Have just published another update. Some cosmetic changes and some new material on Dr. Aseem Malhotra's recent testimony in Helsinki and an interview with Julian Gillespie and his findings pertaining to the regulatory and legal framework used in accepting the Covid vaccine in Australia.
UPDATE: To Background Material I've added a subsection with links for vaccine injury stories and help web pages. Also added a couple more books and a recent interview with Sasha Latypova with a detailed description of the time line in the Legal/Oragnisational Structure section.
Have just made a small addition to the end of section 6. "The W.H.O. Pandemic Preparedness Treaty" with some reporting on the failure of the W.H.O. in May to achieve agreement on the treaty.
Heinz, thank you very much for your feedback. I will not be judging a man based on accusations about his brother. I'm aware that Brett Weinstein is a controversial figure for some (though who in the public eye dissenting from the official narrative on Covid and/or vaccines has not been painted as controversial). However he is highly qualified to speak on the subject considered here. In the interview with Tucker Carlson that I include in this article I find his arguments are thoughtful, balanced and lucid and his analysis of the dangers of the mRNA technology especially when wielded by a profit driven entity like the pharmaceutical industry and the dangers of giving an unelected, unaccountable organisation like the WHO the power to direct use of such technologies are not at all overstated.
He also gave a ted talk about ten years ago about the dire need for radical global population control. That seems a bit suspicious to me.
We have here established questionable actions from two very questionable actors. To ignore these would be irresponsible given the magnitude of what's being implied.
Yes, it's a great takedown of Bret's bravado. Alistair Williams is a very talented and funny comedian but this is hardly an invalidation of the man's academic qualifications. I know many intelligent and capable people who were affected similarly by the propaganda. I don't think specific knowledge of the area was a defence against this in fact it may have been a disadvantage in formulating a response at the personal level. The point is that his academic achievements qualify him to present a certain viewpoint on the situation which he does and of course as an establishment academic in such a field he will undoubtedly have or have had 'buy in' to certain aspects which are now rightly being called into question. Nobody is perfect but none of this makes me concerned of his trying to fool people for nefarious purposes.
Have just published another update. Some cosmetic changes and some new material on Dr. Aseem Malhotra's recent testimony in Helsinki and an interview with Julian Gillespie and his findings pertaining to the regulatory and legal framework used in accepting the Covid vaccine in Australia.
UPDATE: To Background Material I've added a subsection with links for vaccine injury stories and help web pages. Also added a couple more books and a recent interview with Sasha Latypova with a detailed description of the time line in the Legal/Oragnisational Structure section.
Have just made a small addition to the end of section 6. "The W.H.O. Pandemic Preparedness Treaty" with some reporting on the failure of the W.H.O. in May to achieve agreement on the treaty.
A valuable library - thank you!
Eric Weinstein was unequivocally exposed as a poseur and a fraud some time ago. His brother has also been shown to share similar characteristics.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j86WIfRfPDk
Heinz, thank you very much for your feedback. I will not be judging a man based on accusations about his brother. I'm aware that Brett Weinstein is a controversial figure for some (though who in the public eye dissenting from the official narrative on Covid and/or vaccines has not been painted as controversial). However he is highly qualified to speak on the subject considered here. In the interview with Tucker Carlson that I include in this article I find his arguments are thoughtful, balanced and lucid and his analysis of the dangers of the mRNA technology especially when wielded by a profit driven entity like the pharmaceutical industry and the dangers of giving an unelected, unaccountable organisation like the WHO the power to direct use of such technologies are not at all overstated.
Does this further example not make you even slightly more curious about the true validity of his qualifications and expertise?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=um-DJfWmBnA
He also gave a ted talk about ten years ago about the dire need for radical global population control. That seems a bit suspicious to me.
We have here established questionable actions from two very questionable actors. To ignore these would be irresponsible given the magnitude of what's being implied.
Yes, it's a great takedown of Bret's bravado. Alistair Williams is a very talented and funny comedian but this is hardly an invalidation of the man's academic qualifications. I know many intelligent and capable people who were affected similarly by the propaganda. I don't think specific knowledge of the area was a defence against this in fact it may have been a disadvantage in formulating a response at the personal level. The point is that his academic achievements qualify him to present a certain viewpoint on the situation which he does and of course as an establishment academic in such a field he will undoubtedly have or have had 'buy in' to certain aspects which are now rightly being called into question. Nobody is perfect but none of this makes me concerned of his trying to fool people for nefarious purposes.
I fell into that exact same trap. That's why I tried to help.
I wish you luck.