following two articles, which were published only 20 days apart, gives a glimpse at the alarming world we're living in:

Mar 9, 2022:Pfizer’s Released Documents Show 158,000+ Side Effects | Dr Joseph Mercola
Mar 29, 2022: FDA OKs a 4th dose of Pfizer, Moderna COVID vaccine for 50 and up

July 26, 2022 Article: German government admits COVID vaccines cause severe side effects
There is also data from vaccine manufacturers, however reluctant: this one.

As for short-term safety:
1. Harms In THEORY:
2. Harms In PRACTICE: The following harms are reported following COVID-19 vaccination:
As for long-term safety:
1. Unknown: Since the COVID-19 'vaccines' only existed for less than a year before not only the invention but testing of most COVID-19 vaccines before their rollout, it was IMPOSSIBLE for anyone to know the long-term (year+) effects or safety. Specifically COVID-19 was only discovered in December 2019, and the first vaccine approved in December 2020, so the disease was only known for a year, and so the vaccine could not have been known, not even in the research setting, for longer than that, before it was approved for the public to be injected with. In comparison, it took 4 years after its approval for society to notice the dangers of thalidomide to pregnancies and withdraw it from the market.
2. Long-Term Hormonal Problems Suspected to be Coming: Nov 1 2022: Endocrinologist Forecasts More Hormone-Related Diseases as Spike Proteins Found to Deplete Endocrine ‘Reserves’
3. Baby Deformities: Abnormalities are starting to be reported with babies conceived after COVID vaccination of the parents: for example, see here, here, and here.
4. The following downloadable pdf document discusses possible long-term effects:
  Worse Than the Disease? Reviewing Some Possible Unintended Consequences of the mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19
5. Human Genetic Alteration:
  
  For certain, if you accept a genetic vaccine, you are deliberately altering your overall (DNA and RNA included in this view) natural human genetic information with synthetic genetic information, from what you were born with, and that has implications.
  
  One implication which deserves special attention is the question of whether or not the genetic alteration(s) is permanent, and/or potentially transmissible to future progeny. It is not a question of whether or not we are altering our genetic information, which is a certainty, but whether or not the change has any permanence.
  
  Government agencies and online fact-checkers are generally insistent that there is absolutely no way the vaccines could cause permanent genetic change nor be passed on to future generations (even ignoring the obvious case of vaccination during pregnancy). Specifically, these sources are insistent that the mRNA genetic information in the vaccines is quickly degraded in cells (because that's how natural mRNA is processed), and can never ever enter the nucleus where our (permanent) DNA genetic code lies, and therefore there is no risk of altering it. As an example, the following image capture (only adding a few red marks for emphasis) is from the official Health Canada webage in late December 2021. Notice the assurance of absolute impossibility of our DNA alteration (how can we know the long-term effects in a vaccine that hasn't existed for the long-term?) and omitting to mention what type of genetic code is used in the adenovirus vaccines:
  
  It's a misleading assurance in the context of the COVID vaccines. Here's why:
  1. We don't know enough about biology to be sure what happens. There's a risk you take when the people interfering with the machine (scientists) are not the ones who built it (God). It's like the risk you take when you take your car somewhere else than the dealer for repairs. The human body is the most complex machine we know of; we didn't make it, it didnt come with a manual, and we don't understand it all. We need to respect the fact that we don't know all of the potential implications of artificial genetic interventions.
  2. Some of these vaccines are DNA-based: DNA which is delivered directly to the nucleus of our cells, and therefore at high risk of permanent integration into our DNA or at least presence in the nuclei. The adenovirus-based vaccines, such as made by Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca, are DNA-based, although since it's DNA enveloped in adenovirus, they are popularly called adenovirus-based without mentioning that the genetic information is coded as DNA. Furthermore adenoviruses deliver their DNA payload to the nuclues: they have an outer shell which gets it through the cell membrane, and then an inner shell which gets it into the cell nucleus. Official COVID vaccine information sources are surprisingly quiet about all this (for example the Wikipedia page for the Janssen COVID-19 vaccine doesn't even mention the DNA except in titles of articles of the endnotes). Here are a few resources on the topic:
  3. As for mRNA 'vaccines, there are metabolic pathways whereby the genetic information of this mRNA could be permanently integrated into our cells (in DNA form, making the Government assurances of impossibility a lie) and, due to the deliberate engineering of this synthetic mRNA, these pathways are far more likely than they would naturally be.
    
    It's true that to gain permanent presence the information in the injected mRNA faces three obstacles (besides entry into the cell cytoplasm which is apparently solved by their artificial delivery envelope): rapid degradation in the cytoplasm (which is normal for natural mRNA), not being in DNA form, and being outside of the cell nucleus. Yet:
  4. If we are to accept expert assurances that these genetic vaccines will not cause permanent change to our natural human DNA, at least we should accept those assurances only from the manufacturer's scientists, who can speak from the context of the engineering they actually did on the synthetic mRNA or DNA they designed, rather than outside scientists or physicians speaking on general principles in nature. This is not natural genetics!
  5. Some articles are, rather than denying it, trying to portray it as a positive. As this article from MSN Health puts it, "Regarding whether mRNA vaccines could change DNA, Dr. Jaenisch thinks it might be a good thing." (How far will you go trusting experts?)
  6. Furthermore blatant DNA vaccines for COVID have started being approved (example here for India), again with no mention of the risks of permanent genome alteration.
  7. It's worth noting that viruses regularly alter our DNA, even that 8% of our DNA is from ancient viral infections.
    
    Video: The Human Genome Is Full of Viruses
    
    Does this mean that our deliberate introduction of genetic code to our cells (some of the vaccines actually use an adenovirus shell to do this), is nothing to worry about? No. DNA is the foundation of physical life and changes in it can therefore never be dismissed as unimportant. Rather we need to admit that this realm is far more complex than we currently understand and we should hesitate to interfere with it in living humans, nevermind trying to do it to the entire human population at once. We should at least admit that we don't know if it will change the human DNA or not, but it is sure within the realm of possibility.
6. The engineering of the artificial genetic code introduced by the vaccines also causes the mRNA to be transcribed much more than for natural mRNA. As this article puts it:
  
  According to Seneff, this switch results in a 1,000-fold greater amount of spike protein compared to being infected with the actual virus. What could go wrong? Well, just about anything. Again, the shot induces spike protein at levels unheard of in nature...
7. Gene Deletions as allegedly described in patents, as per this video: Marburg Virus - The Next 'Pandemic' Release Via The Vaccinated
8. A formper Vice President of Pfizer speaks out:
9. Regarding Prognosis (course and final result) for the Vaccinated: It's not looking so good, but again, that's the risk you take when you allow other mechanics than the One who built the machine to tamper with it:
  1. It's said that all of the vaccinated will die within a few years. See this video: Dr. Sean Brooks Warns Vaccinated Will Die Soon
  2. Others are saying the vaccine is to create a new, more controllable species out of humans (see here).
Long-term experience of COVID-19 Vaccine Harms. Not good:

Political Debate on vaccine harm:

Ontario MP Rick Nicholls Dropping Truth Bombs on the Province's New World Order Communist Legislature

Safety of Subsequent Doses? It seems the danger increases with each dose of the vaccine:

August 31, 2022: Excess deaths more prominent among those who took third and fourth covid shots

Establishment (Government, medical industry, and mainstream media) reaction to the evidence of COVID-19 vaccine harms has been a multi-faceted strategy, including:

Simply denying any serious harms associated with the vaccines, since no matter the evidence, even when published by the same government, a govenment official is not compelled to acknowledge it. This attitude started but does not end with their promotion as 'safe and effective'.

June 20, 2022: White House Health Official Makes False Claim About COVID-19 Vaccines

Shifting the burden of proof to victims. The idea is that if a vaccine is suspected of harm, to demand proof of the harm before acknowledging the claim. This is an easy obstacle to put in the way of victims, as vaccine harms work at the level of individual cells, and genetic vaccines at the level of individual genes, and we don't have any direct test to prove it. It might be provable with comparison of detailed medical tests before and after vaccination, but not many people have a bank of tests immediately before and after a vaccine. Any failure of proof is dismissed as, 'just a coincidence'.

Of course, where a change follows a vaccine, in the interests of safety the vaccine should be suspected until proven innocent. That's how product safety is supposed to work and how it's supposed to differ from accusing a person (a person should be considered innocent until proven guilty).
Treating potentially vaccine-caused harm superficially as what it presents as, without digging into causes. For example, even if a vaccine defintely causes blood clots, the emergency physician has the freedom to simply diagnose the problem as a blood clot, and treat that, without going deeper into what caused it. In this way they help the patient through the immediate problem without getting into the highly political issue of vaccine harm.
Leading the Public to percieve serious medical conditions which were rare before the vaccine rollout, or a rise in deaths since the vaccine rollout, as some kind of new normal to deal with, without questioning the cause or vaccines. For example:

Downplaying the danger and permanence of medical conditions which the Public recognizes as risks of the vaccines so that they are not considered serious. Example article: Young people recover quickly from rare myocarditis side effect of COVID-19 vaccine
Creating a medical climate where satisfying medical explanation for why someone died is no longer considered important to pursue, even in the case of otherwise healthy youth or athletes.

July 6, 2022: Deaths with unknown causes now Alberta's top killer: province. That's right: Albertans live in a world where the greatest risk to their life is an unknown cause, and it's not seen as any reason for alarm.
Article June 12, 2022: Healthy young people now dying en masse across Australia, and the corporate media still won’t dare mention vaccines

In place of an explanation, to use the newly coined term, 'Sudden Adult Death Syndrome (SADS)' to describe the phenomenon.

Video: Nick Fuentes || "Sudden Adult Death Syndrome": Vaxx Side-Effects Start Killing Young People

As a last resort, if root causes are demanded, blaming anything but vaccines (ABV). As long as it doesn't need to be proven, it's possible to come up with literally any theory to explain someone's death, so there's a lot of leeway to theorize some other cause than vaccination. Example articles:

There are indications that literally anyone who accepts a COVID-19 vaccine is legally considered part of clinical trial of the experimental product. Video: BREAKING! RECORDINGS OF MODERNA REPRESENTATIVE MAKING HORRIFIC ADMISSION ABOUT JAB

As for effectiveness: One would hope that with so much expense and harms of the vaccines, and so much political and medical promotion of them, they would have some benefit. The evidence is that they don't, and they never did.
1. The dictionary definition of the word ‘effective’ is that the thing produces its intended purpose.
2. The purpose of any ‘vaccine’, from the traditional (and only sensible) dictionary definition of the word 'vaccine', is to ‘confer immunity’. This definition has been changed, since the COVID-19 vaccine rollout, on many online definitions of the word 'vaccine' to no longer mean conferring immunity and to include mRNA injections.
3. The promised effectiveness for the vaccines dropped dramatically since their rollout.
  
  Although COVID-19 'vaccines' were initially promoted as warding off COVID-19 and ending the pandemic (as expected since immunity is the traditional purpose and definition of vaccines), it was gradually revealed, after most people accepted the shots, that these COVID-19 'vaccines' do not confer immunity. Initially these reports were called 'breakthrough' infections, with pointing out that this was not uncommon (example video: FULLY VACCINATED? PROTECTED RIGHT? WRONG. THE VACCINE DOES NOTHING. THE VACCINE WILL KILL YOU. Eventually there was no more expectation that the vaccines make anyone immune or will ever end the pandemic.
4. Transient protection:
  Studies show that whatever protection the COVID-19 vaccines give, it doesn't last long.
5. Numerous fully-vaccinated individuals admit subsequently contracting COVID. For example:
6. Negative Efficacy There is much evidence of the vaccinated contracting and dying from COVID more (not less) than the unvaccinated. This means that society is much worse off for these vaccines, because on top of the adverse effect risks, cost (someone has to pay), and inconvenience of the vaccines, recipients are actually more succeptible to the same thing it was supposed to protect them from.
7. The vaccines never stopped transmission of the virus and so could never end the pandemic.
8. Freedom from social restrictions, if you got vaccinated, was quickly cancelled as health officials started to insist that someone vaccinated, even fully vaccinated, for COVID-19 can still contract and spread the virus, as an argument that they should still wear masks and engage is social precautions identical or almost idential to the unvaccinated. For example:
  https://codeblue.galencentre.org/2021/09/20/moh-fully-vaccinated-people-can-get-infected-and-transmit-covid-19/
  
  Here’s an article discussing that the vaccinated should still wear masks indoors: https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/07/27/1021206558/cdc-expected-to-change-mask-guidance-for-vaccinated-people-including-in-schools
  
  In fact, the vaccinated are sometimes admitted to be just as dangerous to spread the virus as the unvaccinated:
  1. Moderna
  2. Fauci
9. Countries and communities with high vaccination rates are not seeing any noticable benefit to vaccination, and in many cases the public health situation actually got worse following vaccination. For example:
  1. Jan 15, 2023: Japan's Experts Baffled By High 'COVID Deaths' Despite High Vaccination Rate
  2. January 04, 2023: German study finds that COVID-19 vaccines perpetuated the pandemic and caused immune system failure
  3. New Science Shows Vaccines Help Omicron Spread: Peer-Reviewed Study
  4. VACCINES CAUSE MASSIVE DIE-OFF IN TAIWAN! - Jabs Kill More Than Chinese Government!
  5. August 04, 2022: “Covid” deaths hit new record in hyper-vaccinated Australia
  6. April 06, 2022: CDC: The most-vaccinated US counties also have the most COVID cases
  7. March 29, 2022: ‘100 Percent’ Vaccinated Cruise Ship Hit With COVID-19 Outbreak
  8. March 28, 2022: Data: Canada and Israel are suffering from a pandemic of the fully vaccinated
  9. Chile sees Covid surge despite vaccination success
  10. Article: Ireland: Two Counties With 99.7% and 98%+ ‘Fully Vaccinated’ See Massive Covid ‘Outbreaks’
  11. Video: Israel Study May Prove This Is a Pandemic of the VACCINATED Covid-19 Ben Swann;
    and this video: Situation Update, Jan 21, 2022 - After draconian MASKS, JABS and vaccine PASSPORTS, Israel's covid cases go PARABOLIC
    
    and this article (January 27, 2022): Israel is Now #1 in Covid Cases Per Capita, Proving All the Draconian Measures Are Utterly Worthless
10. Immunocompromised individuals aren't seeing much benefits for vaccination: Immunocompromised individuals NOT producing antibodies even after receiving COVID-19 booster doses
11. Additional injection doses, also called 'booster' shots, were typically insisted on by national officials, even that people were no longer considered 'fully vaccinated' without the next booster, but these shots only made things worse. Example articles:
12. The marginal additional protection supposedly conferred by the booster shots, whatver it is, is admitted to drop on subsequent shots. Example article: Protection against COVID-19 infection improves after fourth vaccine dose but wanes quickly: study
13. Yet there's been a tremendous public relations effort, using elaborate explanations, to portray the vaccines as effective even though vaccinated people are still contracting COVID in large numbers, for example this article: Breakthrough infections, hospitalizations of vaccinated doesn't mean vaccines ineffective: experts
14. There are reports of only the vaccinated being treated for COVID with ivermectin, which is not given to the unvaccinated, presumably to make it appear that the vaccine helped them. Example: video: Australian Nurse Reveals Hospitals Only Treat Vaccinated COVID Patients With Ivermectin
  
  This could skew the official statistics and research papers to show vaccinated people recovering faster and better than unvaccinated, as normally we would assume they were given the same treatment.
15. Other references on COVID-19 vaccine ineffectiveness:
16. Once the majority of people accepted the vaccines, the Establishment announced an explosion of virus 'variants' which, true or not, meant that the social restrictions and vaccination program effectively extended and repeated. These were not generally mentioned as a problem or even existing before the vaccine rollout.
The people insisting the vaccines are ‘safe and effective’ are not liable if something goes wrong, so it is very easy for them to say that (actually vaccine manufacturers are typicially immune to liability related to harm caused by their vaccines).
It's emerging in the data recently both that there are more COVID deaths after the vaccine rollout than before it, and that more people are dying soon after the vaccine than dying of COVID: see here.
Vaccines are intended to produce a lasting change in the body which is not intended to be reversible, whether the outcome is good or bad. Therefore we can expect that the majority of effects, good or bad, will be irreversible.
Irreversible health decisions should be taken most seriously.
The different 'vaccines' may be the same politically, but they are not the same medically. For example, each one has a different number of adverse events reported per the same number of doses. Please see figure 2 here:
https://health-infobase.canada.ca/covid-19/'vaccine'-safety/#a3
As for the ingredients of the COVID 'vaccines': people are taking these shots with more concern over the ingredients in a bag of potato chips, even though a vaccination, good or bad, is designed to cause permanent medical change.

Listed Ingredients: There are concerns that some of the listed ingredients may be toxic at least to some people, such as polyethylene glycol (PEG) which can trigger anaphylaxis (which is an allergic reaction serious enough that it can be fatal). Another ingredient of concern is 2-Distearoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine (example article here), which is related to the lipid nanoparticles. Regardless, the bigger picture is that vaccines have long been notorious for having toxic ingredients (example article here).
The potential for illicit ingredients: There are at least four mechanisms by which ingredients might escape being included on the label:

Classification as 'trade secrets' or 'proprietary'. Resources related to this concept include:

Ex Pfizer Employee Now Whistleblower Confirms Use Of Graphine Oxide in Pfizer, Moderna, Astrazeneca
According to in this article, despite 11 ingredients being listed on the label, the raw materials of the proprietary process are 280.
Pfizer Fights to Control Secret of $36 Billion Covid Vaccine Recipe
October 11, 2021: Moderna has no plans to share its COVID-19 vaccine recipe
Pressure Grows on U.S. Companies to Share Covid Vaccine Technology

The actual contracts, between the Government and vacceint manufacturers, long kept secret, seem to admit, in at least in one example, that the manufacturer wasn't even obligated to maintain consistent ingredients: Sep 7, 2023 It’s confirmed – three governments around the world signed contracts where Pfizer said it did not know what was in the “vaccines”, or the long term effects AND taxpayers would pay for all damages.
There is known contamination of certain COVID-19 vaccines with DNA and/or SV40 (a cancer-linked virus) promoter sequence:

Oct 25, 2023: ‘Adulterated’ Covid Vaccines Should Be Pulled From The Market: Experts
Oct 23, 2023: What is Adulteration of pseudo-mRNA vaccines, and why should you care?
Oct 20, 2023: ANOTHER BOMBSHELL: CANADA ADMITS DANGEROUS DNA PLASMID CONTAMINATION OF COVID "VACCINES"
20 October, 2023: ‘An Admission of Epic Proportions’: Health Canada Confirms DNA Plasmid Contamination of COVID Vaccines
Sept 22, 2023: FDA Responds to Reports of DNA Contamination in COVID Vaccines
22 Oct, 2023: COVID vaccine adulteration w/Kevin McKernan, Byram Bridle, Chris Martenson, Steve Kirsch
Oct 22, 2023: Exclusive: Video interview with 3 experts reveals evidence that the drug companies knew about the SV40 promoter, yet decided to conceal it from the regulators
19 Oct, 2023: EXCLUSIVE: Health Canada Confirms Undisclosed Presence of DNA Sequence in Pfizer Shot
Oct 19, 2023: "OK, you were right. We admit the vaccine is contaminated with SV40, but we found some experts who think it's not a problem."
October 11, 2023: DNA Contamination and Cancer-Causing ‘SV40’ found in Pfizer’s COVID Injections.
Sep 26, 2023: SV40 Promoter Region Confirmed via Megahit Assembly
Aug 30, 2023: EXCLUSIVE: Health Canada Not Concerned About Scientists' Finding of Plasmid DNA Contamination in COVID Shots
April 10, 2023: Sequencing of bivalent Moderna and Pfizer mRNA vaccines reveals nanogram to microgram quantities of expression vector dsDNA per dose
Apr 12, 2023: Sequencing the Pfizer monovalent mRNA vaccines also reveals dual copy 72-bp SV40 Promoter
Apr 14, 2023: Pfizer Knowingly Contaminated COVID-19 mRNA Vials with Plasmid DNA
Aug 15, 2023: Federal Scientist Blows the Whistle: Covid Vaccine Purposely Contaminated with SV40 Cancer Virus, MUST WATCH!
Jun 14, 2023: SV40 Cancer, Vaccine Antibiotic Resistance, DNA Contamination, Mesothelioma Polio Vaccine

There is an allegation that the active ingredient in these vaccines is DNA plasmid encoding for venom peptide

Nov 23, 2023: What's Plasmid DNA? Why's the Cabal Putting it in Food, Water, Air & Vaccines?! Dr. Ardis Interview

The manufacturing process allegedly being under the legal jurisdiction and physical control of the Military (rather than a health or medical authority).

Poor practices alleged in COVID-19 vaccine manufacturing, storage, and distribution can cause many doses to be inconsistent or contaminated. Certainly production techniques don't respond well to being rushed, and regulatory oversight can be compromised by national emergency to get these vaccines out. Sources:

Non-Listed Reported Inclusions: There are reports of at least some of the COVID-19 'vaccines' containing things NOT DISCLOSED on the official ingredients. Alleged hidden COVID-'vaccine' ingredients/contaminants include:

Something magnetic:

Mainstream news reports that Japan suspended some of the vaccines due to contamination of something 'that reacts to magnets' (see here). Later news articles, such as this one, report Morderna saying that there were stainless steel particles in the vaccines which are of no safety risk (really? an injection of stainless steel particles is normal or will easily break down? Won't having magnetic steel in their bodies which they don't know about be extremely dangerous, if for no other reason, they go for an MRI (which uses extremely powerful magnets)?) and the Japanese health minister saying it could be "pieces of rubber stoppers" broken off from the lid of the vaccine vials (how does rubber become steel?). The same article goes on to mention, in passing, that other vials had a black substance which 'has yet to be identified' (how is this tolerated?).

There is evidence of magnetic changes in the bodies of recipients (see article here and video here here, and here), especially that a small magnet will stick to the site where the COVID vaccine was injected (that is not normal). Example video: THE COVID VACCINE MAGNET CHALLENGE.

Why might a magnet grip the skin for some vaccinated people but not for others? It may be due to variations in how deep the vaccine is injected, since variance of this is a very real possibility in practice, and since magnetic grip depends heavily on closeness of the magnet to the material.

A related study, STUDY ON THE ELECTROMAGNETISM OF VACCINATED PERSONS IN LUXEMBOURG, was ended prematurely for which the paper gives this reason: "The survey is stopped for reasons of conscience and morals because the investigator is no longer able to cope with the helplessness of people whose faces become petrified when they realise that they have been injected with a substance of which they know nothing."

There is video showing that a strong magnet will show attraction for at least one brand of COVID-19 vaccine while still in the vial itself: Proof the mRNA Vaccine is Magnetic - It Is Magnetic In The Vial

Video: 2021 MAY 13 The Magnetic Mark of the Beast

It may be that the magnetic material is added to better force the mRNA nanoparticles of those vaccines into patient cells, in a process called magnetofection. Video: Magnetism INTENTIONALLY Added to 'Vaccine' to Force mRNA Through Entire Body
Graphene:

Whether an explanation for the magnetic property or not, graphene is reported found in at least some COVID-19 vaccines, as discussed in references such as:
This video discusses allegedly leaked emails from Pfizer regarding the alleged graphene inclusion.

Graphene is a very exotic material of scientifically fascinating properties with potential interaction with wireless electronics such as those using 5G wireless energy. Some references:
1. 5G Powered Graphene Based Nanotech In The Pf!zer Vaxxine
2. GRAPHENE OXIDE - IT'S ALIVE & IT'S IN YOUR JABS..!
3. Graphene Oxide Is Attracted To Magnets 🧲 And Is Going Away From Garlic 🧄 🤔
4. Graphene Oxide Stimulated by 5G Pulses. Vaccine Ingredient. Why?
5. EXCELLENT GRAPHENE OXIDE, 5G AND COVID PRESENTATION {please share!!}
6. Toward the Application of High Frequency Electromagnetic Wave Absorption by Carbon Nanostructures
7. Millimeter wave absorbing property of flexible graphene/acrylonitrile-butadiene rubber composite in 5G frequency band
8. This article discusses a statistical coincidence discovered between 5G and COVID-19; it is suspected that 5G somehow interacts with the graphene allegedly present in the 'vaccines' to make things much worse.
9. Study: 5G exposure a “significant factor” in higher covid cases, deaths
10. Shocking! 5G Cell Tower Components Labeled ‘COV-19’
11. COVID Vaccinated Are Being Tracked via 5G Cellular Towers
12. 5G, Graphene & the Vaccine: How the NWO Stakeholders Plan to Kill You!
According to this German doctor, Dr Andreas Noack, (who was previously arrested and allegedly died 3 hours after publishing the following) in this video alleges that it's graphene hydroxide, and explains that this is a kind of water-soluble ultra-sharp nano-razorblade which can physically shred blood vessels from the inside, and which can avoid detection in a standard autopsy. Far from being a sideline concern, he alleges that this is the reason for rapid deaths seen with some COVID vaccinations in athletes, as well as many other problems, especially if it gets injected directly into a vein.

This is a video allegedly of Dr. Noack's wife confirming his death.

An example research article supporting the idea that graphene induces blood clots: Thrombus Inducing Property of Atomically Thin Graphene Oxide Sheets

Just for reference, here's what a graphene-induced brain blood clot looks like.

According to this article, NAC (N-acetyl cysteine might help to mitigate the toxicity, although assumes we're dealing with graphene oxide (not graphene hydroxide).
Parasites:

the tropical parasite Trypanosoma cruzi. References include:

COVID-19 Vaccine Ingredients. This article discusses many findings on undisclosed vaccine ingredients, but also has a very interesting section on the Trypanosoma parasites, allegedly found in the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine, where it presents evidence/rationale that:

The deep-cold storage required for the Pfizer vaccine (which few people have been able to offer a satisfying explanation for the reason why it's needed and the reason why the Government would bother to accommodate such a need when much easier to store options were available) happens to be virtually identical to the storage requirements for living samples of this parasite.
The symptoms of the diseases named for infection of this parasite have similarlity to the officially listed symptoms of COVID-19
That there are warnings of an outbreak of this disease-by-parasite in America during COVID-19, where risk to this type of disease is considered very low due to modern housing, and no reason given as to the warning
Infection by this parasite might be one reason why the anti-parasitic drug ivermectin is widely reported to have success treating COVID
Infection by this parasite might be one reason why snake venom is reported to have some success in treating COVID

American Scientists Confirm Graphene Oxide in Vaccines, Pfizer Contains Trypanosoma Cruzi Parasite
Microscopy Expert: Vials Contain Graphene Oxide, Parasites, Stainless Steel

Some species of Hydra. References include:

Is there a species of Hydra which can survive in human blood? It is reasonable to believe that one might have been sought or engineered since these organisms are of high interest for research due to their apparent immortality and astonishing regenerative abilities.

Polypodium hydriforme: A tentacled organism resembling the one in the 2017 horror movie Life here (now thought to be the endocellular parasite Polypodium hydriforme), as well as other organisms (video Moderna and Pfizer Thawed Warmed Vials Become Alive Self-Moving Organism).
Other reports:

27 October, 20233: INSECTS GROWING IN VAXED
Eggs "Hatching by the Millions" Evidence: Bioweapon Shots Contain Living Parasite Eggs
An aluminum-based lifeform????
Video: HORROR_ Exclusive VIDEO Captures _Organism_ From Vaxxed Soldier's Body

Microcircuitry: maybe in the vaccine solution, or maybe preloaded in the syringe used for the vaccination (which would allow a larger size and far more certain delivery if it's a single chip).

15 December, 2022: There’s microcircuitry inside the Covid injections, says Australian doctor
Video: Moderna Patent Uncovers HORROR Nanocensor Contained in Bioweapon
Hacker breaks into Vaccine database and claims he found proof of Microchip | Censored Video
ID Chip in Vaccine?
MICROCHIP INSIDE VACCINE SYRINGES: YOU WILL BE TAGGED, TRACKED AND HUNTED DOWN WHEN NEEDED. This video exposes that the microchips don't need to be in the vaccine solution, if they are preloaded into the syringes used.
Another Vaccine Microchip Found in a Vaccinated Person
Doctor Admits Microchip In Covid Vaccines

Fact-check sources tend to claim that it's impossible for the vaccines to deliver microchips because microchips are far too big (such as this article here).
That's not true. Ignoring the possibility of secret (not revealed to the Public) Government technology for a moment, this kind of technology has been revealed to the Public for over a decade now. For example, regarding size, Hitachi announced a contactless RFID chip of length and width just 0.05mm each since 2007 as shown here (this page verifies some of Hitachi's earlier development along these lines since 2001). These types of chips are commonly called 'smart dust'. But that was 2007; where do you think they are now? In comparison, according to this official CDC Reference Guide for Healthcare Professionals, the vaccination needle for the COVID vaccines must be 22–25 gauge, which according to this online reference means an internal bore diameter of 0.168 - 0.26 mm. That means it was announced since 2007 that we have wireless-communicating microchips small enough to be taken up by a standard vaccination syringe.

It's concerning enough that these chips are capable of identifying us to a wireless receiver, but there may be a medical-monitoring application, specificially microchips which output information on our bodies, such as announced by Profusa on their website in March 2018 in this press release: Injectable Body Sensors Take Personal Chemistry to a Cell Phone Closer to Reality.

In addition, it's also public knowledge that scientists have developed micro-machines, the size of a spec of dust, to deliver drugs into the body (see here).

Therefore it is possible to fit working microchips into the vaccines for delivery through the hypodermic needles. The technology does exist.

Someone presumably in the know, a chief advisor for Klaus Schwab (founder of the World Economic Forum and co-author of the book COVID-19: The Great Reset), Dr. Yuval Harari, says about the COVID-19 crisis, at 00:30 in this video, that the Public "agreed to be surveyed all the time", and that "this was the moment when surveillance started going under the skin". How did the COVID-19 crisis introduce surveillance under the skin, except it being in the vaccines? Nothing else went under the Public's skin during that time. (It's also interesting that he calls COVID a 'crisis' rather than a 'pandemic'. We agree, although we didn't derive this usage of this word from him.)

There is another evidence of microchips being in the COVID-19 vaccines. No human being should naturally emit a bluetooth MAC address, yet many people report MAC addresses showing up on Bluetooth scanners in the presence of COVID-19 vaccinated people. Example videos and articles are:

January 16, 2024: If the Covid Jab was a Trial Run – What Happens Next?
June 22, 2023: Covid-19 vaccine mRNA MAC addresses
April 18, 2023: MAC Address Bluetooth Emissions in Vaccinated Subjects - Mik Anderson
Bluetooth Challenge Confirmed BTE MAC address For Each COVID-19 Vaccine Shot!!!
MAC-cinated: Dr. Luis De Benito on the Bluetooth phenomenon

MAC Address Detection/Reconciliation Experiments: It seems like a test anyone can experiment with using their own smartphone and a Bluetooth finder/radar app. There are ways you can detect if people do, using a free Bluetooth scanner app on your smartphone, and compare that with who is vaccinated or not (with their permission).

Experiment 1: Isolation Get to an area so remote that there are no Bluetooth signals in range, with the subject far away. Open your Bluetooth scanner. Ask them to come close. See if an address appears. As them to go far away aagain. See if it disappears. Example video: Each vaccinated person has a MAC address detectable through Bluetooth [COVID]. Be careful not to jump to a conclusion about cause of the MAC address without more information. You can simply say it is unnatural and the cause is unnkown, but add a question about their vaccination status.
Experiment 2: Reconcilation Capture MAC addresses detected by Bluetoothe scanner when people are around. Enter all of them into a public MAC address vendor search. Take not of any which shown on the scannner but not in the search. This test alone does not prove that such addresses are coming from those people, but the fact that there are active MAC addresses of no public record is itself concerning and indicates a secret hidden from public view. This brief video examples of this proceduree).
Experiment 3: Deceased Go to an isolated cemetery, when no one living is around, but there are some people died in 2021 and after, and scan for Bluetooth addresses there. Example video: Vaccinated dead people EMIT BLUETOOTH MAC ADDRESS in Graveyard- Dr Pedro Chavez

It is important to note that some people, if asked, may lie about their vaccination status, and to beware of that in managing your experiments. In particular, the unvaccinated have a reason to lie, after being segregated and punished for non-compliance.

Our theory of how this might work:

each vaccine vial contains a large number of smart dust microchips, suspended in the solution, each with an identical MAC address for all the chips the same vial.
After a dose is administered (to the patient via syringe), the patient will show that MAC address as radiating from their body (some people report them visible on standard Bluetooth scanners such as with their smartphone).
Vaccinated individuals accumulate an additional MAC address with each subsequent vaccination
Even though there are normally multiple doses in each vial of vaccine, which are supposed to be given to different patients, by submitting to further booster shots in different settings, each patient will accumulate a unique combination of MAC addresses.

Central Database: All this suggests that a central database is being kept on vaccinated people, at least to match codes to people, to track them. At least one hacker reports finding the central database of chip information: article: COVID Vaccinated Are Being Tracked via 5G Cellular Towers

Other Mysterious Nanotechnology: Microtubules and more, such as discussed in these sources:

Luciferase: There are reports that a light-emitting enzyme of this name is included in at least some of the vaccines, or at least there is some post-vaccine residue reported in the patients' bodies which glows under some type of scanning (ultraviolet or infrared light?). Maybe it's luciferase-coated magnetic nanoparticles as used in advanced medical imaging? Resources include:

There is verifiable evidence that the extra inclusions match patents explicitly related to the vaccine patents:

Biotech analyst Karen Kingston unveils the covid vaccine 5G link + biosynthetic AI nanotech. This video also includes the theory that the vaccines may have installed an execution platform by which the vaccinated can be killed by a certain EMR signal.
RECEIPTS: Patents Expose "Medical Devices" in Jab, Injectable Computing System

Possible Payload Release inside Vaccinated People on a 5G Signal

It could even be another virus released on-demand.

Pfizer partnered with Marvel comics to create propaganda to induce children to want the vaccine as though it was an act of heroism: October 13, 2022 article: Marvel pushing vaccine indoctrination of children in new digital covid vaccine comic book that partners with Pfizer. The problem, of course, is that children are not supposed to be making medical decisions, so it's not ethical to encourage them the want something they're not supposed to be deciding on.
Regarding parental consent, initiatives were put in place to allow children to be vaccinated at their own decision without parental consent or knowledge:

As for informed consent, pharmacists have been reporting that the 'package insert' (a technical product information document intended for the healthcare provider, and not the same as the 'fact sheet' or 'patient package insert' or 'monograph' which is intended for the patient) accompanying the vaccine, which is a legal requirement, is physically there but simply printed that it's intentionally left blank. Example videos are: here, here, here, here, and here.

Also: The CVS Pharmacist Reaction!
Vaccines to Variants: Since the vaccine rollout, the emergency and pro-restrictions narrative continued based on a seemingly endless array of new virus 'variants' which were reported to emerge and to which the vaccine was not entirely effective, yet somehow effective enough that everyone must be pressured to take it. Some say that these variants are only names used to cover-up the adverse COVID vaccine reactions, to blame them on COVID rather than the vaccines. Others say that the vaccination caused the variants to emerge biologically:

Jan 10 2023: The COVID Jabbed Are Dying While Fueling Variants
COVID Vaccines Are Growing New Variants Inside Vaxxed Bodies Claims Gates Backed Doctor
June 16, 2021: The COVID vaccine is causing the COVID variants

Regarding why some people voluntarily took the COVID vaccine. In this whole crisis, the reasons people give for taking the vaccine have been some of the most scary things of all.

Part 1: Things theorized were the reasons people were taking the vaccine, assuming some kind of rational thought or morality on their part:

Ignorance about medicine combined with pride. Rather than admit their lack of knowledge, they try to hide it by following Government-appointed experts, for which society will not blame them, and accuse any dissenter of being against knowledge. If they would only admit their lack of knowledge, independent experts are more than happy to supply the truth at whatever level they understand, and they could start to learn.
Excessive fear of COVID.COVID and its variants have been promoted with excessive fear, such as the use of unscientific fear-stoking language and dismissal of our own natural defenses. The mortality rate of COVID is very low except for the elderly.
Absolute trust in the recommendations of government and health officials. After all, it's easier to trust than think.
Longstanding trust in conventional medicine: trusting the drugs/vaccine/surgery 'unnatural' approach over natural health approaches.
Convenience. Just as taking a heart pill is much easier than changing your lifestyle, accepting an injection is much easier than doing almost anything else regarding COVID: even taking a pill requires more effort than allowing someone to jab you.
Coercion (Coerced Voluntary). They want or need to keep their job and/or access to travel and social venues which require proof of vaccination.
False hope. Many people took the vaccine on the hope that it would return our society to the freedoms we had before the COVID crisis. It hasn't, things have gotten worse since the vaccine rollout (eg. see here), and officials have been pretty clear during the entire crisis that they will never allow us to go back to the previous 'normal'. Worst of all, those who accept the vaccine mandates and passports are slaves, always having to accept the next booster shot, or lose their priviledges.

Part 2: Reasons those accepting COVID vaccines actually gave this author:

"I don't care." This person subsequently (soon after COVID vaccination) suffered a significant weakening of his already weak heart which he insists is due to the vaccine and now he's getting many heart investigations done at Public expense. Again he gives the same reason as he's booked his third dose.
"I don't want to know." .. "Ignorance is bliss!"
"I don't want to know." .. "I'm a sheep!"
"I trust the science". There's no such thing as trust in science! Science was developed as a method of finding truth WITHOUT TRUST. That's the whole point of the scientific method. If you are trusting, you are in some kind of belief system, not science.
"Otherwise you can't go anywhere" or "I took it to travel" Is it worth altering your genetic information, and risk death, just to have permission to travel?
"I need it for my job". No, you need it to satisfy arbitrary mandates, some of which have recently been repealed due to too many refusals. But if you must choose between your job and your life and you choose your job how does that work out?
Something like, "If humanity goes extinct over it we won't be around to care". Wow.

Why might anyone support vaccine mandates? It's difficult to theorize how, if the vaccines actually worked to make people immune, and they were readily and freely available to all who wanted them, why anyone would go beyond getting themselves vaccinated and try to make it mandatory for others to get vaccinated against their free choice. Theorized reasons for the COVID situation include:

You got the COVID vaccine on assurances it would save us, it didn't, and you realize you've been had. You want everyone else to suffer like you suffer, similar to the fable of the Fox who Lost His Tail
You were mandated in your job to get the vaccine, and because the Public didn't support you having a free choice, you're not going to support them having a free choice, either.
You're a paid part of the political/propaganda machine and you're told by your boss to push the vaccines.
The political party you are loyal to supports mandatory vaccination and you believe that political loyalty is the highest possible virtue.

Regarding why some people refuse the vaccines even though offered for free (please see also this list): It's only fair to allow those who refuse the vaccines to answer for themselves:

Here is Brazilian president Bolsonaro explainning why he refuses the vaccine.
Here is a pharmacist explaining her reason, namely that the package insert is blank, meaning she is denied relevant technical information normally available with such things and therefore cannot make an informed decision. In other words, if you're refused detailed technical information, you refuse to accepting the associated thing. This kind of thinking mirrors the chief of engineering character Scotty's refusal, in the film Star Trek Into Darkness (2013), where he refused to accept missiles to be loaded onto his ship if he wasn't provided with the technical specifications for them.
Suri Kinzbrunner offers her reasons in this article, which include the fact that she knows three of her immediate network of family and friends who has suffered death or serious adverse effects following vaccination.
Here is a nurse giving her reasons.
Chananya Weissman offered 31 reasons why she refused to accept the vaccine
Samuel Sey offers his reasons (here) that he refuses the vaccine because 1) he objects to authoritarian coercion and doesn't want to reward that tactic by giving in to it, and 2) he doesn't believe it's the best choice for his health. It's worth remembering that every individual should have first right to decide what's best for their own health, even if they're not physicians, because they, not the Government or the experts, have to live with the consequences. Those who take the risks should be the ones who make the final decision and it shouldn't be coerced. As a comparison, please imagine if the government mandated one thing where you should invest all of your wealth: no, if you take the risks you should decide.
Please see our Reasons to Refuse the Genetic (mRNA or Adenovirus) COVID-19 Vaccines

How the Vaccinated, rather than Unvaccinated, Maybe Be a Risk to the Public:

Unusual frequency of vehicle accidents since the vaccine rollout, suggesting the vaccinated may be a danger to others when they pilot vehicles:

Shedding: The potential medical harms of the COVID 'vaccines' may not just be limited to those who accept the vaccine. By the phenomenon of 'shedding', the vaccinated may produce something which harms others on a medical level who come in contact with them. It may be spike protein, graphene, or something else, but there is reason to suspect this:

December 08, 2022: Tom Renz: Vaccine shedding is NOT a conspiracy theory
February 25, 2022: Fully vaccinated individuals are SHEDDING GRAPHENE and infecting the unvaccinated, causing serious health complications
January 18, 2022: COVID-19 vaccine spike proteins are SHEDDING, giving people heart attacks, strokes and more
May 21, 2021: WATCH: Dr. Christiane Northrup explains risks of covid vaccine spike protein “shedding”
September 23, 2021: DOCUMENT REVEAL: Covid “vaccines” are shedding deadly spike proteins via “skin-penetrating nanoparticles”
October 30th, 2021: Adverse Reaction: Shedding

Life Insurance Claim Refusal: It's happened in at least one case that a life insurance company refused to pay out on a death claim for someone who died from the COVID vaccine on the company's argument that the deceased person knowingly consented to the risks of the experiment (articles and here).
Number of Vaccine Doses:
Most of the vaccines were designed to be given as multiple, at least two, doses, on the claim that there was no significant immunity until after the second dose. Example articles with this claim are:
1. COVID-19 Vaccines and Immunity: How Long Does it Take for the Vaccines to Provide Protection?
2. Why you're not fully protected from COVID-19 after a single vaccine dose
3. Why you shouldn’t forgo your second COVID-19 vaccine dose
Ultimately it seems booster shots seem to be required 6 months or so, without any end, and if you refuse the next booster shot, you are put in the same social punishments as those who never took the first dose. Some related articles include:
1. September 08, 2022: Biden’s coronavirus adviser says the reason why God created humans with two arms is to receive a flu shot in one and a covid jab in the other
2. Australia you are only considered fully vaccinated with 5 doses of poison
3. Jun 15, 2022: Canada ups number of shots to three to be considered ‘fully vaccinated’ against COVID
4. Moderna CEO claims FOURTH dose needed by Fall, 2022… where does it end?
5. COMPLIANCE IS STUPID: 3.8 million fully vaccinated Austrians are about to be considered unvaccinated and lose their freedoms
6. December 09, 2021: New Zealand PM Jacinda Ardern admits mass vaccination program has “no end point”
7. Vaccine passports DEACTIVATED for French citizens who fail to get THIRD shot… the obedience demands never end
8. IT NEVER ENDS: Israel says FOURTH “booster” vaccine will be required to keep covid “green pass” active
9. England to roll out fourth COVID shot for persons 75 and older
10. ENDLESS NIGHTMARE: Moderna CEO says booster shots will need to be taken FOREVER… Big Pharma now dictating all public policy as real science is SILENCED#
11. INFINITE PANDEMIC: Multiple nations announce never-ending “booster” shots, lockdowns, covid compliance… it will only end when we RESIST the medical tyranny
12. CDC Director: We ‘May Need to Update Our Definition of Fully Vaccinated’ – Jabs FOREVER
13. Mayo Clinic doctor predicts COVID shots will be necessary for over 100 years
14. FDA authorizes fourth, fifth mRNA shots for people over 50, immunocompromised
15. April 04, 2022" FDA announces fifth COVID-19 dose may be necessary by Fall, just hours after authorizing fourth shot
From a business perspective, multiple doses assures ongoing revenue for the manufacturers and distribution chain of the vaccines.

Medically curious was that, although an additional dose existed on the exuse of bolstering declining immunity over time, the recommended time to wait for thet next dose was initially far shorter than any significant decline in immunity could be expected to take place (for example 6 months): more like a time of maximum antibody production from the first dose. The video exposes that vaccinating when the antibodies are high in the blood, would make the second dose even much more dangerous than the first dose in terms of potential autoimmune attack: Dr Sucharit Bhakdi. The CDC, in particular, has been increasing their recommended wait time between doses, initially 3-4 weeks, then 8 weeks, and as of this writing 5 months. Presumably there's obviously some safety reason involved, but that doesn't help people who already received the doses on the shorter timeframe. This kind of thing is to be expected when the whole thing is a huge experiment.
Defense of the COVID-19 vaccines by the medical industry: The medical industry has been observed, from the lowest to highest levels, to show a tendency to defend the vaccine from both criticism and suspicion, especially to not look for a link to prior vaccination when new medical conditions are observed. Example article: Doctors dismiss Aussie woman’s post-COVID vaccine issues as alcohol withdrawal symptoms

It's sad if we're depending on the same people to report vaccine adverse effects.
Physicians can usually dismiss complaints or undocumented facts in practice. The physician, not the patient, writes the chart, and if the physician decides to dismiss a complaint or link described by a patient, it might not even show up in the chart. For example, if someone says they felt terrible following vaccination, the physican can easily omit the 'following vacination' part when writing up their chart.
If no theory (besides vaccines) can be found (as to the root cause of the observed harm), physicians are free to simply say the cause is unknown. Although physicians seem to accept responsibility to check for immediate life threats, physicians are usually under no legal obligation to find root causes or even to diagnose
The fact that there is no direct test for vaccine injury makes it easy to deflect blame to any other cause. Example article: Inventing diagnoses to cover up vaccine injury — a con as old as vaccination itself
Later a 'bivalent' (2-strain, usually original strain and omicron) COVID vaccine was released with similar recklessness. How reckless? Well, for example, thePfizer BA.4/BA.5 vaccine was approved for public distribution based on a study in just 8 mice. Other references:

October 17, 2022: Dr. Paul Offit admits new COVID bivalent boosters offer NO BENEFITS
September 19, 2022: Untested bivalent COVID jab being rolled out
September 15, 2022: NO SCIENCE AT ALL: FDA grants EUA to untested bivalent COVID-19 vaccine boosters
August 23, 2022: Reformulated “Bivalent Spikevax” covid injection from Moderna is made by company with ties to US intelligence agencies

Vaccines were overpurchased by Governments with Public Money: October 14, 2022: European Parliament member says EU over-purchase of COVID jabs equates to “biggest corruption scandal in the history of mankind”
Due to Government purchasing far exceeding demand, millions of doses were eventually thrown out, as new typs of vaccines were brought up. It's another case of Governments paying Public money for no public benefit, but these sums of money are large and more than needed in other areas or better not spent at all. For example:

November 18, 2022: Canada throwing away MILLIONS of COVID-19 vaccines after spending BILLIONS with Big Pharma
October 24, 2022: Switzerland to destroy 9M expired doses of Moderna COVID-19 vaccine after consumer demand plummets
22 Aug, 2022: Untested Bivalent COVID Jab Being Rolled Out

Human genetic alteration has potentially dire non-medical consequences also:

New Species: Regardless of whether the change is permanent or temporary, artificially reprogramming your cells on a genetic level with foreign genetic code, such as in the genetic vaccines, makes you a transgenic or 'genetically modified' organism (GMO), by definition: no longer 100% human. Surprisingly, although it's been popular to resist genetically modified (GMO) foods (there is even a 'non-GMO' promise on the bag of Wonder Bread as of this writing), many of the same people there has been little resistance to accepting these genetic vaccines turning people's bodies into a GMO.
It's worth noting that not all COVID vaccines worldwide or in development attempt to artificially corrupt your genetic information. Some use attenuated (weakened/killed) virus, which is the traditional approach to vaccines, and one uses virus proteins manufactured in plants.
Legality: From a legal standpoint, there are some dangerous legal conquences of genetic alteration by these vaccines:

If a human genome is artificially altered, that genome is no longer completely human.
Not being completely human, such a person would not legally be entitled to human rights.
If such a genome is altered with a patented genetic code, there is legal precedent that the entire genome becomes the legal property of the patentholder. In other words, if you accept a patented genetic COVID vaccine, and if it alters your genome, then you become no longer human but the legal property of the patentholder. Resources:

Morality: The genetic code inserted into the human body by the vaccine is by definition a reprogramming of your body, but are they morally authorized to do that? When you update software on your electronic device, aren't you supposed to be suspicious of installing any software which is not from the manufacturer? Who is the manufacturer of the human body?
Spiritual Implications: Spiritual implications are the most serious because they are potentially eternal. A physical alteration can have spiritual consequences when you accept it, out of your free will, to happen to you. Spiritual consequences are only negated if the change is absolutely forced upon you without any opportunity to choose anything. This may be why the Government has been pushing so hard to encourage and coerce people to get the vaccination, but not actually hold them down and vaccinate them against their will. However coerced with pressures, ultimately the Government wants us to agree to the injection first, presumably so that our destruction will be thorough on all levels.

There are efforts by the medical Establishment to label refusal of the COVID-19 vaccine as a psychiatric disorder for which treatment is medication or psychotherapy, presumably until submission is achieved. Video Nov 26, 2022: Canadian Psychiatric Association Targets Anti-Vaxxers

Ultimately the Public was far worse off for the vaccination program, because not only were they not protected from any of the viruses, but they had to endure horrific vaccine adverse effects, many of which remain unknown and some of which can be hereditary, and an explosion of variants, now with no hope except the next dose, while the last dose kept being shown to be a failure. And of course tremendous public money was squandered on this.

We simplified it for the adults so you can understand... pic.twitter.com/a1JyfL7qZ5
— Patrick Henningsen (@21WIRE) February 18, 2021

COVID-19 Treatment

Officially Approved COVID-19 Treatment:

Officially approved treatment options for COVID-19 have been thin and useless in most countries, while all Public hope has been directed towards the vaccines. For example, in the USA, this official FDA page shows the first treatment as remdesivir (brand name Veklury).
Unfortunately for patients, remdesivir may be helping COVID-19 patients die rather than recover:

The other treatment approved (as EUA) by the FDA was monoclonal antibodies, but they received little press and there have been attempts to prohibit access to them: Biden cuts off America’s supply of monoclonal antibodies – only “vaccines” allowed. This is an experimental treatment of a fairly new technology so safety concerns are valid: Eli Lilly monoclonal antibody drug trial paused over safety concerns.

ALTERNATIVE COVID-19 Treatment Options:

Howevermuch we're lead to believe that a vaccine is the only way our immune system can defeat a virus, how can that be true when our science already understands so many medical tools both natural and artificial? Since viruses are nothing new, surely some of them must be of some degree of help against this virus, if nothing else but to strengthen our natural immune system. Actually there are many other defenses showing medical promise, including:

Ivermectin: (Please see Misleading Public Portrayal and/or Unhelpful Restriction of Ivermectin under the heading 'SUSPICIONS of Malevolence', or search this page for 'Ivermectin').

Dr. Pierre Kory: ‘Covid-19 Is Highly Treatable’

Vitamin D: (Please see subheading Lack of Promotion of Vitamin D under the section of this webpage under the heading 'SUSPICIONS of Malevolence', or search this page for 'Vitamin D'.)
Hydroxychloroquine and/or Zinc:

Nicotine (gum) and other antivenom factors (even velvet beans aka mucuna pruriens):

Vitamin C
Some combination thereof, example article: If hospitals had utilized the Zelenko protocol with intravenous vitamin C and vitamin D, then covid-19-associated deaths would be virtually nonexistent
Honey with Black Cumin
Sunlight
UV light
NAC: Corrupt FDA trying to ban NAC, which detoxifies the body and wards off COVID
Iodine: Article: Iodine, a preventive and curative agent in the COVID-19 pandemic?
Chlorine Dioxide: Chlorine dioxide to treat COVID? YES, says Dr. Manuel Aparicio
Nasal Washes: October 09, 2022 article: Simple nasal wash reduces risk of covid hospitalization by more than 8x
Nutrition. The human body depends on it to work, and this includes our immune system.
Sleep.

Even breathing: New science proves that merely BREATHING fights off respiratory viruses – now we know why they push masks
Do nothing differently. That's right. Rather than look at graphs of projections going up and surrendering everything just based on our imagination of what might happen, we could have chosen to delay our reaction until we saw the reality, or choose to not do anything because we will never surrender our human rights. Here's an article about success doing exactly that. It's also worth noting that SARS pandemic, which is the closest virus related to COVID, disappeared on its own.

Financial Incentives for COVID Diagnosis and Treatment

It's important to note that the medical industry is a for-profit business, and therefore sensitive to financial incentives.

It made tremendous revenues on generous Government research grants, as well as the forced public demand of: Government-mandated shots, mandated medical pesonal protectie equipment (PPE), and mandated medical testing.

More than that, hospitals/doctors had financial incentives for declaring COVID-19 cases, treatments, and deaths: essentially making more money the sicker people got with COVID-19, as well as an incentive to falsely inflate the COVID-19 counts. Here are resources on that:

29 October, 2023: THEY LIED TO YOU!: NHS Director confirms Hospitals lied about Cause of Death to create illusion of COVID Pandemic
The sicker you become with COVID, the MORE money US hospitals receive from the Biden Regime
The SICK AMOUNT of MONEY MADE in HOSPITALS for COVID PATIENTS. According to this video, the hospitals were not only paid heavily for COVID but paid in advance, based on models, and if they didn't achieve the COVID cases/treatment/deaths they would have to pay the money back!
Fact check: Hospitals get paid more if patients listed as COVID-19, on ventilators
Physicians Say Hospitals Are Pressuring ER Docs to List COVID-19 on Death Certificates. Here’s Why

There were also financial incentives for physicians for COVID-19 vaccination compliance of their patients, ie. an incentive to influence/pressure their patients to accept the vaccine:

18 August, 2023: If your doctor told you to get “vaccinated” for COVID, they were BRIBED, evidence shows
Aug 14, 2023: Vaccine Provider Incentive Program

These incentives would pressure medical organizations and professionals to cooperate with the COVID-19 narrative and vaccination program, and to influence their patients to do the same, regardless of merit. Again, the medical industry isn't the truth industry: it's a for-profit business.

Direct-Industry Reaction

Alleged Concealment of Critical Data:

Alleged Bribe Attempts to Silence Opposition:

Dr. Paul Alexander says he rejected Pfizer’s $1 million offer to stop questioning COVID vaccines

Hospitals Become Prisons: Under the guise of protecting the Public from presumably infectious 'COVID' patients, and supported by legislation (such as the Coronavirus Act 2020 in the UK), hospitals were holding people against their will.

Endless COVID:

Health officials (generally those appointed by Government or given speaking time by mainstream news) kept perception of medical emergency going indefinitely by such tactics as:

Telling the world that COVID-19 will never end, despite any treatment, even though the predecessor virus, SARS-CoV-1 (SARS) disappeared quickly without any vaccine.
Declaring a new 'wave' or 'variant' of the virus was upon society, periodically, whenever social restrictions were relaxed, and calling for them to be reinstated. Example articles are:

Periodically announcing new 'variants' of the COVID-19 virus, each one usually and supposedly more dangerous than the last one, and insisting that prior immunity, even from vaccination, was oly partly effective. Each such variant announcement effectively created a new and partly independent mini-pandemic within the original crisis pandemic, for unending fear and no closure, and extension of emergency powers and social restrictions and vaccine mandates and more booster shots.

The basic idea supporting this continual renewal of the crisis was that since society condoned suspending our human rights at the announcement of one virus, then it set a precedent for similar totalitarian measures to be imposed on any other virus (or variant) announcment.
Claiming that the hospital system was already overwhelmed, or would certainly be if 'action' was not taken
Blaming any easing of social restrictions on increasing COVID-19 spread, except for defending political protests supportive of the Government, so that we couldn't release restrictions with a clear conscience.

Recommending more booster shots without end (as discussed previously on this page).

(Chapter 2, Section 4) Government Reaction

Presumably independent Governments around the world have been shockingly uniform and largely simultaneous to implement radical social change and strongly advocate vaccines, even before they existed, based on the prevailing scienctific/medical narrative (that COVID-19 very dangerous and only radical social change and vaccines can safe us).

World Health Organization: This UN agency guided world governments to respond to the pandemic in similar timeframe and manner.
Emergency Powers: Governments awarded themselves 'emergency' (dictatorial) powers, effectively suspending democracy, supposedly temporarily, except that they kept extending them without any clear end. For example, here is an incomplete list of extensions by the Government of Ontario (Canada), sufficient to show the pattern:
1. March 17, 2020: Ontario declares state of emergency amid COVID-19 pandemic
2. Monday, March 23: Ontario orders all non-essential businesses to shut down
3. March 30, 2020: Ontario Premier Doug Ford extends state of emergency for another two weeks
4. April 14, 2020: 'This crisis is far from over': Ontario extends state of emergency until May 12
5. May 6, 2020: Ontario extends all COVID-19 emergency orders past Victoria Day
6. May 19, 2020: Ontario extends all emergency orders, including limits on social gatherings
7. June 2, 2020: Ontario extends state of emergency by four weeks
8. June 27, 2020: Ontario extends emergency orders, lifts some restrictions on indoor sports facilities
9. July 9, 2020: Ontario extends COVID-19 emergency orders until July 22
10. August 20, 2020: Ontario government extends COVID-19 emergency orders
11. October 20, 2020: Ontario extends COVID-19 orders for another 30 days amid second wave
12. December 10, 2020: Ontario extends all COVID-19 emergency orders until Jan. 20
13. January 11, 2021: Ontario considers declaring second state of emergency, sources say
14. January 25, 2021: Ontario officially extends state of emergency and stay-at-home order by 14 days
15. February 18, 2021: Ontario extends all emergency orders under the Reopening Ontario Act until March 21
16. March 19, 2021: Ontario extends all emergency orders under the Reopening Ontario Act until April 20
17. April 16, 2021: Ontario extends stay-at-home order, restricts interprovincial travel as province loses battle against COVID-19
18. May 29, 2021: Ontario extends some COVID-19 orders past June 2, including ban on recreational camping and provincial border closures
19. 23 Nov 2021: Ontario to extend emergency orders under Reopening Ontario Act
Another example is the USA, still extending emergency powers due to fear of new variants into at least 2023: Article November 15, 2022: Power corrupts: US health authorities refuse to lift COVID-19 public health emergency

That is well after the president already declared the pandemic 'over', they sometimes refuse to lift the legal state of emergency. Article 20 September, 2022: Covid-19 pandemic is over in the US - Joe Biden.

This proves that the Pandemic was used as an excuse for even 'democratic' governments to award themselves enduring emergency powers.

(This goes to show the importance of not accepting any human rights or democracy infringements just because they are 'temporary', because 'temporary' is easily made 'permanent' on the principle of precedent, ie. that if they are OK by you once they are OK by you forever.)

Government Orders: As a 'new normal', Governments worldwide, following their assumption of emergency dictatorial powers, started outright ordering the Public in how to live, under the guise of keeping them 'safe' from the invisible threat of COVID-19.

This authoritarian attitude has not only continued throughout the crisis, but has become a permanent social change, in the sense that restrictions were usually not lifted completely in all settings, and the authorities were usually clear on their power to re-impose restrictions if they saw fit.

The orders were supported by severe penalties, normally astronomical fines in case of any violation, and mostly enforced at the business level, rather than direct enforcement by police officers. They were a new thing created for the Public to fear. For example:
- November 8, 2022: Canada’s Health Agency Levied Quarantine Fines of Over $61,000 a Day on Cross-Border Travellers: Federal Records
- Disobeying the COVID-19 emergency law could cost you $100,000 and one year in jail
- Pallister says province will hit pocketbooks of 'selfish' Manitobans who don't follow public-health rules
- Governor of Hawaii becomes a tyrannical monarch, threatens $5,000 fine and jail time for people who do not wear masks
Of course, fines serve no direct medical purpose to remove the supposed danger. A very wealthy person could shrug them off. That's why we don't address murder simply with a fine. This proves that the fines in COVID-19 were politically motivated not medially motivted.

It is crucial to understand that these orders were not brought on by the COVID-19 disease, but by Government. It might seem obvious, but the vaccines were promoted and accepted to save us from the social restrictions which actually Government, not COVID-19, did to us. In fact, in some cases, lifting some social restrictions was explicitly tied by Government on condition of a certain percentage of the population becoming vaccinated. For example, the following press release from the Ontario premier on 20 May, 2021 makes clear that, regardless of whatever the virus is doing, social restrictions will be released only in stages and only so long as certain percentages of the population are vaccinated by that time: Ontario Releases Three-Step Roadmap to Safely Reopen the Province

These orders included:

Government-Mandated Mask-Wearing:

Virtually everyone was deemed a threat to the health of others unless they wore a mask.
For the first time in history, it was not legal to breathe the air directly.
Initially, Western Governments and their experts said wearing masks was unnecessary, but then later in the same crisis they recommended and then mandated them.
Some regions mandated mask wearing even outdoors.
The mandates were so severe, that they did not exclude physical exercise such as working out at the gym or even athletic competition, to the harm of many.
- December 21, 2021: Masks remain mandatory for Bath-area winter student athletes
- January 23, 2022: Masks still a thing for prep sports
- 428 Does exercising with a face mask affect athletes performance?
This caused some athletes to collapse.
- STUDENT ATHLETE PASSES OUT, SMOTHERED WITH MASK WHILE RUNNING OUTSIDE
- Oregon Revises Mask Rule After Female Athlete Running with a Mask Collapses at Finish Line or High School Athlete Collapses at Finish Line After Being Forced to Wear a Mask During Race: 'I Just Felt Super Dizzy'
Sometimes masks were required even online, eg. article: Employer demands all employees wear masks during ZOOM meetings because “unmasked faces” make other employees nervous
Aug 31, 2022 video: NATURE Scientific Journal Admits Facemasks Are Full Of Cancer Causing Chemicals
The pore size in surgical masks is far greater than that of the COVID-19 virus, making it impossible for the former to physically filter out the latter.

Shockingly, the Public was advised to compromise to no strict limit on the pore size, with Government advising that even cloth masks were adequate, but somehow higher medical-grade masks (better than surgical) should not be used, claliming it might trigger shortage for medical workers. For example, from the Ontario, Canada government website:

That's like saying to avoid fleas, all dogs and cats must wear a collar, but it must not be a flea collar, because those are reserved for pets forseeably coming into contact with fleas.

Surgical masks were only designed to stop droplets.
For one thing, they have no airtight seal around the sides.
The COVID-19 virus is acknowledged as being airborne, which is to say, lingers in the air for hours. WHO article: Coronavirus disease (COVID-19): How is it transmitted?
Mask-wearing impedes ability of a person to inhale oxygen (O2) and eliminate carbon dioxide (CO2 gas, a toxic by-product of respiration) from their lungs. Example video: Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi on Masks
It should have been obvious that masks would reduce our oxygen intake with a disease which compromises our oxygen absorption, and obvious that it's a bad idea.

At least we could have exempted those with lung disorders from mask wearing.

The Public wasn't much encouraged to wash or replace these masks, which were usually the disposable kind, and since the easiest and cheapest thing to do is not wash or replace them, the tendency would be for the Public, unaccustomed to these devices, was to wear filthy masks, especially when the filth would not usually be perceptible to the naked eye. This actually provided a warm nesting area for pathogens close to the mouth.
The masks were not scientifically proven to be effective to protect people from viruses like COVID-19:

Mar 15, 2023: The Cochrane Mask Fiasco
A hot mike at an official USA White House press briefing on COVID in April 2020 caught an official directing another insider that he can take his mask off because the case mortality rate is 0.1 to 0.3 (percent).
Article: The Only Study Claiming Surgical Masks Work Has Just Fallen Apart
Aug 12, 2022: Sacrificing children’s health in the name of Health
May 11, 2020: Blaylock: Face Masks Pose Serious Risks To The Healthy.

October 24, 2021: Physician and Ex Medical Journal Editor: 8 Ways Covid Masks Are HARMFUL.
Article: More than 150 Comparative Studies and Articles on Mask Ineffectiveness and Harms
Article: Masks purposely being forced on children to dumb them down by depriving their brains of oxygen

Masks Shown to be manufactured with chemical contaminants:

Article: Masks contain deadly graphene oxide nanoparticles indicted Fauci associate Charles Leiber patented as a deadly “gain of function” ingredient that enters the respiratory system and bloodstream
Article: COVID-19 discovery: Researcher in Canada invents coating that can kill virus on a mask, prevents transmission
Mysterious black fibers are reported on the masks: see here.

Even some of the strongest promoters of masks during the COVID-19 pandemic, were recorded earlier in their career advising against healthy people masking:

Despite it being impossible that surgical masks could offer any significant protection against an airborne virus, mask use was Government-mandated, strongly enforced, widely adopted, demanded by citizens against each other, and staunchly defended, so strong that some people could be seen wearking masks alone in their cars, and years later many healhty people still want to wear surgical masks in public voluntarily and refuse to acknowledge studies dismissing any alue to this type of use:

Mar 21 2023: The Mask of Ignorance
October 15, 2022: JAILED FOR NOT WEARING MASK! - As Narrative COLLAPSES The Tyranny Continues!
I Don't Know Why I'm Wearing a Mask

Government-Mandated Social Distancing:

Just as seriously as we were ordered to wear masks, we were also ordered to keep a 2 meter or 6 foot distance from each other for 'safety' to stop the spread of the virus.

⭕️ #NeverForget the Covid scam and how vulnerable we as a society are to groupthink & collective stupidity.

(Rock concert, 2020) pic.twitter.com/VllmMp9OJ2
— Patrick Henningsen (@21WIRE) May 20, 2023

It was enforced religiously, with floor markings in stores and all buildings where there might be a waiting line, and by police (who never had to distance). Technologies sprang up to remind us if we're keeping the appropriate distance.
But it made no sense, especially since the virus is airborne, but even if it wasn't. It's not supported by medicine: yes, the idea of distancing but not this specific distance. It was just another medical-nonsense way to order us around in blind obedience.
Besides being a suspension of our human rights (right to assemble), including making it difficult to form protests, this rule simply ignored that our buildings and vehicles (especially airplanes) were simply not designed to maintain a 6' spacing between us at all times and in all situations. Rather than admit this, we pretended we were keeping a 6' distance all the time even if sometimes we could not.
It's been admitted that the number was completely made up.

Government-Mandated General Lockdowns: This was essentially house arrest for all healthy people, with limited exceptions at Government discretion, (such as for 'essential workers'), because if you were known to be infected, there were separate quarantine principles for that. Locking down the entire society was not an accepted medical principle but an accepted prison principle. It was a shocking human rights infringement but Governments worldwide were amazingly willing to implement similar human rights supensions simultaneously. People couldn't go to Church, visit their parent in a nursing home, go to a funeral, or even get married, despite not being in a war, not being sick, and the virus, if it did exist, being only about as dangerous as the flu (if not a rebrand of the very same flu under another name): so mild that most people proven to have it showed no symptoms. The catastrophic social, psychological, economic, and freedom-related harms of this measure were touted as a necessary tradeoff for safety.
1. Lockdowns typically involved the following components:
2. Some nations proudly instituted 'Zero COVID' goals or would implement a lockdown on a single positive test of COVID based on the same mentaltiy. Unfortunately these policies ignored any false-positive rate to the COVID tests (which all tests have some amount of, and certainly to which all PCR tests are prone when run at high cycle rates) which, with enough people tested, effectively means guaranteed lockdown even by the false positive rate of the test, however rare.
3. It's worth noting that since the Public didn't ask the Government to focus on COVID-19 out of many possible diseases which exist in the world, or even disease as the foremost priority literally locking down all others, and now that this rationale has been accepted in practice, it's conceivable that the Government could lock any population down for a single case of any disease they choose to use as an excuse in the future. Nobody need have symtpoms: just based on test results. As was done with COVID-19. And the test doesn't even have to be accurate. Article: Why not test everybody via PCR for chicken pox and lock down the whole world from a single case of chicken pox?
4. There were no significant benefits to lockdown orders and only much harm. Articles:
5. Lockdowns instead caused massive additional harm in many ways, such as economic, social, psychological, physical, emotional, spiritual, and of course, medical. Parts:
Admittedly, there was an arguable (but not real) medical benefit to lockdowns, in the sense that if you restrict people going out of their home, you might stop them from spreading the virus, because it requires a mixing of people in close physical proximity. Besides the fact that SARS-CoV-2 was never purified and proven to cause disease, and that there are an infinite number of pathogens in the environment everywhere, the thinking also ignored the tremendous human rights and economic costs of lockdowns, and the tyrannical political precedent. These harms should not have been considered worthwhile in battling a disease which experts tell us we'll never be free of and will one day have to live with it anyway. Why not just live with it now and avoid the harms? If you can't ultimately stop something from coming and remaining, why kill yourself trying to stop it?

For these reasons, the medical excuse of lockdowns was thought to be just an excuse to get society to accept dramatically increased Government controls.
Government-Ordered Curfews

This was an act of control and social cost without any reasonable argument for medical benefit. The idea that you can see anyone in the day but no one at night, as though the virus is only active at night, is complete nonsense. COVID-19 doesn't turn people into werewolves dangerous at the first full moon. Yet government imposed curfews anyway, supported by mainstream media (who presented it as a contact restriction even though it was a time restriction), and publicly accepted as a show of 'strong' government.

January 4, 2022: Quebec government faces backlash for 2nd curfew
January 12, 2021: Québec Imposes Strict COVID-19 Lockdown Measures and an Overnight Curfew Through February 8, 2021
Jan 06, 2021: Quebec to impose 'electroshock' curfew for 4 weeks, starting Saturday
15/01/2021: France extends 6pm-to-6am curfew to the whole of the country
Sep 9, 2020: Boris Johnson could give Brits a STRICT 10pm curfew to halt horror second wave of COVID-19

Government-Mandated COVID-19 'Vaccination'

Infographic: The Countries Where Covid-19 Vaccination Is Mandatory | Statista

You will find more infographics at Statista

Initially, Goverment offered vaccination on a strictly voluntary basis.
Later, while vaccination remained voluntary it was encouraged with positive rewawrds, such as: beer, food, entry in a lottery, a cash reward, or even brothel services. These are inappropriate for many reasons, one of which is that medical decisions are so serious, and with such risks, that it is immoral to exert even rewards to sway the patients' decisions.

Later, Governments started using negative rewards to promote the vaccine, ie. returning arbitrarily suspended human rights on condition of compliance.

Vaccinated travellers will no longer need a PCR COVID test to get into Canada
1st November 2021: Thailand drops lengthy quarantine restrictions for vaccinated travelers
17th March 2022: Canada to lift testing requirement for fully vaccinated travelers
15 Oct 2021: US to lift restrictions for fully vaccinated international travelers on 8 November
March 10, 2022: Tourism, business groups call on Canada to lift COVID-19 testing for fully vaccinated travellers

In particular, many made lifting of the social restrictions which they arbitrarily imposed on a certain percentage of the Public. For example, there were certain percentage requirements for the Public to be COVID-vaccinated before society was allowed go to the next level of freedom in a published 'Reopening Plan'. We had to do something they wanted to get back the rights we were born with (later they would reimpose social restrictions despite our vaccine compliance). Our rights were held for ransom, and since the tactic was successful, Government has both precedent and incentive to use this tactic again in the future.

May 05, 2021: Whitmer threatens Michigan: Get vaccinated or stay locked down and masked forever
Victorians’ Hard Work Means Hitting Target Ahead Of Time with the 'Roadmap' of explicit vaccination requirements they are talking about downloadable from the official source here.
September 15, 2021: With vaccination target unmet, N.L. holds off on easing COVID-19 restrictions
October 21, 2021: New Zealand sets 90% vaccine target for ending COVID-19 lockdown
Nov. 5, 2021: Western Australia Sets 90% Vaccination Target for Reopening
May 04, 2021: 3-step plan to relax COVID-19 rules in Sask. an 'incentive' to get vaccinated, province says
Ontario, Canada May 20, 2021: Roadmap to Reopen

After a majority of the population was vaccinated at their own free will, there was a sharp change in Government tone: to start directly pressuring remaining people to take it, in denial of any right to medical freedom of choice. The strategy seemed to rely on the majority who already accepted the vaccine not being motivated to defend the rights of others to refuse to accept it, both because they obviously saw vaccination as the right decision, and because people tend to be a lot less motivated to defend others' rights than their own. In other words, if the Government had mandated everyone take the vaccine from the beginning, there would have been tremendous pushback from everyone base on principle, as everyone's rights were trampled, but by first separating out those who wanted the vaccine, to mandate it only for the others only appeared to trample the rights of the minority, which is of no significant political resistance in majority-rule systems of governnace.
As if to emotionally drive the Majority to support the persecution of the Minority, two mandate-supporting narratives were put out by the Establishment at this time:

A narrative was put out that vaccine mandates were the only way for us to get out of the Pandemic, as though a necessary inconvenience.

A narrative was put out that the unvaccinated were actually the cause of the Pandemic. This made coercion of the Unvaccinated seem like self-defense and supported segregation of them as though filthy that they were unhealthy for others to even be around.

Belief in the necessity of vaccine mandates missed a few points, including that:
1. There were many other alternatives to help us resist the disease, both natural and pharmaceutical.
2. The mortality rate was low, comparable to the flu, and negligible in children.
3. If the 'vaccine' worked so well to protect people, and since it was readily and freely available in these regions, then vaccination would be sufficient to keep safe whoever wanted safety without any need to pressure anyone else to do anything. If the 'vaccine' doesn't work to protect people, then there's no argument at all to pressure others' to be vaccinated against their free will.
4. Medical freedom is one of the most important human rights, because without it most of the others are meaningless.
5. No action which tramples our rights serves society because it's our rights which we are supposed to be defending.
6. Vaccine mandates eventually come back to bite even the vaccinated. The Vaccinated didn't seem to realize that mandating the first dose of the vaccine on those who refused it would mean that everyone, including those who took the first dose, would be mandated by the same principle, when the second dose came out.
Almost no medical excemptions from the mandates were allowed; not even pregnancy was considered an excuse to avoid immediate vaccination, which has resulted in 8 miscarriages in 10 pregnant women who received a COVID vaccine before their third trimester of pregnancy, according to this study. Is this not mandated child sacrifice?

Even if you have an adverse event from the vaccine, unless it's an allergic reaction, so long as you're not dead, you were often still expected to go for the next dose. For example:
- On this Pre-vaccination Checklist from the Connecticut government website, the chart, at the very bottom, clearly indicates only those who have experienced immediate allergic reactions should be excempt from vaccination.
- A Warning to Parents: My Daughter Suffered a Horrific Reaction to the COVID Vaccine... Think Twice!. In this account, even a documented serious adverse vaccine reaction wasn't enough to get an excemption for the next one.
- Canadian college of physicians targeting doctor who refuses to turn over medical records of patients she exempted from COVID vaccines. This physician was actually forbidden from writing vaccine exemptions.
Government-Lead Vaccine-Based Discrimination included the following punishments:

Substandard medical care for the unvaccinated, whether due to political, medical industry, or public distain for the unvaccinated. Example video:
- EXECUTING VAXXED!!! HOSPITAL=DEATH !!!
- A woman is treated in a garage because she is unvaccinated - Disgusting
Refusal to allow organ transplantation to or from unvaccinated people, even if they were already on the waiting list. (example articles:

November 8, 2022: Alberta’s Court of Appeal dismisses case against COVID-19 vaccine requirement for organ transplant
July 20, 2022: Canadian legal group blasts Alberta magistrate who ruled that doctors can require COVID vaccination before organ transplants
Father denied heart transplant because he won’t get Covid vaccine).
and Hospital Refuses Father-to-Son Kidney Transplant Over COVID Jab

Unfortunately, you will be taken off the transplant list anyway if the vaccine kills you, as we see in this article: Texas man with natural immunity DIES after being forced to take COVID-19 vaccine while awaiting lung transplant

Government-ordered prevention from travelling on commercial carriers (planes, trains, passenger ships)
Government-ordered prevention from crossing international and even some domestic borders
Government-augmented taxation for unvaccinated people

Loss of visitation rights for loved ones in nurshing homes or hospital (even your own child): There is also tremendous indirect pressure on the unvaccinated in order to attend to loved ones resident in or visiting hospitals or nursing homes, which typically permit only the fully vaccinated to enter. Even if you were willing to suffer anything yourself, such as to lose your job and be locked out of many businesses for not accepting the vaccine, this ploy of barring you from escorting or visiting loved ones under institutional medical care attacks your ability to care for your family. It's much like when a villain tries to threaten a hero in a movie, that when the villain fails with directly threatening the hero, the next thing the villain often does is threatens the people the villain cares about or the hero's ability to care for them. Example Articles:

Higher medical insurance premiums: No Insurance Payments: The Next COVID Shot 'Mandate'?
A lower rate of pay if you are employed and unvaccinated (some employers). For example: The unvaccinated owe a figurative debt to society that should be literal
Barred from access to education. Example video: STATE SEN TO FORCE CA KIDS TO GET COVID SHOT
Loss of child custody: New Brunswick father loses custody of children after refusing COVID vaccine.
Loss of access to gyms, restaurants, movie theatres, and many other 'non-essential' businesses if not.
Not being allowed to eat, drink, or talk to anyone at social events: Jill Biden event bans unvaccinated people from eating and drinking
Loss of virtually all social access in some countries.

Italy imposes more covid fascism on citizens, says they must get vaccinated to work and enjoy public life

Elected ministers evicted from their political party or blocked from voting in parliament for refusing vaccination and/or criticizing the COVID-19 vaccines::

January 16, 2023: British MP suspended, investigated for tweet critical of COVID clot shots
Unvaccinated Vic MPs could be banned
August 19, 2021: Doug Ford to vaccine-refusing local MPP: You're out of our party

Sudden loss of employment, or prevention from applying for it, if not 'fully vaccinated' for COVID-19, typically in cruel manner which would not even allow victims the usual payments from employment insurance programs. Not even front-line health professionals were exempt from this, despite both the acclaim that they are heroes and the healthcare system supposedly being overburdened and threrefore in need of staff: Heroes To Zeros Compilation... This Is So Powerful... All People Want Is Choice... NOT Vaccine Mandates

British Columbia says firing people for refusing the COVID shot is a ‘just cause’ for termination

Imprisonment:

In late 2022 Russia conscripted 300,000 reservists for military service, and then made COVID vaccination compulsory for them. This means that if they refuse the vaccine they are refusing military service and for that face 10 years in prison. Article Oct 5, 2022: Russia imposes COVID jab mandate on citizens conscripted to fight war in Ukraine
Phillipines: President threatens unvaccinated with prison time

This coercion pressured people unequally, depending on their situation, such that it pressed some people in some situations so hard that even if they would rather die than accept the vaccine they might had no dutiful option but to accept it. For example, to someone in a financially fragile position, losing their job might actually mean losing not only their life but their dependents' lives also. Alternatively, for someone with a sick child in hospital, they need to visit, and if a vaccine is required for entry how can they conscientiously refuse?

As of this writing, countries like the UK were considering sending vaccine squads to 'encourage' the unvaccinated to get the vaccine (Example article: Ministers mull sending vaccine teams to homes of unjabbed – reports).
Physically Forced vaccination was used when Society tired of allowing choice, especially of the elderly in nursing homes.

January 15, 2023: History repeats itself: Holocaust survivor goes into hiding after German court authorizes her transfer to psychiatric institution for forced COVID-19 vaccination
January 14, 2023: PURE EVIL: The Lula da Silva regime in Brazil forcibly injects its political enemies with deadly covid “vaccines”
Forced Vaccinations In Nursing Home
Now is an especially bad time to be in a nursing home if you don't have family to check on you.
video on Forced Vaccination
FORCED VACCINATION IN SPAIN
FORCED VACCINATION - A MAN ESCAPES TO THE ROOF AND GETS A FORCED VACCINATION IN ARGENTINA!
A video from the National Vaccine Information Center: Forced Vaccination Was Always the End Game
Ontario (Canada) Premier Tells Toronto That He Will 'Use Force' To Pull People From Their Homes To Get Vaccinated in 'Hot Spots'
SHOCKING FOOTAGE! MENTALLY CHALLENGED FORCE VACCINATED BY POLICE! - THIS IS INSANE!
Massive anti-vaccine protest happening worldwide!
This one is especially concerning. Mostly it shows protests and that's good. But after approximately 2:30 it shows police mistreating vaccine protesters in the most humiliating way: force-vaccinating them.
INDONESIA: Military forcibly vaccinating the youth

Indirect Punishments for the Unvaccinated: As we might imagine, there were many harships that were a consequence of the direct punishments, including:

Loss of home secondary to loss of employment. Example article: ‘We lost our home’: School employee suspended for refusing COVID shot says vax policy ‘ruined lives’

Attack by Government on the Unvaccinated for Non-Health Reasons: In many cases, public officials announced social restrictions they said were meant to frustrate or anger the unvaccinated, dispensing with any medical excuse or social benefit for the measures. For example: Macron on unvaccinated people: "I really want to piss them off"
Open shows of intent by Government to further pursue and persecute the unvaccinated. Examples include:

Prime Minister of Canada Justin Trudeau: Trudeau is threatening Canadians and Trudeau Says He Will Override Our Rights
Biden says his 'patience is wearing thin' with unvaccinated Americans
Australia Announces Permanent Lockdown with Reeducation Camps

'Accidentally' Vaccinating COVID-Vaccine-Objectors Against their Will: Article Oct 05, 2022: National Guard Gives Service Members COVID-19 Vaccine Instead Of Influenza Shot
Public Heroes became Public Villains by the same Establishment, for doing the exact same thing as before, by their abrupt switch of narrative. The Establishment (Government/employers) didn't hesitate to impose mandates on front-line crisis workers, despite previously calling them 'heroes'.

Critical Service Mismanagement under COVID Vaccine Mandates: Government didn't even hesitate to impose COVID vaccine mandates on workers who supply vital services which the Public depends on, not even if they work primarily alone in an enclosed area. This forced terminations of those who chose not to be vaccinated, impairing the related service, and causing related work which society needed done to become much more expensive to finish (such as due to overtime payments for remaining staff). It proves that the COVID agenda was not about public welfare because public welfare was always flatly ignored if it conflicted with the promotion of COVID vaccines. Mainstream media failed to make a complete connection between the vaccine mandates, the staff shortages, and the service reductions. For example:

Health Care Worker Shortages: By vaccine mandates Government and hospitals forced termination of many in the same professions we most directly depend on to relieve this crisis. The sudden departure of staff forced them to reduce services to the public, even restricting emergency services (although mainstream news generally avoided linking the reduction in services to the vaccine mandates).

Examples of Emergency Wards shutting their doors or restricting hours (whereas before they were always open since emergencies can happen at any time) in Canada:

January 19, 2023: Ontario looking to poach health-care workers from other provinces to fill shortages
After firing all unvaccinated doctors and nurses, Ontario orders hospitals and clinics to CANCEL non-urgent surgeries due to lack of staff
Vaccine Mandates Are Hitting Nursing Homes as Worker Shortages Worsen
Front-line health care worker shortage due to COVID-19 vaccine mandates, burnout
Vaccine Mandates Hit Amid Historic Health-Care Staff Shortage
Ontario hospitals face massive staffing shortages after vax mandate prompts hundreds of resignations

Public Transit Worker Shortages: Similarly here's an article on reductions in Toronto public transit service, on which millions especially the poor are dependent, due to the vaccine mandates causing sudden loss of staff. This is despite the fact that all TTC drivers and collectors have plenty of plexiglass shields between them and the Public already, if not completely enclosed.
Supply Chain Disruptions: Why do truckers travelling alone in their own vehicle so need to be vaccinated, that we would turn back the vital supplies they carry for our life sustainance? Canada already seeing FOOD SHORTAGES following ban on unvaxxed truckers
Ferry Worker Shortage: November 21, 2022: Washington ferries won’t rehire unvaxxed crews despite worker shortage
City Snow Clearing Service Impairment: In 2022, the City of Toronto did not hesitate to terminate unvaccinated snow-removal workers at the start of winter, even though they generally work alone in tractors outside, for which the city soon suffered physically and financially at the next major snowfall. The city simply increased their taxation on the Public a month later, as once again the Public is forced to suffer for Government mismanagement:

Jan 05, 2022: City of Toronto fires 461 employees for failing to comply with COVID-19 vaccine policy by deadline
Jan 18, 2022: Toronto digs out: Cleanup from Monday's major snowstorm may take days, residents warned
March 22, 2022: Intense January snowstorm cost Toronto more than $17M to clear
Feb 17, 2022: Toronto council passes 'COVID-19-era budget' with average property tax hike of $141

Military Depletion even as much of the world takes sides in the Ukraine - Russia war, some involved countries like US and Canada discharge soldiers for failing to be vaccinated. Why do we have to bully people to be vaccinated who are putting themselves in the line of fire to defend us? Is it in the national interest to deplete our military for reasons of refusing a vaccine?

Public Shame Badges: In at least one state in India, citizens who are not vaccinated are forced to wear warning labels (see here). Nothing like this has been seen since the Holocaust badges which Jews were compelled to display in Nazi-dominated Europe.
Mandate Failure of Logic: All of these mandates ignored the fact that if the vaccines actually worked to protect people from COVID, the unvaccinated would be no threat to them. How could an unvaccinated person, with their own immune system, be more of a threat to spread COVID-19 to a vaccinated person than the virus itself?
Adding COVID-19 Vaccination to Official Vaccination Schedule Recommended for Children

This was not a mandate on its own, but a solid legal foundation for local governments to base COVID-19 vaccine mandates on children. Articles:

October 25, 2022: High risk, NO reward: CDC officially includes COVID-19 vaccine in its recommended immunization schedule for kids despite proven DANGERS
October 21, 2022: CDC to add covid “vaccines” to childhood immunization schedule despite near-zero risk of covid among children
Oct 20, 2022: CDC panel votes 15-0 to add COVID shots to childhood vaccination schedule. It's heartbreaking that even in late 2022, when vaccine harms were well known and child resistance to COVID-19 also well known, not a single person on the CDC panel would vote against it.

Government-Ordered Indefinite Suspension 'Non-Emergency' Medical Procedures: On the excuse of their own models forecasting a future strain on the healthcare system due to COVID-19 infections, many governments ordered that pall procedures considered 'non-emergency' be suspended until further notice. This is whether they actually have the capacity that day or not, and ignores the fact that shutting down procedures in one ward or specialty (eg. colon care) doesn't necessarily increase capacity for dealing with respiratory infections (like COVID-19), and ignores that just because a medical procedure doesn't need to be done today (emergency) doesn't mean that waiting is harmless to the patient.

Examples of this policy are reported in the following articles:

Windsor-Essex residents endure fear, pain as surgeries get cancelled across Ontario
'This is my life we're talking about,' says Ontario woman whose cancer surgery's been delayed by Omicron
Ontario moves school online, closes indoor dining and gyms as part of sweeping new COVID-19 measures. This article makes clear that the suspension of non-urgent surgeries in Ontario was by Government order, not by hospital administrators, and is based on a timeframe regardless of actual capacity.
Here are the hospitals postponing elective surgeries amid the omicron surge
Inslee pauses non-urgent medical procedures, deploys National Guard to Washington hospitals
Gov. Kathy Hochul orders halt on elective surgery amid COVID spike, Omicron
Hospitals cancelling urgent surgery despite NHS bosses' orders
28 million elective surgeries may be cancelled worldwide: how non-COVID-19 medical care is suffering
Providence pauses non-emergency procedures and visitation
Beebe postpones non-emergent procedures as COVID-19 continues to strain hospitals

People died due to these surgery delays. Just because surgery isn't necessary right now doesn't mean that the patient's condition isn't deteriorating while they wait. Such is the case, for example, with cancer surgery, where the chance of a cure drops significantly every day while they wait for the surgery. Some related articles include:

More people in Saskatchewan died waiting for surgery during COVID-19 than before: data
A struggling system: Understanding the health care impacts of the pandemic published by the Canadian Medical Association in November 2021, this report states that (in Canada) 'Delayed and missed health care may have contributed to more than 4,000 excess deaths not related to COVID-19 between August and December 2020.'

Proof of Vaccination Requirements:

This was introduced around the same time as vaccine mandates, but is a different concept. Vaccinated or not, by this order people were expected to reveal their medical information (vaccination status) to gain access to many establishments.

It was at first done by document, and later done by a scannable QR code.

As usual, the enforcement was usually carried out by businesses at their own cost, compelled only by a threat of severe penalties from Government if they refused to comply.

Examples include:

WTF Is Going On In Ausralia
Trudeau announces Canada's proof-of-vaccination program for COVID-19
The Zimbabwe government even mandated the vaccine to attend Church.
Ask for COVID vaccine proof, face a $5,000 fine in Florida

In a stunning such move, the Canadian Government decided that they won't allow truckers entering from the USA into Canada without proof of vaccination (example article: Canada resists pressure to drop vaccine mandate for cross-border truckers. How dare the Canadian Government prevent Canadian citizens from entering their own country!

Since the vaccinated were exempt from the penalties, they were typically all to eager too show their proof of vaccination to be allowed some rights back, in exchange for giving up the right of their health information being private, while supporting the discrimination of the Unvaccinated unable to show that proof.

Covering the cost of the vaccines, even where emergency medical care is not covered.

No stopping of flights: Governments were reluctant to stop flights from China when the virus was only in China (at which time the primary concern was not appearing to be racist), and generally kept airline travel open to almost anywhere throughout the pandemic (even while closing local places of worship for example). This is despite US-funded research in 2007 revealing a critical need to shut down interational travel to control an pandemic: Predictability and epidemic pathways in global outbreaks of infectious diseases: the SARS case study.
Unusually Reduced Identification Requirements. Governments typically permitted foreign or even expired identification to be used for vaccination, even though this is permitted for nothing else, not even other medical services. Expired identification is normally not accepted by anyone as useful for any purpose, not even by the office that issued the identification as any help to renew that same type of identification (rather once it's expired you ususally need to apply again as if you never had one).

Toronto: COVID-19: Vaccine Eligibility & Doses (see 'Required Identification' under 'Residents Without OHIP Cards')
ID card no more needed to get Covid-19 vaccine

Government Override of Physicians: Physicians were forbidden from using medications at their discretion which they normally could, basically ordered how to practice medicine. Example video: Dr. Paul Marik: “I had to Stand by Ideally, Watching These People DIE!”
Contact Tracing: Governments demanded records to be kept, for their use in case someone had a positive test result, of who and where they visited. You couldn't even attend Church or some stores without giving your identity and contact information at the entrance. Apparently to lean the process towawrds their control, Government also released various cellphone apps which automatically reported who a person came into contact with based on the strength of nearby bluetooth signals. Like other human rights abuses, contact tracing was seen as a necessary intrusion into people's privacy. Example article: Ontario will use contact tracing app to prepare for possible second wave of COVID-19
Social restrictions were supported by such shockingly high penalties that obedience seemed far safer than defiance. This control strategy relied on people always doing what seems the easiest thing to do, even to do something itself inconvenient (eg. wear a mask) if the penalties for not doing it were even more fearsome (eg. astronomical fines), and it worked.
In some cases, appropriate medical officials were not even consulted by Government in imposing these supposedly medically necessary mandates: EXCLUSIVE: Official Who Authorized COVID Vaccines in Canada Not Consulted on Mandate
Like most COVID social restictions, the measures seemed and were in some cases openly admitted to be of no medical basis but merely to pressure the unvaccinated against their will to be vaccinated. But is it appropriate in a democratic and free society for Government to exert that kind of pressure against medical choice?
Government persecution of the unvaccinated as priority over any (other?) crime. Example: The NYC police are arresting the unvaccinated over the looters!
A claim that vaccine hesitancy increases the risk of car accidents: December 17, 2022 Canadian study finds “vaccine hesitancy” is linked to “risky driving” so vaccination should be encouraged to avoid accidents
A trend towards more punishments for the unvaccinated, eg. Article: Lockdowns and no medical coverage: Countries’ limits for the unvaccinated are growing more draconian
Forced Chaos: As if to emphasize their authority more, the social orders, fair or not, were not considerately designed, written, announced, or implemented. These discourtesies only increased the chaos of the pandemic, as people who wanted to comply were often left confused about which rules applied to them today. These discourtesies included:

Cat-and-Mouse:

Emergency powers and social restrictions were typically announced with virtually immediate effect, but promised only for a short time with a specific end date. As the date approached, the orders were typcially extended on some exuse.
Lifing longstanding social restrictions where virtually always promised at a time a long way off, in gradual stages, and the Public accepted them athat way. Then excuses arose to never reach the final stage of freedom.

Medical Falsehood: As discussed in other parts on this webpage, NONE of the orders given under medical excuse made any medical sense. The mask pores were far too big to filter out an airborne virus, social distancing of 2m/6' is meaningless to an airborne virus, and imposing strict border controls once the virus was already confirmed inside the country could not be of any significant benefit.
Medical Inconsistency in the orders, though they were supposedly based on health expert advice for a health purpose, such that they had to be read rather than predicted. For example, you must wear a mask (allegedly for medical reasons) but it must not be a medical mask. Another example was that although many businesses and events were ordered to closed/cancelled, some others were allowed to stay open unfettered without any medical sense behind the distinction. For example, in Ontario (Canada) banks were never locked down, but for supposedly medical reasons it was illegal to go even into the deep woods (back country camping), even alone, as the chance of infection, even totally alone in complete wilderness, was supposedly too high to tolerate.
Severity: The orders were severe enough, affecting many of the most basic functions of our daily lives, even whether or not we were allowed to breathe the air directly, or if we could purchase basic supplies, or if we could go to work, so that they could not be ignored.
Indefiniteness: There was never any promise that more social orders would not be given, but even region-wide orders of dramatic social restrictions were announced often with almost immediate effect (perhaps a day or two notice). When orders were given, there was never a firm end date to them: dates were normally given with an 'at least until' warning, were often extended, and extended again, and, although rarely, were sometimes suddenly ended early. The result was that, for years, the average person couldn't plan almost anything which involved leaving their house with certainty more than two days ahead.
Short Notice In response to any new stimulus in the environment, Government decision-makers were typically silent and unseen for a time, and then suddenly appeared with an announcement of new social orders for implementation at dramatically short notice (such as to lock down the entire province of Ontario in less than 2 days notice). The style seemed to be to huddle themselves together with their experts and officials, to decide something slowly together that they were all ready for, and then announce it on the Public who did not have any significant time to prepare. The time between the stimulus and the response, which we can assume is the time the Government took to prepare what they would do, was always more time than they gave the Public to adjust to the ordered change. This was done again and again with severe orders rarely having more than a month's notice at most, and usually just a day or two. This unnecessarily multiplied the harm and fear of the orders, ie. knowing that at any time you can be locked down for months on less than 2 days notice, with many implications, the least of which is that you therefore can't afford to miss any Government announcement.
Ambiguity Some types of establishments were not clearly addressed in the orders or not in all aspects. This left businesses perplexed.
Contradiction. Sometimes officials would blatantly contradict each other, and this, combined with the short notice of the implementation of the changes, meant that sometimes (example article: Canadian truckers already en route should get reprieve amid vaccine mandate confusion: industry leader).
Many Threats made by officials against the Public that they might extend the orders, provoking fear and helplessness before authoritarian dictatorship.

Punishments for violating the orders were unusually severe, even more than most crimes.

‘Shoot them dead’. Duterte warns against violating lockdown: Warning from Philippine president comes after slum dwellers stage protests over lack of food amid coronavirus crisis. The poorest people protested the lockdown due to their lack of food. The Government response? Rather than bring them food, the order given was to shoot to kill.

Inconsistent Response There was no consistency in the response to anything, such that it could not be predicted. Not even rising or falling case numbers always resulted in more or less severe restrictions.
Continual Change. No matter how well we adjusted to the changes, the changes kept getting changed with new announcemtns of more or less restrictions under entirely new frameworks or conditions for the same pandemic. Nothing was allowed to be the same for long, but every day we had to look to see what the new rules were, and how our business, employment, or lifestyle was specifically referenced in the latest version of the rules. As an example, the UK made hundreds of laws on social restrictions to this pandemic.

This continual change multiplied the stress and suffering of the social restrictions, preventing us from getting used to living any one way, and forcing us to keeping our ears on new announcements for changes on how we were allowed to live.

Omissions Sometimes your activity wasn't listed on the orders, so you didn't know whether it was permitted or not.
Puppet Show: Government announcements of human rights suspensions, such as by emergency orders or mandated social restrictions, were usually preceded by a few days of expert-published data numbers going up, and government-appointed or media-selected experts calling for action before things get worse.

This gave the appearance that leaders only impose social restrictions because the experts insist it is necessary, and that no other action is responsible.

The basic premise of it is the notion that whatever experts advise must be followed by non-experts: even Government ones.

That basic idea is a real threat to democracy. It means that your right to choose can be overriden by an 'expert' whose opinion is always accepted above yours, even in regards to your own life.

As an example of tyranny portrayed as serving the will of the People, on the same day 11 February, 2022, when Ontario (province of Canada) Premier Doug Ford announced a state of emergency and harsh penalties to end anti-mandate protests, followed by Prime Minister of Canada Justin Trudeau giving his own press conference later that day about measures the federal government is taking against the protestors, each of them was asked, as the very first question from reporters following their draconian announcements, not how they presume moral authority to suspend human rights, but why they didn't take these measures earlier:
1. Ontario Premier Ford takes his first question at 10:38 of this video, after his State of Emergency announcement: Trucker protests: Ford declares state of emergency in Ontario amid protests in Ottawa, at border
2. Prime Minister Trudea, at 10:30 in the following video: Trudeau says "everything" on the table to end border blockades, warns of potential violence
It's also worth noting just how calm, unsurprised, and unoffended both politicians reacted to the question, even though it publicly insinuates their wrongdoing, as though it was rehearsed.

It's worth remembeing Josh Sigurdson reporting that, at a Trudeau press conference, he was given a list of 5 questions he was allowed to ask

Opening the Public Coffers:
1. many Governments have spent heavily both to give grants to vaccine manufacturers to develop vaccines, and to give economic relief to various sectors of their economy. There isn’t much talk about paying these public debts back on the presumption that the pandemic is a far greater concern than that.
  
  Despite the grants and presumably to make the most of mandates, vaccine manufacturers are looking to increase prices: 18 Jan, 2023 Moderna wants to quadruple the price of its Covid-19 vaccine as hundreds die per day
2. Deficit spending has lost virtually all sense of accountability or restraint on the excuse of the COVID virus. Who must pay this back?
Loss of Regard for the Will of the People: Since this crisis began, the Establishment has shown little and progressively less respect for what the People want, even in countries which were supposed to be free democracies. For example:

Unlilateral Social Restrictions: In imposing unprecedented and human-rights-trampling social restrictions, Governments worldwide usually portrayed this as being in consult with experts, but there wasn't even the pretense of consulting with the People. Initially, this was argued on the basis that there was simply no time for that; that leaders had to act quickly to contain the virus. But as the crisis, and social restrictions, dragged on for a year or two, even with elections happening during that time, without ever holding a referendum on how the People want the crisis handled, it became increasingly clear that the Government will not allow the People to decide the policy.
Elected Representative Deafness: In a democracy, we have the right to write our objections to our elected representatives. In practice this usually ended in usually being ignored or at best receiving a form-letter reply which acknowledged your letter but not your opinions. In other words, this democratically provided channel was deaf to the will of the People, simply because although elected representatives theoretically represent the will of the people in their jurisdiciton, they actually have no legal obligation to correspond with any of them or do or say anything those people want.
Views against the mandates were proclaimed 'unacceptable'. For example, in Justin Trudeau Issues Odd Video Response To Canadian Trucker Convoy, the Canadian Prime Minister says that some Canadians hold 'unacceptable views'. Actually in a democracy everyone should be entitled to their views, and a Prime Minister be interested to hear all of them. How are some thoughts unacceptable?
Restrictions on Protesting: Of course, if a true democracy, the People can at least hold a peaceful protest, yet even this was met with unprecedented restrictions or punishments, such as:

Unusually high surveillance of protestors, including even cameras embedded into trees: Cameras In Trees Spying On Protests Against Vaccine Tyranny
Vilification and/or criminalization of protests on the argument that they should be done at the Government buildings (eg. parliament), rather than disturb people at any other place, even if what they are protesting occurs at those other places. Example: Protesters urged to stay away from hospitals
Classifying peaceful protests as illegal simply by referring to them as seiges/invasions or other words which insinuate violence even if there is no violence. This sets the stage for them to declare the protest illegal and then use law enforcement to force an end to the protest.

Classifying peaceful protests as illegal because they block roads. Unfortunately if the protest is not large it is not considered to represent the views of many, and if the protest is large, there's typically no way to get that many people into the appropriate area without congesting roads. So either way you lose. This is despite pro-government counter-protests being allowed to block roads without police interference (example here).
Restricting or even criminalizaing protests under the guise of public safety if they occur along roadways. Unfortunately that's where the public property to protest usually is in local areas. For example, in Nova Scotia, it was outlawed for people to gather along the highway to support truckers, saying it would put them at risk (apparently because it was along the sides of roadways): Nova Scotia outlaws support on highway for 'freedom' truckers days after massive protest
Forbidding gatherings, completely or of a certain size, as illegal, on excuse of COVID health reasons, ie. the supposed need to keep far apart.
Classifying absolutely peaceful protests as 'invasions', 'seiges', 'riots', or even 'insurrections' because they disturb people, and thereby trigger police again against the protestors and anyone who gives them support, as well as seizing (a word for legalized stealing by police) vital supplies to survive outside in the winter. For example:

Legally prosecuting protests for noise, by people who chose to live near the proper national protest area, insinuating that protests must not only be peaceful, but be silent, to avoid legal liability.

Exerting political pressure to caue the seizure of funds raised for and belonging to protestors, even when that funding is from a diverse Canadian Public which also funds these some Government bodies:

Closing roads ahead of protestors close to where they intended to arrive. For example: With truck convoy set to arrive Saturday, Toronto scrambles to prepare for ‘disruption’
Various other immoral and illegal police tactics, which are not supposed to happen but do, such as arresting someone in a 'democracy' for not showing identification, or ramming a vehicle and acussing the victim of doing it and arresting him in an unnecessarily forceful way (on the ground): Canadian Police Beating And Arresting Citizens In The Street For Supporting Convoy
'Disappearing' (abducting never to be heard from again) protestors:China Disappears Vaccine Protestors
Some governments directly outlawing protests, for example: Any kind of protests still illegal under Covid-19 emergency, says Bangkok police
In some jurisdictions the COVID-related rules restricting protests were so confusing and so frequently changing that it made undersanding the legality of it virtually impossible for organizers, for example: Ever-changing Covid rules on protest set up conflict with the police.
Declaring a state of emergency with astronomical fines and livelihood-ending capital seizure and license revokations for protestors. Premier Ford declares state of emergency in Ontario over blockade; court grants Ambassador Bridge injunction
Severe penalties for any police member assisting protestors in any conceivable way: Ottawa Police Chief Threatens To Fire Any Police Who Help The Truckers!
Protests often being seen as a violation of the 2m/6foot 'social distancing' COVID-related Government-imposed social restriction. Example article: Hong Kong Police Arrest Protesters for Violating Social Distancing Guidelines
Specific Government-imposed orders restricting the size of outdoor gatherings on excuse of COVID-19. Example article: Protesters ticketed under N.S. COVID-19 injunction
Tear Gas:

Use of Foreign Troops: This is an illegal, immoral, and diabolically clever resort by tyrants, since they know foreign troops will be mroe willing to abuse the People than local troops would be willing to abuse their own People. For example, badgeless flagless troops were used in putting down the Ottawa Freedom Convoy protests: Situation Update, Feb 21, 2022 - Nameless, faceless POLICE GOONS in Ottawa may be UN troops. In this exaple they may have been UN troops since UN planes were spotted landed a few hours' drive away: UN Planes Have Landed in North Bay Near Ottawa
Snipers: Police in Canada, France Deploy Snipers, Tear Gas Against 'Freedom Convoys'
Trampling protestors with horses: example BREAKING: Ottawa police on horseback trample freedom protesters
Threats to seize and kill pets of Protestors: Canada threatens to seize, potentially euthanize truckers' pets
Things we Saw during the Freedom Convoy 2022 protest in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada from 29 January, 2022:

Police admit there was no violence, but were focusing tremendous effort to gather evidence and personal information against not only the peaceful protestors but their supportersalso (article: Ottawa police vow ‘surge and contain’ response to trucker convoy ‘occupation’).

This intense focus to end what the Ottawa police chief called "lawlessness" of the protest is in stark contrast to the complete disinterest to investigate or even look at video evidence from neighbourhood car thefts a few months earlier, to the bewilderment of Ottawa residents (article: Egan: Thief caught on video, residents told police too busy to follow up
Seizing (legally stealing) Money Publicly Raised for the Protestors: The crowdfunding site GoFundMe seizing millions of dollars of donations collected to support a protest, based on allegations of "violence and other unlawful activity" related from three arrests none of which were actual violence at the protest (article: Freedom Convoy: GoFundMe seizes funds of Canada 'occupation'. This is despite intense police scrutiny in trying to gather evidence on any possible violation of many thousands of protestors, as well as GoFundMe having no problem releasing funds to a politically acceptable riot: GoFundMe doled out cash to Capitol Hill Occupied Protest in Seattle where businesses were looted and vandalized - despite freezing $8 million to Freedom Convoy: Canada truckers hit with $9.8m lawsuit by fed-up Ottawa residents for mental distress.
Seizing Supplies of the Protestors and Anyone who Aided Them: Police were threatening to arrest anyone who would give the protestors fuel, toilet paper, or food, even though many of them were just trying to survive in their trucks in the cold (article: Canada trucker protest: Ottawa declares emergency). Again: even to give food was illegal. These threats were carried out as reports have emerged as of this writing of related arrests: Several people arrested for bringing gas to 'Freedom Convoy' demonstrators in Ottawa, police say
Seizing (legally stealing) other assets, even livelihood-critical capital equipment, such as seizing truckers' trucks and selling them to incur 'costs'. Example article: Mayor of Ottawa declares vehicles stolen by authorities during Trudeau’s Freedom Convoy crackdown will be sold to “cover costs”
Freezing Personal Financial Assets, including Cryptocurrency, and Suspending Insurance, of Protestors: Trudeau vows to freeze anti-mandate protesters' bank accounts and Trudeau gov’t confirms Canadian banks have started freezing accounts of Freedom Convoy protesters. Of coures the effect of freezing bank accounts, as non-harmful as it may sound, causes tremendous indirrect harms, such as inability to meet financial needs and commitments and facing consequences for those failures. For example, someone might thereby be prevented from making the next payment on their mortgage which they are obligated to pay.

And isn't vehicle insurance to protect both parties in case of accidents? How does suspending accident insurance keep anyone safe?
How do they know who attended the protest? This is just as concerning, as the protestors didn't give them a list of names. Perhaps they are using a combination of financial records, social media records, and cell phone records.
They cast the net of prosecution very wide, apparently to anyone even remotely connected with supporting the protests. For example, this article discusses an example of someone losing their job for making an online donation to the protest, and
Focusing on protest organizers first and foremost for prosecution. It isn't moral, or legal, to target them any more than any of the other participants for charges which would apply the same to most of the participants. This choosing where to focus prosecution is using the law to strategically disrupt the protest with the least effort.
The city had the closed-circuit cameras around Ottawa turned off, which the Justice Centre (representing the Freedom Convoy 2022) has requested they turn on, so that "law enforcement and the public have access to video footage, in order to know what is actually occurring in and around the protest" (article: “Turn on the closed-circuit cameras in Ottawa,” says Justice Centre. If they were intent on doing harm, why would Freedom Convoy 2022 request the cameras be turned on?
Denying protest organizers bail following their arrest, even when there is no allegation of violence, even when in the same jurisdiction it is common for people charged with murder to be granted bail. For example, one of the organizers of the Freedom Convoy 2022 protest, Ms. Tamara Lich, who was arrested only for 'counselling to commit mischief', was denied bail, which means she must stay in jail until her charges are resolved (normally through trial and can take years), even when Ontario often grants bail to people charged with murder. This effectively means that protestors can be arrested for almost anything and held in jail by denial of bail so that they spend a long time in jail even if proven innocent.

Canadian truckers protest organizer denied bail, judge cites 'safety of the public'
Lucy Li, suspect in Hamilton shooting homicide, granted bail
Doctor accused of murder at Hawkesbury, Ont. hospital granted bail
According to 2016 data (long before COVID impaired the convening of jury trials), the average time to resolve a homicide case in Ottawa was 684 days:
Ottawa’s trial backlog worst in province

Lawsuits for protestiong, eg some Ottawans are launching a class action lawsuit for $9.8 million against the protestors for the "unbearable torment" of the protest (article here). It is stunning to even allow peaceful protestors to be sued for inconveniencing others, and difficult to believe that Ottawans would be furious about a week of protests hurting their business or personal lives, while seemingly happy with the greater social restrictions ordered for the entire province for almost two years now and ongoing with no end in sight, which the protestors happen to oppose on their behalf.
Goverment officials portraying the protest as a 'seige': not against them, or their policies, but against the People (article: Trudeau: Ottawa residents need their ‘lives back,’ won’t commit to negotiate with truckers). In a masterful show of lies-as-truth rhetoric, the police chief actually called the protest a "threat to democracy" (article: Truck convoy: 'Our city is under siege' ). How is a protest a threat to democracy?
Government officials refusing to negotiate with the protestors or their organizers. This even though negotiation with protestors is normally the first peaceful option in the Establishment handling large protests. Just because you are peaceful doesn't mean the Establishment is.

Government officials declaring states of emergency to deal with peaceful protests in supposedly democratic societies

Canada (Federal Government):Justin Trudeau invokes Emergencies Act against peaceful truckers' rebellion
Canadian Province of Ontario: Ontario declares state of emergency over trucker protests, calling the demonstrations an 'illegal occupation'

There are official calls to punish protestors more severely (though they are not violent and it is their democratic right to protest), including seizing their truck and other possessions (their trucks are very expensive and, by definition, their livelihood). Article: Del Duca Calls on Ford to Seek Forfeiture of Assets Used in Commission of Illegal Ottawa Occupation
Deliberate saboage by police of vehicles parked on private property: Police damage parked vehicles, cut cables to prevent their use in Alberta border blockade - LifeSite
False Flag staging: Trudeau’s Imminent False Flag To Crush The Canadian People

Stealth weapons, such as LRAD or microwave, used against protestors:

Bribing community organizations, including schools and churches, to promote the vaccines, ie. preach a gospel of salvation by vaccines. Related articles:

Jun 17, 2022: Canadian pastor says health officials offered church $50,000 to push vaccines
June 22, 2022: Mystery Babylon churches taking government bribes to push covid “vaccines” on congregants

Otherwise creating community projects to change public opinion towards vaccination, such as with Canada's Immunization Partnership Fund. Government shouldn't be trying to change public opinion towards their narrative in a democracy.
Restricting ability to grow petitions. A pre-COVID pandemic example of how this is done with vaccines is March 01, 2015: EXCLUSIVE: Whitehouse.gov caught freezing vaccine choice petition to prevent signatures from reaching 100,000 threshold
A habit of Government to announce dramatic social restrictions, such as region-wide lockdowns, with extremely short notice, such as two days.
Locking down many types of businesses down without any regard as to how these business, people, or their staff will survive, this being an immediate threat to the existence of all of these. For example, those who work in the restaurant industry live paycheck to paycheque, and the cut off of their livelihood, by government order, is a far greater threat than accidental exposure to COVID.
An avalanch of nonsense policies from the private sector based on COVID, as they tried to implement the nonsense Government orders in practice, for which examples are:

Ontario (Canada) Premier Doug Ford, on the guise of protecting the Public's health in the face of rising case numbers, announces, during the CANADIAN WINTER, that all indoor dining must be closed but the Public are allowed to dine outside. So even if it's empty inside where it's warm, and they are glad to have you, you must go outside into the snow and deep cold to eat your meal, trusting that the Premier only wants what's best for you.
Able to hand a customer a mask but not a drink: Wow, this stupidity takes the cake!
Article: ‘Confusing’: Doctors voice concern over capacity limits at large venues as COVID-19 cases soar 10,000 allowed to attend sporting event while Christmas celebrations and visits to elders in nursing homes restricted.

In fact, COVID also became the master excuse used to reduce services to customers in many sectors both public and private. The reason given was always the same, even if it made no medical sense: "because of COVID".

Indefinite Human Rights Suspensions (Forfeiture): Peoples around the world submitted with surprising compliance to clear cancellation of their formerly inalienable human rights on one condition: that Governments use the word 'emergency to do it. This has gone so far that it's difficult to discern if the Public has any human rights or freedoms left at all. For example:

We can see from the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights that the human rights violations committed by Government include violations of the following articles:

Article 01: “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.”
Article02: “Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.”
--We’re not equal if we have different social rights based on our vaccination status. In fact, in addition to that segregation of society, there is another one: that Government considers itself, at least in some regions and cases, to the COVID restrictions: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZjOG5k6f5k
Article 3: “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.”
--Our person is not secure if we must submit to injections decided by other people against our will, especially formulations known to kill and disable some people now, and for which long-term effects are impossible to know yet beause the formulation has not existed for the long-term.
--Being compelled to wear masks impeding our respiration interferes with our right to life and liberty
Article 09: “No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.”
--Actually many governments are arbitrarily detaining people based on their chosen excuse of COVID-19. For example:
- Canada has been detaining travellers as described here.
- As for Germany: After throwing them in covid quarantine camps, German government also STRIPS prisoners of compensation payments to bankrupt them
- A general video on the topic: Covid Camps Built Around The World
Article 11
1. Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
2. No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavierpenalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.
--In the Canadian Government response to the Freedom Convoy 2022 protests, after they deemed it illegal for blocking roads, bank accounts were frozen for anyone who donated to the protest, even those who did so long before it arrived in Ottawa or was deemed illegal. Example article: Outrage as Canadian single mom on minimum wage has bank account frozen for donating $50 to Freedom Convoy: Trudeau is blasted for draconian law that 'would never have been imposed on BLM'
Article 12: “No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.”
--Actually we’ve been obligated to reveal our vaccination status to many people at many social checkpoints which should have been private medical information.
Article 13:
“(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.”
--Actually we couldn't do this if we’re locked down by Government order, or ordered to self-isolate, and specific border travel restrictions were put in place at many national and internal borders on the pretense of limiting the spread of the disease.
Article 16:
“(1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.”
--Although weddings were not directly outlawed, severe restrictions on social gatherings made them impractical. For example, restrictions of gatherings to 5 or 6 people wasn't enough for the 7 people normally required to marry: bride, groom, cleric, and both sets of parents.
Article 18
“Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.”
--Places of worship were closed by either by direct order, or because the severe restrictions on the number of people made them impractical.

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/open-places-of-worship-juma-masjid-chief-to-cm/articleshow/85881656.cms

We even effecitvely cancelled Christmas out of fear of COVID, which isn’t cancelled even in wartime:
1. https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/italy-enters-christmas-lockdown-limiting-holiday-travel-74895981
2. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/covid-19-christmas-cancelled-ask-1.5808826
Article 19: "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."
--Actually there are severe restrictions on freedom of expression of anything against against government COVID policies (such as lockdowns or vaccine mandates), both in the private sector (social media platforms quietly cancelling accounts or shadow banning) and in the courts (example this pastor ordered not to preach criticizing government health orders, or this man interrogated by police for posting in favour of protests on social media)
Article 20: “(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.”
--We don’t have right to peaceful assembly if large social gatherings are outlawed such as because they impede traffic, or we must stand 6 feet apart, or we are locked down, due to COVID, as we have been. It doesn't help when peaceful protests are labelled as riots/seige/invasion, as they were for example in Ottawa, in order to deny the right to protest and turn the police against protestors or anyone who helps them.
Worse than that, many people were't allowed to see even their own elderly parents in nursing homes (example article here).
Article 21
Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.
Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.
The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.
--It's impossible to participate in your Government when they give themselves emergency (dictatorial) powers on excuse of a virus (as they did in many places), or if they refuse to allow elected representatives to vote because they're not vaccinated (as they did in some places).
Article 23: “(1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.”
--Many people couldn’t go to school or work or had to close their business by government order during lockdowns.
Article 26: “(1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.”
--Actually physical schools were closed during COVID lockdowns. So much for that right.
1. https://www.pnas.org/content/118/17/e2022376118
2. https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse/consequences
Article27: “(1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.”
--You can’t very well participate in the cultural life of the community when cultural events are cancelled and people ordered to stay home due to lockdowns.

Another example of flagrant human rights legislation violation gy Government during the COVID-19 crisis is an analysis of how the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was violated, in an 17 August, 2023 article written by one of its original signers: Brian Peckford ! Why Do You Say Governments and Courts Are Violating Our Constitution ( Charter of Rights and Freedoms ) .

De facto loss of democracy.

No matter how long the crisis goes on for, or how dramatic the social restrictions announced, the Public has never been allowed a direct opportunity to decide what how we want this crisis handled. The closest we ever got was voting in an election where all of the major candidates supported COVID-related social restrictions, and this was not the only issue in the election.
Democracy is not about having the right to vote in an election, but rule by the People. If we don't have any real say on policy decisions it's not really a democracy anymore.
Governmance around the world has clearly changed from us mostly telling our Government what to do to them telling us what to do. They do not even ask our input in policy decisions anymore, and order us around even in our most basis functions of life. Many of us, for example, are not even allowed to breathe the air without a mask. It is truly dictatorship now, though it pretends to be democracy so that we feel their orders are our own decision.
On 13 September, 2021, the Saskatchewan (a province of Canada) government gave itself powers to restrict travel, enter anywhere without a warrant, seize anyone's property, take anyone away, and conscript anyone, among other things (as if that wasn't enough), as emergency powers on excuse of COVID-19 (see section 18 here: The Emergency Planning Act; ...or just the key two pages here; an article on it is here.) This is similar to wording in the 'Public Health Act' section 52.6(1) of Alberta (another Canadian province).
The fact that even the most radical social changes were ordered with the most amazingly short notice is evidence that we don't have rights now

Psychological Stress including Suicide: The social restrictions, fear, and guilt (persistence of the virus always blamed on people not complying with Government orders well enough) of the crisis has lead people to despair and suicide, even to kill themselves out of a twisted sense of social duty. These deaths in some regions exceed the deaths attributed due to the COVID-19 virus; in other words the social reaction to the virus was clearly more deadly than the virus even in just this way alone. For example:

Slavery to End Slavery: The social restrictions (aka human rights suspensions) were promoted as the only way to restore social freedoms. That is to say, human rights suspensions were promoted as the only way to get our human rights back.

Despite that being obvious and dangerous nonsense, the mainstream media didn't question it and the Public cooperated with it.

Trudeau Says Restrictions Are Necessary to Prevent Further Restrictions

COVID-19 Social Restrictions Extension:

Even when the pandemic was waning, China continued to be severe and more severe on its People.

Lockdown so severe that at least one Chinese local Government prevented people from leaving apartment buildings during an EARTHEQUAKE, and not only prevented them from going out to buy food, but prevented them from ordering food by delivery. Article September 6, 2022: China's Chengdu enforces strict lockdown despite earthquake. By this thinking presumably they won't allow people to leave their homes even if the house is on fire. Actually something similar happened also November 27, 2022: Protests in Xinjiang after deadly Chinese apartment building fire
Shanghai, March-May 2022: In the name of keeping people safe in this large city of 28 million people, Chinese authorities have locked down the population so severely that many are literally starving to death and/or leaping out of their highrises in suicide, because they are not allowed to go outside even for food and getting food delivery is practically impossible. In the name of Public safety, people caught alone outside are being physically abused by police, children taken from parents, and pets of COVID-positive people are being rounded up and destroyed. At night the apartment buildings blare with the sounds of the screams of their inhabitants slowly dying. Yes, the Government is keeping them so 'safe' that they would rather kill themselves than endure it any longer. The situation is serious not only for the sake of the local people, but also because Chinese severity was used as the model for the world in running lockdowns the first time. If China becomes more severe, the rest of the world could also. Resources include:

Actually, the lockdown was supposed to end 5 April at which time it was cruelly extended indefinitely despite that obviously residents would be caught unprepared for the change. Article: Desperation amid food shortages in Shanghai as Covid lockdown bites

Lifting of COVID-19 Restrictions:
In mid 2022, COVID-19 measures started lifting worldwide due to Public fatigue and pushback. For example, if you live in Canada, there is good news about COVID-19 restrictions lifting concerning border travel. Article Sept. 26, 2022: Canada dropping travel mask mandate and ending COVID-19 border and quarantine restrictions
Shutting Down Police Investigation into COVID-19 Vaccine Harms:

Example articles:

August 16, 2023: BREAKING: Canadian policewoman faces disciplinary tribunal after querying SIDS cases post-covid injection
August 15, 2023: Political meddling suspected in Ottawa police investigation of Constable Helen Grus

(Chapter 2, Section 7) Legal Reaction

Charters/Declarations/Bills of Rights/Freedoms were either not mentioend or reinterpreted to allow suspension of rights supposedly under the emergency protection of Public lives, ie. a greater good.

Legal challenges did arise to the mandates and social restrictions, but they were typcially struct down by supposedly independent but apparently puppet courts for immoral reasons.

Court reverses ban on Biden’s vaccine mandate

Through this we realized that the human rights we thought were totally inalienable actually weren't.

(Chapter 2, Section 8) Freedom of Expression

It is important to note that the more imperceptible a threat is to the average person, the more public truth needs to be protected to ensure the wrong perception takes hold.
Similar to the attack on other human rights in this pandemic, the right of free speech has been attacked during this pandemic as though a threat to us all.
Government, corporations, social media, and celebrities publicly labelling literally anything critical of the official narrative as 'misinformation', combating it as though a lethal threat (rather than the best way to find truth), or even the cause of vaccine side-effects, and directing the Public to only listen to official sources for truth. This touted 'problem' of 'misinformation' (formerly called free speech) was also called the 'infodemic', alleging that sharing information supposedly endangered lives.

January 06, 2023: Look who’s talking: Skeptics of COVID-19 vaccine safety branded “criminals” by nefarious Pfizer CEO
Dec 9, 2022: WHAT??? Now The “Science” Says Anti-Vax Movement IS CAUSE OF DEATHS AND SIDE EFFECTS FROM VACCINES!!
"AMERICANS WHO QUESTION THE COVID-19 SHOT ARE CRIMINALS" - Says Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla
August 21, 2022: Over 100,000 ‘digital first responders’ recruited by UN to push establishment COVID narrative
Managing the COVID-19 infodemic: Promoting healthy behaviours and mitigating the harm from misinformation and disinformation
How to spot misinformation amid the coronavirus outbreak (by the Washington Post)
How to spot COVID-19 misinformation
Coronavirus: The misinformation outbreak
Pope says fake news, disinformation on COVID, is human rights violation
Nunavut health minister calls out ‘dangerous’ COVID-19 misinformation
Trudeau accuses far-right website of spreading vaccine misinformation
Biden: Social media platforms 'killing people' with COVID-19 vaccine misinformation
Even experts in their field were accused of 'misinformation' if they contradicted the Government narrative. Ontario Health Minister calls for “immediate censorship of doctors” … medical totalitarianism rolling out fast
"Unless you hear it from us, it is not the truth. Dismiss anything else. We will continue to be your single source of truth."

Some related questions which come to mind immediately are:

What's the difference between a speech criminal and a thought criminal?
What is the test for 'misinformation'?
How can the sharing of information be attacked as killing people by the same authorities who have already won legal immunity for any physical harms of their products?

The Unvaccinated and Anti-Vaccine Portrayed by Government as a Primary Public Enemy On the assumption that criticism of the official narrative was always misinformation and that misinformation endangered lives, Government started using public money, legislation, and public rallying to fight the alleged 'misinformation', in at least one case going so far as to label those who spread it 'terrorists'

The crusade on COVID-19 'misinformation' ignored misinformation by Government and its agencies (even though misinformation from official sources tends to be far more damaging due to maximum social reach and trust). Example articles:

Nov 1 2022: Officials Across United States Spread Misinformation on COVID-19 Vaccines
October 29, 2022: EXCLUSIVE: CDC Officials Told They Spread Misinformation but Still Didn’t Issue Correction: Emails
September 7, 2022 article: CDC Gave Facebook Misinformation About COVID-19 Vaccines, Emails Show

Dissent within the medical community has been effectively limited by persecuting dissenters, especially revoking phyiciancs' licenses. This takes away not only their livelihood (they can't work in the entire region and to go somewhere else they'd normally take a long time to re-sit exams), but their credibility (not being a licensed physician anymore). There is (usually) no fair trial. Who knew that the licensing requirement could be used to blindly eliminate differences of opinion? In some cases other legal methods were used to punish COVID-19 physicians who criticized the official COVID-19 narrative or suggested unapproved options. Related articles include:

10 Nov, 2023: Ontario Doctor at Risk of Losing Licence Over COVID-19 Vaccine Comments
November 30, 2022: Cardiologist Dr. Thomas Binder forced into Swiss psychiatric hospital for publicly warning against covid lockdowns
November 26, 2022: Ontario Tribunal Decision Could Define Limit on Doctors’ Freedoms Nationwide
"Censorship Literally Kills" - Dr. Eric Nepute
November 3, 2022: Doctor Who Questioned COVID Response Ordered to Pay $1 Million in Legal Costs After Losing Libel Case
November 01, 2022: Dr. Peter McCullough to be STRIPPED of medical certifications for defying official covid narrative
Doctor Who Was Reporting On Vaccine Side Effects On pregnant Mothers Disappeared In Canada
Meet the Doctors Who Were Punished or Threatened for Questioning the COVID Vaccines
Bill Seeks to Muzzle Doctors Who Tell the Truth About COVID
Ontario doctor suspended for spreading COVID ‘misinformation,’ warning about jab dangers
Doctor With Contrarian Views on Pandemic Policy Approach Gets Licence Suspended
UK doctors who question vaccines, lockdowns could lose careers under new medical council proposals
Physician in Ontario, Canada, being stripped of her medical license for opposing COVID vaccines. Apparently it wasn't enough for the Government that she resigned from her hospital ER job already; they had to take it further, presumably to make a public example of her. Considering it takes around a decade of hard work to get a medical license, this is serious hardship for her. It's also hardship for the Public because a competent ER physician is precious, such as to stop bleeding and restart hearts, and Ontario is short of physicians, especially in the North; also nobody comes to the ER for a COVID vaccine anyway so not likely her opinion would have much direct impact. They could have allowed her to go to the North. Ah, but that wouldn't send a message to scare all the other physicians from speaking out.
Nurses May See Their Licenses Revoked for Spreading COVID-19 Misinformation Online
Ontario MPP could be barred from participating in the legislature
Texas doctor suspended for spreading 'misinformation' about Covid-19 submits resignation letter
Biden poised to ROUND UP anti-vaccine doctors and force them into insane asylums
Maine Doctor Ordered to Undergo Psych Evaluation for Prescribing Ivermectin, Hydroxychloroquine
Doctor who helped discover Omicron says she was ‘told not to publicly state it was a mild illness’
Column: A warning to doctors — spreading COVID misinformation could cost you your license
Physicians who post COVID-19 vaccine misinformation may lose license, medical panel says
Doctor loses license, must have psych evaluation for COVID falsehoods, board says
Ontario Health Minister calls for “immediate censorship of doctors” … medical totalitarianism rolling out fast

Some have spoken out against this censorship: December 22, 2022 Former Australian Medical Association President slams regulators for medical censorship and silencing doctors

It's worth noting that punishment of medical professionals resisting the official policies is not simply a matter of obeying law, but of using the law, or not, to punish only those against the COIVD-19 vaccines. For example, one physician was reported for doing something clearly dangerous, in vaccinating 500 children much younger than the Government approved for that injection, and continued to do so even after the local Public Health department gave him a direct order to stop it, yet he escaped all discipline by them dismissing the case: Canadian doctor who defiantly gave COVID shots to kids as young as 6 months old won’t face discipline. Isn't injecting 500 children with a vaccine not approved for them, and in violation of a direct personal order from the Government, clearly more dangerous than the merely sharing opinions (which other medical professionals were severely punished for)?

There are widespread reports of major social media platforms canceling/suspending accounts of anyone critical of the official narrative on COVID-19 issues, even when they have so many followers such that this is against their business incentive to do so. Examples include:

Pro-life Ontario Party leader permanently banned from Twitter for calling out COVID vaccine injuries

Even those officials who were fiercely supportive of the COVID-19 narrative and social restrictions are swiftly cancelled if they eventually question it. Article September 04, 2022: Cancel culture comes for Leana Wen, an obedient vaccine pusher who wasn’t obedient enough

(Chapter 2, Section 9) Religious Organization Reaction

Despite being entrusted as the moral guides of society, and there being many moral reasons to protest the obvious medical tyranny (including human rights suspensions), and ignoring even their self-interest and organziation-interest to keep their institutions open, the vast majority of religious leaders around the world went along with the official narrative with no objection. They enforced whatever restrictions on worship Government told them, no matter how ridiculous (such as limit of 5 people at wedding services including the bride, groom, and cleric: not even enough for the parents to come), while many other venues (such as banks or liquor stores) were never restricted whatsoever. They didn't even protest for the sake if their income, or that their obedience meant that they bow to Government not God, nor even the implication that places of worship are 'not essential'.

But more than simply remaining silent and complacent, many of them actively supported the Government narrative, such as teaching that vaccination was a 'moral duty' or 'moral obligation', which when it comes from your spiritual leader, is in practice an order to comply. Some held vaccination clinics. Some even implemented their own vaccine mandate to attend religious services. Example articles include:

(Chapter 2, Section 10): Non-Directly-Involved Business (aka Corporate) Reaction

Large corporations typically supported the Government narrative, recommendations, and mandates, even against their profit incentive, and social media and social funding companies, in particular, were seen to make moves censoring or otherwise making life difficult for anyone critical of Government policy or narrative.

In addition to that, many businesses used COVID-19 as an excuse to reduce service without reducing prices or refunding payments. For example: some hotels eliminated daily room service, some casinos stopped self-serve drink counters, and some day-care centers would close on any one case of COVID-19 and not refund parents' money for the time closed.

(Chapter 2, Section 11): News Media Reaction

Both mainstream and alternative news sources have been raising alarm over the overall COVID crisis, although for different reasons. Mainstream news tended to portray the crisis as being primarily caused by the disobedient, while independent news sources tended to portray the crises as by design as an engineered virus and response designed to collapse our human rights dressed up as 'keeping us safe'.
Mainstream media consistently supported the official narrative, while independent media mostly challenged it vigorously. Each side had their own experts and evidence.
Official Narrative Support by Mainstream Media: Mainstream (largest, usually quietly Government supported) news media were in shocking support of the COVID-related social restrictions, such as by:

Failing to Test and Expose the Truth of Government Allegations: There were many astounding claims promoted by Government and the WHO as facts, and mainstream media should have tested them as a natural part of good journalism, but they didn't challenge them, not even when the narratives reversed course. For example:

Many people investigated and posted videos about how surprisingly empty the hospitals were when they were reported on mainstream news to be overrun with COVID-19 patients, and clealry the hospital staff hand plenty of idle time to film numberous dance videos when they were supposedly worked ragged.

Initially the Public was told by Government not to wear masks, then we were mandated to wear under threat of severe fines and legal action, then much later many of us were told they were useless or to take them off despite COVID still raging.
Initially Government and pharmacy officials told us the vaccines were nearly perfectly effective, and then the story changed to them only reducing the severity of the disease but not stopping infection or transpission, and mainstream news didn't expose that betrayal.
Some of us being promised there would be no proof of vaccination requirements only to have the same Governor institute them a month or two later, without any criticism from mainstream media.
Mainstream media failing to expose that the social distancing rule, at least when first came out, was based on no science but completely arbitrary.
Mainstream media failling to critiize the mask mandates for demanding ineffective surgical and cloth masks while prohibiting more effective types of medical masks.
Mainstream media failing to report that the WHO has admitted that the virus is airborne, and what that means for the completely uselessness of masks.
Mainstream media failing to criticize lockdowns, masks, vaccines, and social distancing as practical failures until and unless officials said it first.

Failing to criticize Government actions and policies, no matter how rash, including unprecedented mandates and unilateral emergency power renewals, no matter how nonsensical, how severe, or how often repeated, or even how much the narratives would change course (such as promising no vaccine passports to implementing vaccine passports).
Mainstream Media Blackout on COVID-19 Vaccine Adverse Reactions: Despite official data on many hundreds of thousands of adverse COVID-19 vaccine-related events around the world, and despite the personal shock and suffering it must be to suffer something like, for example, a heart attack from something you did to ake you more healthy, mainstream news have not covered even a single such story individually, but only go as far as admitting that adverse events do occur (rarely, they say) and that's as far as the mention goes. In the face of so many reactions, the main thing supporting the Public perception that the vaccines are 'safe' is not merely Government and experts but a total absence of coverage of vaccine adverse events.

Meanwhile, independent news sources abound with personal stories of adverse vaccine reactions.

Are these stories of death and human suffering not worth covering, when even a single death in traffic is always headline news?
Concealing the vaccination status on stories of people who die suddenly, such as discussed in this article: Vaccinated Doctors are Dying and Unvaccinated Doctors are Quitting or Being Fired: Who will Run the Hospitals?
Distortion on Relative Percentages of Unvaccinated verus Vaccinated Hospitalizations: After the vaccine rollout, mainstream news have been portraying most of the COVID infections as in the unvaccinated. That is a lie, as testified by insiders and clearly shown on Government data such as the Ontario website, where we can see that the majority of hospitalizations are in the vaccinated.
Pro-Narrative Aggression by Mainstream Media Even Beyond Government: Through such methods as choice of stories, opinions, and data to present to the Public, as well as direct outcry, mainstream media has shown support for the tyranny of the crisis even more than Government. For example:

In the following article, mainstream news actually demanded Government delete data which goes against the narrative: UK health agency deletes study that called vaccine efficacy into doubt after media outcry.
When social restrictions were being lifted by Government, mainstream media had a habit of portraying the lift as dangerous or unwanted by experts and/or residents, even that some would continue being restricted voluntarily, and giving press only to these voices, rather than press to far more likely opinions against the restrictions, no matter how rare or unlikely those voices in favour of restrictions should have been. For example, in the following article, in covering Public reaction to the lifting of proof of vaccine requirements in Ontario, Canada, Global News portrays only people and organziations who resist the change, including one business owner who, despite it being against profit and efficiency, intends to continue voluntarily to restrict the number of customers in her business as well as continue to exclude non-vaccinated prospective customers: Some places to keep checking for COVID-19 vaccine proof in Ontario. This is despite the Premier of Ontario coming out with strong remarks against COVID restrictions, even though many were imposed by him, less than two weeks before: Ontario premier Doug Ford echoes Canadian truckers' complaints: 'Everyone's done with this'. Unfortunately for balanced news coverage, despite even mainstream news reporting the Premier of the Province saying that 'everyone' was done with the restrictions, mainstream news failed to publish the opinions of even a single such voice.

What is the mainstream media reaction to the independent criticisms on the official narrative of the COVID crisis? Mainstream media reaction has been to automatically dismiss literally anything which goes against the official COVID crisis narrative as 'minsinformation', without stating exactly what the misinformation was, and to vilify or prosecute those involved for 'spreading misinformation'. The assumption in this thinking is that information from official sources is always completely trustworthy, and anything which conflicts with it is therefore false. Examples are: here, here. Social media platforms have been working to silence independent COVID information on the accusation that it is all 'misinformation' (examples: here, here). This stamping out of any criticism of the official narrative is an extremely totalitarian approach. It goes to show how even hard evidence cannot guarantee that you win an argument; the other side can simply dismiss it using any label they want by blind application of the sheer power of their own choice. It is also very dangerous that we can arbitrarily attach labels to something without needing to prove that the label is deserved, and then punish based on the label rather than what was actually said or committed. This is why those who control the media are considered the most powerful people on earth: they can declare literally any narrative they want true or false, attaching whatever labels they want, without having to prove them true or false, and even get hard evidence ignored.
Ultimately the role of the mainstream news media in this crisis seems to have been primarily to build and maintain fear in the Public to the COVID-19 virus (an invisible enemy) strongly enough that we would accept literally any measures or treatments recommended by Government with the minimum of questions or hesitation, and then to support those measurs, especially vaccination, while condemning all other approaches.
Evidence has recently emerged, in 2022, that the mainstream media (and more) were paid off to support the official narrative: article October 06, 2022: Shocking trove of HHS records reveals most aggressive vaccine propaganda campaign EVER: Screenwriters, comedians, church leaders, black doctors and influencers all PAID OFF to pimp the vax. The douments the article is based on are here.

Ultimately the news on the mainstream media, ie. what people are told is happening around them, has been getting so different from what they actually see happening around them in their own lives and social contacts, that it's been reaching a breaking point in perception of reality. How much will you trust what you're told you see over what you actually see?

Jan 15, 2023: They Promised "Safe And Effective"; We Got "Sudden And Unexpected"
October 25, 2020: Enough conspiracy, let’s stick to data and science to end the lockdowns, Part 2

(Chapter 2, Section 12): Celebrity Reaction

Although a minority of celebrities spoke out against the vaccines and/or social restrictions, the vast majority who spoke out publicly did so in favour of them:

Those who have spoken out against the vaccines or restrictions have typically suffered for it:

Some celebrities have expressed regret over their anger towards the unvaccinated: Dec 21, 2022 Demonizing the unvaccinated was ‘incredibly dangerous’: Shawshank Redemption star im Robbins

Chapter 2, Section 13: Public Reaction

The majority of the Public followed the official narrative into fear of a perceived extrenal threat, and rushing without question to whatever solution officials offered for that threat. This trust and loyalty was enough to actually incite anger with anyone of a different opinion, and continued even if the orders plainly made no sense, or if they were reversed later by the same people for the same issue. It was an example of Mass Formation Psychosis (example video on that here).
Creation of a COVID Culture: The Public majority seemed to adopt COVID as a belief system, based on complete trust of all of the Government orders and claims. This religious cult included:
- Trust was portrayed as the most reliable path to truth. We were told to trust in science as though infallible truth, ignoring that our science doesn't know everything, and ignoring that trusting Government-appointed experts is not the same thing as trusting the scientific method. Note that the words 'believer' and 'trust' are properties of religion, even a cult, and not true science.
- High priests who dictate truth were designated, being select scientists and industry professionals.
- Irrational claims were adopted as truth as soon as spoken by the high priests, as with any dogma, such as: high lethality of COVID-19, or that surgical masks filter viruses far smaller than their pore size, or that masks with smaller pore sizes must not be used, or that only vaccines which don't work will save us, or that social distaning will safe us from an airborne virus
- Practically useless rituals were demanded of everyone, such as: mask wearing, social distancing, and lockdowns
- an idol was worshipped as infallible, in this case a vaccine
- there was a blood Sacrifice, in thise case the deaths and other harms caused by the vaccine were considerd a necessary evil
- there was punishment for criticism, including censorship, cancellation, or even criminalization of any criticism of the COVID-19 'vaccines'
The tenets of this religion seemed to be:
1. Absolute trust in Government and their appointed experts.
2. A fear of being labelled 'anti-science' or 'anti-vaccine', such that these two terms were used to threaten critics, usually at their fierce protest.
3. Automatic disqualification of any information critical of Government or their appointed experts, by accusing those who asked such questions or spread such information as automatically being 'anti-science' and their information automatically labelled 'misinformation', usually without even pointing out what the misinformation was. Only the science quoted by officials was considered 'real' science.
4. Compliance with Government-ordered rules no matter what they are.
5. Approval for unlimited punishments for the uncompliant. Even the sudden forced loss of their livelihood was not seen as wrong.
6. Viewing the uncompliant as threat and the most dangerous threat in this crisis.
7. Never questioning where the virus came from or allowing anyone to question this.
8. Never allowing the questioning of vaccine safety or talking about anyone having adverse reactions to it except to dismiss those reactions as normal.
9. Never allowing friends or family to share COVID information, but insisting that everyone must listen only to official sources on these matters.
10. Gratitude towards politicians for enforcing COVID-related social restrictions.
11. Insistence to vote support for politicians promoting more social restrictions, especially for the uncompliant.
Surrender portrayed as Free Choice:

Some activists are finding that whereas people formerly resisted changing their lifestyles (eg. smoking, narcotics, etc.) for the good reasons presented to them by friends and family, insisting that their sacred right to choose be respected, how immediately these same people radically change their lifestyles, and defend the change, and proclaim it as truth and right, and demand others do the same, even punishing someone ele's choice to refuse, if Government imposes it as an order backed up with threats of fines or imprisonment. Even the formerly fierce 'my body my choice' pro-abortion argument has been silent in the context of vaccination mandates.

What it means is that choice is not sacred in our society, but what is sacred is always completely surrendering, even your own body and your children, to whatever threat seems the biggest at the time.
A Rise of Snitching: Public perseuction of the uncompliant with the social restrictions (masks, distancing, etcetera): Apparently due to longstanding Government and mainstream media portrayal of not following the Government-imposed social restrictions as extremely dangerous to everyone's health, people have begun snitching on, challenging, and even attacking those they find who are non-compliant. For example:

A rise in 'Karens', ie. individuals who take it upon themselves to publicly accuse the uncompliant and try to bully their compliance to the 'rules'.

August 11, 2022: Mask Nazi tells unmasked man: I hope your children die because they don’t have masks on
Mask Karens Are Out of Control!
Attack of the Corona Karens
OK, Karen!

Fake social media accounts pushing the Establishment narrative. Article January 06, 2023: These doctors pushed masking, COVID lockdowns on Twitter. Turns out, they don’t exist
The vast majority of individuals (example 80 or 90%) accepted the COVID 'vaccines': most due to lifelong trust in elected officials or their appointed medical specialists (which was called trust in science), unable to believe that they might betray us, or unconfident to question superior expertise, and some on promises of having certain human rights (such as travel) returned to them.
Rather than object to human rights suspensions by Government, those who disliked the social restrictions preferred to avoid the problem where they could, in particular moving out of cities and into rural areas, where staying home tends to be much more spacious, and where COVID restrictions tend to be far less enforced.

Public Vilification of the Unvaccinated:

The unvaccinated were openly discriminated against by the Establishment, meaning by Government and mainstream media with Public majority following. Suddenly it was popular to openly hate, persecute, and restrict basic rights of one innocent group of society for no wrong to anyone, but only refusing a risky, irreversible, and ineffective medical treatment they did not want. Examples:

EDITORIAL: Stop vilifying the unvaccinated
Prime Minister Trudeau even publicly accused the unvaccinated of being racists: 'Fascist Psychopath': Justin Trudeau Calls the Unvaccinated 'Racist and Misogynistic Extremists' (Video)
You Have an Ethical and Moral Obligation to Get Vaccinated -- Shut up and get vaccinated..
Shut Up and Get Vaxxed: These Woke Millionaires Are Literally Killing People
Here’s How We Handle People Who Refuse to Get COVID Vaccines
Ostracize and Punish the Unvaccinated
CNN Medical Guest: We Need to Do More to Punish Unvaccinated Americans
VAXXHOLES
Dec. 8, 2021: I’m Furious at the Unvaccinated
Column: Mocking anti-vaxxers’ COVID deaths is ghoulish, yes — but may be necessary (reading the URL link address of the article is equally disturbing).
January 11, 2022: Macron is right: It’s time to make life a living hell for anti-vaxxers
Vaccine resisters are lazy and irresponsible — we need vaccine passports now to protect the rest of us
Jan. 17, 2022: The unvaccinated cherish their freedom to harm others. How can we ever forgive them?
9 December 2021: It's time to punish Britain's five million vaccine refuseniks: They put us all at risk of more restrictions, says ANDREW NEIL. So why shouldn't we curb some of their freedoms?
Even children were so riled up with hate as to demand persecution for the uvnaccinated with a cruelty which is uncharacteristic of children: QUEBEC CANADA INDOCTRINATORS THE YOUTH INTO WANTING TO CALL THE POLICE AND LOCK UP THE UNVAXXED

The basis of this public, open, and Establishment-supported attack on the unvaccinated was the Establishmet portrayal of he unvaccinated as the sole cause of the continuance of the pandemic and its social restrictions. The Establishment went so far as to proclaim the crisis a 'pandemic of the unvaccinated'.

Even though the virus was created by scientists, presumably in a Chinese lab, and the social restrictions were ordered by Government, the Public accepted the idea that the unvaccinated were solely to blame for the social restrictions and fear: not China, not virus scientists, and not Government tyranny.

They even blamed the unvaccinated for the rise in variants, even though the unconvenient truth is that the variants only exploded after the vaccination program started, and it was fear of variants which kept the pandemic going. Neither did the experts warn us of the possibilty of a variant crisis until after the vaccines were widely distributed: only then did the variant narrative provide an excuse as to why the pandemic emergency continued despite vast majority acceptance of the vaccine. Of course the Public forgave them for not mentioning variants earlier because they were only experts and not expected to know what the virus would do.

Of course, the accusation that the pandemic was of the unvaccinated has since been proven false: Canadian COVID Care Alliance destroys the ‘pandemic of unvaccinated’ myth

The Public majority actually voting support for the imposition or increase of social restrictions, mandates, and punishments especially for the not-fully-vaccinated as if there was no such thing as human rights but only what the majority wants. An example is the 2021 re-election of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who was re-elected on a very clear proposal to implement vaccine mandates and proof of vaccination across the nation. Of course, since the definition of 'fully vaccinated' kept changing by the addition of another required dose, the majority actually voted to impose this on themselves eventually (yes, the majority of People voted to restrict themselves against their interest).

That Public didn't seem to consider that they might want the right to refuse future doses (but no longer have that right because they supported taking it away from others on previous doses), at which time the penalties they impose for the 'unvaccinated' now will threaten them as 'not fully vaccinated' later.

In addition to that, they also probably didn't consider that the vaccines they'd be required to get in the future may no longer be covered by the Government (example article 22 Oct 2022: Pfizer Says COVID Vaccine Will Cost as Much as $130 Per Dose When Government Contract Ends). Just because a vaccine is mandatory doesn't necessarily mean it its cost is covered.
Some of the punishments for the unvaccinated which the Public carried out themselves included:

Physical property damage for being unvaccinated: article: Psycho vaccine pusher runs her SUV over the car of an “anti-vaxxer” and brags on video
Exclusion of the Not-Fully-Vaccinated from buying gasonline: Article July 24, 2022: COVID QR codes now being used to RATION FUEL in Sri Lanka as economic collapse accelerates
Physician-level refusal of medical care for the unvaccinated. An example article is: BC Doctor Refuses to Treat Unvaccinated Children

Other examples of non-government Public action against the unvaccinated:

Suicide Cult: Support for the vaccination program was so fierce that even some of those clearly harmed by the vaccines continued to advocate them. For example:

Nurse Shares COVID Vaccine Side Effects from Trial
"I Would Love to Die From The AstraZeneca Vaccine"
Aussie actress who had stroke after COVID-19 jab still fiercely supports vaccination, says husband
VACCINE SIDE EFFECTS: THE RELIGION OF SACRIFICE FOR THE NEW WORLD ORDER

Overall Public Response: Although there have been a minority of freedom-loving residents, the majority of the Public have:

Followed all the social restrictions, no matter how much against our own interest.
Accepted all the vaccines we were told to take
Not defended the right of anyone to refuse a vaccine we have accepted.
Submitted to Goverment more the more we were threatened by Government. In particular, Government has been publicly remarking on the success of using harsh measures in dealing with the Public.

Thousands sign up for 1st dose of COVID-19 vaccine as Quebec threatens to tax the unvaxxed. In Quebec (a province of Canada), the people rushed to comply to a mere proposal to punish them which handn't even been defined, nevermined implemented, yet.

(Chapter 2, Section 14) The Wages of Compliance

The public has repeatedly been promised that compliance to the many social restrictions (such as vaccine mandates) is the fastest way to end all the social restrictions, and the Public accepted that lie as true. In practice, the more we complied, the more both the medical problems and social restrictions increased (usually excused on some 'new data' or 'new variant' rather than 'broken promise'). For example please see:

Desipte being vaccinated in the vast majority, societies still experience at least as bad social restrictions as before:

We were promised that the original lockdown would only be for 2 weeks, and would save lives. By our compliance it was used as precedent to keep us locked down for months and release us from lockdown only to lock us down again.
We were told that vaccines were the way out of the pandemic and all social restrictions. The vast majority of us accepted the vaccines. Then we were let out of the social restrictions despite rising case numbers and told to just live with COVID as though, now that we're vaccinated, the Govrenment doesn't care about the COVID numbers anymore.

After we approved their use, social restrictions, against our human rights, became a tool for Government to threaten us with for disobedience to anythig they wanted us to do: either we do it or we don't get our human rights back. For example:
Trudeau Viciously Heckled In Parliament For Refusing To Relinquish His COVID Tyranny. Notice where Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says, at the 11:30 mark, that the vaccine "mandates are a way to end further restrictions". He's not talking about immunity or the pandemic, on that if we accept the government-mandated vaccines there will be no more government-ordered social restricitons (punishments).

Austrian chancellor threatens lockdown for unvaccinated
Ford says vaccine passports are the 'best chance' Ontario has to avoid another lockdown

Chapter 2, Section 15: Psychological Situation:

The COVID crisis was primarily a psychological exercise over the Public, with the following components:

Stoking maximum Public fear of the virus, through daily headline news announcements of COVID death and case numbers on all mainstream news sites, and frequent Government announcements on the situation, and strong wording to those announcements, despite the virus having an infection fatality rate of less than 1%, many other things killing more, and ignoring substances which kill which Government sells or makes money on the sale of.
Deflection of Public focus away from the virus origin, because either it came from a Government-funded lab or doesn't exist at all.
Silencing any allegations of the false positive rate of the COVID tests, even though all tests have such a rate, and especially the COVID tests used a method (PCR) never intended to diagnose and prone to great error when run at the high cycle rates it was run at.
Pretending that any positive test result was a COVID 'case', even in completely asymptomatic people, ignoring not only the possibility of a false-positive result but also all other requirements to make a diagnosis. In fact, the notion that people without any symptoms could be carriers of the deadly disease stoked Public fear even more and provided a rationale for effectively quarantining everyone with lockdowns.
Pretending that a vaccine was our only hope, even before it existed, refusing to acknowledge any signficant hope from already available pharmaceuticals, any natural supplements, obvious ways to improve health (such as sleep), or even provable naturally acquired immunity.
Reframing tyranny as responsible leadership: what would normally be seen as extreme tyranny, including putting everyone under a kind of house arrest, compelling everyone to breathe only through a mask, and coercing irreversible medical treatments which many did not want, was all done as through an apparently blameless cooperation with the medical industry which worked like this:

the medical industry declared the emergency: a deadly new virus as a tremendous immediate threat to us all.
Government assumed dictatorial powers to combat the great emergency which the medical experts said existed.

Experts have authority in our society, with no one able to challenge them in court except another expert. Even if there were some experts who didn't agree, Government was not expected to listen to the recommendations of any medical experts but those whom they themselves appointed.
the medical industry also recommended and/or defended social restrictions and mandates. This wasn't seen as tyranny because they were merely expert recommendations based on data and their expertise. Example articles:

Dec 27, 2021: Fauci says vaccine mandate for U.S. air travel might incentivize more shots
October 17, 2021 : Fauci Defends Coronavirus Vaccination Mandates

the Government simply implemented the mandates, but this wasn't seen as tyranny because they were only doing what the medical experts said to do; in fact a failure to perform the medical recommendations could expose them to legally supported blame.
Government awarded the medical industry tremendous grants and revenues out of Public money, presumably in return for their cooperation.

Portraying the unvaccinated, rather than the ineffectiveness of the vaccine, as the sole cause for continuance of the Pandemic. This stoked the hate.
Ending the pandemic as abruptly as it began by simply lifting the mandates and stopping the daily case number reporting, even though there were many cases outstanding, proving there was no true medical basis behind these types of decisions. But the Public was too exhausted with social restrictions to express any sentiment but relief.

Chapter 2, Section 16: Spiritual Situation:

Everything in this world has a spiritual side to it.

The spiritual side, although imperceptible to our physical senses, is even more important than the physical aspect to the reality. Regardless of whether you believe this, certainly the spiritual side of the COVID-19 crisis deserves recognition and discussion.

PROPHECY on the COVID Crisis:

Where is God in all of this?

What would you do if you were God? We should be able to see His perspective in these ways:

That despite power-mad human scientists evidently working for decades to create this virus to defeat our natural immune system and terrorize us helplessly into their control, yet the immune system God gave us was still much stronger than the Coronavirus, the latter prevailing only in 0.27% of cases. We were relatively safe.
Yet without the smallest crumb of faith we chose to fear, trusting our televisions over our own eyes, believing we were all dying and we needed to abandon our human rights to scientists to save us. We actually trusted some of the same scientists who made COVID to save us from COVID, rather than trust God who made life, because of our worship of science, even though science is only a a limited study of His creation.
We not only gave up our rights, but even our humanity, ignoring that we were created in God's image, and by His hand, but rather allowed our scientists to re-engineer our God-given genetics in their mad experiment, denying that God alone is the rightful author of life.
We furthermore accepted Government to declare worship of Him as 'non-essential', and our Churches shut themselves in agreement with the principle, while it kept open all: banks, vendors of alcolol, vendors of marijuana (where legal), and abortion clinics (slaughterhouses).
We further humiliated Him by turning not to Him for our salvation, not even His almighty power, nor His infinite mercy, but we faithlessly threw our trust and worship on a potion created by the scientists, praising this idol publicly as our only salvation from COVID, touting its infallibility even though it failed, trusting in it absolutely even though it killed, demanding sacrifice to it, and persecuting those who would not sacrifice themselves and their children to this new god.

If you were God how would you react to being treated like that? Does that help you understand 'where God is' in this?

A Satanic link to masks and distancing:

These madates were enforced strictly, against severe fines, yet they have no medical basis. As we discuss elsewere on this page, surgical masks reduce the spread of bacteria but their pores are far too large to impede the spread of airborne viruses (which SARS-CoV-2 is, as the WHO has pointed out). Why did Government insist we must wear masks but not medical-grade filtration masks? And what use is standing 6' apart when an airborne virus, ie. carried through the air, can spread for hundreds of feet? Who decided on the number 6?

If there is an insistence to do something, presented for medical reasons, but it's medical nonsense, then there must be another reason why this is insisted.

It just so happens that wearing masks and standing 6' apart is a common feature of satanic ritual: WEARING MASK & 6 FEET IS SATAINIC RITUAL. Do you mind being mandated to participate in a satanic ritual?

Is COVID-19 vaccination immoral?

It is theologically unreasonable to believe that God would be angry with us for doing something which is moral. However if there is something immoral, the theology tends to get very serious very fast, because although society has tolerated many evils, especially if we consider them less important, God does not tolerate any evils at all (although He is merciful if we repent). Here's how the morality of COVID-19 vaccination looks:

The world, even many religious leaders (surprisingly), have presented the COVID-19 vaccine as not only acceptable, but necessary, even so moral as to be immoral to refuse. Some would even shut out refusers while not shutting out partakers in any other (supposed) sin, such as murder. Examples of this are:

The logic that accepting the vaccine is a moral obligation is flawed and the idea faulty. Here's why:

The vaccine doesn't work to protect anyone from contracting or transmitting the virus (as disussed elsewhere on thie page: see subheading 'as for effectiveness'). Therefore there is no protection of other people in taking it: none at all.
The vaccine doesn't even protect the recipient.
Accepting the vaccine is either based on belief in the clearly evidenced lie it is effective protection, or based on coercion (such as having the right to keep your employment), neither of which is a moral reason to accept it. Perhaps another reason could be that someone believes it is their moral obligation, but that is also a lie as we are exposing now.
Even if the vaccine did medically protect other people (which it doesn't but for argument's sake):
It has enough risks of serious adverse events, and enough unknown risks including all long-term effects, that to exert any kind of pressure on someone else to take it is an assault (morally whether or not legally). Nothing risking their personal harm should be demanded of others.
The risks are proven to be greater than the benefits, if there are benefits at all. This is especially true of children.
There is a moral obligation of Public officials, and the Public in a democracy, to stop the vaccine distribution when people die or are seriously harmed. Yet they ignore all death and harm counts as acceptable.
We must accept the risks inherent in our bodies if we expect to have any human rights or life at all. The idea that humans can spread virus and therefore need to be altered is a very slippery slope which we must not take one step down. The human body is by design a certain repository of viruses and bacteria, especially in our gut, and it is not possible to sterilize a human of all of these without killing them. We even have viral DNA already incorporated into our genome. If we allow ourselves to believe we must sterilize each other to be safe, we do unnecessary harm to each other in the name of trying to avoid something which is unavoidable. The path ultimately leads to the inescapable conclusion that the only way to keep everyone safe from the risk of other people's bodies is to kill everyone. But killing everyone isn't keeping everyone safe. This path is a path of self-destruction of our species out of irrational fear of risks of other people.
We already have plenty of potential pathogens already in our body. The only real safety from viruses is our overall health more than trying to shield out virus particles. It is the difference between germ theory and cellular terrain theory. Video: Science, Pseudoscience, and The Germ Theory of Disease - Dr. Jordan Grant (2022 Conference)

The fact is that accepting the COVID-19 vaccines under mandates is immoral, because to accept them is to accept:

unlimited harm of your own body. Ignoring the baseless claims by the Establishment that it is 'safe and effective', they also publicly publish data of the harms and deaths followig it. That's why a French court declared accepting the COVID-19 vaccine an act of suicide in upholding a life insuranc company's refusal to pay a death claim on life insurance for someone who had received the vaccine. Furthermore, it can be argued that even its stated mechanism, even if there is nothing hidden, is potentially harmful in theory.
arbitrary Government regulation of everyone's God-given human rights. When Government suspends God-given human rights, and then returns them only on condition of compliance to orders, and you comply with the order to get the right back, you are accepting that Government has the authority to regulate those rights, and you support the withholding of those rights from the people who didn't comply. If you think you are innocent of this harm, consider this: there is no way that the Government would have been able to suspend the human rights of the few for long unless the many complied with that system: it is only because the majority complied that the minority who didn't can be excluded from society.
synthetic genetic reprogramming. God being the sole author of life, you defy this in accepting anyone else to reprogram your cells to do anything. You know there are consequences if you have your equipment repaired by anyone but an authorized repair person, and you wouldn't accept a software update for your computer except from the official source of that software. Neither are you permitted to edit any artistic work on earth for reasons of copyright. How did you allow these vaccine manufacturers to reprogram your cells?
abortion. The production of these vaccines absolutely did use aborted fetal cell lines, at least in testing and possibly more than that, and therefore to accept the COVID-19 vaccines is to accept benefits derived from, and therefore participate in, this murder of innocent children.

another immune system. God already gave you an immune system, and it is proven to defeat COVID nearly all of the time even without any conscious additions. Beyond that, God provided many herbs and vitamins which are far safer and, unlike the vaccine, proven effective to mitigate COVID-19 risks. Beyond that, there is the power of prayer and the Saviour, Jesus Christ, He provided us with. For us to submit our bodies to this artificial overrides despite the innate, natural, and spiritual options provided to use by the Creator being more than adequate, before there is even a challenge, simply out of our trust in public officials rather than the Creator, could be interpreted as a choice of officials' science as the god we trust in, and the vaccine the baptism into that religion of trust.

As for potentially offending God by ignoring Him in crisis, our society was just too exclusive to proclaim the vaccine as our only possible salvation. For example, please consider these headlines:

That the vaccine is the sacrament of a religion would explain phenomena such as:

Why the vaccine has been promoted and defended as 'trusting the science', even though science, specifically the scientific method, was specifically designed to be a method of finding truth without trusting anyone. Trust is unquestionalbly the realm of religion, and being told to trust is being told to believe in that religion.
Why the vaccine has been defended no matter any evidence, even to the point that clear failure of the vaccine to protect agaist transmission or infection of even the exact strain it was formulated for has been considered acceptable. The reason is that trust in the vaccine is what is expected, not results. This clear show of blind faith is unquestionably of religious and not scientific or logical character.
Why all harms following vaccination have been considered acceptable, even 'proof that the vaccine is working', rather than ever a reason to stop the vaccination program. This is blood sacrifice.

If trust in what official call 'science' is the religion, and the vaccine is the sacrament of initiation, who does the religion worship? There is no clear answer to this yet, the worship for the moment being vaguely centered on a collection of medical public officials. The door is open for a single figure to emerge for everyone to trust in as a clear focalpoint of the religion. This would seem to be the Antichrist of the Bible.

Is the COVID-19 vaccine the Biblical MARK OF THE BEAST?

A critical question arising in the spirits of Christians is the question of whether the vaccine is somehow related to the Mark of the Beast prophesied in the Bible. Why? The prophecy fortells a time when people would be required to have a mark on their hand or forehead or else they cannot buy or sell, and those who accept that mark would be rejected by God forever:

Bible (KJV) Book of Revelation

13:15-18:

15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.
16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.

Revelation 14:9-11:

9 And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,
10 The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:
11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.

Revelation 20:4: And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

The answer to the question (of whether or not the COVID-19 vaccine is the Biblical 'Mark of the Beast') seems to be a technical 'no', although it is a forerunner.

The reason it is a technical 'no' is that the COVID-19 vaccine is not a mark on the right hand or forhead (even though having it has been used as a requirement to buy, sell, or travel). Due to this simple fact, many people have let down their guard regarding this spiritual warning.

The reality is that whoever wants to implement the true Mark of the Beast must somehow overcome the resistance whcih could be expected by suddenly announcing to a Bible-aware and free society that they are to accept a mark in the hand or forehead. We can expect them to use a primary tool of evil, which the Bible warns us about, and which evil forces have been using extensively to slowly change society to their aims: longstanding deception towards slowly accomplishing incremental goals. It's called 'cooking the frog': since a frog will jump out if placed in hot water, but not jump out of water slowly made hot, their strategy seems to be to slowly get the Public to consent to a framework being built around us from which it will be impossible to escape once we recognize what it really is. In other words, by the time a clearly recognizeable Mark of the Beast is introduced, our freedoms will already be so restricted (with our consent up to that point), that we will have (by their design) minimum power and maximum punishments to refuse even what we clearly understand is evil.

To arrive at the truth we should want to find, we need to re-phrase the question as, 'Does the COVID-19 vaccine have a relationship to the Biblical Mark of the Beast?'. The answer that broader question is that the COVID-19 vaccine is not the Biblical Mark of the Beast but lays the foundation for the Biblical Mark of the Beast to be introduced (and for the Beast himself to be introduced following). Here are the ways the vaccine culture of the COVID-19 crisis established a foundation for the Mark of the Beast to be introduced:

The Public majority accepted that no action is necessary to stop virus engineering, but may continue unabated. Rather they blamed the unvaccinated for the pandemic.
The Public majority accepted the idea that only the uncompliant (with Government orders) are to blame for all Public problems.
The Public majority accepted, and even mandated (by voting support of when given the chance), the following immoral and dangerous principles, now set in precedent:

the idea that hatred, segregation, and persecution of a segment of society is OK so long as the Government makes the determination of who. Unfortunately we didn't learn not to do this from examples of history, such as the Jewish Holocaust under the Nazi regime.
the idea that the WHO can declare a pandemic for any unusually high positive test results around the world for any disease, even if no one is sick or dying, because of how they've redefined how they use the word 'pandemic', ie. to use it to trigger drastic measures on a much lower level of threat than the old definition would allow.
the idea that Government can take on self-renewable dictatorial powers on the basis of any medical threat at their sole determination.
the idea that all human rights can be suspended at any time by Government if and when it decides a medical threat exists and in its sole discretion. No longer is there such a thing as inalienable human rights.
the idea that Government or the UN declare something as a global pandemic even if nobody's dying.
the idea that Government can arbitrarily order an entire nation to put an obstruction on their mouth and nose to impede breathing.
the idea that Government can arbitrarily mandate anything to be put inside our bodies, or any other medical treatment, even treatments with mortal risk, and anyone who refuses can be shut out of society, including from such things as: employment, visitation rights, travel, shopping, and even going outside. Really there was no sense that any punishment was too much for the unvaccinated. As for those first to comply, they were touted as heroes of society.
the idea that Government can artibtrarily detain anyone on medical excuse of possibly being a carrier or disease, even if they have no symptoms nor positive test of carrying any pathogen. In the pandemic, this was called 'mandatory quarantine'.
the idea that other humans are a threat since they can possibly carry dangerous pathogens, whether they do or not at the time, and at the Government's sole determination of what is 'dangerous'. Since human bodies naturally have potentially dangerous pathogens inside our gut (example E.coli), lymph nodes, on our skin, and in the air around us at all times, the Government can prosecute anyone as a threat at any time.
the idea that anyone spreading information contrary to the Government narrative is a threat to society.
the idea that those who accept the mandated thing into their bodies should present something, preferably scanned from a Government database, at various checkpoints, for permission to carry out basic activities. This scan is linked to their medical records and identity.

Is the requirement for us to produce a proof of vaccination QR code to enter venues really very different from the Mark of the Beast scenario portrayed in this video: (1985) Cathy don't go to the supermarket

Considering the above social changes have already been established, it seems a small step now to transition to a Biblical 'Mark of the Beast'. The changes would only be:

The treaty the World Health Organization is already working, which grants them direct dictatorial powers to command the nations as a central authority in a pandemic, would need to be completed. It's important to note that the COVID-19 crisis was used as the justification for the creation of this treaty (example article: Opinion: We need a Global Pandemic Treaty -- before it's too late . (Here's a petition on opposing that if it's not too late).
To announce a new medical scare or continue the old one. This is very easy because the COVID-19 test kits have a false positive rate, like any test does, and so if you test enough healthy people you must get a positive, and at least some nations consider just one positive test result as enough of a reason to lock down the entire country.
To re-declare emergency (dictatorial, democracy-suspending) powers and re-impose social restrictions/punishments especially for the uncompliant to be locked out of society. They already renewed their emergency powers and re-imposed social restrictions, with emphasis on the uncompliant, so many ties during the COVID-19 pandemic that this would be nothing new.
Make the scannable proof of vaccination (for access to basic social rights) an actual microchip, in the right hand or forehead, instead of a document or on-screen display. They could easily argue this as being less vulnerable to fraud and therefore more safe for everyone.

It's worth noting that such a microchip exactly matching the Biblical description is already developed and at least thousands of people have already accepted it: MICROCHIP INVENTOR WARNS NOT TO TAKE IT!
If they want to, they can declare one leader of the worldwide central authority to guide the world through the fake crisis. This would be the Antichrist.

So we're almost there, and the COVID-19 vaccine culture laid the foundation for almost everything the introduction of the Mark of the Beast into a society requires, even one which started out relatively free and Bible-aware.

Here are videos of similar warning:

Here are some other scenarios on how might officials might be planning to get us the rest of the way (to a scriptural Mark of the Beast):

SCENARIO 1:

Going from the vaccine to a universal digital ID.

So THIS Is What Vaccine Passports Were Leading To
Aug 15, 2022: Germany announces color-coded vaccine passport system similar to Communist China’s
Aug 12, 2022: Canadian gov’t looking to implement digital ID program despite concerns of privacy experts. This article exposes that the Canadian Government is not only pursuing an digital ID, but doing it explicitly on the excuse of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Aug 12, 2022: Lawyers say Canada’s travel app violates many Charter rights
ID2020: This organization aims to give everyone in the world some kind of digital identification, and before the pandemic had already started a project in Bangladesh linking this to immunization there.
As further evidence of a planned transition from COVID to a digital identification for everyone, notice this video's title, where the World Bank links digital identification as a requirement for recovery from COVID-19: Inclusive Digital ID for a Resilient Recovery from COVID-19
The vaccine doesn't become the digital identification. It's the requirement to prove vaccination which brings us to digital identification of some kind, whether it's an app, a QR code, or a biochip. Those who submitted to showing proof of vaccination in a digital format have already given their support to the first widespread digital ID system; it only needs upgrades to become universal. Here's a related video: Canada's Ontario to adopt digital vaccine passports
Germany is now underway, in passing the implementation of a data collection program which will keep a profile on each citizen: up to 200 points of information, they say, including bank accounts and health records. The Philippines is also said to be rolling out a digital ID soon.

Going from a digital ID to something implanted in our bodies. Well obviously they will say it's far more secure and convenient to have the ID implanted than to carry with you. Sweden is already using a microchip in their hand to proove COVID vaccination. It really doesn't take much imagination to get here.
The twist is the Quantum Dot technology, which uses the enzyme luciferase to produce dots of near-infrared ligth under the skin, and can be used in a digital ID system. This is likely the scriptural Mark of the Beast for three reasons:

It is implanted.
It's easy to imagine that they could tell us to put it on your right hand or forehead.
It honors Lucifer, and that's the part that's clearly immoral. Here's the detail on that:

Christians don't want to do something which could offend God and cost them our salvation.
But besides the printed page, Christianity is about morality, and certainly that's what God cares about also, and what other religions should also respect.
To that end, we ask the question: is there anything immoral about the vaccine, beyond the medical risks, at least from a Christian perspective? It's starting to look like there might be, and it might be very serious. Here's how the argument adds up:

There is a family of enzymes called Luciferases. These enzymes, originally obtained from natural life forms which give off a glow of light, produces light as a by-product of splitting a substrate it relies on as a kind of fuel, called Luciferin, to produce this effect. These molecules were known since ... but it was Raphaël Horace Dubois (20 June 1849, Le Mans – 21 January 1929) who gave them these peculiar names.
The names are peculiar because they include the specific name of the chief evil spirit described in the Christian religion, Lucifer, also called Satan or Adversary as general titles.
Most online references seem to pretend that there's no relationship between the name of these enzymes and the specific name of the emperor of demons, but there is. They are the same, except the enzyme has the '-ase' hallmark suffix at the end which denotes that it is an enzyme.
Why would he choose that name? Especially growing up in a Christian region, this French pharmacologist (educated person) should have known the specific name of Lucifer and not chosen to use that name accidentally. Normally if you discover something, in science, your own name goes on it, to honor you. Until and unless a better explanation surfaces, the most reasonable guess seems to be that he named it that to honor Lucifer.

SCENARIO 2: This includes everything of the prior scenario but adds something considering the genetic technology in the vaccines and the horror we should have had that the entire world population is expected to undergo mandatory gene therapy.

The risks of these genetic vaccines permanently altering our human DNA into something unnatural is real, and we know some of the mechanisms, but it is virtually impossible to test for when it happens to individuals cells unpredictably. Regardless of mechanism, merely the fact that the vaccines haven't been existed in the long term proves that we cannot know the long-term effects, plus them being genetic means possible genetic effects, and the product monograph for at least the Johnson & Johnson vaccine states unknown 'genotoxicity'.

If our genes are altered away from being completely human, these bad things happen:

unpredictable health effects
virtually unpredictable transmission to future generations
loss of our natural, true, humanity: the 'beast' in 'Mark of the Beast' would be us! We would have lost the form given to us by our Creator. This is one of the big disadvantages of the 'transhuman' agenda.
We risk offending our Creator for having knowingly given up the humanity He/She gave us, or for directly tampering with our genetic code of life that only He/She is the true author of.
Irreversability (except by divine intervention). We just don't have the technology to undo this.

Despite all of that, on the other hand, it is possible that the COVID-19 vaccines, at least the genetic ones, are the actual Mark of the Beast on some level. For example, they are reported to build biostructures inside the body; is it possible that they might build a third strand into our DNA, and that would be the Mark of the Beast? Video on this: Does This PROVE The MARK OF THE BEAST?

Could witchcraft or sorcery be related to something as trusted and supposedly 'scientific' as the pharmaceutical industry?

Yes. It not only could be related, it is sorcery, by definition of the word 'pharmacy'. No wonder that industry insists on artificial chemicals and concoctions while attacking natural remedies. No wonder they cure nothing, at least not without causing another problem. Please consider:

Ultimately, the sin of pharmacy is to cause us to trust in unnatural substances such as drugs (solid) and potions (liquids), rather than in God or His providance, for our salvation. In fact the root word in the Bible, pharmakeia, translated in English Bibles as sorcery or witchcraft, has in its definition not only those things but also idolatry. It's about worship of a substance. Ask yourself if this is indeed national idolatry in a political climate where:

The vaccine is promoted as absolutely infallible even if it isn't. Adverse events following the vaccine must therefore be coincidences.
The Vaccine(s) is promoted as the only available Saviour of Humanity even if it isn't. Both spiritually and physically we have other and proven options.
Any kind of criticism or questioning of the vaccine is seen as deserving of punishment, much like blasphemy of society's god.
We subjugate other worship to this one, even casting aside our money-god also in the worship of the new vaccine god. No cost is too great to purchase and distribute endless millions of vaccines, and no one questions it. Strange that we were never able to find enough money to satisfy any other good purpose (eg. education, general health care, feeding the hungry, etc). In fact a small fraction of what we spend or sacrifice on COVID would easily feed all hungry people in the world.
Children are the favourite to sacrifice to the vaccine god, the proof of which is the medically insane push to have children vaccinated to COVID even though they are virtually immune and the risks of the vaccination are clearly more in their case. In fact, there is some evidence that these vaccines, especially as deployed in children, may be a deliberate blood sacrifice to Satan. Here is support for that claim:
1. Sacrifice-Implicit Allegations:
2. Sacrifice-Explicit Allegations:

Some other articles, on the topic of a link between the vaccines and idolatry or Satanism, include:

Chapter 2, Section 17: How Has Our Society Changed due to this Crisis?:

We lost confidence in the reliabilty of our long-term plans for our lives. Whereas before we would pride ourselves in having a 10-year plan for our future, for example, from this crisis we learned that the Government can and has already repeatedly ordered radical social change on such short notice that no one can confidently plan their future in the face of such unpredictable control. For example, you might work and invest for years to build a business, but then the Government could order it closed on just 2 days notice, as they have already done to many people repeatedly in the COVID crisis. Since the COVID crisis, most people's planning for their lives became seen as subject to Government allowance.
Somehow the pandemic, arising in the communist country of China, spread not only their medical problem, but their political one. The rest of the world suddenly started to suspend human rights in a totalitarian fashion, as if a political virus of communism were what was spreading.
Whatever the cause, we Realized that our 'Democracies' are becoming Dictatorships. Governments around the world, on excuse of COVID-19, suddenly gave themselves emergency powers (which they have no moral authority since only the People can grant that), and renewed them indefinitely, and used them to order the People around in many vital ways. For example: 'This is dictatorship': Newmarket councillor speaks out in support of Ottawa protesters
We learned that although the Police are there to protest us, they are there to protect the Establishment first.
We learned a universally Accepted Excuse for Government breaking promises: Data. Before the COVID pandemic, if someone made a clear promise there was no way to break it without being accused of breaking their promise. Since the COVID crisis, all they did was say that the 'data' compelled the change, as if even though it was still in their power to hold their promise they were forced otherwise, and this was accepted without criticism. By this rationale, one could say that they were not going to repay their mortgage because the 'data had changed'.
We allowed Government the precedent and power to switch our human rights on and off forever arbitrarily. For example, even as leaders relieve us from restrictions they emphasize they can reinstate them at any time they want: Public health mandates could return, Tam warns, but favours lighter touch in future
Social Discrimination with Blame and Punishment: After fighting for equality on many fronts for hundreds of years, and making tremendous progress, now Government orders discrimination, with blame and punishment besides. Admittedly, the old push for equality was Government-supported, often with penalties for discrimination, but it was a major social movement, righteious, and society seemed to agree on the principle without complaint.

It's very disappointing, therefore, to see our society quickly adopt obvious discrimination, hatred, and punishment for the unvaccinated simply because the Government encourages it, as if the only reason they weren't discriminating before was in fear of penalites. Examples of this culture of discrimination against the unvaccinated include:

A Popular Doctor Went On MSNBC To Advocate For Denying Anti-Vaxxers Access To Major Medical Treatments

Fearmongering: The largest news agencies have now quite obviously become fear machines: giving you a reason to fear every single day. This is why COVID case and death numbers are ALWAYS kept at the very top of the news, every day, and any kind of new variant is mentioned in a context of how it might kill you and you need to submit to more restrictions if the government decides. The only hope these news agencies allow you is what the government wants you to do. Nothing else is mentioned as a possible aid. They don't provide uplifting stories anymore.
The Rise of 'Data' as a Publicly-Accepted Way to Lie. A new way to present a lie as the truth and have it accepted has been developed and it's this: data. It has taken preeminence over other forms of evidence, including witness testimony and even scientific laws, ignoring the tremendous trust involved in accepting data as hard evidence. The presenter, usually an expert for increased trust, to support a lie, or to refute the truth, even against a scientific law (like the reality of natural immunity), says something like, "Let's look at 'the' (as if there is only one) data...". Then they pull up whatever numbers they want and say whatever they want as an interpretation, and the lie suddenly seems like the truth. Really there are many ways to cherrypick data, misinterpret it, reinterpret it, conceal it, and reclassify or pad it even at the level of its collection, and that's ignoring the ability to actually enter false data. For example, in the case of COVID, it's widely known/reported that:
A Rise of Trust in Public Officials over your Own Friends, own Family, and any evidence. Political loyalty is seen as the cardinal virtue.

Regarding COVID 'case' numbers, it's not supposed to be called a 'case' without symptoms, and the PCR test used is run at so many cycles as to corrupt the test with false positives (example article here).
Regarding COVID 'death' numbers, cause of death rules were changed so that anyone who tested positive for COVID, or even is presumed to have had COVID, however they died (even if shot), was classified as a 'COVID' death and recorded that way in the public data (example article here).
Sometimes the diagnostic criteria were changed mid-stream, as government policy, creating an abrupt change in the COVID statistics: example see here.
At the same time we started collecting COVID case data we stopped collecting flu and cold data, these diseases closely resembling COVID in symptoms. The risk of these pople being included in 'presumptive COVID' cases should have been obvious. Astonishingly, it was widely reported that these diseases were suddenly eliminated, experts saying it was due to the success of mask-wearing and hand-washing.
'Do Not Resuscitate' Orders were mandated in some cases and effectively increased the COVID-19 death count. 30 Aug, 2023: ‘We were ordered to “Euthanise” Patients to falsely increase COVID Death Counts while Hospitals were Empty’ claims Whistleblowing NHS Doctor

Democracies functioning as Dictatorships where your only real say is to choose your Dictator from fixed options for a time, but no legal mechanism to affect policy: Some of these ways include:

A Dictation of Perception: Perhaps the most subtle but amazing social change emerging from this crisis is the rise of the centralization of perception based on trust of public officials over our own eyes. Even though the world outside looked the same, the birds were still singing, sun still shining, and people around us seeming fine, and even though emergency wards were less busy than usual (in the initial outbreak of 2020), we believed that people were literally dying all around us and we're in a war and need Government to take emergency powers and action and no time for democratic process. We allowed ourselves to be terrorized by something that's merely an abstract conecept for the vast majority of people, who cannot perceive it there or not there. Rather than our inability to see it causing calm it was used to stoke fear the more that even those who appear completely healthy may be carriers so we need to lock down everyone, to keep us all safe from the invisible threat supposedly in anyone and therefore of everyone else. It's like The Emperor's New Clothes but in pandemic form. Government had us begging to be masked and locked down out of fear of their 'data' and we praised them for doing it to us. Here is an article on the subject.
Dictation of action: Dictatorship is where Government tells the people what to do, and Democracy is where the people tell the Government what to do. Since the start of the COVID-19 crisis, Government at their own discretion has declared an emergency, taken up emergency dictatorial powers, and ordered many aspects of our lives so personal it would previously would have been unthinkable. We literally wait every day to see if there are new orders on how we're allowed to live, including if we're allowed to travel, work, see our elderly mother, or even go outside. Never has a referendum been called on how we want this handled. We've been locked down and ordered around like slaves. But we accepted it out of fear for what Government said is all for our 'safety'.
Practical inability to vote our way out (yet): Elections have come, but none of the candidates of any of the established parties is offers a 'no' option to lockdowns, vaccines, masks, etc. So we get to choose, but all of the options we're given to choose from are effectively the same policy platform, not only on COVID, but on most other issues also.
No Decision-Making Authority on Policy: The Public worldwide was generally offered no direct decision-making on COVID policy, and as for trusing elected representatives to do that on our behalf, they were usually unresponsive to protests or sometimes did the exact opposite of promises to block or relieve restrictions (they are not obligated to keep any of their promises to voters, a fact which makes representative democracy meaningless; example articles: After choking for far too long, Doug Ford finally swallows his opposition to vaccine passports or Doug Ford just did a U-turn on vaccine passports. Better late than never).
Crippled ability to start a new pro-freedom/anti-vaxx political party: Rallies and meetings over a few people, even in Church, are generally illegal now due to social restrictions at least for the unvaccinated. You're not even allowed to have meetings outside. Neither does anyone want strangers knocking their door, which could easily be accused of risking a spread of disaese.
Other democratic tools weak: Many of us have tried contacting our elected represenatives only to be ignored. Pro-freedom protests have been ignored. For example, Reignite Democracy Australia is a grassroots organization struggling to find ways to stand up for freedom noting that peaceful democratic methods, even huge protests, keep being politically ignored.

It's worth remembering that, as with the case of the former 'German Democratic Republic', just because something calls itself a democracy, doesn't mean it is. As for elections, even North Korea has those, but it isn't democratic, either.

I, Robot

Chapter 2, Section 18: Concerns for the Future:

OPTION 1: IF THERE IS NO SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC INSISTENCE FOR TRUTH AND RESISTANCE TO GOVERNMENT HUMAN RIGHTS SUSPENSIONS:

Regarding when the pandemic will be over:

No matter even cases drop and restrictions lift and the Public wants to put COVID-19 behind us, the Establishment doesn't seem to want to allow that to happen. For example:

Sept. 6, 2022: Is COVID-19 winding down? Scientists say no
Follow The Science
Jul 26, 2022: Fauci calls for more masking, says lockdowns should have been ‘much more stringent’
May 26, 2022: Quebec to start vaccinating against monkeypox as cases climb to 25
May 30, 2022: BREAKING: Canadian Parliament votes to uphold ban on unvaccinated traveling by air, train, sea
May 22, 2022: The COVID-19 pandemic is 'most certainly not over,' WHO's health chief says

Regarding the ultimate death toll of the COVID-19 vaccines:

Nov 23, 2022: 3.5 BILLION could be injured or killed by the jab. Are YOU ready? —Dr. David Martin interview

Regarding when our society will be allowed our rights and freedoms back:

Officials seem to have already decided that we will not be allowed to go back to the way we were before, calling the current changes the 'new normal' and that COVID will be with us forever. This is despite the fact that SARS, the closest virus relative of COVID, disappeared on its own, and the experts we trust in have had approximately 20 years to learn since then. At best, they ease restrictions, but they have not ended their legal right to reimpose them at any time for any crisis they declare.

Some officials have even spoken out about COVID as an 'opportunity' for permanent and deliberate social change, but exactly whose will or plan they will impose they did not say:

Canada: PM Justin Trudeau
UK: Prince Charles

From recent COVID-related Government contracts, Government seems to expect the COVID crisis to continue for years to come:

Regarding what may be coming next or more (if we don't object):

More waves of COVID-19 being declared to justify extension or re-introduction of social restrictions over the Public and dictatorial powers of Government. The vaccines are already pre-ordered years ahead so why not declare another wave to distribute them? For example:

Sep 4, 2023: Alex Jones Right Again! - NEW COVID RESTRICTIONS IN NYC & CALIFORNIA! - It's Happening!
Aug 21, 2023: Are YOU Ready For Covid-19(84) Round 2? We Will NOT Submit!!
18 August, 2023: Early signs suggest fall COVID-19 wave starting in Canada — before updated boosters are available
August 18, 2023: Should we wear masks again? Covid guidelines experts recommend
Aug 18, 2023: 'Worst nightmare': Family calls for stricter mask policies after vulnerable Ontario woman contracts COVID in hospital
August 18th 2023: EXCLUSIVE: Biden Admin Preparing to Bring Back FULL Covid Restrictions, Rollout to Begin Mid-September
15 August, 2023: Gloomy scientists call for people to start wearing Covid masks again as they sound alarm over new variant BA.6 that has 'a lot of new mutations'
August 16, 2023: New Covid wave has begun and masks should be worn again, scientists warn
September 12, 2022: Philippines extending state of calamity for virus pandemic
Ontario's COVID-19 test positivity climbs to 13.5% as new details of 7th wave emerge
Jul 4, 2022: Trudeau’s Health Minister says Canadians ‘will never be fully vaccinated’
May 7, 2022: Coronavirus wave this fall and winter could potentially infect 100 million Americans, White House warns

More states of emergency declared by Government based on more pandemics, apparently to take further advantage of the precedent the Public allowed, under COVID-19, that Government may assume dictatorship powers simply by declaring a public health emergency. Now things which would never have been an emergency before COVID-19 pandemic culture arose, are considered an emergency, literally even any sign of any infectious disease, and we are expected to give up our rights on any such declaration:

Dr. Li-Meng Yan’s mother arrested by Chinese Communist Party operatives in coronavirus cover-up

New engineered viruses:

Monkeypox:

May 29, 2022: Wuhan Bio Lab Carried Out Gain of Function Research on Monkeypox Virus . Are you surprised? It just wouldn't be an official sequel to the COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) virus if the Monkeypox virus going around the world wasn't made by the same lab.
November 14, 2021: US developing lethal, new genetically engineered viruses, including MOUSEPOX and MONKEYPOX... will these be used to demand MORE JABS in the name of “public safety?”
May 22, 2022: Here we go again: MONKEYPOX is the next “scariant” being unleashed on the world to demand vaccine compliance

Super forms of COVID: October 18, 2022: SUICIDE SCIENCE: Boston University creates new chimeric COVID bioweapon with 80% KILL RATE… has humanity learned NOTHING?, which is a commentary on the original 17 October 2022 article, EXCLUSIVE: 'This is playing with fire - it could spark a lab-generated pandemic': Experts slam Boston lab where scientists have created a new deadly Covid strain with an 80% kill rate. In comparison, the infection fatality rate for the original COVID-19 strain was less than 1%. Related article 18 October 2022: Top NIH director admits Boston lab that created new COVID strain did NOT clear research with agency... and only learned of details on DailyMail.com

More Types of Vaccines:

Sept. 6, 2022: China approves world's first inhaled COVID-19 vaccine for emergency use

More Vaccine Mandates: Example articles:

Increasing Persecution of the Unvaccinated. For example: New York State Legislation Proposes: Indefinite Covid Prison Camps for Unvaccinated
Aerosolized Vaccines Sprayed from Above: Article August 23, 2022: VAX CARPET BOMBS: Aerosolized “vaccines” being developed that can be sprayed on human cities for automatic depopulation
Death Camps for the Unvaccinated

CONFIRMED: Gov. Inslee setting up covid concentration camps in Washington state, issuing job listings for “strike team” coordinators
Washington State legalized LIQUEFYING human corpses before activating covid concentration camps. There are concerns that the COVID camps may actually be death camps where bodies will be disposed down the drain rather than leaving any physical evidence.

Massive Depopulation

A transition of Public narrative from focus on the COVID crisis to focus on 'Climate Change', and using the same style of dealing with it. One of the arguments behind this is the idea that lockdowns are good for the environment.

Digital ID, increasing digital surveillance, dictatorial style of governance, and transition to a New World Order, on the excuse of COVID-19 and/or Climate Change.

Dystopian Details about the current vaccine passport dictatorship in Australia. This video mentions things already in place or proposed including: unvaccinated elected representatives being stripped of their voting rights, leaders taking emergency powers permanently, astronomical fines for non-compliance, de facto slavery, Government lies.

Mandatory Microchip(s) in your Body, especially to connect you to the proposed 'internet of bodies'. It will likely be promoted for 'health' and/or 'safety', but the goal is to track you and control you inescapably.

The Shocking Plans to Microchip Everyone by 2026
Rockefeller insider exposes the microchip agenda
Implantable Microchip Conspiracy Fact!
Sweden Put Covid Passport Microchip Into Hands
Tracking how our bodies work could change our lives
What Is the Internet of Bodies?
Pfizer CEO on Microchip Tracking in Pills. Here they talk about technology, they call 'engaging the patient', which ensures compliance of people to the medical orders.

The United Nations increasingly acting as an unelected one world government, starting with medical dictatorship through its agency the World Health Organization and their arbitrary pandemic declarations, and their increasing grab for power under those declarations. They are working on roping nations into a new and more severe pandemic treaty they hope to be implemented by 2024. Specifically, it seems that by the next pandemic (or by not ending the current one) it won't be our own governments ordering social restrictions, but unelected officials at the WHO directly ordering nations how to handle health emergencies which the WHO (not that nation) declares, which effectively means a one world government through medical dictatorship. Related resources inlude:

Higher Taxes or Hyperinflation With the unlimited deficit spending most governments seem to be doing to battle COVID, there must come a time to pay for it, either by higher taxes, which is the usual way, or if not, then by inflation.
Property Confiscation and/or Government Kidnapping.

This one might seem pretty far-fetched. How could COVID-19 possibly connect with property confiscation, not to mention kidnapping? Whether it makes sense or not, officials have already made these ideas public, if not law:
- In Alberta (Public Health Act section 52.6(1)(a)) and Saskatchewan (Emergency Planning Act section 18(1)(d)), there is already legislation that allows the Government, on declaration of an 'emergency', to confiscate real property. What should public health have to do with confiscation? Nothing. But it's the law.
- As for Government kidnapping, that's been announced; please see this video: !~WHO Dr. Michael Ryan Says They need to go into Your Home to Remove Family Members~!

OPTION 2: IF THERE IS SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC INSISTENCE FOR TRUTH AND RESISTANCE TO GOVERNMENT HUMAN RIGHTS SUSPENSIONS:

Scientists around the world desperately trying to find an antidote (to the COVID-19 vaccines, especially the 'mRNA' and 'adenovirus' (genetic) ones). Aside from divine power through Jesus Christ, it's unlikely that they will. These vaccines are irreversible by design: our technology can't reverse it. It's unlikely that they will invent the required technology fast enough to reverse the harm in anyone completely. However maybe they can slow it down, or at least maybe they can warn others.

Chapter 2, Section 19: Hopes for the Future:

Cries for Help:

Public SOS: Recognizing the danger, some residents under COVID-related Government tyranny are starting to issue international calls for help: see this one from Australia.

Lawsuits for Justice Against COVID-19-based Tyranny:

Public Officials Speaking Out / Standing Up against the Official Narrative:

Jan 6, 2023: Canadian province says no way it’s returning to masks and lockdowns due to new COVID variant
January 01, 2023: Gov. DeSantis: Big Pharma will pay for deceiving the public with false advertising about COVID-19 vaccines
EU politician blasts ‘psychopath’ leaders over COVID restrictions that may cause ‘millions’ to die
Ontario judge defends mom’s stance not to jab her kids, rebukes blind obedience to gov’t experts
Canada: Ontario Premier Doug Ford February 15th, 2022:Doug Ford admits vaccine passports don't work, "Everyone is done with this."
Caanda: Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe speaking out:Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe feverishly backpedals on lockdowns. Do you believe him?
70 Toronto Librarians write open letter to City of Toronto
Covid 19 Red Pilled🧐 A Judge in Portugal stands Up to police 🧩🧩
600 Austrian Police Demand Govt to Cancel Tyrannical Mandate
After Austria, Now Spanish Police Declares Resistance to Covid Tyranny

Organizations Speaking Out

Amnesty International urges Italy not to discriminate against the unvaccinated

Medical/Biology Professionals Speaking Out or Defying Immoral Orders:

Medical professionals calling for a suspension of the COVID-19 vaccination program:

January 30, 2023: Renowned MIT Professor and Drug Safety Analytics Specialist Calls for Immediate Suspension of all mRNA COVID Vaccines
January 17, 2023: Cardiologist goes off script on live TV, warns covid vaccines pose a cardiovascular risk and must be shut down
January 16, 2023: Saudi cardiologist calls for suspension of mRNA injections because of cardiac harm concerns
Jan 14, 2023: COVID Vaccines Are "Obviously Dangerous" And Should Be Halted Immediately, Say Senior Swedish Doctors
January 12, 2023: Emergency doctor calls for immediate suspension of mRNA “vaccines” because of serious harms they cause
Sept 30, 2022: JAB REGRET: Doctor who once promoted covid vaccines calls for immediate end to their use
21 April 2022: A Moratorium on mRNA 'Vaccines' is Needed. This article goes into detail about sidespread distribution of the lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) used for mRNA vaccine delivery.
Prof Sucharit Bhakdi LOSES HIS PATIENCE!

Other medical/biology professional activism:

Clerics Speaking Out

Catholic Archbishop Viganò admits the vaccine is a gene altering bioweapon and that it's satanic

Celebrities Speaking Out (some perhaps unwittingly):

Individuals Waking Up to Question the Official Narrative:

Other People Standing Up / Speaking Out:

Some news agencies apologizing for fearmongering:

Face-toface Challenges within Parliament or Government:

Trudeau Viciously Heckled In Parliament For Refusing To Relinquish His COVID Tyranny.

Worldwide Protests

: since the mainstream news has failed to acknowledge the massive protests against the mandates happening worldwide, it's important to note that they have been happening.

Canada:

Canadians to hold rosary rally in Ottawa to end COVID mandates, pray for freedom
Freedom Convoy 2022 Protest: Truck Drivers Protesting COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate Begin March From Vancouver to Ottawa or 50,000 trucks heading toward Ottawa to demand an end to COVID mandates, or video: Freedom Convoy 2022 - Great Clips!, organized by Canada Unity as operation BearHug

Related video: Boycott Tim Hortons for Refusing to Serve Freedom Convoy Truckers

People finding unusual ways to resist tyranny

Physically banding together: Police Showed Up to Arrest...and 🇨🇦CANADIANS 🇨🇦 did this..
Vehicle convoy protests: Official Trailer For Freedom Convoy

Legal Initiatives for Justice or Freedom: for example:

In some countries murder charges have been started against COVID vaccine manufacturers for related deaths. For example:

4 October, 2023: Class-Action Lawsuit Alleging Discrimination Launched Against Feds on Behalf of Unvaccinated Canadians
Canada, 23 March, 2022: Canadian legal center files multiple lawsuits against ‘egregious’ Trudeau travel ban on unvaccinated citizens
International Group of Attorneys Proceed With Covid-19 Crimes Against Humanity Grand Jury
Cranston dentist who defied RI COVID vaccine mandate sues for right to see patients again
Supreme Court blocks Biden COVID mandate requiring vaccine, testing at work. Here’s what we know.
Wife of COVID patient sues to force NYC hospital to treat husband with Ivermectin: report
Arizona sues Biden to keep school anti-mask rules

Victories by Refusal: It should be clear enough now that the only path back to normal is to refuse to obey the officials who insist on clearly immoral orders and/or the claim we must never be allowed to go back to normal. Does that work? Yes. Here are examples:

August 19, 2023: The Unvaccinated Will Be Vindicated
December 22, 2022: Appeals court upholds decision to block Biden’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate for government contractors
Dec 5, 2022: Prosecutors drop charges against Canadian pastor, church director for violating COVID protocols
Oct 25, 2022: Judge voids NYC COVID jab mandate, orders reinstatement, back pay for fired unvaxxed workers
BREAKING: Alberta to drop vax passport at midnight after truckers pressure government
Jordan Peterson reports that a Canadian senior Government advisor told him "flat out that the COVID policy here is driven by nothing but opinion polls related to the popularity of the government" (article here). This means both that COVID social restrictions in Canada are driven only by the number of people afraid of COVID, and that if we reject the restrictions they will easily and immediately stop.
The Government of New Brunswick (Canada) instituted a very cruel order , to give grocery stores the option to refuse to serve the not-fully-vaccinated, but they repealed it due to public backlash. Article here.
Here is an example of Toronto Police standing up for the Public's rights: causing immoral Government orders to be corrected solely by refusing to enforce them.
Article: Southwest Airlines backs down from vaccine mandate after massive protests
Article: Massive backlash forces Michigan university to back down from enforcing medical device to monitor coronavirus symptoms
Howevermuch the Government may describe their decision process differently, it is thought that the widespread lifting of COVID-19 restrictions in late 2022 wasn't somuch due to Government mercy as due to a sufficient rise of Public anger.

Signs of a weakening resolve to continue the emergency orders: There are hints from the other side that they might end the emergency (which is by Government declaration and therefore discretionary), sometime in 2022. It's not clear yet whether they mean it, or if it's a false hope they intend to override later, but they are starting to get enough resistance in terms of protests, vaccine refusal, and some successful legal challenges by the Public that they're probably doubting whether or not they can enforce medical martial law worldwide at the same time like maybe they planned. Speaking now about 'the next pandemic', they may pull back on the COVID crisis to try again later with another pathogen. Some references include:

Bill Gates Warns The "Next Pandemic" Is Coming After Covid-19 – And How To Stop It | MSNBC. In this video, early on, Mr. Gates says we need to bring the current epidemic to a close and that "there will be another pandemic" (at approximately 0:41 of the video).
WHO forecasts coronavirus pandemic will end in 2022
Omicron variant could ‘end the pandemic,’ new data suggests. This one is paving the way for a narrative of how we might see a sudden end to the crisis despite rising cases right now.
UK via GB News: 19 Jan 2022: Boris Johnson cancels Plan B Covid restrictions - Speech in FULL
Ontario (Canada) 18 Jan 2022:Ontario premier says 'positive news' coming this week on COVID-19 restrictions
In a surprise move, Ireland’s Prime Minister announces most COVID restrictions will be lifted

Signs that the Narrative is Collapsing (ie. Average Person No Longer Believing It): Truth-sharers are finally seeing enough people understand the truth that a tipping point has been reached where many people no longer believe the official narrative and won't tolerate it anymore. Example video: WHEN THE FEAR NARRATIVE IS COLLAPSING

Signs of the Public Abandoning Automatic Trust of Government: For many years the same kind of evil forces were in Government but it wasn't as obvious that they wanted to harm us, and difficult to get the Public to listen to the warnings. Now, with outright Government orders that we can't do basic things we need to do to live and take care of our families (like open our shop or visit our mother), a whole lot of people are 'waking up' to realize that the Government has become something ugly, leading us into slavery not freedom. For the first time, a good job, even a Government job, is no longer security (because you can be locked down or mandated out of it quickly). Doing what you're told is no longer security (because the orders might only get worse). Obeying the law no longer means that nothing bad will happen to you because you will live like a medical slave. For the first time, it's also become obvious that representative democracy isn't good enough for freedom (because they have broken clear promises against our human rights and never allowed us input on how we wanted the crisis handled). For the first time, we discovered that our precious laws enshrining rights and freedoms can simply be overridden with the word 'emergency'.

We need to question everything, defend our freedoms, limit Government authority, and be less dependent.

Here's a video on the topic: The Tipping Point - Infinite Waters

Chapter 2, Section 20: Miscellaneous Finds

Extraterrestrials may have warned us about the dangerous COVID vaccines excessively promoted by officials: Beware the bearers of FALSE gifts and their BROKEN PROMISES

Chapter 3: Truth on Trial:

(Chapter 3, Section 1) The Official Narrative

The official narrative kept changing, but generally had these tenets of belief and declaration:

That the COVID-19 virus (SARS-CoV-2) is extremely dangerous to everyone even though it's only significantly fatal to the frail and elderly.
There are no effective treatments for COVID-19 even though great results are reported with vitamin D and ivermectin (see elsewhere on this page).
A positive test result always means the person has the COVID-19 virus and is a danger to others, no matter how asymptomatic they may be even though the test, especially the way it was implemented, is known to be faulty.
That if someone is in hospital with COVID they are there because of COVID
That if someone dies with COVID they die because of COVID
COVID may be diagnosed presumptively
That some organizations should be ordered to close while others are always left open, solely at Government discretion, on the presumption that a virus can tell the difference.
That places of worship be included in the most 'non-essential' venues.
Cloth masks are mandatory because they protect us from the virus even though they obviously cannot (virus is airborne, virus far smaller than cloth mask pores, cloth masks only restrict oxygen and visibly and publicly show blind willingness to obey any order).
Social distancing is mandatory because it protests us from the virus even though the the 2m/6' mandatory spacing is based on nothing and the virus is airborne making short distance meaningless.
That healthy people should be lockded down or quarantined just to be safe.
That lockdowns mitigate the spread of the virus and save lives which is difficult to challenge when we're not counting how concentrating people in apartment buildings spreads the virus and how many people the lockdowns killed in a variety of ways.
That we will always have to live with COVID-19 even though the SARS pandemic, which was of the closest related virus, disappeared suddenly without any vaccine or medical breakthrough.
That there is no validity to natural medicine; the only true medicine is pharmaceuticals especially patentable ones.
That neither is there any effectiveness of our natural immune system without pharmaceuticals, not even for the many people who were already naturally immune due to prior exposure to COVID.
That COVID vaccines are the only protection against the virus and to end the pandemic, even before they existed, so that we were made to fund and wait on their invention while the virus raged unabated.
That the COVIO-19 'vaccines' are safe and fully tested even though governments regularly publish official data on the many people harmed including killed by them, even though the product monographs available from the same Government expose many unknown risks listed by the manufacturer, and even though it is logically impossible to know the many-year effects of anything which only existed less than a year before it was released.
That mandating ineffective vaccines is the way to keep us all safe.
That anyone who refuses vaccines should be punished to no limit because they are putting others in danger even though they have their own innate immune systems and the vaccine doesn't prevent infection or transmission.
That social restrictions are the only way to end social restrictions. For example: Trudeau Says Restrictions Are Necessary to Prevent Further Restrictions
That if social restrictions fail it is always only the fault of those who didn't properly obey them, no matter how few, rather than there being anything wrong with the restritions themselves.
That no other disease matters which is why some Governments suspended all other 'non-emergency' medical procedures during lockdowns.
That our hospitals are full, even if they are visibly empty, because they say they are full.
That all emergency powers and social restrictions are temporary though they keep getting extended or reintroduced, so often that, eover the years, it's actually become normal to be living in a state of emergency.
That colds and flu have completely or nearly disappeared due to social restrictions, distancing, and masks, even though this is theoretically impossible and didn't stop the COVID-19 virus.
That if social restrictions and vaccines haven't saved us it's only because we need more doses of vaccine and more social restrictions.
That information from Government officials is always true, but from anyone else is always misinformation if it disagrees. The silent premise of this thinking is that there is no such thing as 'evidence', only the level of credibility of the presenter of the information, and you would be a fool to trust anyone with lower creditiblity than Government.
That although vaccine harms have happened, they are extremely rare, and it's not worth the News reporting on any individual such case.
That protecting human life is more important than protecting human rights. This is the opposite thinking our national soliders fight our wars for, and would mean that we should all be locked up to prevent us from any risk, such as in the robot thinking shown in the movie I, Robot (2004)
That human rights should be suspended whenever Government has a problem.
That Government can always be trusted to lay down the emergency powers they give themselves.
That social restrictions should be implemented immediately, but it's acceptable for relief of those restrictions to be promised only revokably for some time away.
That polticans show their strength and worth only by instituting harsh social restriction and punishments.
That rising inflation is due only to temporary supply chain problems never out-of-control Government spending.
That there should be no limit to how much money we spend ineffectively battling COVID despite that the sum would have ended world hunger many times over if it was spend that way instead.
That no matter how many years it goes on for, the pandemic is always such an immediate emergency that there is no time for a referendum to ask the People how they want it handled with a direct question.
That different levels of force is the only way to deal with protestors of this narrative, negotiation being out of the question, and that Government needs to be awarded more powers to use more force..

There was pressure for Non-Official Experts to Cooperate with the Official Narrative:

Chapter 3, Section 2: Evolution of the Official Narrative

The official truth kept changing in so many ways that it was difficult to believe what was condemned as dangerously false before was accepted as true now without question. Here are some examples:

Vaccine mandates were considered a hoax when the vaccines were first rolled out, then an accepted reality after the Government implemented this policy once the majority of the population had accepted the vaccine (presuming majority support to oppress the minority).
The vaccines were considered to confer immunity at their rollout, and later said to not prevent infection or spread of disease but to only reduce severity of the disease. The change of promise after most people had accepted it was generally not questioned.
The issue of variants was not revealed by experts until it was time to encourage subsequent doses of vaccine and a new reason was required.
Some governments openly assured the people that there would be no proof of vaccination requirement, and later introduced that same policy.
Government-imposed strict social restrictions, which were accepted because they were assured to be 'temporary', or for a specific timeframe only, where repeatedly extended without Public outcry.

(Chapter 3, Section 3) MISUNDERSTANDINGS:

Vaccines stimulate a different part of our antibody defense system than needed to defend the surface of our lungs from the COVID-19-causing virus (SARS-CoV-2).

The body has an antibody system to defend our body's surfaces, and one to defend our internal organs.

An injected vaccine, by its delivery, stimulates the one which defends our internal organs.

To defend against a respiratory (lung-surface-attacking) illness, we need to stimulate the antibody system which defends our body's surfaces, in this case the lining of our lungs. This means the antigen must be presented to the body at the surface, not within our bloodstream.

Therefore the injected COVID-19 vaccine (which stimulates the internal antibody defenses) cannot be effective against a the COVID-19-causing (SARS-CoV-2) virus (which attacks the lining of the lungs). It's the wrong line of defense we are fortifying. This video explains it in more detail.

That's why the flu vaccines never prevent the flu each year, but vaccines for viruses which come in through the blood, such as rabies, seem to work well.

However, as a business model for vaccine manufacturers, product failure is business success if it generates more demand for the same politically-unblamable product.
Germ Theory is Mostly Wrong:

Conventional medicine, including the official COVID-19 response, is based on the theory that disease is due to the presence or absence of a germ. This is the 'germ theory' introduced by Louis Pasteur.

However a friend of Pasteur, Claude Bernard, proposed a more holistic theory, 'cellular terrain theory': that dangerous germs are a natural part of the environment and what matters in being immune to them is the overall health of the body.

Video: Science, Pseudoscience, and The Germ Theory of Disease - Dr. Jordan Grant (2022 Conference)

Bernard was mostly right and Pasteur was mostly wrong. Although it matters a little which germs we are exposed to, our bodies already have plenty of dangerous pathogens not only around us, but already INSIDE us (especially living in our gut and trapped in our lymph nodes), and it's the overall health of our bodies which is the dominant factor in both our defense and diagnosis. One proof is that although E.coli is dangerous enough to be a justified public scare in public food and water, and it has killed people through these channels, we live with a tremendous amount of E.coli already in our intestines. If this disease was only about the presence or absence of E.coli then everyone would test positive and everyone would also already be dead. It matters a little which pathogens reach us, but our overall health matters much more. It is said that on his death bed, Pasteur admitted, “Bernard was right: the pathogen is nothing, the terrain is everything.”

Unfortunately, the medical industry has chosen to follow germ theory, at their profit and the Public's harm. It's simply much more profitable to sell people defenses to feared pathogens than encourage them to be so healthy they don't need them.

The result is that our overall lifestyle health has been ignored in officials' direction for the Public during the COVID-19 crisis, and even naturally acquired immunity has been discounted or entirely dismissed by them. Rather they promoted the thinking and measures that our only defense against the COVID-19 causing virus is to either physically block it from reaching us (with physical protective equipment), or a vaccine to saves us if the virus physically reaches us, and that supposedly nothing else matters. The belief system was so exclusive to any other approaches that even if the vaccine didn't work we were taught that our only recourse was to take another booster shot of the same vaccine. The following tweet-captured video, put out by the Hawaii department of health during the COVID crisis, clearly puts vaccination above healthy lifestyle choices and is a perfect example of the corrupt official health advice the Public was given: Look what these people just deleted from an official state government account

It's our overall health we should focus on, as our first and foremost physical defense to any germ crisis, and any other advice is deceptive no matter who it comes from.

(Chapter 3, Section 4) MISREPRESENTATIONS:

Corruption of COVID data at the point of collection:
1. Mis-definition of Data Collection Labels: In many ways the data was made misleading by tampering with the definitions for the labels it was collected under. For example:
2. Presumptive Diagnoses: To declare a patient positive for COVID, at least in death, physicians were permitted to do this persumptively (in the absence of a test).
  
  COVID-19 Death Reporting: Questions and Answers for Medical Examiners, Coroners and Physicians
3. Positive Tests called 'Cases': In fact a person must be symptomatic to be a medical 'case'.
4. Slipshod autopsies which decided cause of death without looking for vaccine harms
5. Video: The Covid-19 Data is a ‘Travesty’ (FULL VIDEO) - How the UK and US Covid Death Data is Inflated
6. Ultimately the only thing which has been driving the COVID case numbers (which are reported daily as headline news by all major media outlets and used as basis for public policy) are a combination of: Government demands on people to be tested (mostly through contact tracing programs), a COVID test which is extremely high in false-positives, and calling every positive test result a 'case'.
Corruption of COVID-related data at the point of processing inside Government agencies::

Florida police raid COVID data whistleblower’s house with guns drawn, where a lady was fired from her government job for refusing to manipulate COVID-19 statistics).
CDC quietly cuts a quarter of child COVID-19 deaths, blames ‘coding logic error’

Never giving any mainstream media focus to a single adverse reation from the COVID vaccines, even though, from official data, many such adverse events have happened, up to and including instant death. Considering that every shooting and fatal car accident is always news, this should be news, especially if we care about life, balanced reporting on the COVID crisis, and informed consent on vaccination..
Clearly misrepresenting the majority of COVID cases being in the unvaccinated, and them being an unfair burden on the healthcare system, when in fact (shockingly) the opposite is true, even by the same Government's own statistics.For example:

From the official Ontario Government website for COVID data, according to their charts all on the same day (12 January 2022) from the same webpage, the vaccinated are catching COVID more, in both rate of infection and total cases, than the unvaccinated::
Now please compare that with the following local (Ontario) headlines, which paint a different picture:

September 29, 2021: Unvaccinated 60 times more likely to end up in ICU with COVID-19, Ontario data shows
Jan. 11, 2022Tightening rules for unvaccinated is justified as health system struggles: experts
January 12, 2022: Inside an ICU where 70 per cent of COVID-19 patients are unvaccinated

Misreporting of the number of unvaccinated people: Example article August 22, 2022: UK statistics office LYING about the number of unvaccinated adults in the country
Reluctance to Report Vaccine Injury as Such: PARAMEDIC SPEAKS ABOUT WHAT HE IS SEEING...HE HAS LOST COUNT OF THE DEAD FROM THE VACCINE.
Rebranding vaccine injury as COVID: The deaths among the vaccinated are generously included as ‘COVID breakthrough’ cases and therefore used to inflate the COVID death numbers. Ann Vandersteel joins Mike Adams to reveal what's REALLY happening with forensic audits and rigged elections
Underreporting of COVID-19 Vaccine Injury Regardless of Why or How: German insurance data reveals COVID vaccine adverse events are 10 times higher than gov‘t reports
Government actually keeping different post-vaccination harms data on two systems: one Public one Secret: 15 Nov 2023: CDC Runs Two VAERS Systems — The Public Can Access Only One of Them
Refusing to publish counter-narrative medical research: for example Oct 04, 2023: CDC Journal And Five Others Rejected Key Paper On COVID Vaccines, Heart Inflammation

Chapter 3, Section 5: Has this been done before?

Yes, vaccination based on a hyped health scare, which officials insist is a terrible emergency, and for which they present vaccination as the only rational solution, only to find out later it was overblown, has been done before the COVID-19 pandemic and in a similar (albeit milder) way. For example:

H1N1 Swine Flu:

Chapter 3, Section 6: CONTRADICTIONS in the Narrative:

Vaccine effectiveness If the vaccines are effective, vaccinated people don't need to social distance, mask, or fear the unvaccinated. If the vaccines are ineffective, we should be putting our hopes elsewhere..

Chapter 3, Section 7: Reasonable SUSPICIONS of Malevolence:

Is there evidence that, while not being absolute easily-verifiable and irrefutable proof, suggests that something nefarious might be going on concerning this crisis?

Many parallels with the 9/11 attcks, which this video exposes and much more: Astounding Parallels: 9/11 & Covid - Video Presentation Updated/Overhauled/Augmented
Indicators of Suspicion: Public officials have all of the investigative 'indicators of suspicion' required to be guilty of exaggerating the COVID danger to the Public, and have them all strongly (this should alarm us):

Means: Do officials have the ability to fake a pandemic to gain dictatorial powers? Yes. Here's how:

Government and their health officials not only announce the virus data, and control its collection, but even control the definitions used in its collection. For example, by government guidance, it's not required to test someone for COVID to put COVID down as the cause of death.
As for gaining emergency powers, that's the easiest thing: they just grant it to themselves by writing and passing such a law.
As for compelling people, they can not only write and/or trigger laws establishing fines and other measures but they control and pay the police force used to enforce those fines.
It's also easy to influence portrayal of truth when the gold standard is research papers, researchers depend on grants, and the pharmaceutical industry and government control most of the grant money.
There is a way that worldwide decision-makers in government, mainstream media, industry, academia, and organized religion, and other influential people, which appear indepdendent, could all cooperate, through secret pacts or organization. For an example of a worldwide secret society of the influential, please see this video: Altiyan Childs Exposes Freemasonry.

Evidence that Premier of Quebec (province of Canada) François Legault, who has pushed some of the most draconian COVID restrictions in the world, including a curfew and promising a health tax on the unvaccinated, shows in the following video him taking a moment, unnaturally just before he sits down, to make a traditional hand sign for 666: Premier of Quebec François Legault Showing Loyalty to the Devil in Plain Sight
Similarly Dr. Anthony Fauci takes a moment to unnaturally make a traditional Masonic hand sign at the start of a press briefing: Dr. Anthony Fauci WITH EVIL masonic HAND SIGN
Anthony Fauci Hidden Masonic hand sign while hidden demonic being peeks through the doorway

Motive:

Government gains Public justification to increase and prolong dictatorial emergency powers when the announced COVID case, variant, and/or death numbers increase, so they have a motive to make sure those numbers trend upwards when they want to use them as an excuse to impose something as well as make sure the pandemic never ends.

Government health agencies, especially those dealing with infectious diseases, gain tremendous increases in importance, public influence, and spending budgets when they magnify the dangers of infectious diseases.
They also have tremendous opportunity for personal profit, in terms of which companies they select for government medical including vaccine contracts, which businesses they arbitrarily allow to remain open during lockdowns, as well as the ability to personally profit from patents, stocks, and other legal means, not to mention bribes. Some of these conflicts of interest are not obvious, such as the premier of Ontario owning a signage business which would stand to profit heavily as businesses need to post signs regarding how COVID restrictions impact their customers.

Opportunity: Of course they have opportunity; officials are in the driving seats of society by definition.

Evidence that Officials at least knew the pandemic was coming:

January 11, 2024: vWhy The “Covid Pandemic” Was Planned In Advance, In Just 4 Minutes
Event 201:

On October 18, 2019, in New York, NY, the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, in partnership with the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, hosted ‘Event 201’, which was an exercise of pandemic response in terms of high-level decision making.
You may read about it here, or watch its official videos here.
This fictional exercise assumed that there was a coronavirus outbreak originating from pigs in South America (Brazil).
This is less than 2 months since the first case of COVID-19 disease was officially detected as a new disease in China, is a coronavirus, and an origin is one of the prevailing theories of its origin from the outset.

Both Event 201 and COVID-19 bear significant similarities, espeically in origin of the virus (animals) and in government response to it (social distancing, vaccine), to the pandemic depicted in the ficitonal movie Contagion (2011).
Dr. Fauci:
1. On 10 January, 2017, ten days before Mr. Trump’s inaugration as president, Dr. Anthony Fauci, in giving a speech at Georgetown University, made the bizarre prediction that the Trump administration will be faced with a “surprise utbreak” of infectious disease (if it's known to be coming, how is it a surprise, or is it only a surprise to some?). Here is an article from 2017 discussing the comment which apparently was unusual enough at that time to be newsworthy:
  
  https://www.healio.com/news/infectious-disease/20170111/fauci-no-doubt-trump-will-face-surprise-infectious-disease-outbreak
  
  or see the USA Today fact-check on it here:
  
  https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/07/29/fact-check-2017-anthony-fauci-warned-potential-outbreak/5494601002/
  
  You can see the entire speech here:
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNXGAxGJgQI.
  
  Please be sure to pay attention to approximately the 3 minute 19 second to 3 minute 36 second marks where he says, “there is no question that there will be a challenge to the coming administration in the arena of infectious diseases ... there will be a surprise outbreak" (unfortunately the USA Today fact-checking article, above, did not report this phrase).
  
  This phrase is very telling. When people guilty of a crime talk enough about it, they usually eventually say something which betrays their guilt or at least knowing more than they pretend. It can be just one suspicious word or even a suspicious choice of a suspicious tense of an otherweise suspicious word. For example, someone who reported their child missing but actually killed the child themselves, was pressed by authorities and convicted when they played back tapes of her testimony and realised she kept describing her son in the past tense, as though she knew he was already dead. Similarly, in scrutinizing the choice of words Fauci used in the above phrase, the terms ‘will be’ and ‘surprise’ cannot be logically used in the same phrase to refer to the same thing (because what is seen as certain is no surprise) unless the speaker means that the surprise is to others not the themselves, ie. the speaker has inside knowlege that it will happen which others do not have. For example, if someone says, “there will be a surprise visitor at the door in the next 10 minutes”, it means that the speaker knows someone is coming, and that others will be surprised, but not them.
2. Dr. Fauci had plenty of reasons to push a pharmaceutical solution, as discussed in this video.
3. If there was a conspiracy, was Dr. Fauci in a position to know about it?
  --Answer: Better than most, being the director of the director of the (USA) National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NAID) for decades (since 1984), and should have been aware of NIH funding of research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
  https://humansarefree.com/2021/04/fauci-funded-gain-of-function-research-at-wuhan-lab.htm
Regarding foreknowlege and the Omicron variant:

Israel Simulates COVID-19 “War Game Omega Exercise” on November 11, 2021: approxmately two weeks before the announcement of the Omicron variant in South Africa, Israel ran this exercise for top officials there to prepare for, as the Prime Minister there put it, "a new variant that does not even exist yet".
Bill Gates Had a Game Created for Windows Called ‘Omikron’ in 1999 About Demons Pretending to Be Human in Order to Harvest Their Souls

The National Health Service (of the UK) not only instituting a strange new procedure for certifying deaths in 2016 which would serve to later misattribute many deaths to COVID-19 which were actually due to other causes. Article October 29, 2023: THEY LIED TO YOU!: NHS Director confirms Hospitals lied about Cause of Death to create illusion of COVID Pandemic

The World Health Organization violated accepted public health principles News Article: The WHO review: WHO’s COVID and monkeypox policies fail every one of the 10 public health principles
the Review: The WHO Review and why it matters to you
Vaccine manufacturers legally allowed to skirt many rules. Article: Pfizer Moves to Dismiss Lawsuit From COVID-19 Vaccine Trial, Citing ‘Prototype’ Agreement
Focus on the dangers of COVID-19 without mention of the dangers of the Government's countermeasures. There is no way that the Lockdowns didn't kill people, deprive them of their livelihoods, destroy their psychology, and worsen their medical conditions while waiting on medical procedures which were forced to wait. Also even to catch COVID-19 would have been a fraction of the population each person for a few weeks, but locking down everyone for 2 years is vastly worse.
Disinterest in Virus Origin: Isn't it suspicious that Government and mainstream media focus is so much on how to deal with the threat of the virus, with hardly any mention as to its origins, or updates on that story? Is it because such an investigation would eventually implicate the Establishment in planning this crisis?

As an example, if you find a wild animal in your house, you would certaintly not only deal with the animal, but thoroughly investigate how it got in. Then you would certainly do something to ensure it doesn't happen again. The only reason you wouldn't investigate the origin is if you already knew how it got in.

And so it is with the COVID virus. The lack of interest in pursuing exactly where this novel virus came from indicates that officials already know and don't mind it happening again.
Medical officials' conflict of interest: Acting NIH Director Admits Appearance of Conflict of Interest in Secret Royalty Payments to Fauci, Scientists
Explosion of Housing Market: If people have been dying in large numbers due to this pandemic, then why has demand for houses surged internationally strongly and still going 2 years after the pandemic began? If many people were dying, there would be a lot less people who need a house, and many houses would have no one to live in them much less buy them.

April 7, 2022: House price rise since first lockdown revealed
March 31, 2022: Canadian house prices rising strongly despite pandemic
31 Mar 2022: UK house prices grow at fastest rate for 17 years
April 6, 2022: It’s ‘never been harder’ for first-time homebuyers amid soaring rates, sky-high prices, and scarce inventory
April 7, 2022: As prices soar, Canada bans most foreigners from buying homes

NIH deletion of COVID-19 virus genetic sequencing data at Wuhan lab's request in early 2020: NIH Deleted Info From Wuhan Lab on CCP Virus Genetic Sequencing, Watchdog’s FOIA Finds
Immedate Erection of Totally Uneeded Field Hospitals: Why was Government so quick to set up large field hospitals, many of which were never used for even a single patient? Why were they so ready and eager to set these up long before there was any need? If we can do that how come we can't erect temporary shelters for the homeless?
No Show of Concern for Working Against Their Overt Interest: Is it reasonable to believe that any Government would order lockdowns without hesitation for the human suffering or taxation revenue disruption it would cause? The only reason they might sacrifice these things is that it offered them an opportunity to increase control, permanently, as a new social order of accepting continual Government orders, and ultimately reap more benefits thereby.
Draconian Measures despite No Deaths: Australia has suffered some of the most severe COVID social restrictions in the world. Health Minister of Australia announces that there were no deaths this year, at approximately 50-second mark in this video by ABC News (reportedly of press conference in Canberra on 17 June 2021): IN FULL: Health Minister announces AstraZeneca vaccine age recommendation raised to 60 | ABC News
Inconsistent Medical Restrictions expose their Non-Medical Basis: For example, in Ontario, Canada January 2022, while outdoor gatherings for individuals are limited to 10 people (see this webpage on 20 Jan 2022 as screenshoted below), while under the same restrictions the Government permitted 12,000 people to gather for a sporting event (article: Capacity held to 12,000 for World Cup qualifier game against U.S. in Hamilton)

The Ontario guidelines make a distinction between 'social gatherings' and 'public events', but to a virus there is no medical distinction.
INCENTIVE to lie: Is there any reason why Government or the medical industry might lie to the Public? Sure there is. With totalitarian control and trillions of dollars at stake, people have been known to lie about a lot less. In particular:

Profit: Officials may have patents or stock or other rewards in pushing vaccines as the only solution, mandated for everyone and paid for with Public money. It's could be partly a big scheme to turn the Public coffers into a large and mandated income stream for pharmaceutical companies.
Statis: Health officials are only center-stage celebrities as long as the Pandemic continues.
Control: When you declare an emergency, and repeatedly claim it's still on, you can take up and keep dictatorial powers to rule at your whim with impunity, even in a democracy.

Conspicuous Omission of Highly Interesting and Relevant News Stories which work Against the Official Narrative: If we are being told everything important by mainstream news sources, why have none of them reported real life stories from families who have suffered any of the serious adverse effects from the COIVID vaccine which official Government data shows have happened, up to and including instant death? These are stories to tell. Why haven't we heard them? Is it because it might damage Public interest in accepting the vaccine? But isn't that the Public's decision to make; wouldn't deciding not to report such things for reason that it might change our decision proof of media mind control and conspiracy?
2022 Sudden end of the social restrictions by Government Choice, even in the middle of a variant wave. A strange phenomenon is Government using the same statistical trends to justify completely opposite interventions at different times. Specifically, although rising COVID-19 'case' & death numbers were usually used to justify more severe restrictions, on the argument that we must stop this rise ie. 'flatten the curve', rising numbers were sometimes used as justification to actually lift restrictions, on the argument that the numbers had 'peaked'. The ability to use the same type of data trend to argue completely opposite reactions is a hallmark of professional rhetoric: interesting to watch but foolish to follow. For example:
1. Despite this situation:
2. They are doing this:
Why might they be stopping the emergency? Because:
1. Collapse of the Narrative: there has been much successful resistence to social restrictions in many parts of the world, and the narrative of the COVID scare is falling apart on many fronts, not the least of which is that the many societies (including most of the USA) which are open are not suffering noticable COVID harm. Rather than continue in a failure which is becoming increasingly obvious, and anger some societies to be unequally locked down why many are free, the governments still imposing restrictions want to escape being alone in doing that and seem to want to end the orders, and the corresponding scare, quickly. But the fact that they CAN end it quickly, even shortly after emphasizing the terror of the new Omicron wave, suggests that it's all a hoax under their control.
2. Unexpected Threat of Major War War with Russia, due to their positioning to invade Ukraine right now (January 2022), is looking likely, forcing Western governments to realize that they can't afford to make war on their own citizens or shut down their own economies any longer.
How can they stop a medical emergency at their own decision? The COVID crisis has always been either mostly or entirely theatrics. The way they can end the COVID crisis quickly, even during a variant wave, is simply to drastically reduce or stop what's been driving the COVID case numbers, and therefore the state of emergency, and therefore the social restrictions: COVID testing. Less testing means less (false?) positive results, which is interpreted as less COVID cases to report, which means the crisis is over as far as the public narrative is concerned. Examples of what appears to be the implementation of this strategy include:
1. 31 December, 2021: Ontario residents livid after province drastically cuts eligibility for COVID PCR testin
2. 5 January, 2022: Canada is flying blind with Omicron as COVID-19 testing drops off a cliff
3. 4 January, 2022Alberta doctors upset with provincial move to restrict PCR testing: ‘Absolutely absurd’
World Health Organization (WHO) ties to population reduction initiative: New film argues WHO engaged in ‘population control experiment’ under guise of vaccination program
Delaying to inform the Public of vaccine harms: Article June 25, 2022: CDC Confirmed Post-Vaccination Death From Blood Clotting Two Weeks Before Alerting Public: Emails
Why focus alarm only on COVID? COVID-19 is far from the most dangerous disease, and it's not the most contagious, either. Why did Government choose this disease, at the ignoring of all other causes of death, for us to focus on? There are so many other causes of death more dangerous.
Why were the same people linked to gain-of-funcion virus research in the Wuhan lab put in charge of the USA pandemic response?
Why endless vaccines only for the COVID-19 virus? Is the COVID-19 virus so different from every other virus in the universe that we need boosters every few months or we are some kind of intolerable danger to ourselves and others? Or is it because there's something different about this vaccine?
Why only a vaccine? Vaccine or not, defeating a virus depends on a strong immune system, which a vaccine only hopes to fortify. But there are many other ways to fortify our immune system, as well as antiviral drugs already in use. If the pandemic was so urgent for them to safe all human life from, why did our officlals not only insist that a vaccine was the ONLY hope of defeating this virus, but also insist that we WAIT on it, for an expected 18 months timeframe, before a vaccine evern existed? Wouldn't the urgency of the situation, combined with the fact that the vaccines won't be ready for A YEAR AND A HALF, force officials to acknowledge and consider ready alternatives? Why were we told to wait, and offered no other remedy in the meantime: not even to get some sunlight, take our vitamins, or get a good nigth's sleep?
No Precedent: As mentioned in this video, since when (ie. medical precedent before this crisis) did we test healthy people for viruses? Or since when (ie. medical precedent before this crisis) did we lock down provably healthy and uninfected people?
No Voter Mandate: What right did world governments have to suddenly suspend a wide array of human rights to a crisis of their choice, an invisible virus, of which there are many, without a referendum? There were months between the discovery of the virus and the pandemic announcement by the WHO: months which could easily have been used for referendum if the Public had known it was even being considered. This crisis has been going on for 2 years now and still no sign that they ever want to ask us.
Heads of Government resisting to implement social restrictions Shortly Before their Next Election, but Quick to implement severe measures shortly after they are elected. This shows that the social restrictions are done for political reasons first, and medical reasons second if at all.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford before the 2 June 2022 Election refused to implement health measures even when a new wave was upon us and local health officials were calling for masks:

6 April, 2022: Doug Ford isn't worried about the 6th wave of COVID but everyone else in Ontario is
6 April, 2022: Ford defends public absence of top health official amid sixth wave of pandemic
5 April, 2022: Toronto’s top doctor encourages masks in public spaces as Ontario sees 6th wave of COVID-19

Prime Minister Trudeau: many COVID-19 vaccine mandates were implemented shortly after he was re-elected in the 20 September 2021 election

Why does the WHO not seem to care much anymore about the origin point of the virus?
If world governments were willing to lock down everyone in March 2020, why didn't we do this in January or February 2020, before the virus was in most countries? The reason we didn't do much in those earlier months seemed to be that there wasn't much we were willing to do without sacrificing our freedoms. But if we were willing to sacrifice our freedoms and institute dramatic measures, why not lock the borders before the virus is here? Example article: Morning Update: February, 2020: The world’s ‘lost month’ in fight against COVID-19
Officials quickly reversing public statements which seem at all contrary to the official narrative:

January 12, 2022: Ontario's top doctor clarifies remarks about pediatric vaccine after being accused of 'feeding' vaccine hesitancy . In this article it shows that the official who made comments hinting at unknown risks of the vaccines in children was publicly pressured by the leader of the opposition party to 'clarify' his statements or 'go'.

There is evidence that our officials, in doing this, are doing what they are told, when in fact, by law and by appearances, there should be no higher authority on Earth telling them what to do. For example:

In addition to the obvious incentive for Government-appointed experts to say whatever Government secretly tells them to say (to give justification for whatever the Government wants to do), one of these experts accidentally revealed to the public that she just says whatever is written for her to say. In other words, her presentation is entirely scripted by someone else, she is functioning as an actress: only there to give the opinions of an unknown third party her medical credibility by reading them to the Public as hers.

Unfortunately for the Public, if some of the medical opinions were scripted then they might all be scripted, and the Government actions, however justified on scripted medical advice, might have no legitimate basis in medicine at all but simply be for another purpose.

Regarding introduction of the vaccines, which by the official story could not have existed before the supposedly completely novel virus emerged to everyone's supposed surprise, unless the vaccines already existed:

How was the world made to wait an estpimated 18 months on the development of COVID vaccines when:

reseaerch on the closest related virus, SARS-CoV-1 (SARS), failed to produce a vaccine despite all attempts, and neither has any AIDS vaccine come to market despite over 20 years of research
vaccines normally take many years to complete required safety trials before release to the Public (nevermind mandated for everyone)
It should have been decided that we clearly don't have time to wait. The virus was already a worldwide pandemic and many people were already dying. Solutions should have been focused on the many vitamins, herbs, and drugs already available, rather than developing something entirely new. This is not the first virus we've faced and so there was no need to wait on development and deployment of a fundamentally new technology when so many other options were ready. That Government would bet the public defense to COVID exclusively on a vaccine, before it even existed, saying we should wait over a year for it, while suppressing any other significant and available hope (such as vitamins), and despite that creation of a vaccine completely failed for the closest related and less dangerous SARS-CoV-1, is too reckless a gamble to justify: even if it worked too many people would die waiting, and there was no reason to think it would work due to too many faiilures, novelties, and unknowns in the process. This strategy would only be rational if the vaccine was already in existence when we were told to wait on it, which would mean a conspiracy.
If Government insisted the Public must wait for a vaccine as the only hope, and if that vaccine didn't already exist, wouldn't that put extreme and dangerous pressure on the regulatory agencies to approve it, since all lives had already been bet on its quality before it even existed?

Even if one pharmaceutical company was able to work a miralce in a short timeframe, how was virtually every major pharmaceutical company able to do it in that same unprecedented timeframe to get in on the action at the same time?

Rather the fact that ALL major pharmaceutical companies were able to create approved COVID vaccines in less than a year after the discovery of the virus, even though this is just a fraction of the time for any vaccine ever previously developed by anyone, is strong evidence that, rather than believe in many miracles happening at once to every candidate, far more likely is that they had them ready in advance of the crisis.
Why were vaccines promoted as the only hope when there are many other options, natural and pharmaceutical?
Why was natural immunity ignored but the Establishmet insisted that even the naturally immune must be vaccinated also?
Even if the vaccine manufacturers were all able to miraculously create this formulation and have it approved in record time, how were any, nevermind all, pharamceutical companies ready, in terms of manufacturing capacity, to supply the entire world with vaccines in that time? Have they supplied billions of doses in a short time before that they have this capacity ready?

How come a mask is required but it must not be a medical mask?

How come Churches were closed but the biggest stores allowed to be open?
How were cancer treatments suspended but abortions continued unrestriced?
Why did flights keep running? These force a large number of people into a contained area for hours, sharing the same washroom, and spreading disease across wide regions?
Why did airline staff not need to quarantine? Did the virus exempt them?
Why was it considered OK for Canada to delay the second doses of vaccine beyond the manufacturer's timeframe (from the first dose)? Article: A behind-the-scenes look at why Canada delayed 2nd doses of COVID-19 vaccines
When the Government agencies report daily 'cases' of COVID-19, why don't they say how many are asymptomatic? Is it reasonable, for example, to shut down an entire region for a single case of someone with no symptoms at all? At what point is enough asymptomatic positive results an indication of a faulty test?
Before this pandemic, since when was it medical procedure to test people en masse who have no symptoms?
Why are so many medical staff suffering from anxiety, burnout, and depression including thoughts of suicide, since the pandemic started? This is widely reported in the News, and the assumption is that it is entirely due to the disease itself. But wasn't emergency medical work always stressful? Is it possible that many of these workers suspect something is wrong with the official COVID narrative and them being a part of its implementation? Is it possible that they suspect these vaccines are harming people, but they don't want to lose their job, and that is causing great psychological stress? Otherwise what reason is there to be depressed, however stressful, in a job where you are only helping people?
Just an 'Exercise'? US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo publicly referred to the Coronavirus Pandemic, on live television, as a "live exercise" (video here: Did Pompeo have a BIG SLIP on LIVE TV? (Neither CNN or FOX will show you this). What is an 'exercise'? It is 'something done or performed as a means of practice or training'. What's just as interesting is that president Trump, at his side, whispers in Pompeo's ear just as he says this, that he wished Pompeo had told him, indicating that he takes orders from Pompeo.
Why Buy Refridgeration Equipment to Support One Vaccine Type which Required It? Why not just choose another type? Why is the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine the most dispensed and popular, when, unlike its three main competitors (Moderna, Johnson & Johnson, and AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccines), which can be stored in conventional fridges or freezers, it requires an incredible -70 degree celsius or colder for storage, which most medical facilities are not equipped for? If all the vaccines are equally effectie, rather than buy new deep-freeze fridges for everyone, why not just use the vaccines which don't require deep freeze?

Example supporting article: -70 degree C storage: The big problem with Pfizer, BioNTech vaccine
Why aren't we told the cost of the vaccines, their storage, and the overall COVID spending? Typically the Public isn't even allowed to see the wording of the contracts with the vaccine manufacturers.
Unfair Vilification Why has the Establishment publicly vilifying the unvaccinated as unfairly burdening the healthcare system, when:

They are probably using medical facilities less not more than someone in the same situation, as medical facilities are not a welcoming place for them due to Public especially medical industry anger with the unvaccinated.
There are so many kinds of self-abuse which are clearly deliberate and frequently cause someone to require medical care to keep them alive, yet we've never talked about them being a burden on the medical system or fining them. Examples include: suicide, smoking (where all packs of cigarettes by law have clear medical warnings on them), alcoholism (at least for those who know this is bad for their organs), and narcotis abuse. In fact, when someone is sick, physicians rarely demand they change their lifestyle but usually order a set of pills to attempt to compensate for it, and often the Public pays that cost.

Moral Duty? Why has our society and religious organizations promoted these injetions as a 'duty' to society to protect lives, when the same society doesn't consider any other medical treatment such a duty, and actually supports the notion that pregnant women have no duty to carry their preborn child to term (delivery)?
Long-Term Pandemic Contracts in a Supposedly Unpredicatble Pandemic: On the one hand, officials keep cautioning us that they will look to see how the data goes, and have made little indication that another vaccine will be necessary. On the other hand they have secured vaccine contracts years ahead. Doesn't this mean that they know the dosage series in advance, since it's already contracted years ahead?
Reversal of foundational priorities: Before the COVID crisis, we were taught to defend human rights before human life, and therefore be willing to die to defend our national freedoms. Since the COVID crisis, we are expected to surrender our human rights in grasping for any remedies in fear of a threat.
Shocking lack of foresight in Public Experts. We followed public health experts on the presumption that they know the subject better than anyone else, have a lifetime of experience with this subject, and are therefore the most able to predict the result of any kind of scenario. Yet they were often wrong, sometimes contradicted their own advice, and simply offered the excuse that nobody new this would happen or that nobody knew the virus might do that, as if they are just as inexperienced as anyone else. It makes sense that the same people we are expected to obey for reason of their supposed experience, we are expected to forgive for reason of their supposed inexperience. Example reference: CDC head laughs about having had ‘too little caution and too much optimism’ in now-failed COVID vaccines
Irreplaceability of our Experts. Considering that we've followed officials for almost 2 years, committing unlimited public money and the vast majority of the population submitting human rights and even our bodies also to radical but strongly recommended alterations, and we're still in a similar state of crisis than when we began, at what point should we be considering that our officials are either incompetent or deliberately misleading us or even prolonging the crisis for profit or power? For example, at first we were told not to wear masks, then they were mandated; we were told the vaccines would make us immune to the virus and free us from social restrictions, then that it doesn't do either. They keep justifying it based on the 'evolving' situation or 'new data'. Of course that's new for us, the non-expert public. If you had a plumber or mechanic working for you, and the problem after a long time and great expense was just as bad as when you started, wouldn't you say they were incompetent or even ripping you off? If there was a fire marshall managing a burning building, who failed to reasaonbly predict what the fire might do next, wouldn't you say they were incompetent? How much failure should we tolerate in our appointed experts before we at least appoint other people?
Government Agencies Extremely Sluggish or Outright Refusing to Disclose Important Information to the Public:
1. It's not very cooperative that the FDA would insist, in late 2021, as a response to an information request under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), that they need 75 years to release the data they have on the Pfizer vaccines, Articles:
2. 14 Sep, 2022: Smoking gun? FDA refusing to provide key covid “vaccine” safety analyses, suggesting massive coverup
Removal of Evidence by authorities

FDA now burying incriminating documents showing Moderna’s covid “vaccine” to be harmful

Adamance that social restrictions are necessary and helpful when they are obviously only multiply the harmful effects of the virus. The masks they advocate restrict oxygen and aren't fine enough to filter out a virus, the 6'/2m social distancing nowhere near adequate for an airborne virus, the isolation periods are too short, and the lockdowns concentrate people together, cause severe economic and psychological harm, and the end results look no better than regions which didn't lock down. They also ignore the fact that the power to lock down a society is not a power Government should have, from a human rights standpoint. Yet Government again and again keeps doing these things, insistent that this is the only and necessary intervention if the case numbers increase. If Government did nothing, we would only have a medical problem. Because of these interventions, we have a medical problem, an economic problem, and a human rights problem. Some references include:

Other Emergency Declarations Ignored Why was concern for the environment, which was already officially declared an emergency not long before COVID, completely ignored in instituting planet-wide mask (usually disposable) mandates, which has generated tremendous pollution? In the early days of the pandemic, we were also forced to use plastic bags after years of Government camapaign against their use for environmental reasons. Now Governments seem intent to renew the Environment as an emergency when COVID is over.
The many broken promises and misleading assurances from Officials on key elements of this crisis, which should matter to us and are proofs that something is wrong, including:

Misleading assurances that the social restrictions of March 2020 would be for 2 weeks: After 2 years they are still on, and Government has been releasing us from some restrictions only to impose them again later.
Misleading assurances that the vaccines were only for those who wanted them. In the following video, we can see how Canada's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, for example, progressed from portraying the COVID vaccines as completely optional gradually to completely mandatory: Evolution of Justin Trudeau's Vaccine "Mandates" for Canada.
Broken promises, in the early phase of vaccine rollout, that vaccination would protect us from COVID and therefore end the crisis. Now they tell us that even fully vaccinated, social restrictions are still necessary, and endless boosters are needed. Aren't these experts who have enough experience to make reliable predictions? Virus variants may be a surprise to the Public, but should they have been a surprise to the experts? Example resources are:

EXPECTATIONS CRUSHED: Vaccines: Promises Vs Reality. Oh No, The Variants Are Coming!

Broken promises, in the early phase of vaccine rollout, that vaccination would free us from mask and social distancing mandates and go back to our 'normal' rights and freedoms. They should have, since these orders are from Government and completely in Government control to lift. Unfortunately they didn't lift them citing excuse that a new 'variant' has arisen. If we never accepted masks and social distancing mandates, we wouldn't have to beg hopelessly for them to be lifted.

Vaccine Interchangeability: How did Government Health Officials come to mix and match different makes of vaccines in a series of shots on the same patient (also called 'mix and match'), when the vaccine product monographs are consistent saying there is 'no data' on vaccine interchangeability? If even the manufacturer doesn't know, even if there are some new studies in the one year since the vaccine's release, how can Government presume to know the long-term (many-year) effects of doing this?

Interestingly, although Canada has four approved vaccines, two of which are mRNA-based and two of which are adenovirus-based, while proclaiming the safety of mixing the mRNA vaccine doses (pretenting this was the question not mixing any approved vaccine doses) in a series, Health Canada is completely silent about the issue of mixing mRNA-based doses with adenovirus-based ones.

Could it be a purely logistics decision, to have the freedom to give the Public whichever vaccine is in most abundant supply at that clinic at that time?
Ignoring herd immunity: Since we only need a high majority of people immune to achieve herd immunity, why do we need to hound every last unvaccinated person to be vaccinated?
Ignoring inherent ineffectiveness: If the vaccine worked to protect the vaccinated, why would we need to hound every last unvaccinated person to be vaccinated?
Maintained Paramount Focus: Why was government and mainstream media focus mainatined on this virus, even with daily case numbers as top headline news every day for years of the pandemic, when no other issue, not even war, has ever been given such attention? Why were we not permitted to ignore it? Maybe because this persistently reminded fear, rather than seeing any change in the health in those aound us, was the only thing keeping the pandemic going in the public mind?
Excessive Focus. Why did Government portray it as so necessary to bring focus to, keep focus on, and do everything possible about the current threat, to no limit of spending or unprecedented social changees, when there are so many other domestic and international threats to human life they relatively ignore, including: every other virus, pathogenic bacteria such as in our drinking water, hunger, homelessness, drunk driving, nuclear weapons, abortion, drug overdoses (legal and illegal), cancer, geoengineering, sewage and trash pollution (carbon dioxide is a life molecule), fluoride pollution, electromagnetic radiation such as from cellphone towers, and many more. As for international concern, they did nothing to stop the Rwanda genocide in 1994, even with soldiers already there and willing to fight, or stop the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, and many regions are without access to potable drinking water. Why is money no object for Government battling COVID, but it is with virtually every other issue they work on? Simply put, we know from behaviour in other areas that Government doesn't care this much about life: if they did they wouldn't fund abortion for example. So why are they doing this?

December 09, 2022: Processed food is the real “pandemic,” and the government couldn’t care less about it

Support from Pro-Choice (abortion) movement for COVID vaccine mandates. Despite screaming for decades that they insist they must have the right to choose abortion on the argument that any medical treeatments of their body, however unnatural, must be their choice, these groups have generally not opposed Government mandates to inject our bodies with these COVID potions. This reversal in thinking makes no sense, unless they don't believe the argument themselvs, and only intend to switchtheir objections on or off depending on which way will serve the most destruction of humanity. Here is an example video on the subject.
Portraying refusal of a vaccine as a suicidal threat to immunity but not any other action which does that . Actually lots of other things decrease immunity, and we don't persecute the practitioners as a threat to society for it, such as smoking tobacco or drinking alcohol.
Never enough: that no matter how obedient the Public is to lock down, wear masks, social distance, and vaccinate, they still have to live under severe social restrictions. For example, December 2021, when most everyone in developed nations were vaccinated, had virtually the same restrictions as December 2020 (before the vaccine rollout).
No official interest in whether the vaccinations were actually successful to produce antibodies in the individual (these can be tested for). Anyone vaccinated was considered protected even if they weren't, and anyone unvaccinated was considered unprotected even if they were. It was politically convenient, but medical nonsense.
Ignoring the potential for the Vaccinated to spread the disease Since the vaccinated can also contract and spread the COVID virus, aren't they also a supposed 'threat to the public', if the unvaccinated are?
Virulence based on Vaccination? How did we come to see someone as a spreader of disease based on their vaccination status, rather than whether they actually have the disease or not, espcially when dealing with a 'vaccine' which doesn't prevent contraction or transmission of the virus?
Post-Entry Border Closures When implementing border closures to supposedly stop the virus, typically Governments only imposed them after the virus was proven to be in their country. The only reasonable explanation was that they did not intend to restrict the virus somuch as restrict their population.
Incentive. Medicine is a for-profit industry and they have a financial incentive to keep us sick and dependent on their care, which when we are dependent, we will pay any amount of money for. Why should they mind if we are permanently vaccine injured: so long as they don't die, they will need medical care for the rest of their lives. Here's a short video on this subject: HBO Bill Maher: Rants Against The Pharmaceutical Industry (2007)
Forcing Resigation of Direct Responders as a way to Handle an Emergency? Does it really serve Public safety to force medical professionals and military out of their jobs, due to vaccine mandates, even more than a year after the pandemic has gone worldwide? By that time, these people would either have naturally aquired immunity or be very good at using protective equipment: either way they pose no threat. But that would make sense.
Trust for Turth? How come the independent news media tends to tell viewers not to trust them but to investigate the truth for themselves, while Government and its agencies tend to insist that people trust only official sources for their information? Why these two different methods of finding truth, and which one is more reliable?
What is Real Enough? How could officials convince us that commonly intangible factors such as climate change and the COVID-19 virus are real dire threats to the world, to the perseution of any naysayers, but pretend that tangible, officially quantified, and personally-attested vaccine injuries are not real enough to discuss or use in decision-making?
Giving rewards for patients to decide to vaccinate. After they were promoting vaccines by free choice, and before they started mandating them, Governments were offering rewards, such as entrance in a lottery, as a reward to be vaccinated (for example see video here on government program posted here)? Isn't a free vaccine, if it works, its own reward? No reasonable person would offer a free benefit and then try to further incentivise it with another free bonus. It makes no sense. Neither should medical decisions be pressured even with positive coercion but based on the patient's health.
Lack of Open Debate If the official narrative is true, why did officials offer no public debate against naysayers, nor point out what the errors in their message were, before blindly classifying anything opposing the official narrative as public-threatening misinformation? Isn't the scientific and democratic way to invite open debates on the subject? Many independent researchers (such as this one as a random example) have invited the chance to openly debate officials on COVID.

Refusal of authorities to debate anyone who 'doesn't want to be convinced' to take the vaccines: Northern Irish caller asks a chief-scientist some awkward questions
Why Persecute the Dead? If those who refuse the vaccine will die by their own free and informed choice, why bother pursuing them? Why heap more and more pressures against them? Isn't the fact that they are still alive 2 years after the start of the worldwide pandemic a proof that they're doing fine without the vaccine?
Lack of Calls for Prayer: If we are truly in a dire national emergency, and our leaders are truly working in truth and righteousness for our best interest, at what point will they call for national prayer? That's what nations used to do in times of the worst crisis, even to bring out our most treasured religious relics for public procession; in fact prayer alone is credited with ending plagues in certain times and places in history (example here and here). Instead Government has been severely restricting Church attendance.

Even on the American National Day of Prayer, amidst the pandemic, in 5 May, 2021, the White House press release (here) regarding prayer doesen't mention God, doesn't mention COVID, and definitely doesn't ask God to save us from COVID. The tone of it seems to imply that our real trust is in science, with the act of prayer (rather than the person of God), only providing comfort and a sense of hope.

Although many historians credit Britain's resistance to Germany in World War 2 to the RAF, that credit should go first to God. Please read here how every soldier was issued a copy of the Gospels, and the King and parliament called the entire nation seven times to prayer, filling the Churches, and for which God responded with seven miracles.

It seems that the only reason our leaders wouldn't ask for God's remedy in a time of dire national emergency is if they were doing something wrong they don't want a righteous and all-powerful God being invoked and putting a stop to.
New World Order of Constantly Ordering Citizens Around: In supposedly democratic society, how did it become acceptable for Government to not only order civilians around, but order us around so much and so often that we keep looking out for the new orders to live by? We're not military or in their employ, but democratic citizens. Isn't being constantly ordered around by Government the most distinguishing feature, in practice, of living under martial law?

While being ordered around, furthermore, why did the orders and rules keep changing continually? Why did we need so many changing orders and rules for one virus, often announced with very short notice to the time of effect?

The only reasonable explanation is that the primary purpose of the COVID-19 'exercise' was to train us, not only with orders but continually changing orders on short notice over a long time, so that we would become accustomed to look to the Government, every day, for how we are allowed to live that day. COVID-19 crisis has trained us to this new world order.
The notion that we should save lives by giving up our human rights should have been rejected at its face, and it's surprising that people we trust would recommend it, because of these reasons which should have been obvious:

it's foolish to trade our permanent and very hard-won human rights for protection from a temporary threat.
it's foolish that we should accept a lifestyle we don't even want to live in exchange for safety
it's foolish to accept guaranteed and heavy losses of everyone in exchange for possible safety to something only the few are even vulnerable to
it's foolish that we should give unlimited emergency powers and public money to the very same people who assure us of the danger of an abstract threat we cannot see, hear, touch or otherwise directly verify is even real (telemarketing scammers have often tried the same thing), and allow them to renew and expand these powers if they choose to announce any new or more danger
If we give up our rights and freedoms for any threat then we have already lost before the fight even begins

We have too easily accepted the idea of that there is some kind of necessary link between a virus pandemic and major social reforms. No there isn't; they are not related, unless there is a plan to relate them, which would also suggest this may have all been planned from the beginning of the problem. For example, please see this video:
World Economic Forum: Pandemic is unique opportunity to implement ‘Great Reset’ of capitalism

The benefit from the vaccines, even by the official documents, is so low it's nonsense to say that it's worth the risk, expense, or bother, nevermind mandating them from an individual perspective. According to this video, they only provide less than 1% of absolute risk reduction in contracting the virus. Speaking of which, how does that make unvaccinated people a threat?
The virus wasn't so dangerous as to merit radical (stop-everything, suspend-all-human-rights) measures. Even without any treatment, the COVID virus isn't much more dangerous than the flu, and the vast majority of the deaths were the elderly. The overall mortality rate after contracting it is less than 2%: more for the old, less for the young.
Official & Celebrity Fake or Non-Vaccinations: Evidence is surfacing that numerous televised vaccinations of officials/celebrities are evidenced to be fake, or other evidence or testimony that the same officials aggressively pushing vaccination are not vaccinated themselves:

October 14, 2022: Macron and “most MPs are not vaccinated,” reveals former French presidential candidate in shocking claim
Oct 11, 2022: Breaking! Macron Lied, Did Not Get The Vax
Video: Has Justin Trudeau Been Duly Vaccinated? Registered Nurse Expresses Doubt on Authenticity of Trudeau’s Vaccine Jab
Video: Fauci Gets Vaccinated By A Syringe With No Needle
and related video: Fauci is Fake! Signals Wrong Arm For Moderna Vaccine!! Scam!!!
Video: Registered Nurse Proves Trudeau Shots Were Fake
Video: Fake vaccination
Video: Fake vaccination, cap ON!!!
Video: REVEALED!! KAMALA HARRIS - FAKE COVID-19 VACCINATION!!
Video: fake vaccine for fake people
Video: TELEVISED FAKE VACCINATIONS (PRETEND YOU DIDN'T SEE THAT)!!!
Video: Another Fake Celebrity Vaccination!!! | Mariah Carey
Video: Silence of the Syringes | Anthony Hopkins has FAKE VACCINATION, Watch NURSE squirt the vaccine outside!
Video: 133) CoronaCircus – The spectacle of fake vaccination
Video: Where Is The Needle???
Video: Belgium Prime Minister Caught Faking Jab - No Needle!!: This one you need to do the stop-motion yourself, but it's clear that the safety cap is on the needle (the real needle is inside near the black plunger)

Why might someone fake doing something which they recommend the public to do?

Protection of Air Travel: Governments suspiciously and mostly overlooked flight restrictions in their supposed efforts to stop the spread of the virus. For example, air travel between USA and Canada was never blocked even when private cars were blocked from crossing the border, despite the far greater potential for a virus to spread with many people together in the confines of an airplane compared to travelling alone in their own car.
There has been unfair attack on any other treatment than the vaccine, no matter the success with those treatments. Government refuses to acknowlege a single other thing the Public can do to resist the virus, not even nutrition, sunlight, or sleep, but only their mask, distancing, lockdown, and vaccine mandates.
It's very strange that some Governments allowed vaccine boosters to be substituted from other manufacturers, and expiry dates to be arbitrarily suspended, when there were problems with supply. You aren't supposed to just arbitrarily change an expiry date because you're short.
The idea that an old vaccine, formulated for the original COVID strain, will automatically be fine for the new variants (as officials did promote it), is medically unreasonable until and unless it's proven in studies. It's the reverse thinking that we were fed about why the annual flu shots are not more effective: that the creators have to guess which strains will be dominant that year, and if they put the wrong strain in the formula it won't work against the other strains.
Facial Decorations: That we were ordered to wear masks but not medical-grade, and never told to wash or replace them, is medically ludicrous and makes a laughing stock of our foolishness to obey these medically invalid nonsense orders. Even on CNN they are reported to be nothing more than facial decorations. Who did we decorate our faces for? We did it to show our blind and unquestioning obedience to any Government order.
No Significant Government Admittance of Human Rights Suspensions: When Government made the social restriction orders, they did not ask permission to trample our human rights, and did not mention the effect on our human rights. They ordered severe restrictions on our lives as though it is the most normal thing for us to live that way. This was, after all, to be our 'new normal'.
No Significant Mainstream Media Criticism of COVID-Excused Human Rights Suspensions by Government: It's extremely suspicious that widespread suspension of many articles of our various human rights charters, and forced general degradation of human quality of life, would go relatively uncriticized in the mainstream media. There was little admission that the social orders trampled our human rights, but more of an assumption that it is quite normal for Government to order us how to live. On those rare occassions wherehuman rights suspensions were admitted, they were assumed to be absolutely necessary to save lives. Even when it's proven that these measures did not save lives, they were still not criticized.
Patent Evidence:

There is much evidence, out of patent records, which suggest COVID-19 (aka SARS-CoV-2) was known in the scientific community long (years, maybe decades) before it was officially discovered in an outbreak in the human population. The evidence, unfortunately, is not easy to interpret without expert knowledge on the patent filing process or matching patents with other ones.
Here are some related references:
1. Aug 26, 2022: Moderna suing Pfizer, BioNTech for patent infringement in development of COVID-19 vaccine. This report includes that Moderna is suing Pfizer for COVID-19 vaccine related patents from 2010 to 2016. This hints that the vaccine was developed since 2016, since that is the last patent in the alleged infringement by Pfizer for making an allegedly similar product.
2. Patents Prove SARS-CoV-2 Is A Manufactured Virus
3. Patents related to the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus have been filed in the United States since 2002.
4. Patents Prove Etiology of SARS-CoV-2
The main patent supporting the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine, US Patent number 10702600 B1, was filed Feb. 28 , 2020 (as it says on the first page of that patent). This is early considering that the virus wasn't even identified as something unique until China released its genetic code on 5 January, 2020 (please see the CDC Museum COVID-19 Timeline), not to mention how long vaccines normally take to develop. One of the figures, number 17, references a rat study for the patent which took at least 56 days to complete, which would mean they started 3 January, 2020, two days before the virus was even identified, even if they took the rat results the same day they filed the patent. It's not absolute proof they knew ahead of time only because the patent isn't for COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) specifically but for 'any strain of SARS-CoV'. Still, the timing and wording of this patent is very suspicious that they knew about the COVID-19 virus ahead of time, since the related work would have had to start shortly before COVID-19 was identified to exist. Why was Moderna researching and pursuing a patent for 'any strain of SARS-CoV' before a new strain, COVID-19, was revealed to exist, and while the known strain, the SARS-CoV-1 virus (SARS), was no longer any threat since it disappeared from the population over 15 years ago?

Regarding the allegation that the COVID vaccine existed long before it should have (if we believe the official narrative):

This webpage presents compelling photographic and video evidence that the AstraZenica vaccine was manufatured in its final packaging at least as early as 15 July 2018, and that government vaccine mandate posters were printed in France before a single case of the virus, never mind the vaccine, ever existed in their country.
A hot mike at an official USA White House press briefing on COVID in April 2020 caught officials discussing with each other, among other things, that they're "all vaccinated anyway", even though the vaccine wasn't even approved for emergency use in the Public until December 2020.
It's unreasonable that virtually all governments around the world would promote vaccines as the only possible solution to this pandemic, placing all their hopes there, if no vaccine existed and scientists failed to create a vaccine for the nearest related virus SARS, and when no vaccine was expected for an estimated 18 months and could fail development in many ways. If it was really a surprise emergency worthy of any desperate measure, against something which kills in a couple of weeks, even if there was no risk of failure of development, 18 months should have been considered too long to wait, with so many lives at stake, especially for something which might not even succeed to be developed. Even a fool would have wanted at least a backup plan, but the Public was not told about any backup plan or any need for one. This is far too dangerous and slow an option to be reasonable for a national leader to accept unless they knew the vaccine already existed.

Excessive fines, penalties, and enforcement: If there was really a tangible and lethal and out-of-control threat in the midst of the Public, there would not have been a need to back up the orders with astronomical fines. For example, in defending Britain in World War II, the British didn't need to be punished with fines for not following the orders; they saw the need and complied. The fines were needed to create momentum of action in the face of a totally intangible threat, invisible in both its appearance and its effects. No more people were dying or getting sick that unsual, but only the classification of cause of death on the death certificates supported the existence of a lethal pandemic.
Fear-stoking by Government and government-supported media sources, in choosing to use overly sensational priority of and emotional language for COVID news:
Consider:

Article: "COVID-19 numbers skyrocket in Quebec with a reported 1,807 cases" The problem with this is that with a population of approximately, as of this writing, 8.6 million people, 1,807 cases isn't a big proportion (only 0.02% which is 2 in 10,000 people. If we read the article, it reveals the total number of active cases as 12,085 (which is 0.14%, or 14 in 10,000 people). Considering the low lethality of COVID, it's not something to create panic over.
But the daily reporting of cases at the very top of the news, combined with emotional commentary on it, has kept stoking the Public fear.
It is suspicious that public media would unreasonably stoke fear of the Public in COVID, because they normally don't do this no matter how severe the emergency: not even in war do they give us casualty numbers daily as headline news.
Mainstream news has been putting daily COVID case and death numbers above all other news, every day, as though COVID is the most important news at all times every day for over a year and a half.
Unprofessional and socially disruptive use of overly fear-promoting language in COVID news articles and headlines. For example, these headlines were used in announcing Omicron variant to the world:

Yahoo! News: Omicron demonstrates Covid-19 'not done with us' says WHO. So Omicron is making plans against us?
The Independent: Scientists warn of new Botswana variant of Covid with ‘horrific’ number of mutations. All mutations always make a thing more dangerous? No, they just make it different. In fact, viruses tend to mutate to become less dangerous rather than more, to enhance their propagation, precisely because they aren't making plans against us: the viruses which kill people less have a mathemetically greater time to reproduce and spread more.
The US Sun: SUPER STRAIN New Covid variant with 32 ‘horrific’ mutations detected in Africa amid fears it could escape vaccines. 'Horror' is part of the scientific method?
The Daily Mail: New Botswana variant with 32 'horrific' mutations is the most evolved Covid strain EVER and could be 'worse than Delta' — as expert says it may have emerged in an HIV patient
ScienceInfo.net: New Covid-19 'super-variant' discovered containing 32 mutations: Virologist says it's horrible
Montreal Gazette: British scientists warn of 'horrific' new COVID-19 variant
US News: UK's Johnson Warns of Omicron 'Tidal Wave', Says Two Doses Not Enough

Yahoo News 20 Dec 2021: All of Us Have a Date with Omicron

Mainstream news has allowed the Public to believe in only one hope: that of vaccines, and persisted in this notion even before the vaccines existed, so that we were told to wait on them. But we have an immune system, there are many ways to fortify that, and we have many herbs and pharmaceuticals. Really nothing else can help?

Obviously distorted data used as basis for public policy:

Publishing simply the number of positive COVID tests, instead of the percent positive, as the headlined indicator for spread and public policy. Sometimes the number of tests done is mentioned in the text of the article, but the daily, breaking headlines we are subjected to are COVID case numbers (all positive tests they call cases) and deaths. Consequently, Government, media, and public reaction has simply been on the daily number of COVID positive test results, rather than the 'percent positive', ie. the percentage of positive tests as a ratio of all tests done. If this number goes up, media publishes sensational headlines and Government reacts with more social restrictions.

Unfortunately, if we ignore now many were tested, then simply by running more or less tests one day, anyone could cause the 'case' numbers to go up or down for that day, even with the exact same number of people infected in the population. The fact that they keep increasing testing for COVID would also help drive the number of positive test cases up even without any further virus spread. Since it must make sense on some level for it to be done by intelligent people, it seems to be a method to deliberately mislead of the Public without actually lying: after all, it's within their power to increase or decrease the number of tests processed each day and it's not a lie.
Classification of every positive COVID test as a COVID 'case'. This is medically inappropriate. Medically speaking, the person has to actually be sick, ie. with symptoms not just a test result, to be a 'case'.
Overclassification of illnesses as due to COVID. For example, Alberta, as a matter of policy, is classifying every child who stays home from school as ill with COVID, even if they refuse the test. Alberta has actually closed schools for reason of 'COVID Outbreak' based on the number of students who stay home rather than confirmed COVID cases.
Overclassification of deaths as due to COVID: COVID's lethality is low but Governments have found ways to pad those COVID-death numbers by changing the definitions in the collection of that data from what would make sense. The policy is typically that anyone who dies with COVID is counted as a COVID test (see here), and that the COVID diagnosis can be done presumptively (without a test). Here is a case example. As another example, even in this case of a husband shooting his wife then himself: both were recorded as 'COVID' deaths. But is that really the Public impression of what the numbers mean when COVID deaths are reported?

Governments taking and chronically extending emergency powers. This has been a major feature of the pandemic, and is extremely suspicious. Government with the ability to grant itself and extend it's own emergency powers, and doing it, is extremely dangerous to democracy no matter the reason: by definition it is the suspension of democrcacy. But they seem to think this is their right, and pretend that living under dictatorial emergency powers is still democratic for us. Here is but one example article.
Synchronicity as evidence of conspiracy: How could so many nations (virtually every one on earth), if acting as independently for their own People as they appear, agree at the same time in so many nonsense ways, including to agree:

on a belief that the virus, with only a 0.66% infection fatality rate, is a dire threat worthy of drawing Public attention to and back to every day exclusively with daily official data, updates, and order announcements?
on the belief that severe social restrictions are helpful and necessary, against a virus only a little more dangerous than the flu, and at the forced destruction of the economy and livelihood of the nation. Exaple article: EU report highlights Canada’s ‘invasive’ COVID policies that ‘severely’ affected the nation’s economy
on the belief that fabric or non-surgical masks must be mandated even though they cannot possibly help and more likely to make things worse (by not being cleaned and accumulating filth and restricting oxygen)
on the belief that social distancing must be mandated even though the real distance required for it to be effective is 5 times what was ordered
on the belief that a vaccine is our only hope for relief, even though 18 month estimated development time should have been seen as more time than we can afford with a raging pandemic, it was never developed for most related virus SARS, there are many natural ways to boost our innate immune systems, there are many ways we could improve sanitation, there are many ways we could filter the air in our ventilation systems, there are already anti-viral drugs maybe one could help, and we used to pray to God as a nation for crises this big but not this time

How did the suspension of many basic human rights suddenly seem an acceptable option to every leader on earth at once?

How did not a single leader, no matter how long the crisis lasts, allow the the Public a referendum to decide how we want it handled?

When at any other time did so many leaders cooperate on anything for any reason, much less something which destroys their economy and kills their people?

The odds of all world nations handling the crisis in fundamentally the same and unprecedented and unreasonable way at the same time are too small to take as an explanation. Far more reasonable to believe, until proven otherwise, that they must have cooperated, in secret against the Public, meaning conspiracy. Put another way, if each Government wasn't getting the idea from the Public, were they all just simultaneously inspired to do the same thing at the same time, or were they ordered by the same authority at the same time, meaning conspiracy?

Vaccine Contract Secrecy: The Public is not allowed to see the complete wording of Government 'vaccine' contracts they've made with manufacturers, even though Government signed them (in democratic theory) on behalf of the Public, and vaccine manufacturers similarly seem not requried to answer Government inquiries. How can there be accountablity to and informed consent for the Public if there is contract secrecy? Why should we strust the potions produced by people who refuse to answer quesitions, and through agreements we're not required to read? Example articles:

Jan 19, 2024: Meanwhile in Canada: Motion to Release Copy of Medicago COVID Vaccine Contracts to Public Voted Down by Liberals, NDP MPs
Jan 18, 2024: European Parliament votes to keep secret Pfizer contracts withheld from public
December 18, 2022: Israeli Ministry of Health claimed in court they were unable to locate a signed agreement with Pfizer
October 11, 2022: Press Conference After Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla Refused to Answer in Front of European Parliament)
June 11, 2021: Canada

Environment Cost Indifference: It is suspicious that though the environment was considered and even officially declared an emergency before the pandemic, and government orders were strict to eliminate, for example, plastic bags from grocery stores at that time, suddenly the environmental impact of the COVID orders subjugated all concern for the environment, including actually reversing some environmental mandates, and this was not questioned. For example:
1. Video: 129 billion mask found in the oceans worldwide!
2. The sudden return of plastic bags to grocery stores!
3. the tremendous increase to landfill by disposable masks.
Financial Cost Indifference: It's very strange that Governments would not complain about the tremendous costs of their war on COVID, despite shortage of money being the dominant reason for limitations or reductions on social spending in the past and in virtually all other areas. Even though money was always a limitation in protecting the Public in all other social spending, it was no limitation regarding the war on COVID.

Those costs are enormous, including:
1. COVID testing (usually at many thousands of COVID tests per day),
2. vaccines and their administration (even with requirements to keep refrigerated at -70 degrees celsius governments never complained it was impractical)
3. grants to vaccine manufacturers (they didn't hesitate to give generous grants to vaccine manufacturers, for nothing in return, and have to pay the same companies for the vaccines which resulted)
4. the erection of temporary field hospitals: many of which were not used at all for even a single patient
5. the erection of new or enhanced screening at not only international border entry, but domestic borders also
6. personal protective equipment: both new equipment for workers who never needed any before, and enhanced equipment for medical workers
7. financial subsidy programs for businesses and workers (including food, housing, and discretionary income: even to pay people to stay home), and most of all,
8. to lock down entire economies (strangling not only society but tax revenue).
9. hospitalization at astronomical cost, except to use it as an argument for vilifying unvaccinated people or instituting new social restrictions.
Why was money no object only to fight the war on COVID, when there are so many other threats to human life, many of which far more obvious than the invisible threat of a virus? For example, if costs were no object to protect the Public, we could have done the Public good in so many other needed ways, including: cancelling taxes, income tax debt forgiveness, universal healthcare (at a high level of service not stripped down), universal dental care, universal government-paid insurance and/or utility services, ending homlessness, ending world hunger (for a tiny fraction of the cost of what's spent on COVID).
Astronomical Fines: Fines severe enough to financially destroy a person or business were set by Government for breaching COVID social restriction orders, to coerce businesses and individuals into obedience to any order, no matter how ridiculous. Some of these fines are discussed in the following references:

Article: $500 to $100,000 fines for ignoring social distancing in Brampton
Article: What are the fines for breaking COVID-19 rules in Ontario?
Article: 10 States Where You Will Be Fined for Not Social Distancing
Article: Nova Scotia to impose heftier fines on those who violate COVID-19 health orders
Government of Victoria, Australia: Fines, enforcement and reporting
Video: Victoria's pandemic law fines are 'astronomical

Misleading Public Portrayal and/or Unhelpful Restriction of Ivermectin:

It should have made complete medical sense, in the earliest days of the pandemic, that when faced with a new viral threat, and a vaccine not hoped to be available for 18 months, and even then might not succeed to be created (as none succeeded for SARS), and with people dying right now and the virus spreading now, that the most rational thing to do would have been to look through our existing list of (many) drugs for anything that might help us: even if to just slow the virus down a little, even while we wait for a vaccine? Yet our officials found nothing else that would help us, insisting a vaccine was the only way (apparently howeverlong it took and howevermuch it costed and whatever it contained) and lockdowns were the only effective remedy until a vaccine was available.
Ivermectin has been attracting headlines, in research articles and news, since at least the early days of the pandemic, as potentially or definitely successful against either RNA viruses or COVID-19 specifically. Here are some of them:

Aug 12, 2023: FDA Drops Ivermectin Bombshell
Video: The Untold Story of a ‘Miracle Drug’
Nov 21 2022: The Truth About Ivermectin
October 28, 2022: Mailbag bombshell: The NFL is giving their players IVERMECTIN as a prophylactic AND to prevent “positive” COVID tests
Doctors sue FDA for campaigning against use of ivermectin to treat COVID-19
Here is a University of Oxford article on an ivermectin study there, which has this line in the introductory paragraphs: "Ivermectin is a safe, broad spectrum antiparasitic drug which is in wide use globally to treat parasitic infections."
Research Articles (by date):

Published on paper in May 2020 but available online 03 March 2020: The broad spectrum antiviral ivermectin targets the host nuclear transport importin α/β1 heterodimer. The last line of the abstract says, "Since it is FDA approved for parasitic indications, ivermectin merits closer consideration as a broad spectrum antiviral of interest. "
Published online 2020 Dec 2: A five-day course of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19 may reduce the duration of illness
Published online 2021 May 26 (since retracted): Effects of a Single Dose of Ivermectin on Viral and Clinical Outcomes in Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Infected Subjects: A Pilot Clinical Trial in Lebanon
2021 Jan 10: Ivermectin: an award-winning drug with expected antiviral activity against COVID-19
June 17, 2021: Antiviral effect of high-dose ivermectin in adults with COVID-19: A proof-of-concept randomized trial. One quote from this one, near the top: "Ivermectin (IVM), a macrocyclic lactone with a wide anti-parasitary spectrum, has shown potent activity against SARS-CoV-2 in vitro."
2021 Aug 3: Ivermectin: a multifaceted drug of Nobel prize-honoured distinction with indicated efficacy against a new global scourge, COVID-19

News Articles (by date):

September 29, 2020: Doctors cure 6,000 patients with Covid-19 with Ivermectin
December 8, 2020: Physician Tells Senate, Ivermectin Is a COVID 'Wonder Drug;' 'If You Take It, You Will Not Get Sick'
April 30, 2021: Doctor Defends ‘80 Clinical Studies’ Showing Ivermectin is ‘89% Effective’ at Preventing COVID
June 1, 2021: Ivermectin obliterates 97 percent of Delhi cases
September 9, 2021: STUDY: Ivermectin is a “broad spectrum antiviral of interest” for humans
September 14, 2021: Australia’s murder regime government bans ivermectin prescriptions for covid in order to maximize covid casualties
September 15, 2021: Trust the Science: The Evidence for Ivermectin and COVID-19
September 19, 2021: Explosive! India State of 241 MILLION People Declared COVID-Free After Government Promotes Ivermectin
September 20, 2021: Indian state with 240 million people completely eradicated covid with ivermectin
September 28, 2021: Widespread ivermectin use has caused a 97% drop in coronavirus cases in Delhi, India
Oct 05, 2021: Top Israeli Doctor Says Ivermectin ‘Really Has Antiviral Activities’, Urges More Research As Potential COVID Treatment
Nov 30, 2021: Father is Saved by His Daughter After Hospital Vehemently Opposes Ivermectin Treatment, Even Though He Was Almost Dead
Dec 13, 2021: Brazilian City Cuts Hospitalizations and Mortality Rates in Half After Implementing Ivermectin as Prophylaxis for COVID
January 10, 2022: Twitter complicit in GENOCIDE by censoring large-scale study revealing ivermectin can prevent 68% of covid deaths
January 12, 2022: Leaked military documents show that ivermectin “works throughout all phases” of covid… so why has the medical establishment SUPPRESSED it for two years?

Have you noticed that we suddenly stopped hearing about COVID explosion in India around the same time these articles reported success there?
So why didn't our trusted authorities tell us about it, to give us hope, and save lives? Actually they did tell us about ivermectin: our trusted officials warned us that it was a horse-deworming drug which fools were killing themselves with. In fact, it's alleged that the American Medical Association has been trying to have it banned (see here) so we won't have access to it, because they care so much about free choice and our safety. Here are official pages on that:

From the World Health Organziation (WHO): WHO advises that ivermectin only be used to treat COVID-19 within clinical trials
From the Food and Drug Administration (FDA): Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19. It inludes the quote, "Currently available data do not show ivermectin is effective against COVID-19. Clinical trials assessing ivermectin tablets for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19 in people are ongoing". Really. 'Cause there's plenty of data showing ivermectin is effective against COVID-19. How can you guys rush vaccine approvals despite being a fundamentally new technology, in less than a year from the time the virus was discovered, and all those trials, but you can't finish your ivermectin trials in 2 years?
Wikipedia's page on ivermectin says, "During the COVID-19 pandemic, misinformation has been widely spread claiming that ivermectin is beneficial for treating and preventing COVID-19." Really...
From the American Medical Association: Why ivermectin should not be used to prevent or treat COVID-19. It includes the quote: "The CDC also cautioned about the risk of severe illness caused by ivermectin, which was seen in increased calls to poison centers." Perhaps true, but nobody overdoses with other drugs?
From Health Canada: Public advisory: Ivermectin not authorized to prevent or treat COVID-19; may cause serious health problems

A UK study on Ivermectin was interrupted citing supply problems which are later confirmed to not exist. Please see article:
No Supply Issues With Ivermectin: Pharmaceutical Supplying PRINCIPLE Oxford Trial

If you depend on a study to judge if ivermectin is a worthwhile treatment for COVID, and you can't complete the study, then you can't approve ivermectin for widespread use!

Lack of Promotion of Vitamin D. This should have been obvious. Vitamin D is readily available, cheap to supplement, critical for our immune system, humans are prone to its deficiency (especially in the winter, unless you live near the equator), and it's been proven to be so important to resist COVID-19 infection that vitamin D levels are shown to be a reliable predictor of COVID-19 patient outcomes. Why should we have waited for vaccines when we had this all along? Example references are:
1. May 7, 2022: Preventable Deaths and Vitamin D3
2. CAN VITAMIN D PREVENT COVID DEATHS?
3. Vitamin D supplements might have saved thousands of Americans from dying with COVID
4. Vitamin D Deficiency Linked to Severe, Deadly COVID-19: Study
5. Israeli research: Vaccines don’t prevent serious COVID-19, but Vitamin D does. This article inludes this statement: "the impact of vitamin D was so strong that they could actually predict just how well infected patients would fare simply by looking at their ages and vitamin D levels"
6. video: Vitamin D And COVID - 19
7. video: The importance of Vitamin D to build up your GOD given natural immune system!
Vitamin D supplements are relatively very safe, very cheap (one of the cheapest pills on the market), widely available (even many grocery stores have it), and we wouldn't have had to wait for it. Rather they told us to wait 18 months for a vaccine, and then mandated the vaccine, and then admitted it doesn't make you immune or save you from dying from the virus. But there's simply no money to be made off of advocating vitamin D.
Finding money but only for COVID: Government chronically underfunding medical services (not to mention other life-saving services such as to combat domestic homelessness and hunger), while having no limit of money for COVID vaccination programs and never complaining about that cost. For example, in Ontario, which enjoys a universal health care program, that program now does not pay for:

basic optometrist eye exams: the kind legally required, for example, to get a new pair of eyeglasses
lots of other vital stuff not covered: dental, drugs (unless in hospital), eyeglasses
You even have to pay part or all of your ambulance fee.
Long-term care (nursing) homes are still underfunded, despite the mass deaths there since COVID began and all government assurances

Suspicious Deaths of Prominent Figures who spoke out against the official narrative: These include:

Dr. Andreas Noack, who died the same day as he posted his video exposing the dangers of graphene hydroxide allegedly in the vaccines.
Dr. Kary Mullis, the inventor of the PCR test and an outspoken critic of Dr. Fauci
Doctor Who Was Reporting On Vaccine Side Effects On pregnant Mothers Disappeared In Canada

Unreasonable timeframe of the detection of the Omicron variant: The PCR test is an absolutely RNA/DNA-sequence specific test, for which you absolutely must know the sequence of the RNA/DNA you're testing for before you can design and use this test. Here is an article on the process of a COVID PCR test, one that's already set up, and why it takes time. Although the core reaction can finish in 6 hours, the process in terms of getting results on a patient in practice can take much longer. So to get a test out for a new variant: first you must somehow identify that a new variant exists, then you need to isolate it, then you need to sequence its RNA/DNA, then a group of experts decide which parts of the sequence to select for the new PCR test, then they manufacture those priming sequences in physical DNA, then it must be marketed to health authorities for purchase, then they must decide to purchase, and then it must be physically distributed to test labs to be able to test the Public for Omicron, right? Considering that the existence of the Omicron variant was only reported to the WHO on 24 November, and reported to the world by the WHO on 26 November, is it reasonable that, over the weekend, by Sunday 28 November, governments around the world were already publicly confirming their first Omicron cases (presumably after testing many people)? For example please see these articles:

28 Novenber, 2021:Canada finds first cases of Omicron COVID-19 variant in Ontario. Here’s what we know
Sun 28 Nov 2021: Covid update: Australia confirms first Omicron cases
Nov. 28, 2021: Omicron Covid-19 Cases Detected in U.K., Australia and Italy

No, it's not reasonable and a child could see it. That's probably why a few articles have surfaced explaining that health officials are using the standard COVID-19 PCR tests to somehow detect the new Omicron variant. As this article explains, (and even the official WHO news release mentions in less detail), is that officials are using the standard COVID-19 PCR test, which tests for three gene sequences, this way:

If a person matches all three virus sequence segments they have COVID.
If a person matches two of three, they are now presumed to have Omicron COVID.

the test standard COVID-19 test cannot tell variants apart

Health officials have many incentives to use this shortcut, including:

Not having to purchase new PCR test kits or run multiple tests for one patient.
Being able to create some kind of domestic data regarding Omicron without delay, to feed the curiosity of the Public.
Elevating COVID case counts with results by including two-of-three positive results, which formerly would have been inconclusive, in the positive case counts (elevated COVID case numbers politically empowers health officials, and their bosses, and the health industry).
Artificially inflating Omicron numbers by failing to distinguish it from the other variants which show up that way, and by using an even less specific (two of three sequences) test than the standard COVID test (three of three sequences) was designed to be. This is besides the fact that the standard PCR test, as implemented in practice for COVID testing, has been attacked as extremely inaccurate in the first place (not due to the sequences used but due to being run at too many amplification cycles).

However shouldn't accuracy be of paramount importance, since the Omicron scare is being used to usher in a new round of mask and social distancing mandates, and lockdown threats, and booster shots, based on few, or in some regions even no Omicron cases? Even if we believe these social restrictions are ethical based on a confirmed threat, is it ethical to enforce them based on data we know isn't dependable?

Ultimately, although the Omicron variant seems real, the data on its spread is a lie used to justify more Government powers and human rights forfeitures. Virtually no one is actually doing the direct genetic sequencing per patient sample required to detect Omicron. Instead they are simply reclassifying formerly inconclusive COVID test restuls as 'Omicron variant', apprently to justify the ongoing state of emergency social restrictions and Government overpowerment.

There is a theory circulating that Omicron is also a way to reclassify vaccine harm as being due to COVID. That theory is certainly more reasonable than the data presented to the public on Omicron.

UPDATE 30 Nov 2021: The government of British Columbia (Canada), through health officer Dr. Bonnie Henry, according to this article, assured the Public on 30 November that they used Whole Genome Sequencing (WGS) to confirm their first case of Omicron virus, adding that they do WGS on 'every COVID-19 infection associated with a recent traveller as well as a proportion of all new cases'. This article from Ontario (Canada), shows Ontario's health officials using remarkably similar (scripted?) language to announce Ontario's first case to the world 28 Nov: just two days after existence of the variant was announced by the WHO and four days after its discovery in South Africa.

Even more impressive, the UK claims to have done the genome sequening 'overnight' Friday night (see this official UK government press release) and thereby publicly announced a confirmed case 27 Nov: just one day after the variant's existence was announced to the world.

Impressed with such aggressive use of this touted technology, it might seem that it makes our challenge of Omicron reporting invalid.

However after applying the power of common sense to the problem, it is practically impossible that WGS was used to detect Omicron this fast, because:

Public officials in our society don't have a habit of reacting that fast to change, not even to save local lives. For example, after being officially informed of the COVID-19 outbreak in China, it took the WHO a full month (December 31, 2019 to January 31, 2020) to declare it a Public Health Emergency of International Concern, months (December 31, 2019 to March 11, 2020) to declare it a pandemic (see timeline here), and most governments took the same time to start countermeasures. Similarly, apparently due to bureaucracy, the USA was far too slow to roll out working COVID-19 test kids to labs around the country in the earliest stages of the pandemic when they were most needed (see here).
Whatever the emergency capabilities, these labs couldn't have expected to be ready and staffed to race with this unexpected discovery.
The concept of WGS is too much work to be feasible to perform for many people or perform in a short time even for one sample. The Conneticut Department of Public Health on this official document, which discusses modern WGS in the context of testing for COVID-19 (currently in its April 14, 2021 version and downloadable off of this official webpage) that 'WGS is a labor-intensive process that usually takes at least one week, and sometimes more, to complete'. So it's still not enough time from the announcement of the South African discovery of the virus to the world on 26 November for there to be any cases confimed by WGS until at least one week later (3 December), even if they started work immediately following the announcement and even if the first sample they tested as a positive for this still-rare variant.
Since no one can know who has the variant until the test is completed, the lab wouldn't be able to concentrate focus on just one sample but would be forced to test many samples to detect that one first Omicron case. In the two examples, above, of the Canadian Omicron first cases, announced 28 and 30 November, both of them were linked to travel from Nigeria. That's striking because Omicron was discovered in South Africa just a few days before, and Nigeria is approximately 6,000 km away from there. If they're testing arrivals to the Canada from within a 6,000 km radius from South Africa, that's a very great amount of people and a ridiculous amount of samples to try to rush WGS on.
It's also nonsense to believe that officials are actually doing these labour-intensive tests on a large proportion of the existing public tests as a matter of established ongoing policy as they claim, even if we ignore the costs of time and money. Evidence of it being a lie is in the claim that WGS was done 'overnight' after the Omicron announcemnt to detect the first such case in the UK. It doesn't make sense that they would suddenly need new samples tested to find Omicron if they were routinely doing WGS on many samples public samples routinely already, and therefore would already have accumulated a huge database of COVID genome sequences from the UK patient population already, and only needed to run a quick computer search for the Omicron sequence on the existing database. After all, according to the WHO official announcement on Omicron, the first positive case was from a sample collected 9 November, 2021. That means Omicron was in the population in South Africa from that time at latest. That means that all samples colllected from travellers arriving in the UK from 9 November, 2021 and after would be highly relevant to screening for Omicron. If they were doing WGS all the time on public samples, they would finished and have at their fingertips sequencing results on plenty of samples collected on after 9 November already. They didn't need to rush any new samples 'overnight' after the announcement 26 November as they pretend. It's just sensationalism.
There is also a question of motive to falsify data. Since data showing any increased spread of COVID or its variants strongly empowers government and health officials with 'emergency' powers to suspend human rights and do virtually whatever they want, there is a strong incentive for them to falsify this data in the direction of increased scare. Specifically the announcement of Omicron was immediately followed by officials using it as justification for renewed social restrictions even on populations mostly or entirely vaccinated.

Omicron case announcement seems to be a worldwide public lie designed to quickly ride the momentum of hysteria over Omicron by very soon following the announcement of its existence with a demonstratably false announcement of its cases in local communities. Simply put, Omicron is a justification for Governments to hold onto dictatorial emergency powers they should normally give up as the crisis subsides, by simply not allowing the crisis to subside.

If officials would lie about Omicron, to scare the public not only unnecessarily but falsely, in an attempt to gain (or maintain excessive) power, they are not only liars, but by definition, terrorists. Also much of the entire crisis, which rests from its beginning on trust of official announcements of virus spread and management, could also be a lie.

INCONSISTENT CONCERN FOR LIFE: The basic premise of Government 'emergency'-level reaction, powers, and social restrictions virtually worldwide, is that Government cares so much about protecting human life that it will stop at nothing to protect it.

Unfortunately that idea is pathetically inconsistent with how Government has behaved in the past and present, even how they handled the COVID crisis, which basically shows a shocking disregard for human life in their attitude, and proves that some other motive for their COVID-crisis internventions must be the real one. Please consider:

In the Past:

Total failure to stop the genocide in Rwanda in the 1994, even though the world had veteran UN troops already there who could very easily have disrupted the fragile (not well liked or supported) villainous movement with minimal force, and were more than willing to do so, but instead we ordered them to stand down. Lives lost: approximately a million.
Indifference to allow the USA to invade Iraq in 2003, on allegations Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, evidence for which even the USA could not produce and wasn't expected to. Lives lost: hundreds of thousands; maybe millions.
Arbitrary drone strikes, ie. assasination from the air, becoming accepted foreign policy in nations who can't fight back.

Life-Threatening Things Government Ignores or Promotes Today:

Euthanasia: promoted as a right
Homelessness
Hunger: Actually a tiny fraction of what was spent on COVID (and didn't even work) would have certainly ended world hunger.
Abortion: killing children promoted as a right and often not only legalised but funded by Government
Smoking, Alcohol, and Marijuana: harmful recreations not only promoted as a right but often sold by or licensed and directly profited from by Government
Violent or Dangerous Sports
Prenatal Drug Use: they allow pregnant mothers to consume alcohol, cigarettes, and hard drugs, ignoring the great risk of harm to the developing baby.
Other Diseases: Out of all the other diseases in the world, we're not locking down for them.
Pharmaceutical Overdoses: Many people are dying from legal drugs, not to mention vaccines, but we're not locking down for those, either. In fact, it's ignored.

In the Present Crisis:

how come the same governments always have trouble finding money for public healthcare, but found no limit of money for COVID measures, besides direct expenes, even locking down the entire economy?
why did officials show no cognisence of any level of harm at which vaccinations should be stopped, not even when many experts are calling for exactly that (article here)? Other products are recalled with one death, but this one is killing in the many thousands, but there is no discussion of recall or verbal admission of the deaths.
What life-saving justification was there for Government-ordered restrictions for hospitals to suspend treatment for many other medical needs besides COVID treatment, under the guise of protecting capacity to deal with COVID. For example, even heart and cancer surgeries were delayed if they were not considered an emergency.
Special exemptions for abortion. Abortion procedures were never restricted in the lockdowns but always deemed 'essential'.
Preventing people's livelihood is a threat to life. So how could Government justify as helping to supposedly save lives by:

Callous termination of the employment of people who refuse COVID vaccines, even though it is apparently their livelihood to depend on, and even if they are in healthcare professions which the public heavily depends on right now.
Instituting requirements for all new hires to be 'fully vaccinated' against COVID-19.
Otherwise interrupting the ability of many people to earn a living, affecting the very poor the most.
Detention of people quarantined, for reasons of COVID, together in such a way that it increases the risk for them to catch COVID from other suspects if they don't have it already.

Mask-wearing orders should have been rejected as without medical benefit, medically dangerous, and environmentally polluting. Consider:

Ordering wearing of masks but not helping with the cost, not even for those in the world so poor they cannot afford food, that they must provide their own masks though they cannot afford food, was cruel.
Ordering wearing of masks, for supposed medical safety (from inhaling the virus), while at the same time insisting that the masks must not be medical grade, and therefore of no medical protection, was obvious nonsense (or should have been obvious), revealing non-medical-intentions behind these orders. Some people have actually been punished by authorities for wearing a medical-grade mask instead of a useless one. There was a hint, especially early on, that the high-grade masks were in short supply and needed to protect supply for medical professionals, but there is no shortage: we can have whatever kinds of masks we want, as so many companies are making them, to cash in on the forced demand, that even car and beer manufacturers have re-tooled their factories to get in on the action.
Ordering wearing of masks, for supposed medical safety (to act as a clean air filter on our face), while giving no requirement or guidance on the care, cleanliness, washing, or replacement of those masks, even though the vast majority of the Public could not be expected to have experience with them, obviously would lead to worsening breathing-air quality. Like witih most sanitary products, using them when they are new is great, but if we re-use the same thing indefinitely without washing it, it's worse than using nothing. Failing to replace or wash masks in a timely way would only accumulate filth for us to breathe in constantly far worse than having no mask.
Nothing was said about the filters on our HVAC systems, an improvement of which would have made a real difference. Indoor air quality would have been made medically far safer with no human rights infringements by simply providing all residential and high-traffic buildings with medical-grade air filters for their existing HVAC systems. This would normally not require a new system, just a better version of the disposable filter they already keep changing regularly, and changing it more often. There would be a cost, but way less costly than lockdowns (which include inability to earn an income).

Nonsense Orders: Many of the social restrictions ordered under the guise of safety are such total nonsense that any person with common sense, even if not trained in medicine, should have realized that they were absolutely useless harassments of the Public in a crass display of authoritarian power and rejected them and the entire scamdemic. Unfortunately we chose to put trust in experts rather than common sense. Along similar thinking, this article, for example, discusses the theory that the artibrary rules are designed to create criminals, by mere declaration, out of peaceful citizens, to give government more power to badger people. Regardless of that article, examples of the nonsense ways we were ordered around, and allowed it, include:

Mandatory Non-Medical Mask Mandates: We were ordered to wear masks while in all indoor public places, except explicitly told that the masks must NOT be medical-grade masks. We might as well have worn them on our necks, or any other bodypart, as the pores on non-medical, such as cloth or surgical, masks are big enough to see easily with the naked eye, and therefore far too big to obstruct a virus (especially an airborne virus), which is far too small to see with the naked eye or be trapped by all but the best filtration systems. Here is a video comparing the size of various viruses, including COVID-19 to surgical and fabric masks.
Also, we were never even told to replace or wash them, so that they wouldn't accumulate filth and make things worse than wearing no mask.

As time went on the medical deception of the masks became clear: 10/6/2023 'Voice of CDC' Journal Made Unsubstantiated Claims About Masking Against COVID-19: Pre-Proofed Study

Dangerous and Unnecessary Sex Guidance: While insisting that the virus is so deadly that we must lock down our societies, not go to Church, not buy anything non-essential, not entertain anyone outside our household, keep 2m/6' distance from everyone, and be barred even from visiting our elderly parent, the Government of Canada (on their official website here and tweeted since 2 Sept 2020 as shown in article here) has announced an exception: sex with anyone outside your household circle is OK so long as you wear a mask (not even mentioning the word 'condom' once on the page). Besides being an obvious breech of the the social distancing rule, and unprotected sex never before seen as safe from contagion, it is absolutely insane to think that it is not acceptable to pray near a stranger in Church, or to purchase a can of paint in a hardware store, because it might spread the virus, but it is somehow safe to have unprotected sex with any stranger you want, with as many different strangers you want, and as many times as you want, so long as you wear a mask doing it? The new version of the page says that ensuring the other person is vaccinated is 'recommended'.

Recommended!? You mean that a vaccine is mandatory to sit down at a table in a restaurant, even if you are the only one there, but to have UNPROTECTED SEX WITH COMPLETE STRANGERS, so long as you wear a mask, is perfectly safe? That's not all. The British Columbia health department officially advocates the use of 'glory holes' during COVID-19 to 'stay safe' (article here). So, at a time of social restrictions so severe you can't leave your house, oral sex with an UNSEEN stranger is safe!?

Here's a related article: Covid-crazed Leader of New Zealand Jacinda Ardern announces that 25-person sex orgies can now resume “safely”

This is roll-on-the-floor ridiculous but it is what our highest government health officials have published in writing as guidance in the most official places. At what point do we realize that this is all nonsense?
Close-Quarters Social Distancing: Really this 6-foot number had no scientific basis in the first place, and is far from a hard-and-fast rule but more more a useless measure of our unnecessary suffering. Actually we knew since at least April 2020 (see here) that if we want to use social distancing, it has to be at least 10 meters (33 feet) to be effective: 2 meters or 6 feet would actually put us at risk!
In fact, in the earliest months of the crisis (start of 2020), there were videos published reportedly showing Chinese Government workers in China welding people shut into apartment buildings, presumably for their 'safety' (that word being used to justify all human rights violations now).
Protecting access to abortion procedures during lockdown as 'essential' while, restricting, by Government order whether they had capacity or not, many other surgeries (including many heart and cancer surgeries: anything not an immediate life threat). Here is an article from Canada.
The Canadian federal government lifting the PCR (COVID) test requirements for fully vaccinated travellers returning to Canada if the trips were short (less than 72 hours): as if short trips to another country protect one from being exposed from viruses there (article here).
Keeping alcohol stores open during lockdown as 'essential' while closing the hardware stores.
Restricting what items customers can buy, even within the same store, by arbitrarily classifying certain items as 'non-essential' (article here): as though the virus will attack if you put some things in your cart but not others.
Orders that we can go to the pub but not to work (article here).

Have the experts and officials mislead us, in ways they should realise, concerning COVID? Yes. Examples include:

Doug Ford, the premier of Ontario, publicly stating he would not initiate proof of vaccination requirements, and then doing exactly that a few weeks later.
We being told that vaccines are 'safe and effective', as if there are NO adverse effects, while numbers of adverse effects are posted by official sources in the thousands.
We being promised safety as a reason to get the COVID-19 'vaccine', only to find out afterwards that we can still be infected and infect others, and may still need to wear masks and social distance.
Not being informed before the first 'vaccine' dose that these are designed to go on with unending booster shots.
In the earliest days of the outbreak, being told that the virus is no significant threat to us here, and then suddenly locked down a short time later.
Lockdown orders issued by public officials were to end at a specific time, strictly promised as only 2 weeks initially, but they broke the deal by extending it more and more, until they started to use extensions and more lockdowns as a threat if we are not obedient.

Have officials actually attacked the Public or Nation under the guise of protecting it? Yes, but these attacks have been accepted as somehow justified for safety.

The lockdowns and human rights suspensions ordered on the Public, in both theory and in enforcement, are a clear destruction of our democracy and permanent qualiy of life, and this should not be accepted.
An example article is COVID Responses Defy Canadian Constitution, Says Last Living Architect of 1982 Legal Framework
How afraid are we of an invisible threat that we would accept the destruction of our society and nation as 'safety'?
Jeannette Young, the Chief Health Officer of Queensland, Australia, announced that they [the Government] "will be bringing in virus through the borders in vaccinated people" [which just shows how ineffective the vaccine is] ..."so [meaning so it will cause to happen] every single Queenslander is going to get exposed to the COVID-19 virus and will get infected", for which reason, as her threat goes, the unvaccinated should get the vaccine to be safe.
So they're actually bringing in virus to attack everyone especially unvaccinated people.
Clearly this government cares far more about obedience to vaccine orders than Public health if they're going to threaten the unvaccinated with deliberate exposure to the virus. See an article on it here and the video here.
It's also worth noting that a later segment of the same video shows another official (Danial Andrews, Premier of the state of Victoria, Australia) insisting, as per usual, that the vaccine is the only possible protection from the virus (as if there is no such thing as a human immune system).

Other examples of politicians breaking or even doing the exact opposite of what they promised: There's so many that websites have sprung up trying to track them all, such as Politifact. One quick example is President Barack Obama's failed promise to close the detention facility at Guantanamo.
Other examples of politicians and/or experts building up a false responsible party for a false scare: How about the 2003 USA invasion of Iraq, who had never even threatened the USA, based on the never-substantiated accusation that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction?
Other examples of politicians and/or experts building up a false responsible party as a misinterpretation of a true scary event: commonly called 'false flag' operations, this tactic has an official entry in military manuals, and historically includes Hitler's public blaming of Poland on a radio station attack he himself ordered, as well as the 9/11 attacks for which the physical evidence does not match the official story or the blaming on middle-Eastern terrorists living in caves, or the but a terrible lie. See for example Architects and Engineers for Truth and Citizen Investigation Team. After all, how could two relatively light (and therefore fragile) planes destroy three steel and concrete skyscrapers from top to bottom, despite that the buildings were designed to withstand such an impact? And where were the plane fragments ... such as a broken wing or engine ... there or at the Pentagon? Few people seem to care now, seemingly based on an acceptance that governments are liars. Or maybe it's just easier to trust than think.
But aren't politicians' betrayals so common that it's an accepted part of the profession, and these behaviours should be expected enough that even mentioning them is useless? After all, our news agencies have apparently grown so accustomed to these things that they have developed many euphamisms to report such behaviour when they occur in politicians, such as 'flip-flop', 'U-turn', 'walk back', 'doozie', or 'reversal' rather than using words such as 'lie' or 'betrayal' (which we still use those terms in our personal relationships for similar things). Therefore anyone could easily deflect these allegations as though irrelevant, stating that we know politicians are liars so why does it matter now to remind us? It matters because the COVID crisis is propagated on tremendous trust of Government and the data they present to the public and the experts they appoint to interpret that data and distill it into recommendations for Government to act on. Based on trust alone, rather than medical sense or precedent, we made the wearing of non-medical masks mandtory in most social settings, and locked-down our entire society, even though we were almost entirely healthy people, and allowed our human rights, previously inalienable, to become arbitrary, and we trusted Government decisions to extend or renew these orders at any time at their own discretion, based on the 'data', for our 'safety'. Furthermore, on trust we accepted injections as the primary way to defend ourselves from the virus, even the young for whom the virus is no significant threat, and for which injection long-term effects cannot possibly be known yet, based solely on literally blind trust of Government and their appointed experts. We supported the mandating of these injections, and we were angry with those few in our society who dared to question or not automatically trust these orders as 'conspiracy theorists'. But is it logical to blame someone for distrusting politicians when we also admit that politicians have a proven tendency, an an accepted part of the profession, to blatantly lie or otherwise betray the public? Rather it would be logical to distrust Government and their appointed experts until proven otherwise, and applaud those who remind us to not trust Government automatically. We have already seen many examples where many government officials and experts were wrong and, assuming they knew what they were talking about, lied. Exactly how many such examples does it take before we stop automatically trusting these people?
Mandatory COVID Masks bearing Nano-Graphene: Isn't it suspicious, that at this time of allegations of graphene inclusion in the vaccines, nano-graphene has been detected in some COVID masks? Isn't it equally suspicious, that, discovering this, Health Canada would at first recall these masks and then later allow them? Here is the article from a mainstream Canadian news source.
Many Practicing Medical Professional Refusals of the COVID 'Vaccines': If the the COVID 'vaccines' are so wonderful, and there is full disclosure to the Public on them, then why would so many physicians and nurses, ie. those with frequently recurring eyewitness experience of the effects of both COVID and the COVID 'vaccines', rather lose their (respected, reliable, hard-won, and high-paying) jobs, with little hope of working elsewhere, than accept these 'vaccines'? How can they explain that to their dependent families?

Example articles follow, below, but what is critical to realize is that although the articles offer theoretical reasons to the Public for the refusals, such as the vaccine development being rushed, or the right to choose, they completely ignore the elephant in the room: that whether they admit it or not, or it's included in the news stories or not, by virtue of their job, these people have by far the most first-hand experience with both COVID and the vaccines than anyone else. These physicians and nurses are actually treating patients, ie. practicing medical professionals, unlike many of the paper-degree-only physicians and appointed officials, and in some cases actors, hand-picked and presented to us on the news to trust and obey. Offering only theoretical reasons, rather than any experiential ones, for the refusal of such experienced people is suspicious. Practice is worth even more than theory (which is why we do experiments), and these are the people that have that practical experience with these issues and a lot of it.

No matter what the television paper-degree-only medical professionals say, or what reasons are in the public news for the COVID vaccine refusals of the practicing medical professionals, the refusal is more credible than the recommendation because of the experience.

That doesn't necessarily mean that what the refusers are doing is for the Public good, as many if not the vast majority of them probably spend their days recommending and administering the COVID vaccines.

This insane article actually goes so far as to profess that the reason for the healthcare worker refusal of the COVID vaccines is that healthcare workers are "like everyone else" and that "Health Workers Aren't Immune To Vaccine Misinformation". Wrong. Again, healthcare workers have more first-hand experience with the real-life effects of both COVID and the COVID vaccines than anyone else. They know far more about this than just theory, and so reporting only theoretical reasons for their refusal, or calling them 'misinformed' (as though they need more theory to judge reality), is very suspicious.

Why would any medical professionals take the vaccine if there was something wrong with it? First of all, officials mandate it, so you could lose your hard-won livelihood and have no way to support your family. Second, Government and mainstream news and conventional medical establishment is strongly pro-COVID-vaccine, and it takes time for enough experience in their practice to build up to question these things strongly enough to refuse: by that time they're probably vaccinated. Also, many people never think for themselves at all, and high education doesn't encourage it. The medical industry also depends on internal cooperation: generally speaking, going against convention in the medical profession risks one's medical license, and risks very expensive lawsuits in this high-stakes industry. Only another medical professional can effectively challenge a medical professional, and medical principles are dictated by a central authority (such as the regional college of physicians) rather than left to each physician to decide. You don't want to be doing something or saying something that's outside medical convention, because that makes it wrong, ie. malpractice, in a court of law. If a court case does come up, you're also far more secure if you can show that other medical physicians you work with were in agreement with you at all times. Sticking with convention and in agreement with your fellow medical professionals is where security lies in the medical industry.

Regardless, if a significant number of medical professionals would refuse the COVID vaccines for themselves, despite it being free, despite them recommending and administering it to people, despite having to go against the medical convention their profession depends on, and despite losing their hard-won career and means to support themselves and their family, and since they're the most experienced with this, there is probably something wrong with the vaccines no matter what they say.

Widespread reports of the Public, and subordinate officials, calling for Government-imposed lockdowns and other social restrictions. These reports typically immediately preceded the same actual orders, and gave the appearance that the Government wasn't dictating these things so much as graciously granting the social restrictions we were apparently begging for.

Is it reasonable to believe that people would beg to be restricted, when they could restrict themselves easily by their own free choice?

Yet we were lead to believe this. Example news articles include:

Dec 15, 2021: Covid bombshell as Britons overwhelmingly SUPPORT calls for Christmas lockdown. We are supposed to believe that the Public demands to be locked down over Christmas?
4 Dec, 2021: Over half of Germans want lockdown for all – poll
Apr 16, 2021: COVID-19: Poll suggests majority in B.C. want vaccine proof required for travel
April 1, 2021: Toronto mayor John Tory in full support of province-wide lockdown. This mayor wants his city locked down?
Sep 18, 2020: 75% of Canadians approve of another coronavirus shutdown if second wave hits: Ipsos

The Epoch Times has published a timeline (see here) with many suspicious events.
It is just too suspicious that the vaccines have been proven to to be poorly or even totally ineffective (this study found no difference in viral load between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients), and yet Governments would keep pushing vaccines, and punishments for the unvaccinated, aggressively. This indicates surely another reason for vaccination than a medically protective one.
Not Share the Surplus?If this is all about saving lives, how come vaccine manufacturers and Governments would agree, in the vaccine purchase contracts, to not share surplus doses with other countries? As this article from Vanity Fair puts it, “DoD did attempt to negotiate terms that would allow the use of vaccine doses outside the U.S., but in some cases, the vaccine manufacturers refused.”
Euphamisms for Righteousness? If vaccine coercion is moral, why do we need to stop using the word 'mandates' in favour of more 'palatable' terms? What's wrong with using terms which imply coercion to describe coercion, if it is a moral thing to do? Why do we need euphamisms for good things? Article: Fauci pushes new word for 'mandates,'
Failure of authorities, such as the CDC or the vaccine manufacturers, to reasonably investigate COVID vaccine deaths or injuries. Example articles include:

Why can’t anyone explain how these 14 kids died after getting vaccinated?

Weak and contested reasons for mandating subsequent booster shots of the vaccines. Example article: Tucker Carlson: This is proof Biden and his lackeys in the media are lying about COVID
Why no Pre-Vaccination Warning Labels and Updated Safety Guidance? Since the vaccines are known to cause harm, however rare, why are there no warning labels as with any other product known to cause harm? Even ladders are supposed to have a warning that you can fall off. How about sending updates of health warnings to physicians, nurses, and pharmacists administering the vaccines? Example article: FDA is ‘purposely hiding facts’ about COVID jab safety ‘problems’ from public, says former official
Post-Vaccination Warnings for Safety? If the vaccines are so totally safe, why are there warnings that vaccinated people must avoid operating certain dangerous machinery or doing certain sensitive things within a certain time after being vaccinated, such as:

To not fly (as a passenger): Airlines are now Advising People who have had the Jab to avoid flying
To not fly (as a pilot): FAQs on Use of COVID-19 Vaccines by Pilots and Air Traffic Controllers

No takers for bet offer of millions of dollars for proof of vaccine safety & efficacy. Video: $10,000,000 Research Grant to Any Scientist Who Can Prove the COVID Vaccine is Safe - Steve Kirsch
Is the vaccine worth it (from the perspective of contracting any symptoms)? Articles such as this one from Yahoo! educate the Public to not be alarmed about side effects, "including headache, chills, muscle pain, nausea, fever, and tiredness", which should lessen after 2 days and to take things easy until then. It says 50% of the people vaccinated experience some kind of side (adverse) effects. But considering that 40% of those who contract COVID have no symptoms whatsoever, just based on the the presence of any symptoms at all (though not forgetting that the comparison is fair in that both can have dire outcomes), isn't your chance of having symptoms nearly the same whether you have the vaccine or actually contract COVID? Plus the vaccine doesn't even confer immunity. So why bother? Why mandate it?
Obedience brings more Orders: Ever notice how no matter how much we obey our COVID-focused officials, the crisis doesn't end? For example, despite approximately 90% vaccination of Canadians in 2021, by Government request, have you noticed that Christmas 2021 is approximately just as Government-restricted as Christmas 2020? Our officials keep finding reasons to keep the state of emergency going. What really is their intent?

Chapter 3, Section 8: Reasonable PROOFS of Malevolence

In practice, 'proof' that something is true, although it seems objective, is actually a subjective decision of the point at which evidence is sufficient for that person to consider something true. Otherwise there are ways to dismiss any evidence as insufficient, such as to say it could be fake, or the decision-maker can simply say that they choose to believe something else, regardless of any evidence, as a function of their free choice. Nevertheless we present the following evidences as, in our opinion, strong enough that we believe that a reasonable person should accept them as proof of malevolent intent concerning the COVID crisis:

Falsely reassuring the Public of safety despite pre-approval knowledge of vaccine harms: August 19, 2022: Covid vaccine trials led to birth defects and terminated pregnancies, FOIA requests show
Deletion of Inconvenient Adverse Reaction Data in Vaccine Clinical Trials. Article: HIDING THE HARM: Pfizer documents expose doctor with ties to Bill Gates Foundation deleting trial participant’s COVID vaccine injury
Deletion of COVID-19 vaccine death/injury data from the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

Article: Jun 9, 2022 Dangers of COVID shots ‘deleted’ as thousands of injury, death reports go missing: Data analyst
June 01, 2021: CDC caught removing Covid vaccine injury reports from VAERS

Told not to report vaccine adverse events: COVER-UP: New York physician assistant says she was forced to stop reporting covid “vaccine” injuries
Contracts between Governments and Vaccine Manufacturers being unfairly secretive from the Public (in whose name they are ostensibly signed) and, as much as we know from their partial disclosure now, were written to tremendously favour the interests of vaccine manufacturers over the lives or resources of the Public. For one thing, these contracts state that vaccine adverse effects are not known, despite which the Government assured the Public they are safe. Even the secrecy alone should never be for a medical agreement for the Public good: it should be transparent. This is a betrayal of the Public by Government on multiple levels. Resources on this include:

Callous breach of the first principle in medicine. In approving and promoting the COVID-19 vaccines, in a mad rush to give the Public any pharmaceutical protection from the virus, officials flatly ignored the cost of harms by the same treatment. In doing so they trampled the first principle in medicine: to firstly do no harm (Primum non nocere).
Touting vaccine effectiveness to the Public based on Relative Risk Reduction instead of Absolute Risk Reduction. This was extremely misleading to the Public, who were lead to believe the vaccines would give them 95% boost of resistance to the virus, and accepted it and supported persecution of the unvaccinated on that basis, when in fact the same study showed that the benefit to being vaccinated was only 1%. The misconception arose out of the difference between the statistics of Absolute Risk Reduction and Relative Risk Reduction. The deception is well explained in this video: Informed Consent - It's Your Right. Following are some examples of the 95% claim presented to the Public at the time:

Using a test and an interpretation of that test which would guarantee the contniuance of the pandemic on paper whether or not there was any COVID-19-causing virus in the population. The PCR test was never calibrated to the virus, and running it at a high cycle number further guaranteed plenty of positive test results whether the virus existed or not. Neither can these tests differentiate between active and inactivated virus. Specifically, early in the COVID-19 pandemic the CDC and FDA recommended the PCR test by run at 40 cycles. Even Anthony Fauci himself said that above 35 cycles the test is meaningless, and a study showed that at 35 cycles, 97% of the positive test results are false:
- High-cycle PCR tests do not properly diagnose covid-19, were weaponized to terrorize nations and deprive personal liberties
- Smoking gun: Lord Fauci states COVID PCR test has fatal flaw; confession from the “beloved” expert of experts
- Inventor of COVID test calls Fauci a liar, says it ‘doesn’t tell you that you’re sick’
This is not the first time a disease outbreak was declared, based on PCR testing, and acted on with social restrictions and medical treatments, only to later be proven that no disease actually existed: The epidemic that wasn’t: In 2006, doctors used PCR testing to cause mass hysteria over a “whooping cough” outbreak that didn’t even exist.

Regarding COVID-19 virus PCR testing, once the vaccines were accepted, the government lowered the number of cycles used to test vaccinated people to ensure they rarely tested positive for COVID-19 virus: Vaccinated people now being tested at 28 PCR cycles, which almost guarantees a “negative” covid result
Giving the Public a false sense of security in totally inadequate measures. Although masks and 6' distancing was mandated, many other medical corequisites were ignored or suppressed, including:

Medical-grade masks: As discussed earlier on this page, there is no way to stop a virus with the surgical or cloth masks the Government was recommending, and worse, medical-grade filtration masks were actually discouraged.
Gloves: How is it OK to touch the same door handle someone else just touched, because the Government didn't mandate or suggest gloves? Even handshakes, although not encouraged, were not prohibited, either. In fact, as discussed elsewhere on this page, the Government went so far as to say that even sex work was safe so long as a mask was worn!
Cleaning your mask: If the masks isn't cleaned or changed regularly, it will make infection more likely not less likely. But the mandate was only to keep wearing a mask, not ever clean it.
Air travel restrictions, were hardly or not implemented despite implementing restrictions on domestic travel.
Border restrictions were only implemented after the disease already arrived in the country. Ridiculous.
Far greater social distance than 6 feet, perhaps at least 10x more, as appropriate for an airborne virus. 6 foot distance is a totally false sense of security when dealing with an airborne virus.

Reliance on Expert Opinion as the basis for not only everyday Public Policy, but radical social change, while dressing it up as a scientific foundation, and this reliance as 'trusting the science'. Expert opinion alone was used to justify regional lockdowns and mandates, but expert opinion is of no scientific value, ie. considered one of the lowest grades of evidence in the scientific community, just above speculation. It's really not scientific at all, since it relies on trust of a person, and is closer to a religious belief.
Failure for officials and news agencies to recognize any serious harm in lockdowns, portraying them as a mere inconvenience for great medical benefits. By this mentality, even locking people in their homes indefinitely in Shanghai, China, even without food or medicine, was considered a public health benefit. Even this lockdown was only criticised in terms of economic harms to the rest of the world rather than mass murder of Chinese people:

Officials entertain no criticism of the COVID test accuracy, even though the implications are life-changing for the individual, even though the original PCR test was never calibrated to the virus, and even though any false-positive rate would make the 'zero-covid' regional social policies of some governments mathematically impossible to achieve. By this ignorance, a positive test is always deemed to mean an infected person even if they have absolutely no symptoms and even if this is medically invalid. The test is considered infallible, regardless of which type of test it is, and which manufacturer, and which version, and the only problem is seen as the people.

In fact, if the test was inaccurate enough, it could keep the pandemic going on paper, and support an endless state of emergency, even if there was not a single virion in the society.
The same Governments who protect and fund abortion and euthanasia, even ensuring abortion access was never impeded during lockdowns when most other medical procedures were, are more interested to end human life than save it. Don't be fooled into thinking that promoters of moral murder only care about saving human life.
COVID-19 Grant Money Intended for Depopulation. Articles:

August 31, 2022 Article: Analyst says Moderna’s covid vaccine trials used “deceptive practices,” full of “mostly irrelevant studies”
Forced Do Not Resuscitate Orders as a response to COVID prove officials' distain for human life:

These are standing orders that if the person's heart were to stop, no effort would be made to bring them back to life (such as by using CPR or defibrillators).
Many nursing homes put them in place for elderly and disabled patients during the COVID crisis without proper agreement with patient, family, or attorney, as shown in the following example articles:
1. Covid proves the government is killing disabled people
2. Blanket 'do not resuscitate' orders imposed on English care homes, finds CQC
3. Doctors Issuing Unlawful ‘Do Not Resuscitate’ Orders For Disabled Covid Patients
4. Covid-19: Concern over 'do not resuscitate' decisions during pandemic
As if that wasn't bad enough, these orders were offered even to children with disabilities: Children with disabilities offered ‘do not resuscitate’ orders amid pandemic

The fact that officials would discourage or unilaterally decide against resuscitating patients proves that they favour patient death over patient life, and that our assumption that they recommended and/or ordered all these drastic social changes purely out of love for human life is wrong. It means we've followed the wrong people.
Refusing to allow life-saving organ transplants, even when a donor is willing, because of failure of either donor or recipient to be COVID-vaccinated, even if they are naturally immune, is proof that COVID-19 social restrictions are not designed to protect life but punish the disobedient. In this case Government and their medical enforcers would dare to get between a person in danger of dying and what is found to enable them to live, to not allow them to have it unless they are obedient on an unrelated issue.
Governments show less or in some cases no interest in whether a person is infected with COVID-19 after the person is fully vaccinated. That means their focus is on vaccination not erradication of COVID. That is why, for example:

Australia has announced they are letting in people they know are infected, to infect everyone else, so long as they are vaccinated:

Many countries admit fully vaccinated travellers without any COVID-19 test but unvaccinated travellers must get one. For example, Canada: COVID-19 Travel: Checklists for requirements and exemptions
Societies were allowed to reopen from lockdown, once the vast majority was vaccinated, even though the virus was still spreading.
Lifting of individual social restrictions was done more for the vaccinated than unvaccinated, ignoring who is infected.

Some physicians were ordered not to report COVID vaccine reactions into official databases. This is a critical violation of medical ethics and diminishes public awareness of vaccine harm. Article: US Army doctor reveals medics were told not to report adverse COVID jab reactions
Failure to Present a Cost:Benefit analysis on the vaccines to the Public (instead of a risk-blind recommendation). Officials should mathematically compare the harms from the vaccine to the harms of the virus as an obvious indicator if this is worth recommending, nevermind mandating. Other people do: Senior US Army doctor: ‘I believe the COVID vaccine is a greater threat to soldiers’ health than the virus itself’
Governments post data on vaccine harms, but show no interest in any amount of harms at which point they will stop the vaccination program. When what you're doing is killing people, and you won't stop for that reason, isn't that, then, murder?
The fact that WHO and national governmental health agencies have not told us which vaccine is the best one (with many countries even refusing to allow people to choose which type they receive), proves that they only care about who is vaccinated, and spreading revenue around with all of the pharmaceutical manufacturers, not the fastest and safest medical end to this Pandemic. These 'vaccines' not only represent different brands (for which we would expect minor medical result differences despite similar technology) but based on fundamentally different technologies (for which we would expect major medical result differences). There is no way they are medically equal, that is to say, equally effective with equal risks, when they're built different in any way, nevermind fundamentally different.

Let's take an example: Health Canada has, as of this writing, approved six COVID-19 vaccines: two based on mRNA technology, two based on Adenovirus+DNA technology, one based on protein subunits, and one whole-virus shell made in plants.

Withholding this information (on which vaccine is proven to have the best risk:reward ratio) from the Public means that they don't care what's medically best for us or helping us make a properly informed decision. It means that they are happy to withold critical information at our risk. Perhaps it is done for business or logistic reasons, that they don't want to shed a bad light on vaccine they have already purchased, or they want to maintain market share for each pharmaceutical company regardless of results, but that's a business decision and puts money before lives.
The fact that social restrictions were never applied equally, but exemptions were often awarded along political lines, proves that the COVID-19 social resrictions were politically and not medically based. For example:

Black Lives Matter protests were generally allowed to happen at the ignorance of COVID-19 social restrictions, being exempted as 'vital to public health', at a time when visiting your own elderly mother was prohibited for public health. A virus doesn't know or care why you are protesting and there are other ways to spread a message.

Officials' Self-Exemption:

Nov. 18, 2022: Dr. Kieran Moore goes unmasked at party after ‘strongly recommending’ masks ‘in all indoor public settings’
FAUCI's MASK Comes OFF when he thinks camera is off! HYPOCRISY. This video shows Dr. Fauci remove his mask when he thinks the camera is off, even amongst other people in the same room, who have also taken their mask off apparently for the same reason. Medically, the mask cannot be to protect the camera audience. Rather it is done for the Public mind.

Government Self-Exemption from Social Restrictions:

Official Denial of the Reality or Reliability of Naturally Acquired Immunity proves the COVID-19 Narrative is Medical Nonsense. (example here)

One of the most shocking things we’ve allowed ourselves to be induced by officials (as mentioned earlier) to believe since the start of the COVID crisis is that natural immunity doesn’t work to protect us (either not at all or not effecitvely which is basically the same) but vaccines and only vaccines always do. This is why, for example, even those who can prove they were exposed to COVID and recovered, are not exempt from vaccine mandates (even though with many other diseases you don't vaccinate someone who has natural immunity already).

Our immune system is successful to protect our species for millions of years, and a foundational concept in our study of medicine, proven to defeat the vast majority of COVID infections even without any other prevention or treatment, and even vaccines depend on it.

The body has this powerful and amazingly complex antipathogenic defense system, and once it is victorious against a pathogen, it has life-long memory against that pathogen to react much faster next time: so fast with such an advantage that the person won't even see symptoms and is considered ‘naturally immune’.

We know it lasts life-long from common experience, such as the common observation that you don't get measles or chicken pox twice.

The COVID-vaccine movement, however, have insisted that even if you were proven to have contracted COVID, and recovered, and therefore have natural immunity, you must still have a vaccine to be safe and if you don't you are so terribly infection-prone that you are a threat to everyone else. Specifically, they allege that natural immunity is short-lived and unreliable; that the vaccine is a better foundation of immunity. This is passed of as 'science' because it's promoted by 'experts' who say they have 'data' of their own definition, sourcing, and interpretation. They put themselves up as higher experts than God, that their system is better than our natural one, discounting the natural system as fallible but their unnatural potion as infallible.

However our immune system must have some use since it is what vaccine effectiveness depends on, by attempting to artificially induce our immune system to act as though it was naturally exposed to the pathogen (while officials disqualify those people whose immune system actually was exposed to it). Specifically, if immune system memory doesn’t work then vaccines cannot work because the vaccines depend on it.

Those who promote vaccines as valuable are not logically be able to dismiss the value of the immune system, including the reality and superior value of natural immunity. Beyond that, natural immunity has some major advantages:

natural immunity is a system proven effective for millions years, while the COVID vaccines have only existed for about a year and are based on a technology never before approved in humans, and
natural immunity will remember ALL fragments of the WHOLE virus, not just, for example, the 'spike protein' fragment which the COVID vaccines typically rely on. This means that if one fragment were to mutate, the naturally immune system still remembers many other fragments to react to.
natural immunity is free and already innate: you don't have to develop it, buy it, store it, or distribute it
natural immunity will at least do battle with all virus variants, whereas a vaccine is usually specific to just one strain of a virus (which is why new flu vaccines are developed each year: to different strains)

Since natural immunity does work (which should have been obvious), and the immune system already stimulated to have memory to react quickly to COVID, COVID vaccination of such people subsequent to their immunity is malpractice. Example video here.

The CDC has recently admitted they have no documented evidence at all of a naturally immune person spreading COVID to anyone else (see here).

Here's another article: It’s true: Study backs up earliest claims that natural immunity works far better than COVID-19 vaccine to keep virus from re-infecting

Assuming experts know all this (since if they don't they're not experts), why would they advocate those who don't need the vaccine, ie. the naturally immune, to be vaccinated? Perhaps there are more motivations at work in them than only scientific or medical ones. Specifically, acknowledging the effectiveness of natural immunity would cripple the abiltiy of Government to argue that everyone must be vaccinated.

Nonsense Government insistence on additional 'vaccine' doses, ie. of the same old vaccine formulation based on the original COVID-19 strain, to protect against each scary new variant of the virus, despite that the vaccine wasn't designed for those variants. This is nonsense. The immune system is extremely specific, and is taught to recognize particular shapes exactly. Either the vaccine was designed to present the shape of the variant to your immune system or it wasn't, and more doses can't change that. Put another way, if the original vaccine formula somehow protects against the new variants then vaccinated people are under no threat from the new variants, but if they are a threat, and assuming for argument's sake that vaccines are the only hope, then we need a new vaccine tailored to the new variant. Promotion of additional doses of the same vaccine based on scare of new variants it wasn't designed for should have been recognized for the nonsense it is. Actually the WHO has pointed this out but it's been overlooked by local vaccination programs. Articles:

WHO official publication 11 January, 2022: Interim Statement on COVID-19 vaccines in the context of the circulation of the Omicron SARS-CoV-2 Variant from the WHO Technical Advisory Group on COVID-19 Vaccine Composition (TAG-CO-VAC). This includes the phrase, "a vaccination strategy based on repeated booster doses of the original vaccine composition is unlikely to be appropriate or sustainable".
WHO warns against boosters, says strategy “not viable” for new variants
You may soon be offered a fourth COVID-19 shot. What's known about second boosters?
Ontario offering 4th COVID-19 vaccine dose to everyone 60 and up starting tomorrow
Three vaccine doses give 86% efficacy against Omicron variant
Third vaccine dose critical for protecting populations against omicron variant

First focus for COVID-19 vaccination, every time a new dose became available to the Public, has been elderly and aboriginal people, which are called 'prioritized populations' (example here) for this purpose. Although a medical case could be made to prioritize the elderly (since COVID-19 is more lethal to them), no medical case can be made for prioritizing aboriginal peoples.

This happens to be the same two groups Government has to pay under various treaties and support programs. Is this an attempt to reduce Government disbursements?

Example articles:

The Variants Prove the Folly of Vaccination based on the SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein. Many vaccine manufacturers relied on just one viral shape (or epitope), the spike protein, to train our immune system to recognize. If the spike protein is mutated, though, as has been happening with the COVID variants (example article here) we can expect that immunity should weaken or fail. But in natural immunity to the real virus, the body is trained to recognize ALL shapes of the virus, so that even if one part changes, there are still many other parts which are the same and the body is ready to react to.

If the vaccination program was honest, then it should have shifted towards whole-virus vaccines and away from single-epitope vaccines, for better variant resistance, once concerning variants with spike protein mutations were discovered. But it didn't. Governments continue to maintain the ruse that all of the COVID-19 vaccines are approximately equally effective and few allow patients to even choose which one they receive.

Or the entire vaccination program should have been scrapped as a waste of time and money (at best), and let natural immunity work throught he population for a real end to this crisis. But vaccine ineffectiveness, like vaccine adverse events, was never mentioned by officials to be a reason to stop the vaccination program. Rather ineffectiveness was used to promote more doses of vaccine.
Altering worldwide perceptions and policy reaction to COVID-19 sitation by quietly altering the definitions of three key terms away from what they used to mean in favour of the new narrative: pandemic, herd immunity, and vaccine. In this way, officials could use a word we thought meant something, which were quietly redefined to a significantly different meaning, without technically lying, and laws which were in place to react to the first definition now would react to the new defintion (please see supporting overview article here). As an analogy, imagine if you redefined the word 'shooting' to additionally include 'cake delivery'. If you did that, you could say that your neighbour shot you (with a cake) and so you were justified to shoot her back (with a gun). That's how reality-changing the consequences of changing definitions of key legal terms can be.

Legally misdirective tampering with WHO's defintion of the word 'pandemic'. The WHO's draconion worldwide pandemic response mechanism originally was justified because the definition of the word 'pandemic' was one which required not only a disease which was widespread, but 'enormous numbers of deaths and illness'. See here from a capture 3 May, 2009:

On 6 May, 2009, in the time of the H1N1 pandemic, the published definition changed to remove the requirement for enormous illness and deaths (article here). Here's a capture from 6 May, 2009:

Under this new definition, literally any new variant of any disease, however harmless, as long as 'there are more cases of that disease than normal' and it's spread 'worldwide' can be declaerd a 'pandemic' by the WHO.

Furthermore, since the COVID-19 pandemic saw the medical community redefine 'cases' as any positive test (rather than requiring, for example, symptoms), a communicable disease test which is faulty, either by design or implementation, as long as it shows enough false positive results, can be used to declare a worldwide pandemic, and initiate all corresponding social restrictions, even if no one is dying or even has any symptoms of illness or even if the disease doesn't exist at all.

There is no socially acceptable reason to allow the triggering of worldwide restrictions if no one is sick or dying. This change of definition is a grab of power, to seize it in the name of protecting the public, even if no one is in any danger.
Medically misdirective tampering with the WHO's definition of 'herd immunity' in favour of vaccination programs. On 9 June, 2020, the WHO published a page on their website which, under the sub-heading 'What is herd immunity?', gives a definition which states that a population can achieve herd immunity either through vaccination or exposure to disease. on 13 November, 2020, the page was updated to reflect a new definition which entirely omitted the possibility of herd immunity being achieved through prior exposure, but described vaccination as the only way to achieve herd immunity (which denies the power and existence of our natural immune systems and promotes our mental dependency on and trust in vaccines as our only salvation from any virus). Then an update published 31 December, 2020 had another definition which restored acknowledgement of the possibilty of prior exposure contributing to herd immunity, but mislead a few paragraphs in where it:
1) claims vaccination protects people from the disease and from spreading the pathogen (both of which the COVID-19 vaccines fail to do), and
2) calculates examples of herd immunity only in terms of vaccinated persons. The pages are:
- A saved copy of the 9 June, 2020 version, which states (emphasis ours):
  Herd immunity is the indirect protection from an infectious disease that happens when a population is immune either through vaccination or immunity developed through previous infection.
- A saved copy of the 13 Novemeber, 2020 version of the same webpage, which states (emphasis ours):
  ‘Herd immunity’, also known as ‘population immunity’, is a concept used for vaccination, in which a population can be protected from a certain virus if a threshold of vaccination is reached.
- The current page, currently dated 31 December, 2020 as of this writing, which states (emphasis ours):
  
  'Herd immunity', also known as 'population immunity', is the indirect protection from an infectious disease that happens when a population is immune either through vaccination or immunity developed through previous infection.
  ...
  Vaccinated people are protected from getting the disease in question and passing on the pathogen, breaking any chains of transmission.
  ...
  To safely achieve herd immunity against COVID-19, a substantial proportion of a population would need to be vaccinated
  ...
  The percentage of people who need to be immune in order to achieve herd immunity varies with each disease. For example, herd immunity against measles requires about 95% of a population to be vaccinated. ... The proportion of the population that must be vaccinated against COVID-19 to begin inducing herd immunity is not known.
It's one thing to update a webpage with news of current events, but another thing to update fundamental principles of theory which are still valid. To go to the trouble to alter the definition of herd immunity already published on the WHO website to partly or completely deny the contribution of natural immunity shows intent to promote excess fear in the population from COVID (since two hopes of salvation were artificially reduced to one hope), and a false narrowing of options for the Public to use in their own vaccination decision (as though vaccination is the only option).

Worse, this is not just a print problem or an error of a minor employee working on the website. At a 12 October, 2020 press conference, the WHO Director-General made similar remarks which portrayed vaccination as the only way to achieve herd immunity: WHO Director-General's opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19 - 12 October 2020
Tampering with the definition of the word 'vaccine', to include gene therapy and exclude coferring immunity, at the time of the COVID-19 vaccine rollout, proves intent to deceive the Public.
The dictionary definition of the word 'vaccine' was changed roughly coinciding with and apparently to support the COVID-19 'vaccine' rollout. In other words, rather than choose a word of accurate definition to use to describe the product, like most people would do, someone changed the definition of a trusted word to include a new thing, presumably so that it would also be trusted. That's right. The 'most trusted' dictionary used for the English language, Merriam-Webster, sometime between 18 January 2021 and 26 January 2021 (please compare these links for yourself), changed their definition of the word 'vaccine' to something which explicitly includes mRNA injections, even actually referencing the COVID spike protein (the intention to include the COVID-19 vaccines is just too obvious)! That's like you having someone change the definition of the word 'dry' to include water, so that you can say that water is 'dry' so you can sell it as a solvent which won't rust anything.

The traditional requirement of a 'vaccine' to 'confer immunity', and not mentioning RNA, used to be at dictionary.com until it was changed sometime on or before 28 April 2022 to what it is now: not necessary confering immunity and explicitly including RNA.

Therefore, partly relying on the old definition, are three reasons why the word 'vaccine' is immoral and causing harm when attached to the genetic COVID-19 vaccines:
1. They Bestow No Immunity: Not everyone was informed (if anyone was) of the quiet dictionary definition update, and the public was promised that the vaccines would end the pandemic, which implies immunity.
2. They cause Public misconception about how proven this technology is over the long-term: What our society has come to use and trust as 'vaccine' for hundreds of years are made from attenuated (weakened) virus which cannot infect but still has the shape (the immune system identifies by shapes) that the immune system can learn to react to. The theory is sound and it doesn't play God.
  
  These COVID injected potions called 'vaccines', on the other hand, are based on a fundamentally different technology, that is to say, though the purpose may be the same (we hope), the 'fundamentally new' technology approaches it by a completely different method. In this case, the main two similarities between the COVID 'vaccines' and traditional vaccines are that they are both injected and both contain water and that's about all the chemical similarly they share.
  
  Using the same word for a radically new technology, even if it serves the same ultimate intent, is why we didn't allow nuclear reactors to be marketed as solar panels.
  
  To allow a fundamentally new technology to be presented to the Public under a word used for a very old and trusted technology misleads the Public, especially those who don't understand the difference (and can't be expeted to), in three ways:
  1. It leads the Public to trust this injection assuming it is the old technology. For example, please consider this Health Canada official video portraying the ingredients in these fundamentally new vaccines as being eliminated from the body 'like with all vaccines':
    Are there any ingredients in the COVID-19 vaccines that I should be concerned about? .
    
    Is that really true? Are mRNA or DNA codes eliminated from the body? How about lipid nanoparticles?
  2. It rallies the existing pro-vaccine culture behind this new product even though it's a fundamentally different technology.
  3. It allows anyone who criticizes the COVID-19 injections to be broadly and deceptively labelled as being 'anti-vaccine'.. This instantly portrays them as crazy, and to be dismissed automatically, because the Public understands that vaccines are a trusted technology used for hundreds of years. Example article: New York Times attacks ‘anti-vaccine’ Dr. Mercola for COVID ‘disinformation’
3. They cause Public misconception about whether this 'vaccine' has passed the normal safety trials which other 'vaccines' undergo.
Someone is at fault here. Either Government & medical industry used the wrong term publicly for the new technology that it forced the dictionary to change their definition, or the definition was changed to support the vaccine rollout. Either way, it's public deception.

Regardless of who was at fault, this changed allowed a 'gene therapy' to be marketed as a 'vaccine'.

Yes it is 'gene therapy' because, regardless of why, it's mechanism of action is to introduce genetic information (even if it stays as mRNA, even if it is rapidly degraded) into the body to be used by our bodies as genetic information.

The World Health Organization (WHO) shows it makes decisions based on politics first and medicine second when it blocked the Medicago vaccine's approval because one of the minor investors also produces tobacco (reference article here)?

The plant-based Medicago vaccine is arguabley the best of all of the COVID-19 vaccines, in theory, because it presents the whole virus shell (manufactured in plants) to the patient's immune system, with none of the viral genetic material. It's also been through trials a lot longer than the major, more rushed, COVID vaccine brands, being approved about a year after the others.

It is hypocrisy to criticize tobacco as immoral, which is legal, sold only to adults, and often sold with the most graphic health warnings, but not criticize the marketing of harmful COVID-19 vaccines to the Public with exaggerated assurances that they are 'safe', and with strong coercion tactics (including loss of livelihood for refusal), and neither criticize worldwide Governments turning their nations over to medical martial law by exaggerating the health dangers. We will ignore this hyporcisy for the sake of argument.

Shouldn't it be a valid excuse that the relationship to the tobacco industry has nothing to do with smoking but the fact that the plants they manufacture the viral shells in are tobacco plants?

Is it possible that the more established vaccine manufacturers don't want this kind of competition of a plant-based vaccine in the extremely lucrative mandated-vaccine market, and that they have influenced the WHO to block it?

Even if this is a moral decision for WHO to make, analysis of investors is not a health-based decision despite having dramatic impact on the availability of this vaccine to the Public. It proves that they have non-health influences so strong that they can dominate even critical decisions. That they would allow non-medical information to dominate their public health decisions proves malevolent intent in our opinion. It also means we cannot logically trust them for medical guidance because of these other influences.
Bringing public focus to one cause of death, which is relatively minor, invisible, and virtually impossible to control, while ignoring many other causes of death (example smoking) which are tangible and easier to stop, proves that this not being done to safe life. There are many causes of death, some of them human-made, which are killing more people than COVID, and are more easy to control than a practically invisible and unpredictable virus, yet they've not gotten the Government alarm which COVID has, which proves that Government fixation on COVID cannot be justified by concern for life alone. Rather there must be another motive. Here are some examples discussing other causes of death:
1. Study: More People Under 65 Died from Alcohol-Related Causes in 2020 Than of COVID
2. CDC Data – Fentanyl Overdoses Now Kill More Americans Aged 18-45 Than Covid, Cancer, Car Accidents & Suicide
3. Hunger Crises Caused More Deaths than Coronavirus in 2020
4. More than Covid-19, inequality killed many
5. Lockdowns killed more Canadians under 65 than COVID-19: Statscan
There is no reason to announce unprecedented emergency powers and mandates on the guise of protecting human life, for a cause of death which is minor compared to other causes which kill more people and are more easily controlled.
Suspending Accident Insurance of Protestors: Suspending someone's accident insurance not only is an overreach of power, but unecessarily puts both them and other drivers at risk. Why would you want them to risk an uninsured accident? It is an unnecessarily cruel and Public-endangering form of punishment. Example article: Fears of Losing Insurance Prompt Some Truckers to Leave Weeks-Long Protest
Vaccine Equality: Even if we are to believe that so many pharmaceutical companies worked a similar miracle to have COVID vaccines invented, approved, and distributed in less than a year after the discovery of the vaccine, it is impossible that so many different formulations have such identical efficacy that the Public should not be told which one is better than the other one. If human life or defeating COVID was the top prioarity to Government, as they say, then certainly they would have insisted to discover and promote the best formulation. But they didn't. Instead they balance distribution between the manufacturers and usually you're not even allowed to choose which one you get. There is on medical reason for this, but a political reason is to make sure all of the manufacturers get a piece of the profit pie.
That there is no tolerance for any unvaccinated person, not even if they have natural immunity from recovering from COVID, when, medically speaking, only 65-70% of the population should need to be vaccinated to achieve herd immunity, according to this example article from the BBC.
Mainstream Media Silence on Vaccine Adverse Events: Despite well over a million reported adverse events in the USA reporting system alone, and despite COVID and vaccination issues being top-headline news for two years, not once (to this Editor's knowledge) has mainstream news reported the personal story on (such as a photo of) even a single case of any vaccine adverse event. At most, vaccine adverse events are mentioned to exist, but be 'rare' or 'very rare' and not discussed further. Normally this would be suspicious, but there are so many hundreds of thousands of emotional human stories on such a headline topic that it's reasonable proof of media blackout from reporting on the disadvantages of the vaccines (beyond calling them rare).
Total Deaths: Assigning cause of death (such as COVID death or not) is much easier to falsify than the total number of people who have died. Either they're dead or they're not, and if this number isn't much more than usual then there was not much of any lethal crisis during that time. What many researchers are finding is that for 2020 (the clearest data when, for most of the year, we had COVID but not a vaccine), there were not significantly more deaths than in previous years. Examples are:
Therefore the lethality and threat of the COVID-19 virus, whether real or not, was exaggerated.
Pandemic Prediction: There is no sensible reason why experts were able to predict this pandemic, or why they are talking now about 'the next pandemic', unless they know about gain-of-function research being conducted with this intent. The reason is that dangerous viruses tend not to arise in nature, beause the more dangerous a virus is, the more it kills its own hosts, and the more it cripples its own spread. The reason the cold and the flu, for example, have been so widespread in most of the world is that they rarely kill anyone but the most frail people (unless it's an entirely new population never exposed to such things before). Dangerous viruses are, however, attractive to researchers, both for the opportunity to play God, and military interest in creating new potential weapons.

Deliberate infection for Experimentation: If the virus was really a lethal threat, it would be intolerably unethical for any medical researchers to deliberately infect people with COVID-19 for purposes of study, and certainly this would be called out in any developed and free nation. Well, that's exactly what researchers did in this UK study, as per article: Findings Announced From UK Study That Purposefully Infected Participants With COVID-19. Researchers gave the excuse that they gave the "lowest possible dose" but that's irrelevant when the whole point of a virus is that it replicates itself in exponential multiplication, so that even one virion will quickly produce virtually the same result as a million of them. The real reason they could get away with it is that it's just not dangerous to anyone but the very elderly or frail, which these test subjects were not. Aged 18 to 29, none of them had any serious events from being deliberately infected.
Counter-Medical punishments for the Unvaccinated cannot be for a medical purpose: Unvaccinated shoppers forced to be accompanied by an employee to make sure they don't buy anything the Government deems non-essential (article here) and video discussion here. Of course it is authoritarian, cruel, and completely contrary to medical sense that an EXTRA person should ACCOMPANY you if you are dangerous to other people in close range; neither does a virus care what you purchase.
Punishing those who wear more medically effective masks than required, at theor own cost, cannot be for a medical purpose or the Public health. The insistence that we only wear masks which cannot possibly filter out the virus, even cloth masks, and punishment for those who wear a 'medical-grade' mask (which can actually filter out the virus), is sure proof that the mask mandates, at best, have everything to do with our blind obedience and have nothing to do with trying to keep us medically safe (at worst they may be an attempt to make us sicker by the absence of any requirement to wash or replace them leading to much filth and less oxygen in the air we breathe).

The lame justification for this at the very start of the pandemic was that medical-grade masks should be reserved for medical personnel, hinting that there is some shortage (although ineffective is still ineffective). Since that time they don't even offer that excuse as many producers (even car manufacturers) have jumped into the mask market due to the forced demand, and at a time when many other types of business were restricted, such that we could have abundant supply of any type of masks we wanted.

Example references:

the Ontario (Canada) Government website is still (as of this writing Jan 2022) ~~advocates~~ orders Ontarians to wear cloth masks while forbidding the Public from using medical-grade masks):
19 January 2022: Canada Post employees may be sent home if they choose to wear an N95 mask (note that Canada Post is a crown, ie. Government-owned, corporation in Canada; an article on airborne transmission predating that Canada Post article by the same news service here).
October 2021: People in Ontario outraged to learn teachers aren't allowed to wear N95 masks at work.

Suspension of non-urgent surgeries on the excuse of over-capacity due to COVID when the capacity is and always was there.

All surgery is urgent except for cosmetic surgery: any other kind and there is a deterioration (such as something spreading) or at least prolonged suffering for the patient while they wait. People have died because of these suspensions.

The supposed re-dedication of medical resources to COVID which supposedly hospitals would do without that also being ordered is fantasy. It's foolish, for example, to think that if you cancel cancer surgeries the oncologist is going to go over and work in the respiratory ward to care for COVID patients. It doesn't work like that. Rather the oncologist goes home.

It's also foolish to think that a hospital with a fixed number of beds never imagined needing enough staff in case all the beds were full.

Worst of all, it's naive to take the Government at their word that hospitals are or would be over capacity due to COVID or anything else. Please compare the Ontario Government ordering the suspension of non-urgent surgeries from 5 January, 2022 onward indefinitely (example article Non-urgent surgeries at G&M Hospital postponed a third time, unknown how many impacted, and it is the third time such measures have been implemented since March 2020), to actual hospital intensive care unit (ICU) bed availability data from the Ontario Government website. You will find the latter shows that there were always and still are hundreds of ICU beds, or approximately 20%, available as far back as the data goes nearly to the start of the pandemic (available beds are shown in the graph below in a light blue colour):

If the overcapacity problem was true, triage decisions should be made by the hospital staff based on their capacity in the moment, rather than a standing policy hospitals must obey over a broad timeframe. Otherwise the order would prevent patients from having service in moments, however brief, when capacity does exist.

But the data clearly shows that there is no overcapacity problem! Government is preventing people from accessing medical care on excuse of a problem which does not exist! That is murder!

This is not a strategy to protect Public health but to harm it. It may be a strategy to either save costs (the Ontario government pays for the healthcare for most Ontarians) or increase the 'excess death' numbers (ie. the unusual increase in total deaths regardless of cause, which the COVID crisis has been accused of not having enough of to be real).
A French court ruling that accepting the vaccine is actual suicide If the COVID vaccines are completely safe, why did a court in France rule that a life insurance company was justified to pay out for a policy holder who died from the COVID vaccine, on the argument that the death is 'suicide' because the policy holder voluntarily took an experimental medical treatment which has published side effect data? Either it's safe or it's not, and if it's not it shouldn't be touted as 'safe'. Put another way, Government shouldn't tell you to take the vaccine because it's safe, and then a Government court subsequently say that the person who died from the vaccine committed suicide because they should have known the risks.

This also means that it has been successfully argued in court that anyone accepting the COVID vaccine knowingly accepts the risk of death, and therefore is an act of suicide.

Article: Life insurer refuses to cover vaccine death
Blatant data censoring. The Government of Alberta (in Canada) has been caught taking down information from their website which exposed a correlation between the COVID 'vaccines' and harm (article: Alberta gov’t scrubs data from official site showing spike in hospitalizations, deaths after COVID jab). There is no way that information should be censored if they want us to make an informed decision about our health. This is why it is so dangerous when the same organization (Government in this case) who is entrusted to publish the data is the same one who uses that data to give itself emergency powers and justify draconian orders.
Lockdowns portrayed as some kind of benefit despite no benefit being associated with them in realtiy and horrific pain. It's time to admit that these are punitive measures with no medical benefit only to the Public's medical, economic, spiritual, and psychological harm. Some have dared to speak out against them, such as MPP Roman Baber according to this article: ‘Deadlier than COVID’: Ontario politician slams Ford gov’t over new lockdowns
Exaggerated burden of our healthcare system due to COVID: Especially before the vaccines were distributed, Government and mainstream news insisted that the hospitals were dangerously full due to the COVID-19 pandemic they must act to lock us all down to prevent them being totally overcapacity.

However many people report a strange lack of anything that physically looked like a pandemic at hospital emergency wards: not only that there were few people there, but there were virtually no people there.

It's a subjective proof, in that you had to go and look or yourself, or have the misfortune of needing to go during that time, but some people went and saw and it's proof for them that the overburden of the medical care system was a blatant lie.

Here is an eyewitness's photograph from inside a hospital emergency ward during a COVID emergency lockdown (justified on burden to the healthcare system) in Ontario, Canada in early 2021 (the witness said he saw no other patient on the entire ward or waiting room except one man brought in by paramedics on a stretcher, one could literally hear a pin drop, and that despite being to emergency wards numerous times before, for him or others, he had never seen any emergency ward so empty in his life):

He said it was so quiet, he spent most of his time just listening to the air move through the ventilation.

It's worth noting that Emergency ward wait times in Ontario have been notoriously long for decades, as can still be seen on the official tracking website here. It's worth noting, furthermore, that not only are emergency wards busy with patients the themselves, but they normally have concerned family members with them, and going up and down the hallways fetching things for them and calling other family members and most of them in a frantic search for nurse attention. For all these reasons, one would expect to see an Ontario emergency ward during a lethal pandemic overflowing with people. Yet there was almost no one there. Many other witnesses have recorded similar photos and or video available on the internet.
1. Another Empty Hospital with Hospital Security Confirmation!
2. Debbie Hicks who was arrested for filming the empty Gloucester Royal Hospital speaks out
3. German journalist Billy Six goes to hospital 'teeming with coronavirus patients' - Empty
4. More covid lies. Empty hospital
Looking at this from another direction, why was there an explosion of nursing staff doing dance videos, at work, in the hospital, with other staff during the supposed worst of the crisis? For example:
1. NURSE DANCING WAS OUR FIRST RED FLAG #ODDTV #RFB
2. Another overwhelmed Hospital
3. EVERBODY DISCHARGED in the Hospital... Staff Outside ... NO PATIENTS
4. Healthcare workers can do musicals during a pandemic!
This pattern has been observed again with the Omicron variant scare, ie.: officials screaming about hospitals overflowing, insisting that more social restrictions are necessary to save our medical system from collapse, hospitals actually being quiet and underwhelmed in-person. The only difference is that this time the unvaccinated are blamed.
Baseless Official Assurances of Safety: The product monographs for many of the 'vaccines' reveal risks or unknowns, such as no safety data on the effects to pregnant women, which public officials promoting the 'vaccines' have not revealed about them, rather promoting them simply as 'safe', and not even exempting pregnant women from the 'vaccine' mandates. Please see our vaccine refusal page for details.
Vaccination Catchup: If the vaccine protects us for a certain time, for example 6 months, before we need a booster shot, there is no logical reason why someone who is just starting their first vaccine should need to 'catch up' to be considered fully vaccinated. Yet politicans insist the unvaccinated 'catch up' to have received just as many doses as those who started a year ago. This proves that it is not about medicine, and appears to be for a political reason: to make sure that officials do not allow those who delayed dosing to have consented to less doses to have rights.
Forced Firing of Healthcare Workers who Do Not Comply at a time when they are Vitally Needed: The sudden forced firing of people who refuse vaccine mandates in essential professions, even healthcare, even to create announced shortages of hospital capacity so that non-emergency treatments must be cancelled, is a clear proof that this is about keeping the Public obedient rather than keeping the Public safe. Which is more dangerous to someone who goes to hospital: having an unvaccinated nurse, or being told they can't see you because they don't have a nurse available? Obviously no nurse is much worse than an unvaccinated nurse, and that's even if the vaccine is wonderful. Article: After firing all unvaccinated doctors and nurses, Ontario orders hospitals and clinics to CANCEL non-urgent surgeries due to lack of staff
Manufacturers wouldn't insist on liability protection for vaccine harms if vaccines are safe. If the vaccines are so safe, why are COVID vaccine manufacturers so adamant to insist on legal immunity from lawsuits arising from potential vaccine harm, or demand tremendous government-supplied collateral against this risk? They fact that they're worried about this risk proves that everyone else should be also: after all, they made the thing.
Manufactureres wouldn't express safety concerns, when their liability is in question, for the rapid COVID vaccine development if it wasn't a valid issue.If it's true that the COVID vaccines were fully tested for safety despite being developed and marketed in record time, such that the Public should not be concerned about safety for that reason, how then can anyone know the long-term effects of vaccines wich haven't existed for long, and why are the vaccine manufacturers themselves showing concern for legal liability of risks due to exactly that reason that they were developed so fast? For example, in this article, it says:

he vaccine makers' legal concern is rooted in the unprecedented speed of the effort to develop the COVID shots, the EFPIA said. In normal circumstances, drugmakers buy insurance to cover liability for vaccines' potential adverse effects. But COVID forced them to develop drugs so quickly that some side effects - for instance, a rare blood-clotting condition in some of those who took the AstraZeneca vaccine - are emerging as shots go into people's arms.
The alleged problem of unvaccinated people: Temporarily ignoring, for argument's sake, the human right to choose one's own treatment, and that being unvaccinated is not the same as being a virus, even then unvaccinated people should be no threat to other people, if we can assume, as we are lead to believe, that they are extremely vulnerable to the virus, that the virus is lethal, and that it spreads 'like wildfire': they would be quickly wiped out by the virus in no significant waiting. If that is not happening, such that there are so many unvaccinated people still around that they are of concern to do something about, it means that at least one of those assumptions must not be true. If one of those assumptions are not true, it's not the unvaccinated that are the main problem, but a fundamental flaw in the way we think about this pandemic. The only reason the unvaccinated are a 'problem' to officials is that there are so many of them alive and well so long into the pandemic that they are living proof that the vaccines were not needed.
Truth by Results: The failure of the recommendations of our health authorities proves their malevolence (assuming they really are experts of knowledge in their field, which should be a safe assumption).

Assuming that we can be sure our health experts know what they're doing in virus management even if we don't understand it, and without needing to look into their head, the fact that they keep increasing social restrictions (human rights suspensions) despite these measures being ineffective proves malevolent intent in our opinion. If these measures were intended to minimize the spread of the virus and social restrictions in the long term, and since they are designed by experts of knowledge in related fields, then with each order we obey, they crisis would lessen and the social restrictions would ease. If, however, the orders are only a graduate testing of our obedience in a desire to enslave us by by progressively restrictive orders, the more we obey, the more authorities would be emboldened to announce a continuance of the crisis and more social restrictions to add to the old ones. The latter case is what we have been experiencing. The only way following expert advice would make things worse is if the advice is intent to our harm.

We need to stop making excuses for experts who presume to have knowledge so great that they should order the Public around. At the very least they should be fired, if not tried for criminal negligence or crimes against humanity. When you put yourself up in your profession as having expert knowledge, and what you advise or order makes the situation worse, or added much harm in other ways with no improvement of the original situation, there should be a cost for you.
There is proof that vaccine manufacturers and government regulatory agencies knew the death and permanent (or 'Not recovered at the time of report') harm of the vaccines either before they were rolled out or in the early stages of their rollout, yet they did not stop the rollout. To not stop the rollout, but rather promote it more (such as with COVID vaccine mandates that would follow) is harm with intent making it assault and murder. See:

Video: Evidence That They KNEW the Covid Jab Would Kill Thousands. This corresponds to data for the rollout 01 December 2020 through 28 February 2021 for which adverse outcomes are summarized in the following table from this report:
Video: Finally! Medical Proof the Covid Jab is “Murder”. Again, the proof is strong enough that it should have triggered the immediate cessation of the vaccinations, and that, continuing, officials know the harm is so strong that it's deliberate. Yet as is par for the course in the information war, as shown here the now journal reports that this and other critical statements in the article have since been 'revised'; of course they are revised in the direction of obscuring the meaning with technical jargon as though to not offend the pro-vaccine culture (this is an advantage in having journals in print: some someone else doesn't keep changing them). Fortunately for truth, the above link shows both the text before and after the change.
Adverse event data collected from the first 90 days of the vaccine rollout, only recently released from the FDA by court order, show that they knew early on that it was hurting and killing many people: Newly Released Pfizer Documents Reveal COVID Jab Dangers

Inconsistent leading of the Public concerning rare chance of critical events. How should the very same Government on one hand encourage people to buy lottery tickets, on the portrayal that the miniscule chance of winning could be you, while discouraging the Public from concern about serious COVID vaccine adverse effects by dismissing them as 'rare' or 'very rare'? For example, in Ontario, Canada:
1. The biggest Government lottery, called LottoMax, has a 1 in 33,294,800 chance to win the main jackpot (ignoring all lesser prizes), per play, and they strongly encourage you to do so:
  Get Your Game On
2. Meanwhile the Ontario government speaks dismissively (assumes it is not a reason to refuse) about the 'very rare' risks of serious side effects from COVID vaccination:
  COVID-19 Vaccine Q&A: What are common side effects of vaccines?
  
  Actually, according to the official Government of Canada COVID vaccine side effect reporting, for data data up to and including December 17, 2021, the biggest danger of COVID vaccination (cardiac arrest, aka clinical death, ignoring all lesser risks), was reported occur 39 times in 64,197,951 doses administered, which is a chance of 1 in 1,646,101 (64,197,951 ÷ 39).
In other words, while the Ontario Government encourages Ontarians to see the chance of winning LottoMax as realistic enough to be a reason to play that lottery, and discourages Ontarians from recognizing the chance of serious adverse reactions from the COVID 'vaccines' as a realistic reason to refuse them, the chance of having cardiac arrest following a COVID-19 vaccine is approximately 40 times greater than the chance of winning LottoMax.

It may be that the only thing the COVID 'vaccines' cure is any need to play the lottery anymore.

How bad could it get? There are some things which suggest this situation, if left unchecked, could get extremely bad from a human rights standpoint. Here's why:

Though generally not triggered yet, some regions have been quietly passing laws which give them sweeping emergency powers to the point that they can do virtually whatever they want to you, your family, and your property, so long as they invoke the word 'emergency' when doing it. Examples include:
1. Saskatchewan's Emergency Planning Act (see section 18).
2. Alberta's Public Health Act (see section 52.6(1)).
3. Alberta's Public Health Act (see section 52.6(1)).
There are hints that the Government intends to come into your house and take family members away. This include:

Dr. Ryan of WHO
Refusal to vaccinate a child can be considered medical neglect in court, or even child abuse, and therefore apparently legal grounds to have your children removed by the Government for their 'safety'.

Chapter 3, Section 9: TRUTH BOMBS

(as evidenced elsewhere in this page if not here):

The virus was never isolated or proven to be a cause of disease. It might not even exist.
Based on the published sequence, the virus is definitely human-made.
However it was made, unlike other viruses it had a huge marketing campaign behind it, and that more than anything made it the most dangerous virus ever to our lives as a whole.
The PCR test was never calibrated against the virus it supposedly looks for. There is no way that it tests for COVID-19 virus (SARS-CoV-2) because it wasn't calibrated to any such virus sample in its creation.
The virus isn't the enemy. It was made by someone as their tool.
Human rights must not be suspended due to any scare. They are supposed to be absolutely inalienable. Otherwise we wouldn't fight wars but just give up our rights to the enemy.
If human rights must be suspended there should have been a referendum instead of dictated to us. Yes, there was time to do that.
Medical masks which by their design cannot possibly filter out an airborne virus cannot possibly protect from one. Rather they only make a respiratory infection more likely by collecting and keeping filth near the mouth, and reducing oxygen exchange.
If the Government really cared about stopping spread the first thing they would have done is stopped all flights. But they didn't: virtually all airports remained running the entire time.
The genetic so-called 'vaccines', being admittedly ineffective to protect against infection or spread, are not vaccines but only gene therapy (ie. tampering with your genetic information) and don't let anyone tell you different. It's all about seeing what happens when they use your body to run their genetic software without their liability. If they didn't use the word 'vaccine', and if they admitted how ineffective it was before most people received it, most people would have refused it. Article: COVID-19 ‘Vaccines’ Are Gene Therapy
Forced genetic alteration of humanity most definitely should be considered a crime against humanity.
There are way more dangerous microbes around us and inside us than COVID-19 virus, making all of these efforts to supposedly stop COVID ridiculous. It has a very high survival rate.
Social segregation is wrong .
Medical choice of treatments should be private. The most people should have been required to prove is whether they are infected or not, which should have been what matters.
Proof of vaccination is only about proof of blind obedience. That's why vaccinated people were welcomed and unvaccinated people shunned without any regard for who was infected or not. If only the Public could have realized that it's a pandemic of a virus, not unvaccinated people, such that only who has the virus matters.
Denial of other prevention and all treatments for COVID, even natural immunity, was medical misdirection leading us to only see the vaccine, and not even God, as salvation.
If you lose the right of say over what is injected into you, your other rights don't matter.
Rewarding people with giving them back the same rights they had before you intervened is the cheapest and most degrading form of reward. Yet this is the reward people accepted for submitting their bodies to vaccination.
If a Government can declare itself emergency powers at solely its own discretion, it's not a democracy.
Unfortunately the vaccine effects can't be over yet. Vaccination is irreversible, genetic changes can be hereditary, and humanity may never see the end of the consequences of this mistake. We have grossly failed future generations.
If pursing a feeling of safety is more important to us than our freedoms, we are unlikely to be left with either. Once we show Government that we will do anything to get away from a scare, and even if the promised security is a complete lie we will forgive that, the incentive is to just keep feeding us more scares and more demands of money and rights they want us to give up to supposedly keep us 'safe' (meaning, in this context, enslaved).

Chapter 3, Section 10: Ways You Can Test the Truth Yourself:

Here are things you can do to quickly test and expose the truth:

Challenge the contradiction between COVID-19 vaccine 'safety' claim and official COVID-19 vaccine serious adverse event data.: Few have bothered to point out the obvious discrepancy between officials insisting that the vaccines are 'safe' and the officially published data of many deaths and serious harms following and even definitely attributed to vaccination. The following video is an example of how quickly medical personnel can become uncooperative when anyone points out the data on vaccine harm at the vaccination clinic: LOVE HOW THIS GUY TELLS THEM STRAIGHT FACTS! THE STAFF START TO REALISE..
Challenge who the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine can be safe if it's been banned/suspended by many countries?
For experts who speak about the vaccines, have those experts observed these same vaccines under a microscope, or are they speaking from general theories?
How is it that if the Government told us what religion to belong to, or what to invest in, or what movie to watch, we wouldn't accept it, but if they tell us what to inject in our own bodies, we not only accept it, but we're angry with other people if they do not?
If the vaccines don't stop infection or transmission, why do you need to insist that other people take it?
If the vaccine doesn't stop infection or transmission, why is that soehow acceptable? Isn't accepting vaccines despite their failure a major cause of the confusion and continuance of the crisis?
Why should we demand that other people take a vaccine which we know isn't effective and we know has serious risks?
Since the vaccines are killing people (many even by official statistics), how can it be called 'safe'?
If the vaccinated can still contract, spread, and die from the virus, and the virus is so dangerous that people should lose their jobs if they refuse the vaccine, even if they are healthy or work remotely, why are the vaccinated allowed to congregate in close spaces, such as go on airplanes, or dine, and otherwise still put others at risk? (This idea comes from this blunt video commentary.)
Why did the Government order people to wear masks, but did not pay for them, not even before the vaccines when masks were considered our primary defense if we had to get close to someone, yet pay for the vaccines, which they say we have a choice on (even if coerced)?
Which makes more sense for the good of the public health: allowing medical professionals to make their own vaccination choices (keep in mind that they use PPE to create a barrier between them and the patients), or creating sudden medical staff shortages as a consequence of vaccine mandates which many healthcare professionals reject? Here is a related article.
Do all those advocating the vaccine and mandates know and understand the ingredients or are they promoting something they don't understand?
How should a treatment with any risk of death or disability be mandatory?
How much of this crisis is about belief. Although the COVID-19 issue pretends to revolve around science, for most people it revolves more around faith. Science is about verifiable evidence, and the average person cannot verify any of the key evidence of COVID at their own experience. Rather we are forced to trust someone or something else for the truth. That's why the COVID-19 controversy hinges so much on people presenting different types of evidence fro different sources, and the battle hinging not somuch on the content of the evidence, but what source it comes from and if the recipient of the presentation trusts that source or not. A popular statement on this issue, for example, is that the person 'trusts the science', by which they mean trusts the what the official public experts say, calling that trust 'science'. The best independent researchers, often called 'conspiracy theorists' to discredit them before hearing their presentation, tend to trust hard evidence and official documents, but even that is a trust and not a direct experience with the truth. Admittedly, some of them have their own labs and do their own tests, but to relay the truth to someone else it would have to be received in trust by the hearer. Once conclusions are based on trust, rather than observation, they are more about faith than science.
Is it wise to overturn our economy, human rights, families, livelihood, lifestyle, and bodily security based solely on trust of experts?
If the 'vaccine' is so effective, then how are the unvaccinated any significant threat to the vaccinated? Isn't the purpose of the vaccine to make recipients immune to such threats, or at least immune enough to not be fearful about contact with other people?
If Government orders us to wear masks only to medically protect ourselves and others, then how come:

The high-level virus research labs don't wear face masks, but a complete airproof suit. Maybe no masks are good enough to block something as tiny as a virus? Certainly surgical face masks are totally inappropriate to stop a virus and were never intended for that (example article here).
We're told to maintain a strict 2m/6ft distance between each other, when the virus is actually airborne (see here).
Although we're ordered to wear masks, we're not taught or expected to change or clean them? This is a serious concerned considering that most of the public can't be expected to be familiar with these protocols, never having to use these masks before. Without changing or cleaning they can only accumulate pathogens over time.
We're not expected to wear gloves also?

If we choose to be fearful of contact with other people, why do we insist they change, not us?
How is no amount of coercion to make people take the vaccine considered too much or too cruel, even when they have the legal right to refuse any other treatment (no matter how life-saving)?
If the vaccinated are just as likely to spread the virus as the unvaccinated, why vilify and persecute only the unvaccinated as a threat to everyone's health?
How did our society allow itself to be seduced into a lynch mob mentality where we blame another group (ie. the unvaccinated) for our problems and demand their obvious persecution?
Is it reasonable to believe that the unvaccinated are resisting vaccination for some evil reason which must be stopped? Isn't it obvious that they have decided another course is best for their health?
If the unvaccinated are making the wrong decision (to refuse the 'vaccine'), and will suffer for it, why do we need to institute artificial punishments for them?
Should we have the right to decide our own medical treatments without coercion or artificial punishments?
Since even a 'vaccine' depends on a healthy immune system, why are we not encouraged to support that immune system, with diet, exercise, and sleep? Rather we are discouraged: Hawaii Dept. of Health posts announcement telling people to forget about eating healthy and working out, just take the mRNA vaccine
If the radical Government social interventions and spending are done because Government cares so intensely about protecting human life that we must all do anything to save it, then how come, typically in many jurisdictions the same Government:
1. supports elective abortion of children while in their mother’s womb, even after they are independently viable? Is it just a coincidence that CNN's medical analyst, Leana Wen, who has been vocal to call for more and more aggressive restrictions to freedoms of COVID-unvaccinated people (even that they should not be allowed to leave home), was a former president of Planned Parenthood? Is she doing this desperately trying to save human life or another reason?
2. kept abortion clinics open during lockdowns, while most businesses, schools, and churches were closed, and even many cancer and heart surgeries postponed?
3. doesn’t do much to help the homeless, and sometimes harasses them
4. always has enough money for war, but complains of not having enough money for healthcare, veteran care, elder care, and education?
5. legalises and even profits from the sale of cigarettes, alcohol, and in some places, marijuana?
6. could have ended WORLD HUNGER for just a tiny fraction of the cost spent on COVID, but didn’t? Hunger kills over twice per year what COVID ever has, could have been ended with just a fraction of the spending the USA government has spent fighting COVID and that’s not including the revenue they’ve disrupted due to lockdowns.
  1. Hunger has a 100% mortality rate, if untreated, compared to COVID at a far lower mortality rate of 1.60% (in the USA).
  2. 9 million people die of hunger every year, according to the World Counts, which is more .
    That’s approximately 25,000 per day dying worldwide due to hunger.
  3. Estimates of how much it would cost to end world hunger vary from $7 billion to $265 billion per year according to the International Food Policy Research Institute
    (even the high estimate is only approximately a quarter of a trillion dollars!).
    In comparison, the USA alone has spent or allocated $13.5 trillion for COVID relief funds, spending $6 Trillion so far, and data on how much is spent on the vaccination program is difficult to find.

Why is the Government more than happy to pay for any amount of Covid injections and boosters for you, but won’t pay for your abulance if you need one for any reason?
How many deaths, officially attributed to the vaccine, are required before we should stop calling the vaccine safe?
If any serious threat to human life is worthy of a lockdown, how come we haven’t locked down (or similarly held our society for ransom) to put an end to bigger threats such as:

ischaemic heart disease
hunger
cigarette smoking
substance abuse
reckless or DUI driving
missing children

These officials who insist the ‘'vaccine'’ is ‘safe and effective’: are they liable if it harms you, or if you contract the disease despite being vaccinated?
--Answer: Typically none of them are liable at all. Even the 'vaccine' manufacturers are immune to legal liability. So it’s very easy for them to say it’s safe when you take all the risk.
These people who demand you get the 'vaccine': how many of them are liable if the 'vaccine' harms you (as many have been harmed or killed already, even by the official data).
--Answer: Typically none of them. It’s very easy to demand someone else take the chance when you won’t bear the costs if things go wrong.
If the COVID 'vaccines' are completely safe, and even if all the disability or death seen soon after COVID 'vaccine' administration is only a coincidence which cannot be proven being due to the vaccine, then how come vaccine manufacturers were granted legal immunity from lawsuits? Why would they need that for something completely safe?
Why are COVID case and death numbers are headline news daily, but many other life threats rarely make the news, such as homelessness?
At what point should a democratic Government pause radical social orders, done over years of time, ask the Public what we want to do?
For example, has any government in the world asked voters if they we want to use lockdowns to control the Pandemic?
At what point in ordering interventions into our daily lives, without asking what we want, can a Government safely be called a dictatorship?
At what point is reprogramming the human body with artificial genetic code a disrespect of the Creator?
Where is the news coverage of people harmed by the vaccine?
Why have lockdowns been reported as an inconvenience, and some economic harm, but not a very real health harm?
1. https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/three-outspoken-canadian-doctors-who-condemn-lockdowns-as-causing-more-harm-than-good
2. https://humansarefree.com/2021/02/doctor-proves-lockdowns-10x-deadlier-than-covid.html
Why is vaccination status, rather than immunity status, seen as the gold standard by which we should award social freedoms? Governments tyically let many murderers go free but we don’t tolerate the unvaccinated.
Shouldn’t those who have won permanent natural immunity by recovering from COVID not need a 'vaccine'?
Why do we need endless booster shots of COVID but not for any other disease?
The SARS-CoV-1 (SARS) pandemic suddenly disappeared. Why are we not discussing that possibility for SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19), but relevant officials insistent that it COVID-19 wi ll be with us forever?
Should we be following leaders who tell us the problem will never go away?
Why are some protests allowed, even encouraged and participated in by Government, even without masks, while others, especially anti-lockdown/vaccination protests, are considered illegal gatherings and dealt with harshly by authorities?
What’s the urgency to vaccinate children when they have the lowest mortality to COVID-19?
(Example here and here)
If we allow our human rights to be arbitrary, all suspendable if Government chooses to declare an emergency at their own time and definition, do we really have any human rights at all?
Why do we accept elected officials gone back on their open promise not to enforce a social restriction they soon later did? Why do we use euphamisms such as ‘flip-flop’ or ‘reversal’ when we use much harsher terms when someone does that kind of thing to us in our personal relationships?
If the vaccines are so effective, why is our society in worse shape in fighting this disease even with most of the population taking the vaccine? Are the people who haven’t taken the vaccine really to blame, or is the injection itself, sold to us on a lie? Are we accepting excuses because they sound sophisticated?
What is the pore size of the masks we are told to wear in comparison to the size of the virus?
What research, exactly, was the foundation of the 6 foot social distancing rule?
(--Answer: No one can; it’s been admitted to be arbitrary.)
Is it reasonable to believe that not one but all major multiple 'vaccine' manufacturers produced a 'vaccine' for SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) in a year while no one was able to produce a 'vaccine' for SARS-CoV-1 (SARS) in almost 20 years, and when 'vaccine' development normally takes 10-15 years? Can you force a breakthrough?
Is your body private or public property?
If your body incorporates artificial genetic code from the covid ‘injection’, are you human or a transgenic or genetically modified organism?
If your body is injected with a legally patented genetic code belonging to a corporation, do you still own your body?
If this is all about helping the Public, then how come:
1. The poorest of the poor, who cannot afford food, were left to buy their own masks to conform with government mandates?
2. 'vaccine' manufacturers received huge grants, from public money, without any ownership benefit for the Public?
3. 'vaccine' manufacturers are typically given legal immunity to any harm done to the Public by their 'vaccines'?
4. Churches were severely pressured or closed, and some people not even permitted to see their elderly parents, but banks were never restricted?
5. Businesses received grants to help offset PPE costs, but private citizens do not?
6. The cost to taxpayers of all these 'vaccines' is rarely discussed?
Why are the booster shots designed for us to continue needing a new one periodically to no end? Did the vaccine manufacturers ever intend to erradicate the virus, or are they using it to enslave us to pay them for their products forever?
Is giving up the permanent inalienability of our humans rights the best way to deal with a temporary crisis? What permanent inalienable rights are left for future generations?
Who decided that mainstream news agencies should report the daily COVID case counts, with no end in sight to them doing this, but not daily deaths for any other cause?
If we must wear masks, for our health, why is the Public not guided in how often to replace or wash them?
If we live in a democracy, at what point should Government invite the Public to decide how we want any long-term crisis handled?

Chapter 3, Section 11: YOUR FASTEST WAYS TO CONFIRM THE TRUTH

Take the following steps:

Find the webpage, on the official website of your Government, which clearly shows the adverse events reported from the COVID vaccines. For example, here is the one for Canada.
Find the table or list of how many people have suffered each condition secondary to COVID-19 vaccination.
In the time you have, look up the terms of any of those conditions you don't understand.
Imagine for a moment that the people tallied in the Government report are real; specifically imagine that the mainstream news had reported the personal stories of those individual cases of serious adverse event reaction, including: the effect to their lives, their families lives, and the medical implications. They deserve to be reported, after all.
Compare the reality in the above step to the reality you had before starting this exercise.

Chapter 3, Section 12: FORMAL TRIAL OF PERPETRATORS

International criminal grand jury investigation finds that globalist psychopaths used covid to commit “crimes against humanity”

Chapter 3, Section 13: Comparison with Popular Thought on Other Social Issues

Abortion: In the abortion issue, pro-choice activists have maintained that it must at least be legal for a pregnant woman to elect to terminate her pregnancy, on the basis that she must have absolute right to choose her medical treatments. Based on this argument, the unofficial slogan of the pro-choice movement is , "My body, my choice".

Yet the same groups who insist that even killing is justified under the supposedly all-important right to choose one's own medical treatments, tended to at least passively support the argument that no one has the right to refuse the COVID-19 vaccine, that doing so endangers others, and therefore any punishments to pressure them to accept vaccination are (supposedly) justified. Example article: Pro-choice college students avoid 'my body, my choice' arguments for vaccine mandates

Admittedly, both abortion-issue pro-choice voices supporting vaccine mandates and abortion-issue pro-life voices opposed to vaccine mandates have been accused of hypocrisy based on the "My body, my choice" slogan. The difference, however, is that:

the "my body" part of the argument is not valid in the context of abortion because there are two living human bodies involved: the pregnant woman and the unborn child.
although both issues involve an arguable risk to others, the risk to the other, the unborn child, in the case of abortion is direct and intentional termination, while the risk of to others in the case of COVID-19 non-vaccination isunintentional transmission of a virus (which vaccinated people can transmit just as much of), being a virus which has an extremely low mortality rate. In other words, there is an intent to harm another in an abortion decision, but not in a COVID-19 vaccination refusal decision.
The right being demanded in the abortion pro-choice position is for a access to an unnatural medical treatment, while the right being demanded in the vaccine pro-choice position is the right to refuse an unnatural treatment.

Chapter 4: An Overall Understanding:

Chapter 4, Section 1: THE CORE ISSUES:

The core concerns of the COVID Crisis are, in the form of questions:

Who or what do you trust supremely?

Your supreme trust is, in practice, your god. It is your foremost 'go-to' in the worst problems: the foundation on which you most rely for your sense of reality and security.

Society doesn't trust things, because anything can be interpreted in a multitude of ways, and doesn't provide one singular confident direction which is so reassuring in a time of crisis. Even clear evidence people require to be interpreted by someone who knows best. It is certain kinds of people we ultimately trust in.

So who is society's god?

As Yuval Harari rightly pointed out in this video from the 2:17 mark, since we were willing even to close our places of worship at the recommendation of scientists, it proves that we have come to trust scientists supremely. You could say that in the battle for social trust between religion and science, science has won. Although he didn't say it in that clip, family members also turned on each other over conflicting views and the Public was specifically told not to listen to their family and seemed to comply; this means that scientists were also trusted above your own mother, father, and family.

This wasn't humanity's first pandemic, and prior cultures handled the crisis differently. When the black plague hit Europe, pope Gregory had a large prayer procession, until he received a vision of the plague being spiritually defeated, after which it physicall subsided. Our society rather trusted vaccines and closed churches, and the virus only exploded into many new variants until we were told to just live with it; plus we had to deal with the vaccine adverse effects.

Interestingly, the vaccine/science-trusting attitude showed true religious fervour when in persecuted those who refused to trust in the same.

Should Government be able to award itself emergency powers, and renew them indefinitely?
How much should Government be allowed to restrict, suspend, or cancel human rights?

Before this temporary pandemic our human rights were eternal and inalienable (could never be taken away). Once this crisi started, the Public accepted Goverments to suspend our permanent human rights on excuse of a temporary emergency. In extending the emergency and switching on and off and on and off our human rights in this crisis, Government has made a very clear implicit statement that human rights are something they give at their own discretion not something we have which they must respect.

Should we surrender human rights for fear of death?

If yes, should we stop expecting our national soldiers to die to defend our rights?
How much right should we have to suspend the human rights of others, such as by mandates?
Is it OK to discriminate against anyone based on their medical treatments or social status?
Should we have the right to decide our own medical treatments, when there is a risk of harm?
Should manufacturers of a product be compelled to be responsible for it?

Rather our governments guaranteed vaccine manufacturers legal immunity for all harms in advance.

At what magnitude of harm should a product, distributed to the Public, be recalled for reason of that harm?

Our politicians admitted no level of public harm or death, even by their own statistics, at which they would consider completely stopping the vaccination program. At most they suspended certain vaccines for certain age groups, as though people were the problem, rather than calling any vaccine dangerous.

Is your natural immune system effective?

In this crisis the Public was reeducated to believe that even provable natural immunity is unreliable but synthetic vaccines are reliable.

Is it OK to genetically alter humanity?

Since genetic vaccines alter our genetic material, and since genetic material is what is passed on to future generations, the change could affect humanity literally forever. It's not something we have the technology to undo. Perhaps humanity is ruined.

Chapter 4, Section 2: THE CORE PROBLEM:

The main problem problem of the COVID-19 crisis is a public failure to recognize and refuse immoral including dangerous orders. The SARS-CoV-2 virus eitehr doesn't exist or is mild enough as to only have been a little more disturbing than the seasonal flu. It didn't need to destroy our economy or human rights: that was Government-ordered and we complied with it.

Image by Richard Duijnstee from Pixabay

Chapter 4, Section 3: THE CORE SUSPECTS:

Bill Gates:

Chapter 4, Section 4: THE CORE MOTIVE [Theories]:

Why did the Establishment do this to us?

THEORY 1: The virus and the 'vaccine' are both harmful and intended to start society on a path towards a new world order of very high Government control of the Public with very high surveillance.

The basic premise is that Government must seize 'emergency' powers and implement extreme human-rights trampling measures to keep everyone 'safe' from the virus (even if it kills them). For example, in China November 28, 2022: TUCKER CARLSON: Shanghai is the largest prison camp in human history

This explains why the viruses and variants don't end: so that the excuse to ramp up of Government control doesn't end. In fact Bill Gates promised that Pandemic 2 will get attention.

An important element of the strategy is to not to take powers from and reduce freedoms for the Public, but to ease the acceptance of this by presenting the measures as temporary, while leaving them in place because the crisis has not ended in their view. This explains why the initial lockdown was rolled out with a 2-week promise, was extended for years, and why even in lifting restrictions they merely down-regulate them (so they still exist in at least some small way and can be up-regulated at any time) rather than eliminate them.

The vaccination scam could have been just a payoff to the medical industry for their support in maintaining a medical justification to the emergency powers.

It's not obvious why, then, a vaccine with real ingredients was required, instead of a placebo. It seems that the vaccine is part of the new surveillance nettwork (video: Yuval Noah Harari | "COVID Is Critical Because This Is What Convinces People to Accept to Legitimize Total Biometric Surveillance. If We Want to Stop This Epidemic, We Need to Monitor What's Happening Under Their Skin."). This would explain observations of Governments showing that they cared more about who was vaccinated, rather than who was immune or virus-free, when awarding human rights back.

Of course, the Establishment doing this would want to have some antitode from themselves dying to the virus. Allegedly an antidote is very easy: in the form of nicotine.

This theory has the following sub-theories:

THEORY 1a: This is a plan to alter and enslave humanity on a genetic level through the vaccines.
The idea of the trap is to alter humanity physically so that we cannot go back to the way we were before, no matter how we might revolt. Incorporation of patented genetic material also makes us the legal property of the patent holder, ie. legal slaves. This theory can work concurrently with Theory 1, ie. part of a Government Tyranny plan. Related videos:
- Yuval Noah Harari | Why Did Yuval Noah Harari Say, "In the 21st Century a New Stalin Has the Ability to Re-Engineer the Human Body?"
- Military lawyer says genetic changes from COVID vaccines are creating a new human ‘species’ under the law
Perhaps slavery was never truly abolished, but only became more sophisticated.
THEORY 1b: This is to pave the way for acceptance of the Biblical Mark of the Beast, and a totalitarian, satanic society as described in the Book of Revelation. The COVID-19 injection by this theory is to start the process of under-the-skin surveillance, as described by Yuval Harari here. The idea is that surveillence will not only increase but be a component of Government control. See our Spiritual Situation section for more details on this threat, at least the part on the Mark of the Beast.
THEORY 1c: The COVID-19 vaccines introduce an obedience (to Government) system into the body. The premise here is that the vaccines are high-tech well beyond conventional understanding, as we know from patents, and may involve secret Defense or possbly even alien or demonic technologies. This theory can work to support the Government tyranny purpose of Theory 1. Related articles include:

THEORY 1d: The virus is weak or fake and the 'vaccine' is an unrelated bioweapon which is intended for depopulation with minimum suspicion or blame and no liability.

The idea behind forced depoulation by the Estalibshment is to make the Population easier to manage, so it fits well with an overall tyranny objective.

This theory explains:

The reason for such a strong push to get everyone vaccinated as fast as possible: because not many people will take it once the harms become clear; to get as many vaccinated as possible before they realize.
The reason for the extreme downplay of harms in the official narrative: because not many people will take it if they understand the dangers.
Why the vaccination program would not stop no matter the harms. By this theory, harms were the real purpose of the vaccination program.

Some supports for this theory:

January 8, 2023: Government & Pfizer Documents reveal Gates & Schwab’s Depopulation Agenda: Covid Vaccines are being used for Mass Death & Population Control
X-Files episode predictive programming of covid-19 and depopulation
Here is a supporting video.
Here is an archived headline from the Sovereign Independent newspaper (since closed) published in 2011: Depopulation Through Forced Vaccination
Biotech analyst Karen Kingston unveils the covid vaccine 5G link + biosynthetic AI nanotech. This video includes the theory that the vaccines may have installed an execution platform by which the vaccinated can be killed by an electromagnetic signal.
Situation Update, Oct 6, 2022 - mRNA "vaccines" actually INSTALL a bioweapons staging platform into your body
Ex-Russian Intel Officer: Depopulation Agenda Is Real

THEORY 1e: Non-human entities directed the COVID-19 crisis, through their pawns of Shadow Government, for the enslavement and/or destruction of humanity on multiple layers at the same time including: human experimentation, disabilties, death, human genetic corruption, human rights trampling, human infertility, human suffering, and human depopulation, in the COVID-19 crisis, concurrently with other attacks on humanity including abortion and lgbt promotion.

Many of the harms are likely permanent, not only for individuals but also society, especially the potential of hereditary genetic corruption and the establishment of legal precedent of Government being permitted to order unilateral suspensions of any human rights they choose based on a pandemic.

The theory makes a lot of sense because only a non-human could reasonably be expected to be pleased with the widespread, multi-faceted, and permanent harm this crisis has done to humanity.

The non-humans in question could be extraterrestrials, or hidden intelligent ancient subterranian inhabitants of Earth we don't publicly know about, or demons: any non-humans which definitely or might hate humanity.

THEORY 2: The virus is weak or fake and the 'vaccine' is an unrelated bioweapon which is intended to weaken the opponents of China by using a different vaccine for both groups. This theory alleges a subtly military attack by China to weaken the rest of the world before it plans to attack, especially USA and its allies.

Sources on this theory include:

Chapter 4, Section 5: THE MOST LIKELY EXPLANATION

Most likely, in the opinion of this Editor, the explanation is this:

World Governments cooperated to create the problem: either with a real virus or a test which would produce positive results whether the virus existed or not. Or both. Notice that they waited on the World Health Organization, which is a political rather than medical cue, to declare it a pandemic before they implemented strict social restrictions in unison.
The reason why World Governments cooperated to create that problem is to insist on their one solution: an injection for everyone. That is why officials refused to acknowledge anything else as an effective defense, even if it was proven to be (eg. ivermectin), nor anything natural, nor any vitamin (eg. vitamin D): not even acknowledging the reliability of naturally aquired immunity. That's also why they insisted we wait months or years on a vaccine to be invented when normally waiting should not have been an option in something supposedly killing many around the world right now. We were never allowed another hope, and their was no significant attempt on their part to search for anything available without waiting which would help. The COVID-19 crisis has openly morphed away from trying to erradicate the disease towards simply trying to get everyone vaccinated, whether the vaccine works or not: Biden planning Global COVID Summit to ‘vaccinate the world’
Masks were imposed to help propagate the virus. That is why they insisted you wear a mask but not a medical mask. It was to make sure the pores were large enough to let the airborne virus in, but small enough to impair our breathing, because breathing works against the virus.
Lockdowns were imposed to coerce vaccination. That is why release from them came to be explicitly conditional on a certain percentage of the population accepting the vaccine, rather than linked to the virus.
Human rights were suspended just to give them back only to those who accepted ongoing vaccinations.
Vaccine mandates were imposed to coerce vaccination. Obviously.
The vaccine is a 'soft kill': formulated to harm, and do no good, in such a way as to be very difficult to prove as the cause and with legal immunity for the perpetrators even if a link could be proven. There is also a third layer of defense for them: that recipients consented to it despite vaccine harm statistics being published and so they should have known the risks. Intent to harm is why officials weren't alarmed that the vaccines (which they bet all our lives on, to the exclusion of all other options), were ineffective at this basic purpose; rather they kept encouraging more vaccination. It is also why no amount of vaccine-related harms was ever sufficient for them to consider stopping the vaccination program or to stop referring to the vaccines as 'safe and effective'.
Humanity may still suffer huge losses of life, and permanent genetic corruption, from the lingering effects of the vaccines. We don't know any medical way to reverse the process.
It is suspicious for non-human enemy involvement. It's difficult to imagine a human tyrant hating humanity so much that they would induce society to take a gene therapy which could corrupt not only their own bodies but that of future generations, and potentially mix with their future offspring at some point. It is much easier to imagine a non-human enemy of humanity behind it: someone whose offspring is at no risk of mixing with this syntehtic genetic material. This person might be Satan of the Bible, or evil extraterrestrials, or soemthing else. We don't know. But there's too little benefit and too much degradation and genetic corruption of what it means to be human for any human to be leading this plan on their own.
Humanity fell right into the trap because most of us trusted officials rather than evidence. Actually officials can lie, but evidence does not. When you spend hours a day listening to strangers give you the news from mainstream agencies, but don't have a moment to allow a family member to tell you what evidence they found, you should have known there is something dangerously wrong with your attitude.

Chapter 5: The Significance:

Chapter 5, Section 1: THREATS to the Public from this Issue:

INTERNAL THREATS (things we need to fix about ourselves before we should dare to try to fix others or the world):

Disinterest in Politics: In theory, the Law, which is determined by politics, has a greater affect on our lives than anything else in this world. In practice, we were only able to live comfortably indifferent to politics if our human rights were secure. Now that they are being stripped from us, it's time to wake up and defend them in the political arena.
Seeing each other as a threat to our health.
Seeing someone else's health decisions as a threat to you.
Seeing individual free speech as a danger to society.
Distrust of information coming from your own friends and family, while absolutely trusting information coming from Government, public health, military, and industry officials.
Disinterest in doing anything to help our species or future generations.

EXTERNAL THREATS (things we need to fix in the world around us):

Moral Threats:
1. The deliberate and direct reprogramming of our cells at the genetic level challenges the notion that God is the sole author of life and should therefore be interpreted as a disrespect to God the Creator or ‘playing God’. For example, genetic-'vaccine' technology has been officially desribed as ‘Hacking the Software of Life’.
  To many religious people, since God is the sole author of life, genetic code is therefore sacred, and ‘hacking’ it would therefore be abomination.
2. It is immoral to trust scientists as infallible; the only infallible person is God.
3. Links to abortion-derived human cell lines should not be ignored; this reality means that the vaccines involve people, even their bodies, in the act and products of abortion. Most COVID vaccines are developed, produced, or tested using cells derived from aborted human children. References include:
  1. The brutal reality of the origin of vaccines: Ripping apart living pre-born babies
  2. Leaked Pfizer Executive Emails Confirm Aborted Fetal Tissue Used in COVID Vaccine Testing
  Admittedly this stance is undermined, but not eliminated, where leaders of that religion condone the 'vaccine' (example article here).
4. There is an obedience-based moral crisis in humanity, as medical staff are increasingly being told to do things with their patients, on the master-excuse of COVID, which are unprecedented, cruel, and harmful. One example is denying family visitation.
5. Regarding genetic vaccines, direct and deliberate alteration of the genetic information of human beings poses the following moral problems:
6. It is grossly immoral to consent to human rights being no longer inalienable but arbitrarily suspendable or awarded only on arbitrary conditions; this loss passes to future generations.
7. It is grossly immoral to shield vaccine manufacturers from legal liability for what they manufacture.
8. It is grossly immoral to make anything mandatory which carries serious risk of harm, such as a first-time-ever gene-altering injection for humans for which long-term consequences cannot possibly be known, or pressure that decision such as with termination of employment.
9. Vaccine mandates have been alleged to violate the Nuremberg Code, especially free consent to the medical procedure. The argument has been popularly dismissed on the technicality that the Nuremberg code relates to medical experimentation not an approved vaccine (example here). Yet the moral issue remains the same: if consent is a moral requirement for even for an experiment, it must be a moral requirement for all other medical procedures. It is nonsense to say that experiments should have a higher level of consent than other medical procedures.
10. It is immoral for medical staff to do cruel things to their patients, or falsifying data polcy makers depend on, on excuse of COVID, and sadly, most of them are (reportedly) complying. It is reminiscent of the famous Milgram experiment, where participants chose to do harm to innocents because of firm orders from authority, only this time people are being hurt or killed for real. Examples include (see Covidland.com for evidence examples):
11. The cruelty of the animal testing behind the development of these drugs and vaccines should not be ignored; this reality means that the vaccines involve people, even their bodies, in the act and products of cruelty to animals.
Political & Legal Threats:
1. It's difficult to prove that bodily harm caused by a vaccine is caused by a vaccine. It doesn't leave, for example, a gunshot wound. Any following ailment can be called a coincidence, even if it happens just minutes after receiving the jab. Even the CDC website, in stating the number deaths shortly after vaccination, insists that there is no way to prove that these deaths are related to the vaccine.
2. If patented genetic code ends up in your own genes, such as produced by ‘software’ (RNA/DNA code based) 'vaccine' manufacturers, your genes might be considered the legal property of someone else.
  Reference: here
3. Now that we have accepted 'lockdowns' as a tool the Government can use to govern us, they can and are already considering using it on us for issues not related to COVID or even any virus, such as environmental protection. As of this writing, India is considering imposing a lockdown to reduce pollution (article here).
4. Whether they actually use lockdowns anymore or not, they can use threats to lock us down to attempt to control us, and have already started to do so. For example, Ontario (Canada) Premier Doug Ford hinted that we would be punished with a lockdown if we don't accept the new vaccine certificate system, touting it as a way to 'avoid' more lockdowns (article here). The rise of public policy implementation by ransom, meaning that an authority (eg. Government) dictates a desired behaviour (eg. 90% vaccination), a punishment is threatened for non-compliance (eg. lockdown), and if the behaviour is not obeyed and the punishment is levied, the victim (the Public), not the authority, is blamed as the cause.
  In a domestic setting, this would resemble a father telling his daughter that dinner must be on the table when he gets home or else she will be beaten, and if that happens, it’s her fault.
  Related article here.
Spiritual Threats:
1. Loss of our design by our Creator: By altering our own gentic material, and rendinging our genetic ‘software of life’ no longer natural, we may interfere with our natural spiritual place in the universe. For example, if we were created in the image of God, and we alter our genetic software, we are no longer the image of God anymore, or at least the image our Creator gave us, and this could have critical spiritual consequences, especially when we go to meet Him, such as possibly being refused entry to Heaven.
2. Mark of the Beast: If the virus isn't real, then the vaccines supposedly coded from the virus can't be really that but must be something else for some other purpose. They are likely inserting genetic material (otherwise why bother the risk in claiming that), but genetic material from who or what? In a worst-case scenario, the 'vaccines' may be inserting some kind of luciferian or demonic genetic code for integration into our bodies, by our consent however coerced, in an attempt to separate us from God.
  
  Tracking purposes could also be real but secondary to the spiritual one.
  
  Other inclusions in the vaccine could be to keep people sick and keep the crisis going by rebranding most symptoms as COVID.
  
  This would also explain why the Government cares so much about making sure everyone is vaccinated, but not at all that the vaccine doesn't work to protect people.
  
  Interestingly, whether to separate us from God or track everybody, these scenarios imply a motivation for Governments to pursue everyone until they are vaccinated.
  
  In this distubring deliverance video, a Christian minister forces the demons in possessed individuals to disclose the truth about the COVID vaccies.
Medical Threats:
1. Risk of death or disability from the virus
2. Risk of death, disability, or irreversible genetic alteration, among other things, from the 'vaccines'
3. Risk of medical and psychologial harm from the various mask/distancing/lockdown mandates.
4. Risk of material residue from deep nasal swap tests.
5. Risk of physical, biological, or psychological harm from the mask/distancing/lockdown orders.
Financial Threats:
1. Loss of livelihood especially by Government-ordered lockdowns.
2. Catastrophic economic losses by the shutdown of the economy including ordering many businesses closed.
3. Unrestrained government deficit spending on the public credit, to support the fallout created by their own COVID-19 restrictions, as well as their own decision to purchase and mandate COVID tests and 'vaccines'. How will Governments pay for this? Don't they ultimately come to the People for the money?
Psychological Threats:
1. Psychologial abnormalities associated with restricted socialization.
  1. https://www.naturalnews.com/2021-09-29-social-anxiety-in-teens-young-adults-worsen.html
  2. https://www.aier.org/article/the-damage-of-lockdowns-to-young-people/
2. A public not permitted to leave a state of fear over COVID, with major news agencies insistant to public COVID case and death numbers EVERY DAY as headline news, and officials continually ramping up the public fear with new excuses to do so.
Temporal threat: The unbelievable short notice with which orders of extreme social change have been announced has been its own threat, because the notice has usually been too short for most people to plan an escape. This seems to be by design.
Any Other Threats: COVID has been getting used as the master excuse to justify literally any authority action, from customer service reductions to government tyranny.

OVERALL THREAT: The COVID crisis is the ruin of human rights, a real threat to human genetics, and medical danger from BOTH the virus (although exaggerated) and the vaccine (how it actually works typically being glossed over in favour of how it's hoped to work). This threat to humanity is far more due to the Government interventions justified on the virus than the virus, in these ways:

We have allowed dictatorship to replace democracy while still upholding a pretense of democracy. We literally wait on Government announcements daily to see how we are allowed to live, and how this might change. We have forgotten the most important lesson of World War II: that even democratically elected leaders can lose respect for human rights, and if they do, we need a way to refuse their orders at the earliest possible stages of their plan.
A catastrophic precedent has been set to effectively end all human rights: they have become no longer inalienable but now completely arbitrary on the part of Government, including even what is injected into us (loss of that right alone would make all the others meaningless). We still retain a choice but against severe artificial consequences; coercion is not a free choice. Having failed to object at the launch of these measures, being scared into giving up our rights which former generations died to give us, we have set a precedent of no inalienable rights for anyone now or in the future, but only what rights the Government decides to allow us at the time on the conditions they decide at the time.

Do you think this is an overstatement? Perhaps you haven't noticed citizen videos from once freedom-rich nations begging literally anyone in the international community for help, like this one from Australia.
We have enslaved our society to vaccine manufactures on whom we appear to be becoming medically dependent.
We have allowed the human genome (God's blueprint of humanity) to be corrupted with artificial genetic material by these injections and we have no technology to reverse that. We cannot comprehend the genetic implications to future generations, except to know that we may have forever lost what it is to be human.

Chapter 5, Section 2: Importance of this Issue:

Definition of this Issue: This is a presentation on the public outbreak of the ‘SARS-CoV-2’ virus, also known as the ‘COVID-19’ virus, beginning in late 2019, resulting in a worldwide pandemic, with Governments reacting with major social changes, by their order, justified as being for Public safety.
Motivation (why Everyone Should Make the Time to Learn About and Respond to this Crisis): There is a temptation to leave politics to work itself out, while we focus on our own lives, so that we won't be inconvenienced by by things which don't need our intervention, anyway, or which we can't do anything about.

Many people have already adopted that attitude in the crisis, quietly going along with all the mandates, loyally supporting the same political parties without questiong, waiting for the crisis to end itself.

Unfortunately if we ignore this issue, refusing to take a side or do anything on the belief that everything will be OK in the end, or that it doesn't matter, or that we can't affect it, we do so at our great peril, because:
1. Already Happened: With the tremendous amount of changes ordered on our lives so far, including restrictions of what we need to protect our family or breathe the air, it is obvious that this particular crisis has already had a major effect on our daily lives.
2. Forced to Choose a Side: There is no ignoring this crisis as we are ordered to obey mandantes justified upon it. As soon as we leave the house we are given the choice to obey or not; there is no option to 'ignore'.
  
  Put another way, the strategy of ignoring politics is only livable so long your basic human rights are guaranteed. As long as you have those, it's true that whatever helps happens is not a major threat to your way of life.
  
  Unfortunately, this crisis is not like that. In the face of ordered social restrictions, vaccine mandates, and medical martial law legislation, our most basic rights are under direct attack in this crisis, such that there is no way you are permitted to live the same as you were before, including losing the right to travel, work, or decide your own medical treatments, and by the time this crisis is over, there are laws quietly in place which could be invoked to strip many other things also, including all property, on excuse of medical emergency. You can ignore all of it, but only as long as you accept being forced to surrender everything; really if you don't choose a side you will be forced into one.
3. Public quality of life can never be as good if we allow human rights to be lost. It is unprecedented for most Governments around the world to unilaterally implement such severe social restrictions as they have done in COVID, even to flagrantly strip us of the most basic human rights unless we obey. If we allow that precedent to stand, by simply not objecting to it, then by definition the life we have afterwards cannot have the same level of human rights which we had before. It's impossible. Also human rights are far easier lost than won or restored.
4. The way this ends, if the Public doesn't do anything, looks bad. Officials have made public statements hinting that they intend to take this much farther than anyone would want to live through. We must not allow them to get that far. For example, early in the pandemic, an official at the WHO, Dr. Ryan, made a public announcement about going into homes and taking children away. Are you prepared to let this crisis work itself out, without your involvement, if by the end, you have had your children taken from you?
5. Officials have made clear enough that they will never allow us to go back to living with the freedoms we had before, as a matter of policy.
  This is despite the fact that the SARS pandemic, based on the virus most closely related to COVID, disappeared on its own.
  
  Therefore, it only stands to reason that if the Public wants to go back to what you remember as 'normal', the only way now is to object to the Government plan to never allow that to happen.
  
  Article: 2022 Will Mirror 2021 Unless We Openly Disobey Unscientific Tyranny
6. Winner Take All: Even if you are happy to tolerate the mask and social distancing mandates, school closures, lockdowns, and vaccine mandates, this crisis has spawned the passing of laws which, whether fully implemented yet or not, spell the end of virtually every other freedom you have including your right to property (please do a search for the words 'Public Health Act' on this webpage for an example).
Even if you just focus on making your own money, allowing others to handle the crisis any way they want, the way this has been going, with your property rights at stake, you might find that whatever money you make could be instantly confiscated. Perhaps then 'You'll own nothing. And you'll be happy' (or say you are happy out of fear), as the World Economic Forum has foretold for you here.
Clarification: What Pivotal Awareness is Required to Understand this Crisis Correctly?
It is critical to understand that the COVID crisis is more a political crisis than a medical one. The crisis introduced dramatic social harms, all of which were portrayed as being entirely due to the COVID virus, as though the virus did all these things itself directly or at least there was no other possible course for Government to react to the virus, however:
1. these measures, such as masking and locking down healthy people, were not medically accepted principles before the pandemic, so they shouldn't be during it, especially when they have clearly failed to stop the mutations and spread of the virus. There wasn't a medical justification for them to start, and, especially since they failed, there is no medical justification for them to continue. It is political. For example, though Dr. Fauci advised masks during the pandemic even for the healthy and vaccinated (example video from late 2021 here), even supporting wearing two masks simultateously (example video here), before the crisis the same Dr. Fauci advised against mask-wearing by the healthy as prevention in the face of a virus while advocating instead for healthy immune system support options (see 23:10 of this video).
2. The threat of the virus, however dangerous, was only temporary, but the precedent of allowing Government to have the right to strip us of our rights and freedoms on excuse of any threat they declare, is permanent, making the social change precedent the far more lasting threat.
3. If we did nothing, the virus would not have killed more than approximately 1% of the population alive at the time, but the human rights restrictions ordered by Government affect(ed) everyone including all future generations.
4. The strongest evidence as to the origin of this virus is that it was created in a lab (built by France) in China with USA funding (partnership), and there is no indication that such research has stopped or that there are no more dangerous viruses which could be released. Government origin of the virus makes every bit of this crisis a political issue. For example, as debated in this video: "YOU CREATED THE V!RUS" Irritated Rand Paul SHREDS Dr. Fauci In Congress *NEW*
Why this issue should not be a Debate: One truth exists on this issue and it's a question of research, not debate, to solve it. Differences in Public opinion on this issue therefore exist only because of differences in trust, or, put another way, differences in how deep a person is willing to research the truth on this issue before speaking out their opinion on it.
Fastest way to the truth on this issue: If you need concrete evidence about the truth of this issue in a hurry, you might try:

Comparing all-cause mortality (deaths) in 2020 compared to the years prior. If there was a lethal pandemic, we would expect the total number of people dying to be much higher than for the previous few years. You will typically see that the total number of deaths in 2020 is not significantly different than for the previous years. (Do not use 2021 for this comparison because that introduced the COVID vaccine reactions and COVID variant allegations so it's not as clear to interpret from).
Go to the official website of your government to find the number of reported adverse events from the COVID vaccine, and what types of reactions are included especially the serious ones. You should find numbers for cardiac arrest and/or death among them. If it kills people outright, should it be called 'safe'?
Examining the product monographs (manufacturer's disclosure) for the COVID vaccines in question (such as here from the Government of Canada website for the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine). You should find that there are lots of risks mentioned there for which they reveal there is no data (unknown). That makes Government promises of vaccine safety an exaggeration at best.
Asking for a copy of the contract your Government has signed with the vaccine manufacturers. If it's a democracy, as a citizen, you should have the right to see it. You will find that you don't have the right to see it, or at least not without redactions.
If you look up the original article announcing the discovery of COVID to the world, including its genome sequence, and you look at the method of how they did that, you will see that they didn't even bother to isolate any virus from the lung fluid before running it through the sequencer. That's outrageous.
If you get your hands on a COVID-19 test kit, like the kind used as the basis for our daily news headlines for case counts, you should find that it says on the packaging that it's not to be used to diagnose COVID-19. Why not?
Find out who is responsible for vaccine adverse reactions. You will usually find that manufacturers are immune from liability.

Why Your Involvement Can Make a Difference: In their COVID ordering, Governments around the world have been closely monitoring Public response, and in many cases quickly repealing restrictions if the Public rejected them. For example:
1. New Brunswick retracts vaccine requirements for grocery stores after public backlash
All we have to do is reject the Government-ordered social restrictions, and other human rights violations, as a People, for them to stop. We need to let Government know that however COVID may harm us, we won't accept Government harming us.

Chapter 5, Section 3: CRIMES (critical moral failures) on this issue:

To allow a health test to be implemented in such a way (eg. high number of cycles) that the false-positive rate is significant, is a crime against humanity.
To base public policy on data rather than sick people is a crime against humanity.
To mask and mandate healthy people with health orders is a crime against humanity.
The suspension of human rights of the General Public for ANY reason is a crime against humanity.
For citizens to accept without objection the suspension of human rights of the General Public for ANY reason is a crime against humanity.
For citizens to vote support of politicians openly promising to impose or maintain human rights suspensions for the general public is a crime against humanity.
The mixing of viruses to enable the creation of more dangerous forms is a crime against humanity.
In democratic societies, to deny the public a direct choice, such as a referendum, on implementing or maintaining sweeping social change is a crime against humanity.
To deliberately or through careless pursuit of incentives inflate statistics used as justification for Public policy is a crime against humanity.
To suspend medical treatments for other diseases by Government order is a crime against humanity.
To promote an injection to the Public as 'safe and effective' which hasn't existed long enough to know the long-term effects, or pretending that an invasive medical procedure like this has no risks, is a crime against humanity.
To declare something safe without any means or meaningful looking to tell if following injuries are due to it or another cause is a crime against humanity.
For physicians to under-report vaccine injuries because of the extra work or any other reason is a crime against humanity.
To automatically pretend that any adverse effects, including death, immediately or soon after vaccination are a mere coincidence, without any full investigation, is a crime against humanity. Families deserve to know the true cause of death rather than just rubber-stamping every death, even car accidents if the person tested positive, as COVID deaths.
To exert any kind of pressure against someone's free choice to be vaccinated or not is a crime against humanity. It is extremely immoral to mandate something with risks.
To shield vaccine manufacturers from liability is a crime against humanity. Why should the Public be harmed and have to pay for that harm, rather than profiteering perpetrators?
To introduce artificial genetic code into the public human genome is a crime against humanity. It pollutes what it is to be human, making the public transgenic ie. no longer fully human, and possibly future progeny forever.
To mandate gene therapy for children, ie. before their bodies have developed and before they have their own children, is a crime against humanity.
To mandate people submit to medical testing is a crime against humanity.
To insist that a vaccine is the only possible treatment, ignoring even the most obvious natural methods to support the immune system, ignoring naturally acquired immunity, and vilifying drugs such as ivermectin, is a crime against humanity.
All of the crimes related to polluting the natural human genome of the Public are crimes not only against humanity, but an offense to the Creator who is the sole author of the original human genetic code we are tampering with.
To arbitrarily impose a social division (vaccinated / unvaccinated) and encourage one side to hate the other is a crime against peace and humanity.
To implement a system where residents must present Government papers proving their ongoing compliance with Government policies to be allowed even the most basic human freedoms is a crime against humanity.

Chapter 5, Section 4: Who Will be Blamed?

Due to persistent efforts of truth sharers, the Public is starting to wake up and show interest to hold people responsible for COVID tyranny and Government misinformation, and they might not care that the Government has trid to made the manufacturers legally immune. For example:

If and when Public acknowledgement of COVID-19 vaccine harm becomes widespread, the Establishment seems ready to shift blame to anyone but themselves and the vaccine manufacturers (despite their work being the root cause), such as:

Announcing reversal/reforms before any possible indictment. This reduces the public desire to press for prosecution and changes. Examples:

September 08, 2022: CDC Director Rochelle Walensky admits her agency made critical mistakes regarding COVID vaccines
September 04, 2022: After destroying American society, the CDC admits natural immunity works better than COVID jabs
August 21, 2022: The meaning of incredible
Aug 19, 2022: CDC Director Admits Covid Response Was Wrong And Even Criminal
CDC admits YOU GOT SUCKERED if you believed the COVID lies!
August 6, 2022: Are Health Officials Backtracking on COVID-19 Narratives?

Actually blaming the front-line physicians for distributing risky COVID-19 vaccines (while at the same time persecuting them if they criticized the vaccines). Article July 12, 2022: Governments that mandated deadly covid vaccines now blaming DOCTORS for not telling patients about the risks. Of course this ignores that the Government promoted the vaccines as safe, mandated them, and persecuted any physician who challenged that narrative. The premise here is to blame those who went along with the agenda, instead of the people who actually initiated it.
Blaming prior administrations. For example: TRUMP TRAP SPRUNG: Media FLIPS, sets stage to blame Trump for widespread vaccine injuries and deaths. One of the dangers of leaders doing what their advisors tell them is that if their advisors were wrong, even if they deliberately lied, the leader is still responsible.
Saying they never said that or didn't know or should not be held responsible for what they advocated. For example:

Nov 13 2022: The Dilemma of the Unvaccinated
November 02, 2022: Leftists want AMNESTY for their covid crimes but are unwilling to offer any APOLOGY to those whose lives were destroyed
1 Nov 2022: Nolte: COVID Tyrants at Left-wing Atlantic Beg for Amnesty
09/06/2022 Walensky denies responsibility for CDC’s failed covid mandates for schools, says she wasn’t there “when schools were closed”
TWISTED: Fauci is now claiming that he never recommended lockdowns
Aug 24, 2022: UNBELIEVABLE! Fauci Pretends He Never Called For Lockdowns

Are these some of the same people who demanded Alex Jones be punished with astronomical financial judgments for making one false statement he believed was true at the time?

Saying that the failure was expected, which makes them seem in-control, and therefore wise to trust, even when they fail. This projects an aura of control even in failure, encouraging a continuance of trust, that somehow they are reliable because they expected the failure of what they recommended. Example: Former White House COVID coordinator admits she didn’t think the jabs would stop the spread
Maintaining a glorification of the Government's pandemic response in a complete defiance of public outcry. The Establishment is actually publicly giving themselves awards for key players in this atrocity!

Chapter 5, Section 5: THE END RESULT

This seems to end with either us restoring our human rights or losing them permanently, plus there are already mounting casualties and who knows what the final tally will be. Plus there may be generational genetic corruption for future generations of humans.

Moreover, if the allegations of graphene, and they are widely supported, are real, a seed may have been planted whereby a sudden burst of 5G energy will turn the vaccinated rapidly sick and/or mentally deranged (a kind of zombie apocalypse) or killed.

There are also initiatives to put even more tyrannical treaties and other laws in place to trigger on the declaration of any new 'pandemic', such as the WHO pandemic treaty. It may be that Elites may create and release a new pathogen.

Regardless of that, there is no sigh of (gain-of-function?) virus research still being done.

Chapter 6: The SOLUTION:

CENTRAL SOLUTION: The most important thing to do is to recognize and refuse immoral orders, especially immediately and in unison. Immoral compliance is mostly what caused most of this crisis. It is not the unvaccinated who are continuing the pandemic, but the compliant with immoral orders. As the following video shows, it is only a question of resolve (to refuse immoral orders/mandates) to end all social restrictions: Old Man Cruz & Workmates
INTERNAL SOLUTIONS (things we need to fix about ourselves before we should dare to try to fix others or the world):

We must never see other humans generally as a threat to subdue, for reason of their peaceful choice, which attitude would instantly make us enemies of humanity and freedom.
We should strive to promote policies in society by sharing information not by mandates.
We need to start trusting information from our friends and family before any stranger, including officials we don't know well personally, all other things being equal.
We need to judge truth more by evidence than credibility of the presenter, or how many times a notion is repeated. We need to make sure, for example, that a lie told often enough never becomes the truth.
We should encourage (not discourage) other individuals to share information with us. Government discouraged us from taking informationf rom each other, insisting we only take our information from them, in the COVID crisis. Many individuals had the truth but were shut out from talking about it in their social circles as people told them they don't want to discuss that negative topic, while not telling the Government to be silent the same way. That we should trust strangers, instead of our blood family and hand-picked friends, just because they hold offices which we gave them, is a terrible mistake and it prevented the truth we needed from spreading fast enough to save many of us. Rather we should have helped those who have something to say to be heard by as many as we could.
Politics needs to be our first social priority, which attitude a functioning democracy assumes, at the very least to restore our human rights to absolutely inalienable for any reason no matter what.
We need to take personal responsibility for our vote. For example, everyone who voted for Canadian Prime Minister Mr. Justin Trudeau in the 2021 Canadian Federal Election did so on his explicit platform and promises to introduce proof of vaccination requirements and vaccine passports. Those people are just as responsible for these atrocities as he is, but will they even admit it?
We need to actually read the policy platform of political candidates, correctly recognize and refuse to vote for cruelty towards anyone. We need to actually read policy platforms of politicians and refuse to vote for what we recognize as evil to begin or continue.
We must not allow any emotion, such as desire or fear, to lead us to approving cruelty to others. This was a critical mistake of Nazi-era German Public, who were so eager for a politician who would get them out of the hated peace agreement of the last war, that they turned a blind eye to the part of tne Nazi party's policy statement which was cruel to Jews.

In COVID, how this played out was that people were so afraid of COVID, that, at least in Canada and United States federal elections during the crisis, they voted for candidates who openly promised to introduce vaccine mandates (a stripping of human rights from the unvacciated).
We must never allow Government to assume dictatorial powers for any reason. They have no incentive to ever lay them down, but only keep extending them, and there is no legal mechanism to stop them once it starts.
We must never again allow anything with serious risks of harm, no matter how rare, to be mandated. Otherwise we are murderers.
We must never allow anyone to be mistreated especially not stripped of their human rights, even if it's not us. What we approve for others' treatment has a way of coming back on us as our treatment. We see an example of this in the COVID crisis in the fact that the majority, being vaccinated, was all too eager to vote for vaccination requirements and mandates to torment the unvaccinated, since that was not them. But the way the GOvernment implemented the policy is not against the 'unvaccinated' but the 'not fully vaccinated', and kept increasing the doses for what they consider 'fully vaccinated'. Due to this, those who were vaccinated were suddenly faced with the same human rights losses which they approved for the 'not fully vaccinated' if they refuse the next required vaccine..

A failing to protect others with the same rights we would want for ourselves is behind all cruelties our society is guilty of. This is why, for example, we allow our Governments to assassinate foreigners, and many times that number in bystanders, by airstrikes, but we don't allow that within our nation because we recognize that one day that might be us.

EXTERNAL SOLUTIONS:

Prayer: with a human-engineered virus raging, Government rewriting the laws to give themselves endless emergency powers and strip us of more and more human rights, a dangerous vaccine being increasingly pushed on people with threats of dire punishments for disobedience, mainstream media never critical of Government plans, Churches in full support of Government, the first and best solution for the safety of yourself, your family, and our nation is private worship of and prayer to God. Worship and pray as much as you can more than you ever have.

No other strategy makes sense to rely on. Those promoting this mass death and control through vaccination have most, if not all, of the other strategic points at a great advantage: they can use and even print literally unlimited public money, they can write whatever laws they want, they control the police and military forces and can arm and recruit without limit, they dominate the sharing of information and the public narrative, they control the incentives the medical system relies on, and so many other advantages. We really can't expect to win by buying some canned food and refusing the vaccines. The main advantage, and perhaps only advantage, we have over them is that the Almighty is willing to support the righteous and innocent but not the wicked; He will work with us but not with them. We would be very foolish not to call on Him in the biggest way possible. And not only is He if unlimited power but the angels who serve Him are formidable beyond anything on Earth. For example, please consider these passages from the Bible:
1. 2 Kings 6 (KJV):
  15 And when the servant of the man of God was risen early, and gone forth, behold, an host compassed the city both with horses and chariots. And his servant said unto him, Alas, my master! how shall we do?
  16 And he answered, Fear not: for they that be with us are more than they that be with them.
  17 And Elisha prayed, and said, LORD, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see. And the LORD opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw: and, behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha.
2. Exodus 14:13-14:
  13 And Moses said unto the people, Fear ye not, stand still, and see the salvation of the LORD, which he will shew to you to day: for the Egyptians whom ye have seen to day, ye shall see them again no more for ever.
  14 The LORD shall fight for you, and ye shall hold your peace.
3. Psalm 46:1-3(KJV)
  1 God is our refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble.
  2 Therefore will not we fear, though the earth be removed, and though the mountains be carried into the midst of the sea;
  3 Though the waters thereof roar and be troubled, though the mountains shake with the swelling thereof. Selah.
4. Psalm 62:5-8(KJV)
  5 My soul, wait thou only upon God; for my expectation is from him.
  6 He only is my rock and my salvation: he is my defence; I shall not be moved.
  7 In God is my salvation and my glory: the rock of my strength, and my refuge, is in God.
  8 Trust in him at all times; ye people, pour out your heart before him: God is a refuge for us. Selah.
5. Psalm 23:4 (KJV):
  Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.
6. Psalm 91 (KJV):
  1 He that dwelleth in the secret place of the most High shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty.
  2 I will say of the LORD, He is my refuge and my fortress: my God; in him will I trust.
  3 Surely he shall deliver thee from the snare of the fowler, and from the noisome pestilence.
  4 He shall cover thee with his feathers, and under his wings shalt thou trust: his truth shall be thy shield and buckler.
  5 Thou shalt not be afraid for the terror by night; nor for the arrow that flieth by day;
  6 Nor for the pestilence that walketh in darkness; nor for the destruction that wasteth at noonday.
  7 A thousand shall fall at thy side, and ten thousand at thy right hand; but it shall not come nigh thee.
  8 Only with thine eyes shalt thou behold and see the reward of the wicked.
  9 Because thou hast made the LORD, which is my refuge, even the most High, thy habitation;
  10 There shall no evil befall thee, neither shall any plague come nigh thy dwelling.
  11 For he shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways.
  12 They shall bear thee up in their hands, lest thou dash thy foot against a stone.
  13 Thou shalt tread upon the lion and adder: the young lion and the dragon shalt thou trample under feet.
  14 Because he hath set his love upon me, therefore will I deliver him: I will set him on high, because he hath known my name.
  15 He shall call upon me, and I will answer him: I will be with him in trouble; I will deliver him, and honour him.
  16 With long life will I satisfy him, and shew him my salvation.
7. John 16:33(KJV): These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world.
Is prayer a realistic solution? Has it ever helped on problems of this size and danger as the COVID crisis? It sure has. Please consider these articles for examples:
1. When St. Michael Miraculously Saved Rome From a Deadly Plague – The Supernatural Story of Castel Sant’Angelo
2. Miraculous Intercession of St.Michael in Mexico
3. UK Days of Prayer: All over Britain the lights are going out
4. The hidden power of the Rosary
5. Do you know the history of how the Rosary has conquered?
6. How to survive a nuclear blast? Pray the Rosary.
It would seem easy: we just call on God and we are saved.

Unfortunately in practice it's not that simple, as if our enemies have thought of this also. The great problem with raising a prayer crusade is that many people have adopted a belief system which puts a permission gate between their understanding of a need to act and their action, and this continues to be the obstacle which prevents us from calling on God in large numbers with activist focus. That gate in our minds is effectively controlled by human religious leaders, many of whom apparently support the Government carte blanche (why they do this we can speculate on, such as wanting to hold on to generous Government tax exemptions or maybe hidden loyalties to secret societies which are purposed against the Public good). They won't give us the permission to organize and act which we believe we need, so we don't pray, and we lose. Watching everything fall apart, we comfort ourselves with another belief which is that since the Bible, in its last book, portrays most of the world being lost then theoretically that would seem God's will. So we do nothing watching the world burn and wait for God to reward us, because that's how we have come to interpret our responsibility.

Similarly, in a book-focused religion, activist attitudes against Government can quickly be defeated, on a mental level, by simply quoting verses from the holy book which seem to support unquestioning obedience to Government.

Apparently the strategy our enemies have in place is that by having our leaders in their pocket, we will be unable to act because they will never grant us the permission we believe we need to do so.

The only hope for a good end to the COVID crisis, therefore, is if the faithful find a way to do the mentally impossible: to pray without seeking any permission or spiritual confirmation before doing so, no matter how much your religion teaches it as a prerequisite. It's a lot to ask, but it's the only way to win now. We need to stop restricting what is truly spiritual with obstructions which are only mental (even when the subject is spiritual).
Equally important to prayer is finding and sharing the truth. Truth is required to keep our activism in a morally correct direction, as well as waking people to stand up for freedom. Unfortunately in this situation the establishment has so many advantages (like dominating TV, radio, and print media, and able to censor social media platforms and search engines) that divine help is the stronger hope. However truth is vitally important and makes an excellent companion to prayer.
Science is not a standalone solution now, especially not with the Establishment on a pedestal of trust defining what the scientific truth is. Our science is corrupt and got us into this mess, by its disassociation from morality (perhaps having Government too dependent on scientists of a certain dogma is just as dangerous as having Government too dependent on religious leaders of a certain dogma). We need a moral solution and a powerful one, especially since we don't have the technology to reverse the genetic corruption we've unleashed in not only the virus world but also into human bodies. Only God (God is a person, not a religion or dogma) can save us now, and the sooner we realize and act on that, the far better.
The best medical solution to exterminate the COVID virus and its variants: Ivermectin, as presented already on this webpage, and discussed as a general solution in this video here. Vitamin D is also a significant hope. Even doing nothing, although not the best course, would have served us better than vaccinating everyone with something we cannot possibly know the long-term effects of (the virus never threatened human extinction but the vaccine does).

Chapter 7: The Showdown:

Chapter 7, Section 1: THE SIDES:

The Pro-Mandate side, which seems to believe:

People need to be told what's real by experts and not doubt them, government-appointed ones being the most trustworthy.
People need to be ordered what to do in all things according to the leader's decision.
More social restrictions now lead to more freedoms later, on the trust that as soon as the touted problem is over, the leaders who imposed the restrictions we've come to regard as normal life will suddenly lift them all and give up their emergency powers even though they have no incentive to do that.
That protecting ourselves from a threat is always more important than preserving our human rights or freedoms.
Humans have the right to directly alter our genetic code.
Trusting vaccine manufacturers is exactly the same thing as trusting science.
That not only is the COVID virus the only threat to human life worth talking about and doing something about, it's worth doing everything about: daily headline-news focus, literally unlimited Government spending, and unlimited human rights suspensions, to name a few things.
That no protection is valid except the COVID 'vaccines'.
That even though the vaccine doesn't work if we all get vaccinated then we will all be safe.
That though the vaccine is seriously harming and killing people it, those costs are rare and acceptable, and it should be mandated for everyone to take it at their own risk.
That refusing a risky vaccine is 'selfish'.
That the unvaccinated are always spreaders of the disease, and therefore a threat to everyone.
That receiving a vaccine is an act of love or heroism.
That choice under serious and artificially imposed penalties for refusal is still free choice.
The best way to find the truth is to only listen to the experts with the highest credibility, especially government-appointed ones.
That Government abuse of authority is impossible in our democracy.
That if someone is elected, they have a mandate from the People to do whatever they decide.
That masks, distancing, and lockdowns are necessary no matter their failure.
That we're all in this together.
That worship services are 'non-essential'
That it's OK for officials to break promises if the data changes.
That information which disagrees with the official experts is always misinformation.
Compliance is safety; the crisis ends when everyone is fully compliant.

The Pro-Freedom side, which seems to believe:

People need to be educated about the topic so they can make reasonable decisions out of their own knowledge, ie. give informed understanding consent not blindly trusting consent.
People need to have the freedom to choose their own course of action for their lives.
More social restrictions now lead to LESS freedoms later, because the precedent is permanent and leaders who gain control have incentive to keep it.
That protecting ourselves from a threat is always LESS important than preserving our human rights or freedoms.
Humans DO NOT have the right to directly alter our genetic code.
Trusting vaccine manufacturers is NOT the same thing as trusting science.
That there are MANY other threats to human life in the world, and the case fatality rate of COVID is relatively small: only a little more than the seasonal flu.
That there are MANY other ways to defend against this virus besides vaccines, starting by recognizing our natural immune system, and naturally fortifying it, as well as recognizing the validity of naturally acquired immunity (of tnose who recovered from COVID).
That because the vaccine doesn't work it will never keep us safe.
That because the vaccine is seriously harming and killing people it must be recalled/stopped and certainly not mandated.
That trying to have a say in one's own medical treatments is a vitally important human right, on which the other rights depend.
That the unvaccinated have their own innate immune system, and even the vaccinated can spread the disease.
Although some may accept the vaccine for noble intentions, many are only giving in to coercion.
That choice under serious and artificially imposed penalties for refusal is not free choice.
The best way to find the truth is to listen to all sides.
That Government abuse of authority is possible in any type of government, and we must learn to recognize it and defend against it.
That if someone is elected, they may not have the backing of the majority of the population for a number of reasons, and they have no mandate unless by referendum of a direct question.
That masks, distancing, and lockdowns have failed, are medical nonsense, total failure, unnecessary harm, and must be stopped for all those reasons.
That we're not 'all in this together' because Government exempts themselves, banks, big business, and many other organizations arbitrarily.
That worship services are the MOST essential.
That it's not OK for officials to break promises no matter how the 'data' may change.
That information which disagrees with the evidence is always misinformation
Compliance to nonsense is the worst slavery; the crisis ends when Government ends the emergency orders and social restrictions they imposed and something is put in place to never strip our freedoms like that again no matter the crisis real or fake, not even in the face of death (as we expect of our soldiers who defend our rights).

Ultimately the pro-mandate side seeks to dictate, punish, and enslave, while the pro-freedom side seeks to educate and free people. Who would you rather follow?

This video sums up the opposing mentalities quite well: #18-This Is One Of The BEST Red-Pill Videos I've Ever Seen On Bitchute

Chapter 7, Section 2: The Goals:

The Side of Tyranny: This side has clearly shown a desire for:
1. everyone in the world to be injected with the potion of their (the Government's not the People's) choice, and to keep taking as many booster shots as they (the Government) dictates (which seems to be every 5 or 6 months forever)
2. to keep dictatorial powers especially the right to lock down, mandate, or socially restrict anything for any reason they choose to attach the word 'emergency' to, without voter permission
3. to disallow spreading of information contrary to or critical of Government policy
4. to dis-employ de-fund and otherwise punish resisters of these policies without limit
The Side of Freedom: We want:

for human society to go back to 'normal', by which we mean inalienable (cannot be suspended) human rights such as stated in the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
to add stronger political and/or legal safeguards so something like this tyranny can never happen again.
to bring those responsible for crimes against humanity, at least whoever created this virus (or faked it, if it's fake) to justice

Chapter 7, Section 3: The Balance of Power:

THE SIDE OF TYRNANNY

Advantages:

ability to rewrite the laws, such as to give themselves any powers and order everyone else to do anything
authority to order military and police to enforce any laws
authority to direct unlimited spending at the public cost
prerogative to ignore Public protest
prerogative to do the exact opposite of what they publicly promise
the advantage of advance preparation
mainstream media support
support of decision-makers in the largest established institutions starting with medical ones
Credibility from apparently independent cooperation from so many officials, experts, institutions, and mainstream meadia. They are not independent, but they appear to be, and the appearance gives credibility. The fact that so many sources agree is the main reason why the majority has gone along with the narrative.
Majority Free Choice Support. The biggest reason why the extended forces of good are of low interest to help us restore our freedoms is that, given a free and uncoerced choice, even by secret ballot, in many cases the majority has chosen to elect leaders who support more rather than less severe COVID-related human rights cancellations. For example, in late 2021, Canadians elected Mr. Justin Trudeau back into office as Prime Minister on his paramount (first of all policies in the official policy platform) promise to institute both vaccine mandates (the first promise of the entire platform) and proof of vaccination requirements. By showing that it is the choice of the People, the forces of evil greatly discourage the universal forces of good from helping us end tyranny, out of respect of our free choice. Obtaining this consent seems to be the reason why Mr. Justin Trudeau called an election at this time, which was otherwise unnecessary.

Disadvantages:

Side of moral wrong: but this is lessened the more they obtain our consent to go ahead, whether coerced or not. Forms of consent which help them include: votes, choosing to be vaccinated, opting in to a discriminatory social system (which might seem attractive if you are currently on the non-punished side), or even silence despite having the right to object in the face of objectionable Government orders and interventions.
Ability to mandate behaviour, restrict travel, and many other human rights suspensions which have already happened.
Ability to conscript people, confiscate property, and physically force vaccinations which have already been written into law or happened in some places in this crisis.

THE SIDE OF FREEDOM

Advantages:

Ability to say 'no'. But it works way better if we do it all at once. Who will organize this?
Side of moral right, though reduced the more we consent to the tyranny.
Ability to invoke Divine help. This is the main game-changer which the side of tyranny cannot access. This is the one thing which an easily overpower their worldly authority, military, and money.
Numbers. There's far more of us than there are of them. In fact, the only reason our leaders are 'powerful' is not any significant innate power but the number of people who follow them. If we decide to stop listening to them, their power vanishes instantly and without law or violence.

Disadvantages:

The arrogant. These are people who are more interested in the superficial feeling of self-righteousness and power which comes with being on the side of social authority, and the feeling of control which comes with demanding that other people conform. They would rather try to push others around, with the Government in support, rather than first digging deep enough to find the truth of the issue.
The indifferent. They care nothing about what happens to human civilization, and take no interest in politics (except to make armchair complaints to family and friends), and ultimately will cooperate with whatever the most powerful-looking side says to believe or do. They reduce our effective numbers drastically in the face of Government authority (which they tend to obey completely).

Chapter 7, Section 4: The Organizations:

On the side of medical tyranny:

Any Government ordering social restritions or mandating vaccines.
Any pharmaceutial company issuing mRNA vaccines to humans, and/or products marketed to the Public under coercion.
Any medical officials or professionals promoting COVID vaccines as 'safe' in contradiction of both the manufacturer's product monograph and/or official statistics on vaccine harms already occurred.
Anyone who insists that friends and family should not be listened to but always and only Government.
Anyone who actively opposes the idea that adults must not have a free and uncoerced choice to decide their own medical treatments.
Anyone who actively supports social discrimination based on medical status.
Anyone who votes for political candidates who promise to continue social restrictions.

On the side of medical freedom:

Professional Ethics Organizations:

Doctors for COVID Ethics

Freedom Organizations:

International:

Canada:

Australia:

Anyone who spreads or offers the truth, or helps those with the truth to be heard by many.
Anyone who supports freedom of speech.
Anyone who actually contacts their Government to object each time a social restriction or mandate representing a breach of human rights is announced or proposed.
Anyone who stands up for the rights of everyone even when it doesn't seem to apply to them in that instance.
Anyone who prays for freedom of our society.
Anyone who protests Government dictatorial powers or human rights suspensions including mandates related to COVID-19.

Chapter 7, Section 5: The Champions:

EXPERTS: Both the pro-mandate and pro-freedom sides have experts supporting their case. Generally the pro-mandate side has experts with credentials more that they were appointed. The pro-freedom side has experts more that they achieved something. In particular:

Dr. Kary Mullis, the co-inventor of the PCR test; example article: Inventor of COVID test calls Fauci a liar, against his own incentive to promote the usefulness of what he discovered, says that PCR ‘doesn’t tell you that you’re sick’
Dr. Robert Malone, the inventor of mRNA vaccine technology; example article: Before your child is injected, watch Dr. Robert Malone’s statement on child COVID vaccinations
For what medical reason has there been a Government push to vaccinate absolutely everyone, even children (who are virtually immune to the virus), even those who have provably recovered from COVID (and therefore are naturally immune), and even a higher percentage of people than would be required for herd immunity?
Fiona Lashells, an 8 year old girl in Florida, has been defying the mask mandates at her school since they started, no matter the pressure or punishments her school puts on her. She has shown bravery to stand up for her rights to abuse of authority which virtually few adults in the world were able to find. Videos are here and here.

Many journalists investigating and spreading the truth, including: Mike Adams, Alex Jones, Stew Peters.

Regarding this crisis, there is big power and status to be had for health experts to continue the crisis, and potentially much profit also. There is a safety in learning your own knowledge. As a specific example of abuse of our trust, our trusted health experts keep telling us that COVID will never go away (for example here), even though:

Unfortunately, health care facilities tend to have financial and time-saving incentives to diagnose and treat people as being COVID-infected, or declare it as cause of death, while it is against their incentive to spend time filling out the related forms (for free) to report vaccine injury.

There is such a thing as herd immunity and it rises on its own even if you do nothing.
The SARS-CoV-1 virus, also known as SARS, which is the closest relative of the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) virus, was also a pandemic (in 2002-2004) but it disappeared on its own in an unvaccinated population (there was no vaccine; this point actually gives support to a no-vaccine strategy with COVID).

The 'experts' have had almost 20 years to study that similar virus to COVID-19, ie. SARS, and they can't give us even a reason to hope we'll get rid of COVID-19 like we already did with SARS, not even with their new 'vaccines'.

Considering all of that, it's quite a defeatist and unscientific a statement for our experts to declare that COVID will never go away, and shows how worthless experts can be if you give them too much trust.

Why do we follow such people? Maybe because health experts are appointed, rather than elected?

This much is clear: if we ever want to be rid of COVID, or its related social restrictions, we need to stop following people who have decided that these things will never go away.

FOCAL POINT: Besides attending to our own bodies, family, communities, and nation, we should lend assistance for the freedom in nations implementing the most severe COVID tyranny, such as Australia (who have issued an international call for help), and Austria. Besides the fact that we should always help innocents and allies in more need than us, these countries seem to be testing grounds for COVID severity; we should help make sure the tests fail.

A Special Call to Police and Military Personnel: You're supposed to defend the rights and freedoms of the Public from threats foreign and domestic. That's what makes you different from mercenaries or assassins. That's why you are heroes. Hopefully that's why you signed up for these dangerous professions. Right now critical human rights, like the right to decide what is injected into us, are being stripped away from the Public. That should bother you. Please help us.

Chapter 7, Section 6: The Victors:

Ironically, although the official narrative was that those who were vaccinated were heroes, in hindsight it turns out that those who resisted the vaccine mandates and propaganda are the real victors and model humans.

Chapter 8: Your Response:

Chapter 8, Section 1: Questions to Ask Yourself

Should fear be used as a justification to suspend human rights?
Should a state of emergecy be announced for any new virus or variant, considering that there are literally always new viruses or variants?
Should anything with any risk of serious harm be mandated?
Are we actively looking for vaccine harm and how?
Do we have, and are we using, technology which can detect harms at the nano scale which these new vaccines act on? Is lack of this the reason why so many people are dropping dead and no cause found in the autopsy?
Should a 'vaccine' be expected to confer immunity (which was the pre-January 2021 definition of the word 'vaccine')?
Does locking people in their homes, legally or physically, improve safety on all levels?
Are there long-term economic consequences to shutting down our economies?
Are there long-term adverse effects to the vaccines, and how was there time to know before they were rolled out?
Is it possible that a virus test can have false positives?
If we give up our human rights, when do we get them back?
Do you want a world where we live each day only as Government allows us?
If the vaccine doesn't stop the virus, why do Governments continue to spend so much time, money, and effort to promote and demand more vaccination?

Chapter 8, Section 2: Decisions You Need to Make

Should you take the COVID vaccine? Without knowing your individual situation, most people can be worse off in almost every conceivable way for taking it. Please consider:

the CONS: How you are worse off:

You are more (not less, amazingly) vulnerable to the COVID virus (see our section on 'Misrepresentation').
You are exposed to possible adverse physical effects, both in the short-term and the long-term.
You have rewarded the Government for using coercion against the Public, encouraging them to do such things again in the future. For example, here is an article which includes Candian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau gloating about how 'strong' (coercive) government measures have 'worked' (wom compliance): Quebec's tax on unvaccinated: Trudeau says 'strong measures' have worked, also Canada says vaccine mandates work as Quebec's 'unvaxxed tax' leads to spike in first-dose appointments
You have consented to a system which creates forced social inequality based on medical status.
Your genetic information would be altered at least temporarily, making you a genetically modified organism by definition, and there are mechanisms by which it might be altered permanently.
You have given up your natural human genetic integrity for the integration of synthetic genetic information.
Once your body incorporates the patented genetic code, you are no longer your own.
Your Creator might take offense at you artificially altering your genetic information which He is the author of.

the PROS: How you are better off: you get a very temporary social acceptance pass, but when the next vaccine is ordered, you'll be put in the same catagory as those who didn't receive the first vaccine if you don't take the next one.
The Decision Frame: Will you take a 'vaccine' which offers temporary social priviledges, in exchange for permanent human rights loss by precedent, supporting a forced social system of inequality, possible adverse effects up to and including instant lethality, becoming a GMO possibly permanently, possibly becoming a legally patented organism owned by someone else, possibly hurting your relationship with your Creator, and the Public expense of doing all this?

How many shots are you willing to take trying to protect yourself from the same virus?

Chapter 8, Section 3: Personal Defense Steps You Can Take

You could take a modest dose of vitamin D (such as 1000-2000 IU per day) every day of this crisis. It's one of the cheapest, safest, and most widely available vitamins, if not the most.
You could encourage your family and friends that sharing COVID information, especially high quality evidence, is OK.
You can refuse to be vaccinated. The vaccine is far more suspicious and uknown and potentially harmful than the virus.
If you are vaccinated:.

You can repent.
You can refuse further doses
You can object to condoning any segregation system as immoral, even if your vaccination puts you on the easy side of that system
You can take a D-dimer test, to detect blood clotting (video here, here, and here)
Article with further ideas: Doctor: What to Do After Covid Vaccines

If you plan to get vaccinated, despite the dangers and of your own free will, you might take certain tests beforehand which will help prove vaccine harm if it does happen to you afterwards. For example, blood clotting is reported to be common problem with the COVID vaccines. If that happens to you post-vaccination, imagine how much stronger your case would be if you had a d-dimer test just prior and it showed no blood clotting.
You can actively defend everyone's right to decide their own medical treatments without coercion. If we lose that right not only will you not be able to refuse the next booster, but none of your other human rights will matter in practice. You can't condone someone else's right to choose their medical treatments and expect to keep that right yoruself now or any time in the future: the only way you have rights is if we all have rights.
You can get politically active, to keep tyrants out of power. Don't forget the political parties which did and which advocated the human rights suspensions: they deserve to be boycotted permanently. They acted as though human rights are temporary but political parties are permanent; teach them instead that the opposite is true. Allow new political parties to rise in their place.
You can have a discussion with your coworkers or community on how to respond immediately to refuse immoral orders if and the moment they are announced.

Chapter 8, Section 4: What Most People Can Do Now to Help:

Make clear that you are willing to accept certain unavoidable risks in the defense of natural human rights. Regarding pandemics, make clear that you accept that the human body cannot be stopped from harboring and potentially spreadying bacteria and viruses, and you will not allow that to mean we must all live in a bubble. We already allowed this to happen and we must stop allowing it; here is a picture of children in school band practice under the cruel COVID-19 measures we supported: US high school band rehearses in individual bubbles - BBC News. The fact is that if we allowed it to be done to children, we deserve it to be done to us.
Make clear that, for defense from bacteria and viruses, that you rely primarily on support of our natural immune systems, in line with cellular terrain theory, because the presence of bacteria and viruses in and around our bodies is naturally unavoidable and we accept that truth.
Make clear that if there is some threat to humanity so dire that it is totally outside of our control, our first reliance must be God, to whom we must make ardent appeal, or at least a kind of science which is not based on trust of anyone (no matter their position or credentials).
Read and know your human rights. For example, you could read the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Don't allow your human rights to be suspended for any reason: no matter any scare no matter even certain death. That's what we expect of our soldiers, and that's what we should expet of ourselves.

Accept risks with rights: This attitude is required to be immune to arguments that no activities should be allowed if they have any risks. All rights carry risks we must accept or have no rights. For example, our risk of carrying on a gainful occupation carries with it the risk that we might suffer an accident or assault at our workplace. Being allowed to go outside carries with it the risk that we might be hit by lightning. We must not be surprised that our rights carry some risks or be terrorized into giving up our rights by someone emphasizing those risks. Accept that human rights carry some risks and do not allow anyone to strip your human rights, and those of our children, for any reason, not even emphasis on the related risks.
Choose liberty over life: This kind of attitude is required to be immune to arguments suggesting that we need to give up our human rights to save ourselves. We should not immediately surrender what others have died to give us. The concept of human rights took thousands of years and much blood to establish in our society, and we should at least remember that before we make any decision to surrender or 'suspend' them (same thing). After all, in a formal war, we send soldiers out to defend not us, but our rights. If it was only our lives to defend, surrender would usually do it just fine, and we could live as slaves before the enemy. Enemies rarely want to kill everyone because slavery usually profits more. We make a mockery of the soldiers who died for our rights if we give those rights up immediately in fear of anything. Most of us have already and immediately surrendered, before the threat of COVID, the most important rights we have (such as the right to decide what's injected into us), and laws are on the books in some regions, including Alberta and Saskatchewan, explicitly to take away all the other rights also if the appropriate health emergency is declared.
Insist on democratic Government: Governments are not supposed to protect the Public from every risk but protect our human rights, even before our lives. NO politician is supposed to assume the power to suspend human rights for ANY reason; it is NOT supposed to be in their toolbox of how to address problems. If we don't understand that we don't understand democracy, and we accept dictatorship simply by failing to understand the difference. It's very important to note that even democratic Governments, such as Nazi Germany, can function as dictatorships if left unchecked (this, more than anything else, should have been the lesson learned from WWII), and numerous dictatorships-in-practice use a democratic label (including the former communist German Democratic Republic, and the current communist 'People's' (hinting at democracy) Republic of China). We cannot rely on that word 'democracy' to protect our freedoms, but rather we should see if we're telling Government what to do or they're telling us what to do. So if someone tells us to wear a mask useless to obstruct a virus, or to not leave our house, presuming the power to order us in that way, we should have told them it's not their power and to give us liberty or give us death (mirroring the same idea from a Patrick Henry)
Human rights suspensions are permanent, never 'temporary', because of precedent. There is no such thing as a temporary suspension of human rights, because once you allow the suspension of your rights, you allow the same people power to extend it or do it again by legal continuance of your consent to the premise of it. This happened in Ontario, and much of North America, during this same COVID crisis: the first lockdown was strictly promised to be only for 2 weeks. Once the public allowed it, it was extended and repeated for months and months and is still hung over the Public as a threat to lock people down again if we don't comply with new demands. Again and again this promise of changes being 'temporary' being made permanent has been repeated. For example, in Canada, the federal sales tax was promised to be temporary and now is permanent. Income tax in many places was instituted as a temporary measure to recover from WWI and became permanent. Recognize human rights suspensions as the PERMANENT threat it is and decide on that basis.
Human rights susension 'temporarily' must NOT make it OK: We should beware to suspend permanent human rights for any temporary emergency, just based on the timeframe alone: when the temporary crisis is long over, how do we get our permanent human rights back? Do we have to spend another four thousand years to re-establish them?

Don't allow your Government to make your natural human rights conditional on your compliance to their orders.
Demand the right of medical freedom. If you lose the right to decide your medical treatments, your other human rights don't mean much. It should disturb you that the pharmaceutical industry and Government have already developed and approved technology to report to them whether you have taken the pills you've been assigned or not: Pfizer CEO on Microchip Tracking in Pills. In the movie Equilibrium (2002), everyone was assigned by the Government to take medication which would suppress their emotions, against severe penalties for not taking it. Therefore as just one example, if we ~~lose~~ don't recover our right to medical freedom, the Government could easily order us to consume mind-altering medication, especially anyone uncompliant, and track whether we take it or not, and could justify it as keeping other people safe from our behaviour.
Spread seeds of truth. Unfortunately the side of tyranny has tremendous public funding and media cooperation behind it; the side of freedom is often individuals struggling at their own energy and expense to expose the truth, nevermind promote it. If you can help the needed truth to be spread around, that's the help we need. Do it based on evidence rather than expecting anyone to trust you. Don't worry if you don't see an immediate change of attitude: sometimes you just plant the seed and it will grow in their mind in its own time. Don't waste too much time on a few resistant people, though; your job is to spread the seeds as widely as possible.
Organize community commitments to defy tyranny, especially before the fact. That way, however fast tyranny might happen again, each individual knows they are not alone but already have a freedom support network to rely on. So far, the humanity's evil side has been far better at preparing in advance than humanity's good side, as well as tending to have the surprise advantage in making the first move at a time of their choosing. Good needs to be ready.
Pray for divine assistance, such as: to know the truth and not be deceived, to make the correct decision regarding vaccination of you and/or your children, the Public victory of truth, for Public-serving Government, and the protection of human rights.

The Government, the government-supported news media, and the vaccine manufacturers, working together, have so many advantages and resources that hardly any individual citizen is in a position to do anything significant to make a difference in the COVID crisis except with divine help. Prayer is the most powerful yet most underrated resource in our society (please meditate on both of these things for a moment). Knowing prayer can save us, Governments have classified places of worship as 'non-essential' instead of calling for national prayer. Don't be fooled but use it, even outside of a place of worship: even in your own mind. Even a small amount of prayer by a single person, performed regularly, will make some real difference.

Prayer crusades against COVID tyranny have already begun in some places; some example references are:
1. Irish men launch public rosary crusade in reparation for abortion, end to COVID tyranny
2. Abp. Viganò: We must pray the rosary daily to defend our faith, culture, and end the ‘psycho-pandemic’.
3. Canadian Catholics begin public prayer crusade to end lockdowns, COVID mandates
But what if we can't raise enough prayer to change the outcome? Take hope: even if we can't muster enough people praying to change the course of the main events, by prayer alone we can at least lesson their severity. For example, even if we can't stop the unvaccinated from being persecuted, we can at least minimize the severity of the persecution. Maybe we can make it no more than dirty looks. :)
Pray for the healing of individuals who have received the vaccine against their free will or unaware of the danger or sin (see the Bronze Serpent Prayer). Thank God, He has power over the virus, the vaccine, the politicians, and all their effects.
Never vote for any political party who imposed mandates ever again. That would be voting for tyranny.
Use your provided political channels to cause change or at least speak up. For example, for any citizen, you have the right to express your wishes to your elected representatives, as well as directly to the leader and ministers of the government you live under (it's most important to reach the decision-makers), and you should do so at EVERY SINGLE POINT OF SIGNIFICANT WRONGDOING in this crisis, to express your displeasure each and every time. Keep a copy of the correspondence if possible. Do this for these reasons:

As a matter of principle. Contacting your elected representative is the diplomatic channel you are officially provided with to use in corresponding with your Government.
As a requirement for your moral innocence. In any major Government wrongdoing, for moral reasons it's important that you have something to show, even just yourself, that you objected. Remember; silence implies consent.
To slow them down. It's reported by insiders that COVID-era politicians are watching closely for public support before they do anytyhing. Make sure they see that they don't have it, which just griping to your friends will never do.

Don't give 'emergency powers' to public officials, because we have no way to take them back, and they have no incentive to give them back. We should have known this from the movies, for example in both Planet of the Apes (2001) and Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith (2005), dictators assumed control by being granted 'emergency' powers to deal with a temporary feared threat. Of course these dictators not only showed no intention of ever giving up their powers, but both of them actually played a part in the manufature, misinterpretation, and magnification of the crisis to lead the Public to a decision to grant them emergency powers.
Stop voting for those who take your rights away. To vote for someone whose intent is to suspend your human rights is to vote for an enemy of humanity to rule over us. Such politicians are weak (at least in serving us) or worse and not fit to lead. This is not the kind of leadership which saved China, Russia, or Britain in WWII and it won't save us.
Re-think mandates. Is there anything which is not right, which remains not right even if it is made mandatory? Is there anything you're not willing to do even if it is made mandatory? So far we've seen no limit to what the Public will accept as right if it's promoted under the magical word 'mandatory'.
Oppose punishments for the unvaccinated, even if that's not you, because it ultimately protects everyone''s right to decide our own medical treatments now and forever. For example, the current persecution is not actually for the 'unvaccinated', but for the 'not fully vaccinated', meaning that if you miss the next booster, you'll be put on the same list as those who never took any COVID vaccine in the first place (no, the boosters are not desgined to end, see here and here). Many have already lost their 'fully vaccinated' status this way (example here). If the 'not fully vaccinated' don't have rights in this social system then nobody does, at least not any permanent rights, because it's the Government who decides who is on each list by their own criteria, which they can change at any time and may not even have to reveal. Like a credit card which suddenly stops working, you might find out you've been discredited only when you go to scan the next time, which the Government has power to do; China already has been doing this for years with their 'social credit score' system which keeps people in line with Government policy. You are actually being checked for Government permission for human rights every time your vaccine passport is scanned. The more you allow the 'not fully vaccinated' to be persecuted, the more pressure you will be under, for the rest of your life, to do anything demanded of you to stay on the 'fully vaccinated' list no matter how the requirements to stay on that list might change.
If you must get vaccinated, and you don't want to become a GMO, then insist on a non-genetic (ie. 'hardware' not 'software') vaccine type: for example, attenuated (weakened) virus or whole-virus protein, rather than mRNA or DNA-adenovirus. That means Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson, and AstraZeneca's vaccines are out. Medicago's may be in as just one example (recent press release here). Here is a page on the types.
Decline to be COVID-tested. The COVID tests drive the whole COVID political system. In fact, in one video narrated by Morgan Freeman, he implied that the crisis would end if we simply stopped the COVID testing. He's right: the COVID tests produce the positive case numbers which fuel both public fear and Government-imposed social restrictions.
Avoid environments with contact tracing requirements if possible. Who you contact should be your own business, and it's a human right. It should not be a public record for authorities, or a ground for them to call you up to order you around because you've been, they say, 'exposed'.
Find some way to help the Public act as one, such as all refuse infringements all of us at the same time. Our strength is in unity and we need to find a way to unify.
Post a sign at your business declaring that you do not discriminate due to vaccination status. For example, here is a downloadable sign used at numerous Canadian businesses today.
Accept to participate in any opinion polls you are asked for regarding COVID, even if from telemarketers, as your chance to make your voice heard. These polls do matter.
If you need something (besides God) you can rely on in this crisis, rely on your immune system. Invest in it to strengthen it. Although trusting it has been discouraged by authorities, it's kept us alive since life began, and it can do battle against any new variant which comes. When your immune system is ready for anything, why should you be terrorized by news of any new virus or variant? You won't have to be one of those people who bet their life in a vaccine which doesn't apply to the new variant.
Keep attention on banning all virus research which has any chance of making new viruses. This is supposed to be the central lesson learned from this pandemic, even though Governments are drawing focus away from where this virus came from, as though it doesn't matter. Deliberately making any new virus to attack life should be a a crime against humanity, and act of war, and merit a death penalty.
Join and support a freedom organization or start a new one if there is none to join.
Live off the grid preferably with a like-minded community.
Pray for all those with authority over you, and those you follow, even the bad ones, for their moral and wise decisions. If they get corrupted or deceived it's a lot of people who could be lost.
Stand up to challenge your leaders if they are on the wrong path. Confront them with evidence, starting with the strongest evidence first. Whether they listen or not, this is an act of good which can potentially save many who follow that leader.
Pray for the activists for good, for their purity and protection. Activsts for good can be targets for attacks from public enemies, including by spiritual attacks, and they depend on your prayers, whether they know it or ask or not.
Defend God's honor, particularly that His worship be protected as a social 'essential'. Please object to places of worship to be classified by Government as 'non-essential' (as they have been in the COVID lockdown orders, while banks always remained totally unrestricted in an implicit statement that money is the god). There is nothing more essential than to worship our Creator and planet's Provider. The Government greatly oversteps its authority when it restricts worship of the Creator, but we do also if we condone it by our silence.

Chapter 8, Section 5: HOW TO SPREAD THE TRUTH ON THIS ISSUE:

How can you promote truth in this environment like this? Here are some suggestions:

Base your presentations on evidence first and foremost, of the highest quality you can find. Many such resources are organized for you on this webpage for example.
If you have a channel of any social influence, even if only with your own family, use it.
As for those who won't let you speak on the topic of the COVID crisis, there is no better remedy than to keep offering the information, hoping they will eventually allow you to speak, and meanwhile find ways to move on to those who want the information. It's not fair but Government needs no one's permission to speak but we often do to address someone personally even in an emergency matter. We have to wait on that permission, as we don't want to be seen as pushing the information, which would only make them resist us more as well as attract punishments to us.
Challenge their trust in Government by showing them related evidence. Then ask them if the safety of the vaccines might also be a lie? It more easily could be, since unlike the above lies, which potentially could be tied to Government responsibility, Government and manufacturers have been careful to make themselves legally immune to vaccine harm. It more rationally could be, since there was no time to study long-term effects in these vaccines.
Ask if they would you like to play a game. Take the 'Hospital Overwhelmed' Truth Challenge. Simply compare the hospital occupancy by COVID patients as shown on the official CDC website (by county, here) to where in America news articles are saying COVID patients are overrun (which claim is used to justify more social restrictions). You'll find that they're not overrun with COVID; rather it is a lie. Similarly a game like this can be played for any country which publishes that kind of data.

DEFENSE: Resources for if you need to defend an anti-COVID-'vaccine' position:

For those who tell you that the vaccines are 'safe and effective', you can say:

"Please provide me with the studies you base that claim on". Usually they have nothing even close to reasonable to offer. This will expose that they are not trusting science but someone or something else in promoting these vaccines. Then you can offer your own studies, or start with the government-published data on vaccine harms including deaths.
Have you seen the vaccines harms published on the government website? Give them the link if they haven't.
Did you know that a court in Paris ruled that taking the vaccine was an act of suicide, because the harms are well published?
Have you read the product monographs provided on the Government website for these vaccines? Usually they haven't bothered. The manufacturer lists many risks there for which there is no data, such as, for example, risks to pregant women. That means theyr'e not safe and effective.
If they're so safe and effective, with no significant risk of serious harm and only benefits, then why have vaccine manufacturers insisted on and been granted legal immunity for vaccine harms?
"Do you know the ingredients of what you are promoting?" This is not a strong point, because an ingredients list is publicly published, and assuming you won't bring up the topic of 'trade secret' ingredients, but you'll be surprised at how many people supposedly 'trusting the science' don't even know the public list of ingredients. Is someone telling you to be vaccinated, who doesn't know what's in it, really acting for your best interset?
"Can you tell me how many people have died of or within a short time of this 'vaccine'?" This information is publicly posted on official Government websites. Surely it is relevant for an informed decision?
"May I please see the package insert (healthcare provider technical document, not patient fact sheet or monogram) which comes with the vaccine?" Usually they don't have it, refue to provide it, or it's blank, any of which is proof you cannot give informed consent.
"Can you tell me the risks in taking this vaccine?" They usually won't because either they don't care, don't know, or because the real list is around 16 pages long.
"Why should something with any risk of death or disability be mandatory?"
"If I am harmed by the vaccine, however rare, is there a reliable way that I can show that the vaccine was the cause, so that I can get the help I need?"
--It's so difficult to prove the harm was from the vaccine, and so politically incorrect, that it could be very difficult, and that would put you at a medical and legal disadvantage trying to pursue the correct diagnosis, treatment, or other remedies.
"If I am harmed by the vaccine, however rare, will you support my claim for compensation?"
If the physician doesn't want to get involved in vaccine harm claims you might need if you are injured, maybe you shouldn't get invovled with them.
"Who will pay if I am permanently harmed following this vaccine?" This is a great follow-up question once they admit the risks. The law is that you're on your own in most cases, although some regions have a vaccine compensation program funded by taxpayers.

RESOURCES TO RESIST (things to help you if you're under pressure from the other side): These webpages (the following hyperlinks) have a good list: USA and Canada.
REBUTTALS (defensive answers to misleading statements or arguments or vaccine coercion): Try to get the truth out with minimum time and argument. Here are some suggestions:

"Society needs a vaccine to end pandemics!" Answer: Better to have a strong immune system, which is proven for millions of years and can defend against any pathogen and sub-variant present and future, than to take a risky vaccine, one for each pathogen and sub-variant, for which our manufacturing can't even keep up.
"Why don't you just take the damn vaccine?" Answer: Because I know how it works and I don't acceptsynthetic genetic reprogramming of my body, however temporary.
"The vaccine is safe!" Answer: That's not what Government vaccine injury databases are showing, even though they typically exclude injuries within 14 days of the injection (who are considered unvaccinated until that point). For this reason all-cause mortality is a more reliable indicator of population effects of the vaccine.
"There is nothing suspicious about the vaccines!" Answer: Can you find me an unredacted copy of the COVID-19 vaccine contract between our Government and the manufacturer for us to read? If there is nothing to hide, and since the Government only signs these on behalf of the Public, why are these not available to the Public to read?
"You are putting other people at risk by not being vaccinated!" Answer: If the vaccine worked, and you took it, you wouldn't have to worry about who else was vaccinated, and their vaccine wouldn't help yours work anyway.
"That's fake news!" or "That's misinformation!" or "You are misinformed".
Answere: "Based on what?". Let's compare your evidence to mine and see where the misinformation is.
"Don't listen to what you see on the internet!"
Answer: Actually virtually all major institutions and influential persons are on the internet, including: national leaders and governments and their agencies, universities and libraries, police, military, scientists and their research papers, patents, and news agencies. We can't, or at least shouldn't, judge truth by the medium it is presented on. To advise someone not to believe what's on the internet like saying not to believe anything you read in any book.
"So many celebrity (Government and mainstream news) experts can't be wrong." It does seem unlikely, but it can happen, as it already happened before with both the AIDS scare and the Y2K scare, not to mention celebrity expert support for the 2003 invasion of Iraq and other atrocities. In fact, for every atrocity in history, during how many of them did the celebrity experts speak out against them at that time?
"If there was something wrong with the way the COVID crisis is being handled, where are the experts speaking out against it?" Once you go into the independent news, it's easy to find a different host of experts and stories there. As just one example of a story you won't hear on mainstream news, at least one public health official KILLED HIMSELF (see here) in unbearable guilt and explicit confession at the COVID vaccines he called 'genocide' that he could no longer be part of.
Regarding the argument that people should be vaccinated against COVID because it’s unfair to burden the healthcare system to pay the costs of people who deliberately refused to protect themselves.
Although this argument is partly sensible, it fails on the following ways:
Regarding the accusation that those who question the vaccine are ‘conspiracy theorists’.
--Answer: It's conspiracy fact when virtually all Governments in the world at the same time impose the same radical human rights suspensions based on the same lies.
Regarding the notion that only physicians can know this subject or have any right to debate it.
--Answer:
1. The fact that the patient bears the risk, that alone gives the patient the right to make the final decision, and therefore a need to be informed to make that decision properly.
  These experts are not liable if the injection harms us, but we will have to live with it for the rest of our lives.
2. It is blatant inequality to think that only someone with a degree can understand a subject, or the one with the higher degree understands more. A degree doesn’t necessarily mean understanding and not having a degree doesn’t necessarily mean not understanding.
  People who are educated can be educated poorly, or forget.
  People who are not formally educated can put the time in and learn.
  All humans can learn and while degrees are an achievement they do not mean that other people cannot know the same material.
3. It’s naive to think that paid experts have no other incentive than the good of the public. If only that were true. For starters, most experts are appointed; that alone implies they have a need to please someone to keep their job and it’s not the public.

Chapter 8, Section 6: PETITIONS YOU CAN SIGN:

PETITION: Stop Tedros' WHO Pandemic Treaty

Chapter 8, Section 7: Suggested Protest Sign Slogans:

Reject Medical Dictatorship
Never Suspend Human Rights
Mandate Freedom
Freedom Variant
Vaccine Choice
Vote Freedom
Pray for Freedom
Stop Gain-of-Function Virus Research
Respect Vaccine Choice

Chapter 8, Section 8: ACTIVIST INITIATIVES:

In Progress:

USA: Saturday, 5 March, 2022: trucker convoy to arrive in Washington DC

Facebook page was here but now seems offline.
News Articles:

February 28th 2022:

Barriers Erected around Capitol ahead of Washington Trucker Protest
'People's Convoy' Departs Oklahoma Taking Vaccine Mandate Protest To D.C.

February 21, 2022:

Upcoming:

Canada: Saturday, 19 March, 2022: Canadians to hold rosary rally in Ottawa to end COVID mandates, pray for freedom

Concluded:

Canada: Freedom Convoy 2022, organized by Canada Unity:
This is a trucker convoy of thousands of trucks almost 100 miles long converging on Ottawa (Parliament Hill) for with the purpose of demanding an end to the COVID vaccine mandates/passports/proof-of-vaccination-requirements. Please note that this is a question of freedom, not a debate about, for example, vaccine safety or efficacy.

This movement has become an example and hope for Canadians and the World. Canadians and humanity needs this initiative to work. Canada has waited all its history for a movement like this. Please do literally everything you legally can to help it be known and succeed (including with prayer commitments).
Canada: stay STRONG AND FREE!
Related videos:

Strategy: Please keep in mind that: It's more important to participate in supporting the movement, however you can, than necessarily attending yourself in Ottawa.

Developments:

Trudeau gov’t dropping Emergencies Act early after pressure from Senate
Situation Update, Feb 21, 2022 - Nameless, faceless POLICE GOONS in Ottawa may be UN troops
February 19, 2022: Heavily-Armed Ottawa Police Arrest at Least 70 ‘Freedom Convoy’ Protesters – Will Run ’24 Hours A Day’ to Clear City
Ottawa police move in on the protestors
February 17, 2022: Tyrants Abusing Power: Freedom Convoy Protesters Are About to Get Arrested En Masse
February 14, 2022: Tucker: Trudeau has declared Canada a dictatorship
February 13, 2022: Freedom Convoy Heart-Warming Story - "You Have To See With Your Own Eyes!"
February 12, 2022: Police move in on Ambassador Bridge protesters; Ottawa convoy remains defiant
February 11, 2022: Premier Ford declares state of emergency in Ontario over blockade; court grants Ambassador Bridge injunction
February 10, 2022:

February 9, 2022:

February 08, 2022:

February 07, 2022: Ottawa police ban bringing supplies to trucker Freedom Convoy – no soup for you!
Feb 06, 2022: Armed Riot Police Arrive In Ottawa!
Feb 06, 2022: Ottawa Police Stealing Fuel From Convoy!
Feb 07, 2022: Truck convoy: State of emergency declared; police announce arrests; people bringing 'material' supports to protesters — including gas — could be subject to arrest, police say

Results: As of this writing on 30 January, 2022, Whether or not this protest achieves its stated goal, it has already had these successes:

VICTORY: Canadian truckers helped bring down Conservative leader Erin O’Toole
Mainstream Media Breakthrough: Whereas COVID-freedom protests before this were almost always ignored (except to occasionally mention protesters as fools or disrespectful), this protest had mainstream news channels posting continual live video coverage. The freedom movement is now a mainstream news topic.
Solidarity: The movement has helped COVID-freedom groups to become more aware of each other and freedom-minded people to cooperate.
Emboldening: Suddenly freedom-minded Canadians realized there are MANY other people who feel the same way, and were encouraged that the Public is not against them if they want to uphold a pro-freedom message anywhere, whether at Ottawa or in their community.
Revelation: With Prime Minister Trudeau going into hiding before these protesters arrived, officially on the excuse of (actually unnecessary) COVID isolation, and guarded by the military at an undisclosed location by some reports, despite there being no sign of this group being violent or that they ever intended violence. this protest exposed his cowardice and possibly guilt. He does not have the confidence that innocent people have, and he shows contempt for, even fear of, real democracy. If he truly believed he was working for the Public good, and if he truly loved democracy, he would have been be more than happy, even flattered, to welcome many thousands of people who had traveled thousands of miles on the road to meet him and express their views. Only if he knows he is working to harm the Public should he have been gripped by fear and dive under military protection before a crowd of peaceful protestors even arrived (as an aside, it is bewildering that Canadians would trust a man like this to lead us at a time of serious risk of war with Russia).

Chapter 9: ACTIVIST TAKEAWAY (When the Crisis is Over):

Chapter 9, Section 1: HOW DID WE DO (as a Society)?

We gave up our eternal human rights for fear of a temporary threat which we cannot even see. Now and for future generations, unless the current tragectory is altered, human rights are no longer inalienable but discretionary on the part of the Government. In exchange we didn't even get security but the threat only got worse and more complicated.
We turned a situation where most people were testing positive but without symptoms or soon recovering into a situation where people were severely suffering or dying from our countermeasures.
We should have realized that it's more important to be experts in morality than experts in science. If our sense of morality was strong, we would have been able to make the correct decisions to navigate this crisis to a good end result, even if our knowledge of science was weak.
We should have realized that all human rights come with risks, risks we accept to have those rights. For example, yes yyour right to assemble associate means you could contract a virus from someone else, and we accept that.
We could have let the virus burn itself out naturally rather than react in panic with tyrannical lifestyle restrictions and mandates to accept injections based on radical new technology for which long-term consequences cannot be known. In this mistake we did far more medical, emotional, legal, and economic damage than the virus would have caused, and with effects for a lot longer than the virus would have raged.

This is what the Amish did (see article here), and they achieved herd immunity against COIVD by May 2020.

It's worth remembering that the SARS virus, the closest relative to COVID and much more deadly, disappeared on its own without any vaccine in less than 2 years since it emerged.
Instead of stripping rights from our own citizens and heaping focus, blame, and punishment on those who are not obedient to these orders, rather we could have kept focus on the pursuit, finding, and shutting down of the lab and scientists who are responsible for engineering this virus, if not for crimes against humanity, at the very least to ensure they don't create or release something worse.
We could have invested in many other health supports for a lot cheaper than a vaccine (such as sunlight, vitamin D, sleep, zinc, ivermectin), rather than insiting that a vaccine is the only health approach which can save us and nothing else matters.
We could have raised up a widespread prayer campaign, instead of locking down places of worship. Our Creator, and worship of Him/Her, should have been recognized the most essential thing of all, rather than non-essential. The mere classification of divine worship as 'non-essential' is abominable.
We could have insisted on a direct-democracy instead of representative-democracy system, where we must be asked what we want to do about this, especially when the emergency persists for more than a month.
We could have recognized that, whether people are now dying from COVID or from the COVID vaccine, we are definitely worse off than before the COVID 'vaccine' programs began.
No longer allow Governments or anyone to suspend human rights for any reason, no matter what emergency they might declare. Once we give up our human rights, there is nothing else to protect, and so we must not be scared into giving them up again.

Chapter 9, Section 2: HOW DID YOU DO (as an Individual)?:

Assuming we survive the crisis, you might want to ask yourself some questions on your performance as an activist: the same questions history may ask of you. We suggest answering these questions:

Were you prepared for something like this?
Were you receptive to initial reports on the problem? For example, when someone came to you with this, did you listen or turn them away?
Did you correctly identify the truth in time to do something about it?
Did you find evidence of the truth?
Did you share the truth?
Did you live by the truth?
Did you refuse to obey clearly immoral orders?
Did you officially object to your own human rights infringements?
Did you officially object to human rights infringements of others?
Did you pray?
Did you organize?
Did you support the side of good?
Did you in any way succeed to turn back the evil?
Did you save anyone else?
If you lost some human rights during the crisis, did you insist on getting them back when the crisis was over?
Have you learned anything about how to be or do better next time?
Have you made a personal commitment not to vote for any political party (if any) which was responsible?
Will you help bring those responsible to legal justice, at least to prevent them from perpetrating similar harms again?
Will you push for changes in society to help prevent something like this from happening again?

Chapter 9, Section 3: LESSONS WE SHOULD LEARN FROM THIS CRISIS:

The majority is neutral, by which we mean most people care about personal not social issues and will cooperate with whatever narrative is easier to cooperate with without regard for moral boundaries. The democratic premise, that the majority is truth-loving, rational, and makes decisions for the best long-term result of humanity is shown time and again to be false.

During the pandemic, in many cases the majority actually re-elected the same leaders who oppressed us, or elected in their place leaders who promised to oppress us more. For example, residents of Toronto, Canada re-elected the leaders of all three levels of government who put them through some of the most severe and drawn-out COVID social restrictions in North America. It's as if the majority rewards tyranny, teaching politicians to abuse us the more.

It was the most shocking cause for disappointment with our society to see so much of humanity with no internal moral compass, ready to hate whoever they are told to hate, even if the reasons should have been obvious nonsense. In particular, there was no rational reason to punish the unvaccinated for not taking the vaccine, because:
- the shot is risky, and
- if it actually worked it would protect those who received it enough that they wouldn't need to worry about who wasn't vaccinated, and
- since it doesn't work there's no reason to take it nevermind coerce anyone else to take it.
Watching this moral failure play out in the COVID crisis finally solved the mystery of how so many people could cooperate with the Nazis to persecute Jews: it's not that the majority of humans are rational and compassionate and need a strong force of some kind of magik to induce them to become irrational and hateful. Rather the evidence is that the majority of humans are irrational and hateful by nature (only a minority caring about truth, fairness, and human rights), but they fear society more, so that they are only looking for an opportunity to express their hate in a way that's socially accepted, at which time the hate comes flooding out onto whoever they are socially permitted to victimize. Just as Nazi society made it socially acceptable to hate Jews, so our society made it socially accepted to hate the unvaccinated, and in both cases the Public majority were all too willing to take this opportunity to vent their hatred on whoever they were allowed to vent it on.

Neither does it help that the majority eschewed truth presentations from anyone but official sources (the Establishment). No matter the evidence, most people refused to listen to their relative trying to show them evidence, because the Establishment specifically told them to refuse such presentations.

Especially after watching the majority actually vote for social restrictions to be implemented or increased, and for the unvaccinated to be cruelly stripped of human rights, we need to question if basing our elections and court judgments on majority rule is the right foundation for our society, ie. to lead humanity to a good end.

It's not. Certainly communism is worse, and monarchy is dangerous, but we need to discover some way to guide our society better than majority rule, becaue majority rule is also dangerous.
Although an argument can be made for anything, not all arguments are right.
Parents shouldn't be allowed to sign their children up for medical experitmentation since the children, more than the parents, will have to live out the harm. Example video: Baby Paralyzed by COVID VACCINE
Disinterest in Truth Destroys Democracy: if the People don't have the right information, such as because they refuse to hear all sides on an issue, or just don't care what the truth is, they can't make the right decision when they vote.
The greatest security we have on earth is our Human Rights, and we should not give them up for scare of anything else.
We must never again consent to human rights suspensions for ourselves or any other group in our society. Those rights must be inalienable for everyone at all times. If one group can be singled out then any group can.
We must never again consent to anything wrong just because it's 'temporary' or 'emergency'. Neither Law nor Morality recognize something illegal or immoral as being OK because it's 'temporary' or 'emergency'. If you give consent to such wrongs, even for those reasons, you have approved the principle of the thing in permanent precedent, which authorities may use to extend and/or repeat the thing indefinitely.
We've learned that Government declarations of emergency are whimsical and we must not attach our fear to them. Recently Government has switched states of emergeency on and off issues arbitrarily, even when the issue is still approximately the same, often without any apparent sense to it, apparently just to change where they want public attention to be at that moment. For example, Prime Minister of Canada Justin Trudeau declared a climate emergency, and then the next day approved an oil pipeline, and then approximately 9 months later supported tremendous pollution via mask mandates (usually disposable but not readily compostable), and since says we should "take on the climate crisis with the same strength and determination we took on the pandemic crisis with". That's also why despite Governments using rising COVID case numbers to justify more social restrictions, they could also openly ignore those numbers if they wanted to release those restrictions by simply declaring that the numbers have 'peaked'.
There are no human experts only evidence and action. Since experts are human, and humans can lie, it makes the concept of human experts meaningless.
It is dangerous for allowing the people overseeing the classification and collection of data being the same people who may use that data to institute radical measures.
Our Democracy is Fake: We learned that howevermuch a society may call itself a 'democracy', if the People have no say in policy decisions it's not truly a democracy, ie. 'rule of the People'. This should be espeically obvious where elected represenatatives have no obligation to respond to their constituent inquiries, and are free to break even their most clear promises to the Public, both of which a number of them did in this crisis.

Related Article: The terrifying lessons of COVID-19

Chapter 9, Section 4: WHAT SPECIFICALLY WE NEED TO DO SO NOTHING LIKE THIS HAPPENS AGAIN::

Pray regularly for righteous government. It makes a tremendous difference.
Always know your rights and freedoms. Otherwise you won't be able to discern if they are violated. If you count your money, you should certainly count your rights.
Recognize and refuse immoral orders immediately.
Make sure that expert advise cannot direct your Government or override your right to choose.
Demand Direct Democracy: We've learned that there is something dangerous about representative democracy, ie. giving other humans power to rule over you at their sole discretion for a time, within which they can do things they never asked you about, or even break clear promises they made, without the Public having any legal recourse. Rather we need a direct-democracy system, where the Public directly decides policy issues. We need a better kind of democracy now.
Expect a higher standard of religious leadership, a new kind of religion or an overhaul of your existing religion. There is no way that independent news should have been the ones to point out the immorality of the official narrative while hardly any religious leaders did so, even though the latter are entrusted with interpreting morality for the Public. If religious=moral leaders could not see that arbitrary suspensions of human rights cannot be morally justified, we need to find religious leaders who can. We need a better kind of religion now.
NEVER accept ANY excuse for the suspension of human rights, no matter how temporary the suspension is promised to be, no matter the declaration of emergency: not even in the face of death. This is what we expect of our soldiers fighting for us and it must be what we expect of ourselves. There is no such thing as temporary inalienable human rights: either they can be taken away or not.

Back to the Future: ‘Two Weeks to Flatten the Curve’ Was a Dangerous Mistake From the Beginning

NEVER allow your Government to assume dictatorial (aka 'emergency') powers (no matter how temporary or the inconvenience, excuse, or scare), especially not by their own unilateral declaration for, any reason. The moment they have such powers is the moment democracy has ended, even if you still call it that. Neither do they have any incentive to lay those powers down.

Efforts Needed to Avoid Using Emergencies Act Again in Similar Circumstances, Says Act’s Creator

ALWAYS consider the long-term effects of your interventions, such as the precedents they will set for other issues in the future
Listen to experts ONLY in exactly what they are expert in, rather than assuming they understand how to balance all types of consequences of a crisis or intervention. Article: The Fact-Free Covid Dystopia
NEVER accept any new measure from Government which you wouldn't want to live with permanently. Normally there is no opportunity given the people to ever reverse what was ever accepted. For example, income tax was brought in as a 'temporary' measure after World War I, and never repealed, but rather augmented.
NEVER accept anything risky to be mandated. Those who bear the risk must retain the right to choose.
NEVER allow worship of God to be restricted, or called 'non-essential'. Our relationship with our Creator is even more valuable than anything else.
Be reluctant to follow officials into rash action based on claims which you cannot directly verify. The potential to be mislead in a lie should be obvious; rash action demands the best evidence.
ALWAYS insist that manufacturers bear the liability for harms arising from defects in their products.
Always take your news from diverse sources rather than just one source.
Prefer to base your truth on evidence rather than trust of anyone, and be willing to accept quality evidence from any source.
Allow your friends and family to have their say on important issues, rather than just strangers. Don't only give your ear to the public puppet show of officials and celebrities you may feel you personally know but actually you don't know them and they don't know you.
Lockdowns must never again be accepted as a good thing. They do not have a medical basis but is a measure to punish prisoners or slaves. That this was done under the guise of protecting public health is abolutely opposite to the truth. How can cutting off a healthy person's livelihood, access to most medical services, and access to friends and family be good for their health? It's not. It is only cruelty and a crime against humanity.
If you want to report or confront people who are not following 'the rules', you should first make sure those rules are both moral in purpose and sound in method. Otherweise you could be enforcing something immoral or ineffective.
Demand your nation get out of the World Health Organization so they can't induce medical tyranny around the world again. Unfortunately they are already working on some kind of 'Pandemic Treaty' to give themselves more power in the 'next pandemic' (which officials keep talking about).
NEVER vote for the parties who did this ever again. Teach them that political parties may come and go, but our human rights must be inalienable.

Chapter 9, Section 5: Our Legacy

What rights and freedoms will future generations of humanity have after this is over?
If you ever wondered what you would have done if you were alive in Nazi Germany, to oppose the persecution of Jews and social obedience to the extreme immorality and national ruination of Adolf Hitler, you have the opportunity today to find in yourself a comparable answer, for this crisis now is another Holocaust, and this time, it's global: humanity across the globe is threatened by the COVID injections, and their related forced discrimination, and governments acround the world have used this crisis as an excuse to transition into dictatorships.

Chapter 10: Other Resources:

Please see our own related webpages:

COVID-Related Documentaries:
1. Sep 2, 2023: FLUVID-19: The Documentary by Hibbler Productions - Conspiracy Conversations (EP #19) with David Whited - Sean Hibbeler
2. Anecdotals Movie
3. Superspreader
4. November 2022: Died Suddenly
5. Safe and Effective: A Second Opinion (2022)
6. The Truth about Vaxxed III - The Peoples Choice
7. Propaganda Exposed!
8. Planet Lockdown
9. PCR Test Fraud Documentary
10. COVIDLAND, a documentary series, including:
11. Plandemic, including Plandemic videos 1 and 2.
12. MONOPOLY: Who Owns the World? This interesting video starts out sound seeming entirely economic but it connects with COVID later on.
Notable Symposiums on COVID-19:

MSM Blackout Of Medical Doctors Pandemic Response Roundtable Is A Crime Against Humanity

Expose Videos From Projet Veritas:

Other Notable Websites providing COVID-19 and/or COVID-Vaccine and/or Medical Freedom Resources:

Totality of Evidence, including their page on interveiws with Dr. David Martin
Pure Truth Publications
Canadian Covid Care Alliance, including the following:

The Pfizer Inoculations for COVID-19: More Harm Than Good: view in either PDF or video. A related article is: Stunning video by Canadian doctors shows how Pfizer committed massive fraud during COVID-19 vaccine trials

Vaccine Safety Research Foundation
VaxxChoice
Dr. Sam Bailey
Covid'vaccine'Victims.com
TheCovidBlog.com
Natural News
Brighteon
InfoWars
LA QUINTA COLUMNA
Unjected
Viruses Are Not Contagious
Covid-19 Vaccines: Good or Bad?. This is an unusual publication by Pure Truth Publications which is a kind of digital scrapbook of interesting headlines and social media posts during the pandemic.
LifeSiteNews has produced an extensive COVID-19 resources page. View it here.
Top 7 reasons why people are testing positive for covid-19 after vaccinations
A Shot Heard Around the World: this is a very thorough summarizing resource on the COVID vaccine, with many reference links the reader can pursue.
OpenVAERS: They offer reporting on VAERS (USA's vaccine adverse event reporting system) data for COVID.

Posts on Select Twitter Accounts:

MThebrexitparty

COVID-related Tools and Apps:

How Bad is My Batch: look up batch codes and associated deaths, disabilities and illnesses for Covid 19 Vaccines

Where to go if you are vaccine-injured? Although vaccine manufacturers are immune to legal liability for their vaccines, some governments have implemented compensation programs where the Government, ultimately for taxpayers to fund. This is an important resource for those who are vaccine injured. For example:

The Canadian One: Vaccine Injury Support Program (VISP)
The USA One: National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program
World Health Organization: No-fault compensation programme for COVID-19 vaccines is a world first

Notable Parallels in Pre-COVID Science-Fiction and Popular Culture:

Will flying vaccines one day come for us? See this clip from Dune (1984)
Contagion (2011): This movie about a pandemic has striking similarities to the (real) COVID pandemic, including: A respiratory virus with similar symptoms as COVID, and asian origin which is ultimately from bats, social distancing, and vaccination seen as the only possible salvation. As discussed in this article, one of the biggest differences is that natural immunity is recognized in the movie but not in the real-life COVID crisis.
The Simpsons animated cartoon portrayed forced vaccination of a dangerous vaccine quite well; please see this video:
THE SIMPSONS PREDICTED FORCED VACCINATIONS AND VACCINE SIDE EFFECTS

COVID-Related Satire (Humour):

Please see also our own related webpages:

Back to Homepage

THE COVID CRISISNo Vaccine for Tyranny

TABLE OF CONTENTS:

Chapter 1: Mindset:

Myth: COVID-19 is a serious threat.

Myth: It is wise to trust 'science'.

Myth: It is wise to always folllow the advice of Experts.

Myth: We should only listen to Experts on important topics; we should not accept information from individuals.

Myth: It is wise to trust mainstream news Media the most:

Chapter 2: The Situation:

The COVID-19 Virus Name

What this Virus Is:

How is the virus spread?

Where did it come from?

Isolation/Quarantine:

Contact Tracing:

Hand Sanitizer:

The PCR Test: An Erroneous Foundation for Pandemic Management

Human genetic alteration has potentially dire non-medical consequences also:

Officially Approved COVID-19 Treatment:

ALTERNATIVE COVID-19 Treatment Options:

Chapter 2, Section 15: Psychological Situation:

Chapter 2, Section 16: Spiritual Situation:

Chapter 2, Section 17: How Has Our Society Changed due to this Crisis?:

OPTION 1: IF THERE IS NO SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC INSISTENCE FOR TRUTH AND RESISTANCE TO GOVERNMENT HUMAN RIGHTS SUSPENSIONS:

Regarding when the pandemic will be over:

Regarding the ultimate death toll of the COVID-19 vaccines:

Regarding when our society will be allowed our rights and freedoms back:

OPTION 2: IF THERE IS SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC INSISTENCE FOR TRUTH AND RESISTANCE TO GOVERNMENT HUMAN RIGHTS SUSPENSIONS:

Public Officials Speaking Out / Standing Up against the Official Narrative:

Face-toface Challenges within Parliament or Government:

Worldwide Protests

(Chapter 3, Section 3) MISUNDERSTANDINGS:

(Chapter 3, Section 4) MISREPRESENTATIONS:

Chapter 3, Section 7: Reasonable SUSPICIONS of Malevolence:

Chapter 4, Section 1: THE CORE ISSUES:

Who or what do you trust supremely?

Should Government be able to award itself emergency powers, and renew them indefinitely?

How much should Government be allowed to restrict, suspend, or cancel human rights?

Should we surrender human rights for fear of death?

How much right should we have to suspend the human rights of others, such as by mandates?

Is it OK to discriminate against anyone based on their medical treatments or social status?

Should we have the right to decide our own medical treatments, when there is a risk of harm?

Should manufacturers of a product be compelled to be responsible for it?

At what magnitude of harm should a product, distributed to the Public, be recalled for reason of that harm?

Is your natural immune system effective?

Is it OK to genetically alter humanity?