Updated: Jul 14
Another letter that got me in a ridiculous amount of trouble. I just wanted him to pass it on to the rest of them so they could actually do something about it. Unfortunately he seems too busy virtue-signalling and taking all his clothes off on beaches. What a strange man. I suppose, just for fairness, I can safely assume that he has also checked out all the data points (including reviewing the strength of the varied conclusions of the chronological arguments I am making). Otherwise he would surely be a coward, and also a potential hindrance to the health and well-being of his constituents. Inept, we could say. A gross, obsequious, sponging traitor and that familiar breed of insincere Liberal pervert. The conclusions seem quite obvious to me, having set aside quite a bit of time working this out in personal research. I wish it was as obvious to him and his esteemed colleagues. I'd prefer it if it was not entirely un-obvious though, considering their authoritative roles (and generous salaries, drawn as always from the public purse). A fair day's assessment on my part for no pay whatever. I thought at the time it might save lives. It seems somewhat too late now though. I realise they're all thoroughly psychopathic and corrupt. That's not really very funny. Here's my note to him:
Dear Bernard Jenkin,
Thank you very much for your response letter to me, delivered via your researcher Max Thilo. I initially sent a similar letter to this one to him but heard no reply. I imagine you have been quite busy.
I understand more of the government's position now, and the reasons for their decisions. It is not my intention to adopt the role of a gadfly wilfully or gratuitously in relation to that, but on reading your letter I was left with a few more thoughts, and a couple of queries.
I understand that, provided we are acknowledging the pharmaceutical industry's Germ Theory at all, respiratory viruses, such as this suspicious 'flu' (which can be easily treated early at home with Ivermectin and Vitamin D/C & Zinc, or Hydroxychloroquine, at a stretch), manifest in the populace more quickly during the winter months. It is well known that the single WHO study published in The Lancet medical journal and used to disprove the efficacy and safety of HCQ was fraudulent as they were found to have deliberately administered overdose-level doses to their patients. Regarding that, I wondered if mistakes could certainly be made elsewhere.
The late Kary Mullis' PCR-tests have been shown to be inadequate for their purpose, and indeed now withdrawn from the market by the CDC: https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dls/locs/2021/07-21-2021-lab-alert-Changes_CDC_RT-PCR_SARS-CoV-2_Testing_1.html.
As Kary Mullis himself said: "PCR is just a process that allows you to make a whole lot of something out of something. It doesn’t tell you that you are sick, or that the thing that you ended up with was going to hurt you or anything like that.": https://off-guardian.org/2020/10/05/pcr-inventor-it-doesnt-tell-you-that-you-are-sick/.
It has been made public that at a high enough cycle threshold (35 or more), near anything would provide a positive test, as demonstrated repeatedly by the biochemist John Magufuli of Tanzania before his untimely death: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-tanzania-idUSKBN22F0KF.
A Chinese study found the same patient could get two different results from the same test on the same day: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32219885/. In February of 2020 experts were admitting the test was unreliable. Dr Wang Cheng, president of the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences told Chinese state television “The accuracy of the tests is only 30-50%”.
A Portuguese court ruled that PCR tests were “unreliable” and should not be used for diagnosis: https://www-dgsi-pt.translate.goog/jtrl.nsf/33182fc732316039802565fa00497eec/79d6ba338dcbe5e28025861f003e7b30?_x_tr_sch=http&_x_tr_sl=pt&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en-GB&_x_tr_pto=nui,elem.
Still, the FDA approved up to 40 cycles, with some evidence suggesting 45: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html.
The MIQE PCR guidelines state: “[CT] values higher than 40 are suspect because of the implied low efficiency and generally should not be reported,”: https://www.gene-quantification.de/miqe-bustin-et-al-clin-chem-2009.pdf and Dr Fauci himself even admitted anything over 35 cycles is almost never culturable: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_Vy6fgaBPE.
Dr Juliet Morrison, virologist at the University of California, Riverside, told the New York Times: "Any test with a cycle threshold above 35 is too sensitive…I’m shocked that people would think that 40 [cycles] could represent a positive…A more reasonable cut-off would be 30 to 35″: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html . In the same article Dr Michael Mina, of the Harvard School of Public Health, said the limit should be 30, and the author goes on to point out that reducing the CT from 40 to 30 would have reduced “covid cases” in some states by as much as 90%.
Germany’s Robert Koch Institute says nothing over 30 cycles is likely to be infectious: https://web.archive.org/web/20200925013250/https://www.rki.de/DE/Content/InfAZ/N/Neuartiges_Coronavirus/Vorl_Testung_nCoV.html.
Even the World Health Organization has admitted that PCR tests produce false positives: https://web.archive.org/web/20210120083427/https://www.who.int/news/item/14-12-2020-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users and https://www.who.int/news/item/20-01-2021-who-information-notice-for-ivd-users-2020-05.
In March 2020, studies done in Italy were suggesting 50-75% of positive Covid tests had no symptoms. Another UK study from August 2020 found as much as 86% of “Covid patients” experienced no viral symptoms at all: https://www.repubblica.it/salute/medicina-e-ricerca/2020/03/16/news/coronavirus_studio_il_50-75_dei_casi_a_vo_sono_asintomatici_e_molto_contagiosi-251474302/ and
It is impossible to tell the difference between an “asymptomatic case” and a false-positive test result. Also, in June 2020, Dr Maria Van Kerkhove, head of the WHO’s emerging diseases and zoonosis unit, said: "From the data we have, it still seems to be rare that an asymptomatic person actually transmits onward to a secondary individual”. A meta-analysis of Covid studies, published by Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) in December 2020, found that asymptomatic carriers had a less than 1% chance of infecting people within their household: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2774102.
Given the known flaws of the PCR tests, how many “asymptomatic cases” are false positives?
Also, given these error-prone tests, which can cause permanent disability if administered incorrectly against the blood-brain barrier behind the nose, even before they consign a healthy individual to a Covid-19 ward, and given that SARS-CoV-2 has never been adequately isolated in the first place according to Koch's Postulates or River's Postulates, and admittedly so according to Dr. Wyu Zunyou, the chief epidemiologist of the Chinese CDC in a video interview:
https://twitter.com/EEccetera/status/1354208913315528705 , and given that in its July 2020 report, the CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel admits that it had been running PCR tests based not on an actual viral isolate (an actual sample or specimen taken from an infected human), but rather “stocks” of “transcribed RNA” taken from a gene bank to “mimic clinical specimen”, we can see that there is much room for debate on this topic.
It has never been properly purified and isolated so that it could be sequenced from end-to-end once derived from living tissue; instead, it is merely digitally assembled from a computer database. The CDC scientists state they took just 37 base pairs from a genome of 30,000 base pairs which means that about 0.001% of the viral sequence is derived from actual living samples or real bodily tissue. In other words, they took these 37 segments and put them into a computer program, which filled in the rest of the base pairs. This computer-generation step constitutes scientific fraud.
Another way to say this is that the “virus” has been constructed using a technique called de novo assembly which is a method for constructing genomes from a large number of (short or long) DNA fragments, with no a priori knowledge of the
correct sequence or order of those fragments (https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/6/20-0516_article).
The original Corman-Drosten paper admits they used a theoretical virus sequence for all their work and calculations (https://www.eurosurveillance.org/content/10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.3.2000045 ). They, like the CDC and the government, claim this is only because no isolate was ever available. I wonder if any of these scientists ever asked why the isolate has never been available?
This subsequent study: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/346483715_External_peer_review_of_the_RTPCR_test_to_detect_SARS-CoV_2_reveals_10_major_scientific_flaws_at_the_molecular_and_methodological_level_consequences_for_false_positive_results highlights how the authors used in silico (theoretical) sequences from computer banks, not real isolated samples from infected people. As the paper itself states:
"Neither control material of infectious (“live”) or inactivated SARS-CoV-2 nor isolated genomic RNA of the virus was available to the authors. To date no validation has been performed by the authorship based on isolated SARS-CoV-2 viruses or full-length RNA thereof."
As you may be aware, in the UK, Frances Leader has already questioned the MHRA as to whether a real isolated virus was used to make the Covid-19 vaccines and found that the WHO protocols that Pfizer used to produce the mRNA do not appear to identify any nucleotide sequences that are unique to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Leader asked if the “virus” was actually a computer-generated genomic sequence, and ultimately the MHRA confirmed they had no real specimen:
“The DNA template does not come directly from an isolated virus from an infected person.”
Considering all this, do you have at your disposal any way currently to show me independently peer-reviewed scientific evidence proving that the SARS-CoV-2 “virus” has been isolated?
I know the Canadian and Australian governments have, so far, been unable to provide this evidence. It would a disappointment if the UK government was to follow suit, even by now. As of December 16, 2020, more than 40 institutions in Canada, U.S., New Zealand, Australia, England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland, Denmark, and the European CDC have provided their responses, and none could
locate any record describing the isolation of any “COVID-19 virus” aka “SARS-COV-2” directly from a diseased patient:
If I were more suspicious, I would consider that "Covid-19" symptoms were indeed a strain of the flu, cunningly re-named and re-packaged with a massive and comprehensive propaganda campaign in league with the media and with the NHS, and in order to facilitate the transmission of these vaccines, and otherwise a pure fabrication from faulty PCR-tests. The flu does kill, on average, 600,000 or so people yearly, particularly the elderly.
Bill Gates would like the entire planet's population of near 7 billion to be vaccinated, after all, as he stated in December 2020 and in line with general 5-year plans of the Rockefeller Foundation, and Agenda 21 (and Agenda 2030 beyond that). Perhaps he still wants to lower the world population by 10 to 15%, as he has stated on record in TED Talks, or the decrease of the US population by 70% as backed-up by CIA-front forecaster Deagel corporation, or the 78% decrease as predicted by analyst Amber William on July 24th, 2019. He has gone very quiet recently, and his whereabouts are unknown. Perhaps he could be in Georgia, on a touring holiday of the monuments. Let us hope the Guidestones do not fall on him and crush him to death.
As stated above, I would not worry about delta, kappa or omega variants, etc., let alone superspredders in our nightclubs, as you can’t really have a variant of something that has never been proven to exist in the first place. It all makes for a very convenient fear-tactic though, to keep the narrative alive. I would wonder if the vaccine-damage creates these 'variants' itself. Dr. Luc Montagnier, the French Nobel Prize Winner for Medicine, has postulated similar.
As for the vaccines, if the experimental synthetic mRNA gene therapy injections may even be called that, I am afraid I am forced to disagree with you further. They are very far from safe or effective, unless the efficacy is in their ability to main and destroy, and, unlike Covid-19, they are not theoretical in their damage. Any honest perusal of VAERS data will provide you with that knowledge. In under a year more than 500,000 post-Covid-19 vaccine injuries have been reported to VAERS — nearly a third of all reports accumulated over the system’s entire three decade lifespan, according to Children's Health Defence (https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/vaccine-injuries-regulatory-agencies-hiding-covid-safety-data/).
As of 29th October, VAERS reports show 1,697,252 vaccine adverse events, with 18,078 vaccine deaths and 88,910 vaccine hospital admissions. No really 'safe', no. At least, not to a rational mind.
Also, according to Jon Rappoport, there has been massive fraud in the reporting of vaccine injuries: https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2021/08/17/massive-fraud-in-reporting-vaccine-injuries-withheld-data-pretense-of-safe/.
According to a 2010 Harvard study (https://digital.ahrq.gov/sites/default/files/docs/publication/r18hs017045-lazarus-final-report-2011.pdf) VAERS under-reports by a factor of 100 times. You read that correctly. The study stated that “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported.”
Also, according to this large, compelling report it appears that that data analysis supports a death rate from the vaccine of approximately 1 in 5,000 fully vaccinated people ( approximately 30,000 deaths so far or 5 times the VAERS reported number): http://www.skirsch.com/covid/Vaccine.pdf. This report also presents a great deal of valuable, seemingly irrefutable information, and some worrying conclusions that appear to be totally correct.
According to the FDA, their risk of possible adverse event outcomes is extensive. Guillain Barre Syndrome; Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis; Meningitis; Stroke; Convulsions/Seizures; Haemorrhage; Blood Clots; Cardiac Arrest; Respiratory Arrest; Pneumonia; Myelitis; and more than I have the patience to write here. You may look up the VAERS reports for yourself, or the British Yellow Card scheme. They do not make for pleasant reading. It will take you a while.
You mention possible concern on my part due to the experimental nature of the injections, and thus the unavailability of long-term safety data. Surely that includes what may be passed from parent to child, if those children are born at all? Data for vaccine miscarriages is not uncommon, compounded by the threat of sterility as recounted by Pfizer's own ex-scientist, Dr. Michael Yeadon and from the work of Dr. Sucharit Bakhdi, as recounted in his Alex Newman interview of 16 April 2021, and the warning given by Dr. Sean Brooks to the Ohio Schoolboard on the 16th August 2021. There are increasing video evidence reports of babies conceived by the vaccinated being born with bizarre genetic mutations. What about those on existing medications? Interactions with prescription drugs have not been accounted for, so quick was Arnold Monto, of the FDA's advisory committee, to rush these through. Perhaps his receipt of substantial funding from Pfizer swayed his uncourteous decision, and indeed his decision to neglect safety experiments into what this injection does to a healthy brain, kidneys, lungs or heart. You will perhaps know that Pfizer funds many organizations, up to and including those at government level. I am informed also that the NHS receives money for each patient injected.
The data is just not there. There are no single dose toxicity studies. There are no toxicokinetic studies. There are no genotoxicity studies. There are no carcinogenicity studies. That's a lot to miss out.
It is convenient as usual to notice that the vaccine companies have government-granted freedom from accountability in the case that any are harmed by their products. As indeed they are, perhaps on account of Pfizer's inclusion of ALC-0315; DSPC and Potassium Chloride; Monobasic Potassium Phosphate; Sodium Chloride; and Dibasic Sodium Phosphate Dehydrate, all common to fertilizer. Or indeed the moral implications and psychological harm caused by their experimental use of MRC-5 aborted foetal cells. Or indeed the Mode RNA inclusion of Tromethamine. SM-102 being proprietary to Moderna, it would be useful to identify its nature, but probably difficult - Luciferase, maybe? Graphene Oxide is also a proven substantial constituent of all four vaccines, as are invasive, germinating nanoparticles in the Pfizer vaccine (as filmed by Dr. Erik Enby in August 2021 with the use of an interference contrast microscope), as well as Morgellons 'fibres' and even synthetic regenerating Hydra Linnaeus neurotoxic parasites. Though it possesses many exciting futuristic properties, one does have to remember that Graphene Oxide alone is highly toxic to humans. It would be nice for the people to have the right to know just what is being injected into our bodies.
Also, you will be aware that Gibraltar recently had a 2500% increase in Covid-19 cases despite being fully vaccinated, and similar things have happened in Iceland. As of late September, Australia's hospitals are populated by 73% vaccinated patients and Canada at 80%. It would be fascinating to know the genuine UK data, as I am gently beginning to wonder a few things, as are a plethora of dismayed nurses, ex-nurses and indeed whistle-blowers. As one retired nurse from California recently asked: “Why do the protected need to be protected from the unprotected by forcing the unprotected to use the protection that did not protect the protected in the first place?”
Indeed, as you will know, the clinical trials for Pfizer did not show that the injections prevent either catching the virus, whatever it may really be, getting sick from the virus, or transmitting the virus, only that they reduce the risk of mild symptoms, like coughing, or muscle pain. An article in the British Medical Journal highlighted that the vaccine studies were not designed to even try and
assess if the “vaccines” limited transmission: https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4037.
The FDA is currently unaware as to whether the Moderna treatment will protect people for more than two months, or provide any benefit at all for people who have tested positive, or if their injection is safe for a large percentage of the population, or if it will make getting the disease worse. Pfizer even admits in the leaked supply contract between the pharmaceutical giant and the government of Albania: "the long-term effects and efficacy of the Vaccine are not currently known and that there may be adverse effects of the Vaccine that are not currently known": https://gogo.al/ekskluzive-kontrata-sekrete-e-qeverise-me-pfizer-per-vaksinat/.
The late-stage human trials have either not been peer-reviewed, have not released their data, will not finish until 2023 or were abandoned after “severe adverse effects”: https://web.archive.org/web/20201229112508/https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT04540393.
All in all, they just don't know. Not a good sign. Not particularly effective, no.
As a final note, the survival rates for Covid-19 are as follows (at least according to the Dutch CDC): ages 0-14 - 99.9998%, ages 15-44 - 99.9931%, ages 45-64 - 99.9294%, ages 65-85 - 99.6297%, over 85 - 98.2499%.
Watchdogs and government agencies have reported huge increases in the use of Do Not Resuscitate Orders (DNRs) in the past months. Whistleblowing nurses have admitted the DNR system was abused in New York: https://off-guardian.org/2020/06/11/watch-perspectives-on-the-pandemic-9/ .
In the UK there was an “unprecedented” rise in “illegal” DNRs for disabled people: https://www.hsj.co.uk/coronavirus/unprecedented-number-of-dnr-orders-for-learning-disabilities-patients/7027480.article and https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/covid-do-not-resuscitate-nhs-b1816413.html , GP surgeries sent out letters to non-terminal patients recommending they sign DNR orders, whilst other doctors signed “blanket DNRs” for entire nursing homes: https://www.pulsetoday.co.uk/news/regulation/cqc-to-review-blanket-do-not-resuscitate-orders/ .
A study done by Sheffield University found over one-third of all “suspected” Covid patients had a DNR attached to their file within 24 hours of hospital
The average age of a “Covid death” in the UK is 82.5 years. In Italy it’s 86. Germany, 83. Switzerland, 86. Canada, 86. The US, 78, Australia, 82. In almost all cases the median age of a “Covid death” is higher than the national life expectancy: https://swprs.org/studies-on-covid-19-lethality/#age.
Indeed, Statistical studies from the UK and India have shown that the curve for “Covid death” follows the curve for expected mortality almost exactly: https://medium.com/wintoncentre/how-much-normal-risk-does-covid-represent-4539118e1196 and https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12879-021-06026-6.
The risk of death “from Covid” follows, almost exactly, your background risk of death in general: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51979654.
Also, 94% of Covid-19 deaths have an average of 2.9 co-morbidities. In fact, in March 2020, the Italian government published statistics showing 99.2% of their “Covid deaths” had at least one serious co-morbidity: https://www.epicentro.iss.it/coronavirus/bollettino/Report-COVID-2019_20_marzo_eng.pdf . What rules out a patient having died of these instead?
An epidemiological study done by a Japanese research group that found the case-fatality ratio to potentially be as low as 0.04%: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.02.12.20022434v2.
And according to this report: https://www.epicentro.iss.it/coronavirus/bollettino/Report-COVID-2019_17_marzo-v2.pdf
approximately 75% of the deceased had two or more pre-existing conditions, and 50% had three more pre-existing conditions, in particular heart disease, diabetes, and cancer.
It appears that death figures have been manipulated as "COVID-19" still appears on death certificates, no matter what. Healthcare officials from Italy, Germany, the UK, US, Northern Ireland and others have all defined a “Covid death” as a “death by any cause within 28/30/60 days of a positive test”: https://off-guardian.org/2020/04/05/covid19-death-figures-a-substantial-over-estimate/ .
British pathologist Dr. John Lee has warned of this "substantial over-estimate": https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/how-to-understand-and-report-figures-for-covid-19-deaths-
as have other mainstream sources: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9279767/BEL-MOONEY-dad-died-chronic-illness-hes-officially-Covid-victim.html
An October 2020 FOIA request to the UK’s ONS revealed less than 10% of the official “Covid death” count at that time had Covid as the sole cause of death: https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/covid19deathswithnounderlyinghealthconditionsbrokendownbyage
Swiss Propaganda Research has contributed this general report, which may be of use to you: https://swprs.org/facts-about-covid-19/.
It is good to know that there has been no unusual excess mortality in 2020: https://swprs.org/covid-19-mortality-overview/
In conclusion, I do not think, given this data, that we can honestly say it is a "Coronavirus" that people are dying of. The lack of suspected vaccine death autopsies is also glaring.
I repeat to you, given all this, what is the government really concerned about? What real agenda is at play? Please, don't try to pull the wool over my eyes any longer. I do not appreciate being gaslighted. Is the government inept in its science, or is it lying to us? I would accept both. I see no other option.
I will not be accepting any of these useless and dangerous corporate products into my body via needle, or via pill (or bio-farming GMO-crops sprayed with vaccines such as is being researched currently in Mexico). I am ashamed to live under such callous and yet cack-handed tyranny.
Thank you for your late by proxy response, and for answering my question on vaccine passports. I have a further question though: why is it that proposed COVID countermeasures, presented to the public as improvised emergency measures, have existed since before the emergence of the disease? https://ec.europa.eu/health/sites/default/files/vaccination/docs/2018_vaccine_confidence_en.pdf
.Also, why, in the United States, since February 2020, have influenza cases allegedly dropped by over 98%: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/flu-has-disappeared-worldwide-during-the-covid-pandemic1/ and indeed disappeared worldwide: https://www.healthline.com/health-news/why-the-flu-season-basically-disappeared-this-year#What-drove-down-flu-activity while a new disease called “Covid-19”, which has identical symptoms and a similar mortality rate to influenza, is affecting all the people normally affected by the flu? It all seems a little bit suspicious.
As a final question, is it true that 75% of CDC employees refuse to be vaccinated? If so, what do they know that we (hypothetically) don't?
I'm glad you know all this now. I wish you had known it in the first place. Please take this seriously, as you did my previous two letters. I will be politely expecting an answer to all my questions, including the question on the presence of active 'green zone' quarantine camps and super-prisons in the UK. I should hope they have no equivalent to FEMA's ICD 9 E 978 Billing Code or President Obama's Executive Order 13603. That would be a direct act of War against the citizenry. There would be no other reasonable course but total retaliatory Revolution in the UK, to depose all fifth column parliamentary tyrants.
I don't mind if you or Max genuinely don't know the answers to my questions, and thus attempt to placate me with hackneyed and inadequate stock responses, but perhaps you could go and ask someone who does.
PS. It was once said that those who refuse to defend their children, by any means necessary, will die alongside them.
PPS. oh those darned silly, tin-foil hat, low IQ "anti-vaxxers", what will they think of next? However, I can't help but notice that the great unwashed ranks of plebian thickies that you have such evident disdain for are still alive though. I suppose I'll be one of those for the moment, as I didn't attend Eton. It's that credulous, conformist, lovely'n'Liberal segment in the middle of the bell-curve that we should worry about. They didn't rock your boat. They're dying in droves. Looking out across the British political landscape at our confident representatives in government, if I had to redefine the criteria of one single term for the future, it would be: 'useless eaters'.