september 2021 (Covid1984)

JanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJulyAugust2020 here

This is a chronology not based on the date the information was published but based on the date  I  decided to publish it.

Those who accuse this site of hyperbole would have thought that even suggesting the possibility of half of what’s happening today just over a year ago was hyperbolic and paranoid. The sleep of subversive reason is spawning an epidemic of monsters.

It should be clear that I am not  in accord with the ideological aspects of the content of many of the articles I link to. And, as with all information about Covid,  articles have to be filtered through a critical vigilance that I personally have sometimes not invariably exercised in relation to various articles, at least at the time of putting them up. I put them up because they seem to offer alternative sober  perspectives on what’s happening.

I should also add that there may well be some inconsistency and contradictory information here. That’s because it’s extremely difficult to sift what is valid,  what is speculation and what is manipulation. However, it seems more worthwhile trying to put forward some of what appears to be the more pertinent criticisms of what’s going on than remain silent before the overwhelming propaganda machine and wait a few years in order to be “correct” but too late. “The path toward simplicity is the most complex of all, and here in particular it seemed best not to tear away from the commonplace the tangle of roots which enable us to transplant it into another region, where we can cultivate it to our own profit. ” – here


Slovenia, Ljubljana: Johnson& Johnson vaccine suspended as cops use teargas to disperse angry demonstrators blocking major highroad after 20-year-old dies following vaccine  (29/9/21)

More here, with reports in English and videos (includes mention of demos 22/9/21)

France: as Health Passes are imposed on teenagers, suspicious death of vaccinated 17-year-old occurs


Switzerland, Geneva: call for a one day strike of cultural, hospitality, nightlife, art and performance venues against Covid pass for October 1st

“…We, the cultural, hospitality, nightlife, art and performance venues, independent or not, refuse to have our lives and our audiences recorded, and want to maintain the accessibility of our venues to all. We will therefore close the doors of our spaces on Friday 1st October. We are only striking for one day because we can’t afford more, and prolonging the strike would not correspond to our economic realities after these long months of pandemic. Of course, we want to reopen our venues and welcome our audiences; but the situation is such that we have to mark, by at least one day of strike, our opposition to the application of the covid certificate. However, going on strike does not mean stopping our activities! We will move them into the public space for the occasion; because a strike means stopping work, but it is also an opportunity to meet up, to eat and to imagine the possible together. It seems essential to us, at a time when the right to demonstrate is weakening in Switzerland, to take back possession of the space outside, without asking for authorization. On October 1st we will occupy public space to do what we do best: discussions, shows, concerts, meals… So that we can gather without having to justify our health situation or declare our identity. In the current context of moblisation against sanitary measures, we want to clearly distance ourselves from the postures adopted by the extreme right. We are aware of the extent of the health situation and its repercussions on our lives, but we would like to remind you of the distinction that must be made between the reality of the pandemic that affects us and the security policies that are being tightened and to which we are firmly opposed.”

US, New York: science is God, God is science

Noteworthy is not just the New York politician’s relating God to the vaccines but also the way American leftists ignore the large presence of black working class people among the vaccine-skeptics.

Zoom discussion between doctors on vaccine and in particular what’s happening in Israel

Includes the virologist and immunologist who first developed mRNA vaccines. Haven’t yet seen all of this, but it seems that the vaccinated are between 30% and 50% more protected than the unvaccinated (in France I saw the figure elsewhere of 42% protected) but the vaccinated are a higher risk of becoming super-spreaders. A  leading Belgian virologist (and vaccine developer for many Pharma companies, involved with the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation, who, surprisingly, is calling for the immediate cessation of the Covid vaccine programme)  predicts a massive future wave of contagion due to the suppression of natural immunity, and thus the diminishing of the infectious pressure, caused by the vaccination programme. He says the non-vaccinated, having a more diversive immune response, serve as a dampening function in the distribution of the virus mutants and will be more equipped to deal, more selective,  with all the variants, rather than specific variants or the unmutated virus.

This seems to be confirmed by this comment about a different article here:

“X attacks your body. Your body doesn’t know what’s attacking so it sends out the ordinary everyday antibodies, O, to defend itself. Eventually O defeats the virus and you recover. Your T cells now have knowledge or the virus X and next time the virus or a virus within as much as a 25% variation attacks, your T Cells recognise it and send out exactly the right antibodies immediately to see off the threat. So say the virus mutates a percent or so and becomes the Delta variant D. Unvaccinated, your body recognises D immediately and sees it off easily.
But when you are vaccinated against the X variant, your defences against the X variant are so strong, that completely overrides your O antibodies so when D attacks, your body sends out X antibodies which can only deal with X. Your X antibodies are so strong they completely override your O antibodies . And D gets the better of your body and you get seriously poorly.
Basically when vaxxed your body will deal with X next time but will not deal with anything else including flu, because your immune system has been compromised and overridden.”


Covid epoch results in biggest decrease in life expectancy in western Europe since WWll


UK: 2nd part of article from ASH covering things such as censorship, the Nuremberg code, the vaccination of UK kids, etc

Sample quote:

“…over the next month, children who under UK law are too young to make the decision to smoke, drink alcohol, consent to sex, rent or buy age-rated films, get a tattoo or piercing, work full-time, drive a car, change their name, open a bank account, serve on a jury or vote in an election, who have been subjected to 18 months of coronavirus-justified restrictions in school and at home, to campaigns of guilt and blame in the media about them ‘killing granny’, to lies from the Government about the level of threat of COVID-19 to themselves and others, to indoctrination by their teachers into the cultic practices of biosecurity, to peer pressure from their fellow schoolchildren to comply with the New Normal, and with totally inadequate and misleading information about the risks and possible consequences for them of being injected with these experimental ‘vaccines’ for a disease to which they are statistically immune — will nonetheless be classified as Gillick competent to overrule their parents. Presumably, this represents the less than ‘ideal’ circumstances under which their parents cannot override their decision.”

Of course, the limitation of this and so many other criticisms of the current epoch is that it abstracts from other miseries  and ends up with a legalistic democratic discourse. It’s as if the last 18 months has produced yet another thick layer of alienation, like a new armour-plated Russian doll, whose latest Covid-epoch-impregnated  largest external doll hides so many other alienations and miseries, which nevertheless are inter-connected, and yet which hardly anybody mentions.

Interview with an undertaker which talks about rising deaths since the start of the UK vaccination programme

Some are saying this is fake news, demanding evidence for what it says is fake, though without providing evidence themselves of it being fake .  Who knows? Clearly what he says about attributing deaths to Covid when many weren’t caused by it has been confirmed all over the place. As for the rest – judge for yourself (I haven’t seen all of it).

Holland, The Hague: demo against “Health” Pass


Doctor reflects on how mass vaccination encourages vaccine-resistant virus strains (and other aspects of the current dystopia)

“It seems that the doctors and ”experts” who appear on tv and who drive public policy have completely forgotten how evolution works. Let’s take bacteria as an analogy. Bacteria develop resistance to antibiotics when we use antibiotics too generously. Indiscriminate use of antibiotics puts evolutionary pressure on bacteria to develop resistance, since that’s the only way they can survive in the antibiotic saturated environment. Yet, now, we are supposed to believe that the opposite is true for viruses – they apparently develop resistance when we underuse vaccines! We’re suddenly supposed to believe that up is down and down is up. Just like with bacteria and antibiotics, vaccine resistance will develop in a situation where the vaccines are being overused – if you vaccinate large numbers of healthy young people who don’t really need to be vaccinated then you put strong evolutionary pressure on the virus to become vaccine resistant….In recent weeks, I’ve personally seen multiple cases of myocarditis that occurred days after vaccination. When I’ve suggested to colleagues that we should report them to the authorities as possible vaccine side effects, the response I’ve been met with has been roughly this: “oh, yeah, maybe that’s a good idea… I don’t know how to do that”. I’ve reported the cases I’ve handled personally, but my guess, based on this reaction, is that most other cases have not been reported. Obviously, if you believe that what actually gets reported is an accurate estimate of the reality, then you will grossly underestimate the case rate.”

This is contested here, replied to here and given a further nuance here.

Australia, Melbourne: interesting though thoroughly confused report from marxist organisation with party agenda on attack on  HQ of construction workers’ union, a union which supports mandatory vaccinations and the general progress of totalitarianism

Full of bullshit (eg the standard Newspeak that categorises/stereotypes those skeptical of mRNA vaccines as “anti-vaxxers” – see this for a critique of this unthinking mentality) but also some facts. Indicative of the  miserable muddled idiocy of both the Right and the Left and of this intensely depressing epoch.

Switzerland: fair but rather insufficient statement of opposition to what is called in this country the “Covid certificate” (ie proof of vaccination)


Israel: video of testimonies of adverse effects of those vaccinated

“The Testimonies Project was created to provide a platform for all those who were affected after getting the covid-19 vaccines, and to make sure their voices are heard, since they are not heard in the Israeli media. We hope this project will encourage more and more people to tell their story.”


Marxist/Leftist critique of vaccines and pass laws ( from the US)

Sample quote:

“You know that thing about wars that are never meant to be won, but to be a continuous source of profits for weapons makers? Do we think, in our United States, that the Pentagon-arms manufacturer dance just CAN’T be what’s going on with the medical bureaucracy and Pharma? Or do we think
that just CAN’T be what’s going on with this one type of weapon they produce — vaccines? Something leftists might think about how they think about.

It’s a very dangerous situation because the medical bureaucracy has not, and never will, look for an alternative. They are completely invested, financially AND ideologically, in vaccines as the solution. It’s always been about vaccines, and getting a permanent regime of mandatory adult vaccination—and those continuous profits. The longer they cling to that paradigm—and it’s going to be very hard, virtually impossible, for the generals medical bureaucrats to admit they were wrong—the bigger the  disaster to come if it doesn’t work. And it isn’t.

Of course, it’s not ALL about profit. In fact, the most difficult thing to overcome is the ideological commitment of the agents of the apparatus (and all those they have convinced) to the rightness of the ‘missionary-imperialist pharmaceutical/vaccine paradigm.

The Gates-Fauci paradigm—which is now the dominant one—sees the human body as defective and infective, a plague-carrier, until and unless it
is properly pharmaceuticalized. The natural human immune system just doesn’t work well enough. It has to be effectively REPLACED with a pharmaceutical construct, built with the latest, constantly-upgraded, patented and profitable vaccines and genetic coding packages that EVERYBODY is forced to take.

Speaking of Bill Gates, if you’ve ever used something from, uh, Microsoft, you may recognize the “science” grift  business plan. Moderna literally says it’s creating an “mRNA *technology platform* that functions very much like an *operating system*… designed so that it can *plug and play* interchangeably with different programs…the ‘program’ or ‘app’ is our mRNA drug,” which Moderna calls the “Software of Life.” [I cannot make this up.]

In other words, they will be selling what amounts to immunity-software-as-a-service, where you subscribe to constant updates of the “software of life” via proprietary, plug-and-play “unique mRNA sequence[s]”and coding packages that fix all the new variants—yes, perfectly, bugs—that may emerge. And also JUST HAPPEN to create a constant a stream of income.

The purpose is not to win the war against the virus, but to keep it going as a continuous source of profits.

The model of “public health” in this paradigm is a society divided between quarantined bubble-people and continuously- and fully-vaccinated people, made “free” by the pharmaceutical fix. The unfortunately stubborn and the blissfully compliant. (And we’ll make life too difficult for the stubborn to resist.)

This paradigm JUST HAPPENS to be profitable; they sincerely think. (As does everyone who has been sincerely convinced by them.)

This paradigm is also the surest way to LOSE humanity’s war against viruses. As every scientist before the year 2020 would have said.

Think about this for a minute, scientifically and logically, as you’d think about any such paradigm for chemically or genetically re-engineering any other complex natural eco-system. No one—certainly no one from the left—would or should accept such techno-dystopian nonsense: ‘The earth will kill us with hunger, floods, and plagues unless we sufficiently herbicide all the crops, dam the rivers, fill in the wetlands, and kill all the insects. Do you question that? You’re killing people!’ Says the agro-chemical industry. Oops, I mean “science.” ….”

This brings together in one place and with a fairly radical perspective things that have been said elsewhere…A good implicit riposte to the kind of support for totalitarianism from pseudo-anarchists (like this nauseatingly misinformed rubbish). Over 100 years ago Kropotkin, anarchists in the French CGT as well as “marxist” social democrats in Germany, supported one side or another in WWI. History repeats itself….


On Wikipedia’s treatment of alternative medicine/health, indicative of the pharmaceutical industry’s increasing domination of knowledge

“One of the industries where Wikipedia’s bias is most noticeable is healthcare. In an article for the Orthomolecular News Service, Howard Strauss, Grandson of Max Gerson, MD (the creator of the Gerson cancer therapy) states that:

“This writer and many others in the field of alternative medicine and natural healing have experienced Wikipedia bias personally when contributing well-documented, carefully researched articles to the site, only to have them be radically altered and deleted, by anonymous “editors,” then being banned from further editing or contributions. This is impossible to reconcile with a free flow of information.”

And this can be verified as Wikipedia keeps a public record of all edits made to an article over time. He goes on to comment on the history of Wikipedia and states that:

“At first, it was interesting to see uncensored information flow through the site, and even contribute to it. Then corporate America realized that Wikipedia, and similar sites, were distributing information they had carefully and thoroughly suppressed in the media, and set about correcting that omission. Soon, Wikipedia entries about natural healing, holistic medicine, and other subjects began to resemble publicity blurbs from Monsanto, or Merck, or the NIH. Contributors are supposed to be anonymous, “volunteer” editors were supposed to be both anonymous and neutral. But it was clear that for certain sensitive subjects, this was far from the case.”

If you want to see Wikipedia’s bias for yourself, just search for any medical discipline that isn’t drug-based. And if you want to make things really fun, take a shot of whiskey every time you see the word ‘pseudoscience’.

Here are real snippets from Wikipedia entries on alternative forms of medicine and natural healing, taken from the first few sentences of the entry…

Chiropractic: “Chiropractic is a pseudoscientific alternative medicine…”
Chinese medicine: “Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) is a branch of traditional medicine in China. It has been described as “fraught with pseudoscience.“
Homeopathy: “Homeopathy or homoeopathy is a pseudoscientific system of alternative medicine.”
Ayurveda: “The theory and practice of Ayurveda is pseudoscientific.” Acupuncture: “Acupuncture is a pseudoscience.”
German New Medicine: “Germanic New Medicine (GNM), also formerly known as German New Medicine and New Medicine, a system of pseudo-medicine.“
Functional Medicine: “Functional medicine is a form of alternative medicine that encompasses a number of unproven and disproven methods and treatments.“

The editors display a shocking level of bias by cherry-picking references, many of which are not peer-reviewed or scientific, and make hollow claims which they portray as facts.”

Homeopathy-sceptics  think that the degree of dilution of homeopathic remedies is too absurd to be efficacious (at every stage of dilution the medical property is shaken in water 100 times, and diluted to up to 100,000,000 times, sometimes more). It should be pointed out  that sharks can smell one drop of blood in 100 million times the amount of water. A radioactive substance can likewise be detected in at least 10 million times the amount of water than of that substance. Whilst homeopathy is no cure-all and sometimes you need allopathic  medicine (one shouldn’t be dogmatic about such things one way or the other), it gives a far greater degree of autonomy, of non-dependence on experts, than allopathy.

In the US, the first homeopaths came from Germany, spreading quickly their form of treatment throughout the 1830s and 1840s. From 1847 (the creation of the American Medical Association – AMA) onwards they were increasingly opposed by urban allopaths (who often advocated bleeding or mercury “cures” that made patients worse) whose elite cosmopolitan position enabled them to wage a constant war against homeopaths whom they labelled as “quacks”. The first code of practice of the AMA stated clearly that the patient’s view was not to be entertained: “The obedience of a patient to the prescriptions of his doctor should be prompt and implicit”, warning that patients should not permit their “own crude opinions” to influence attention to treatments given them by doctors. In its early years it ordered all local medical societies to expel homeopaths. With the turn of the century the AMA sought and secured the backing of major industrial foundations, in particular that of  Rockefeller and later Carnegie, which bit by bit managed to stop the funding of  all medical schools teaching homeopathy (also cutting the funding of almost all schools giving places to poorer whites, blacks or women).  From the beginning, the support of scientific medical research by industry meant that the responsibility for disease was placed with the internal biological structure of the individual organism. In terms of illness, the individual became separated from their environment and the industrial process, both of which were inevitably seen by the large industrial foundations as benign.  This was in sharp contrast to the older holistic view of medicine, which always tried to see the person with the context of their immediate environment.


Australia, Melbourne: clashes with cops on anti-lockdown demo

If you believe the statistics of this article,  2000 cops were deployed against 700 demonstrators, 10 cops were injured by them, of whom at least 235 were arrested. Video here.

Germany, Munster: vaccinated-only nightclub event leaves 44 infected with Covid


Statistics from Israel showing little to no efficacy of vaccine or worse

“…Here is the curve of covid cases in Israel, since the beginning of the epidemic. It is clear that vaccination or no vaccination, there is no effect, if not worse, the more people are vaccinated, the stronger the waves are:

Was it a total failure in Israel to obtain this famous collective immunity and to contain the epidemic, whereas the Indians obtained it at 67.6% with the disease and early treatment?

What are the possible biases in reading this curve?

We explained here that the case curve may not be the best index to compare, because it depends on the tests: the more you test, the more cases you have. So here is the test curve. It’s more or less superimposable, so some would say it’s not worse, but the last 3 waves are more or less the same because of the more tests.

If these last 3 waves are more or less identical, let’s point out that the first was without vaccines or treatments, the second half vaccinated, the last very vaccinated. This clearly confirms the low efficiency of vaccines, even in a country that is doing everything possible. The same is true in Iceland, which is more vaccinated than Israel: the results of vaccination are not obvious…These findings are not exclusive to Israel or Iceland. Three papers (from the CDC, Oxford University and the UK Department of Health) also find this. Why doesn’t it work? The first reason is that we vaccinate for the delta variant, with a vaccine made for the Wuhan strain. The second reason is that immunity wears off quickly over time, as with seasonal flu.”


Montpellier: demo against Regional Health Agency

There were about 300 people there. For a mid-week  demo at 10am, not called by any union or political organisation, this was quite a good amount of people. Possibly a majority were health workers, many being threatened with suspension because they refuse to be vaccinated. There were no French flags, which is a nice change. A local politician tried to speak through his megaphone for the cameras but was deliberately drowned out by drumming and the singing of the yellow vest song, with some people saying they didn’t want any spokesmen.

UK: on adverse drug reactions and deaths from vaccines

“…since 1 February… of the 1,091 people who died after two injections, 1,054 were 50 years of age or older (97 per cent), while of the 536 who died without being ‘vaccinated’, 437 were 50 or over (81.5 per cent).”

This text should be read with a fine eye for how far it is not being entirely clear.  For one thing, the above shows, if I’ve understood correctly, that of those who died after 2 injections, 37 were under 50 and amongst the unvaccinated 99 were under 50. So, though it shows that the vaccine is not particularly effective (surprise surprise), it doesn’t seem to show it’s completely ineffective.

However, this seems valid: “…as of 30 June, 2021, the most recent date for which figures were available before the article was published, there were 1,037,376 adverse drug reactions to COVID-19 ‘vaccines’ reported to the MHRA, including 1,440 deaths. This was, already, 17.25 times the 60,137 adverse drug reactions reported to the MHRA for all other vaccines approved in the UK since 2010.

Unfortunately, the MHRA didn’t provide the figures on how many doses of these other vaccines were administered since 2010, compared with the more than 90 million doses of COVID-19 ‘vaccines’ administered so far. But if both PHE and PHS can dismiss the deaths following injection with COVID-19 ‘vaccines’ as ‘natural’ deaths of people they expected to die anyway because of their age or pre-existing health conditions, how can they account for this enormous increase in the merely reported adverse drug reactions over such a short time when compared to earlier vaccines, no doubt each administered in smaller quantities but over a far longer period of time and for multiple infections and diseases? Is this, too, just a ‘coincidence’?”

And this quote from here is interesting: ‘The COVID-19 vaccines have comparatively high rates of side effects and fatalities. The current figure is around four fatalities per 100,000 vaccinations, as documented by the most thorough European documentation system. Currently, our estimates show that we have to accept four fatal and 16 serious side effects per 100,000 vaccinations in order to save the lives of 2–11 individuals per 100,000 vaccinations, placing risks and benefits on the same order of magnitude. For three deaths prevented by vaccination we have to accept two inflicted by vaccination. This lack of clear benefit should cause governments to rethink their vaccination policy.’

Israel: 3rd shot seems also to be failure

This is from someone who is possibly cherry-picking data as much as those who use official data to prove the efficacy of the mRNA vaccine.  Given so much confusion and contradictory information coming from all sides, one suspects that people, just to give themselves an air of knowing what’s what, plump for one side or the other without trying to wade through the fog.


France, Toulouse: leaflet against the Health Passport


Denmark, Copenhagen: Health Passport to be used to ban those with criminal records from nightime venues

Deepl translation:

“In Copenhagen, the Health Pass creates a monster
10 September 2021

The Copenhagen police are going to ban people with criminal records from nightlife venues…. How will the cops or bar managers distinguish between a person with and without a criminal record? Is this the introduction of a permanent control, a pass for everyone, all the time? Will the good citizens of Copenhagen have to sign in every time they go for a drink? Or will everyone be asked to report to the police if they have any doubts about a person? A hint already from Anne Tønnes, head of the Copenhagen police: “The law allows the exchange of information about people banned from nightlife with bar owners. In short, after the announcement of the abandonment of the health pass in Denmark, the control society continues. If today some people still don’t see that the issue of the health pass is far outdated by a matrix of control society that existed long before this pass… the future they hoped would be sweet will in fact be bitter. Four central areas of the city close to bars and restaurants will be considered ‘nightlife zones’. People with previous convictions for types of offences such as certain ‘crimes against the person’ or ‘weapons offences’ will be banned from these areas. Of course the image of the aggressor is frightening. But should we allow freewheeling police societies to develop, which, becoming increasingly ill, are making a dizzying flight towards dystopian solutions whose ideology is to generalise prison conditions to the whole of society? How can someone who has served his or her sentence still be considered legally guilty? This is a reversal of justice in favour of the police. Beyond that, this decision is an admission of total failure of the prison system and the judicial system. After a sentence, here is another sentence, and without justice. It is a regime of permanent guilt. And in the end, what we see is that in the face of this failure of a society that has never tried an egalitarian model to get out of problems, the spare wheel it proposes is the advent of police states where everyone is likely to be controlled and invited to be a snitch. Recently a new job has been created: police auxiliary bartender. This law is expected to come into force on 14 September for a period of two years, i.e. until 13 September 2023, the Copenhagen police said in a statement. It can be predicted that in the near future, if nothing is done to change the global model of our societies, here or there, other forms of exclusion will affect other categories of people considered as enemies of society. Will you be one of these next categories?”

Greece, Thessaloniki: clashes on demo against compulsory vaccination (demo on 12th)

Article from June 2020 on hydroxychloraquine

France:  a Senate report showing how the ruling class are thinking, covering 2020-2021, published on June 3rd (ie over 5 weeks before Macron’s introduction of the Health Passport)

Translation of significant extracts:

“As we can see, the opportunities opened up by the use of digital technologies are immense, and the Covid-19 crisis has only served to give a foretaste  of the many possible uses in the short, medium and long term.  While the Covid-19 pandemic is not over, and is likely to be neither the last nor the strongest, it would be irresponsible not to take advantage of such opportunities. The widespread restrictions on ‘physical’ freedoms in recent months are increasingly untenable.  They are neither sustainable nor even very effective, compared to what would be possible with a more systematic use of digital technology. The use of digital technology would allow precise control of compliance with health measures, at an individual level and in real time:  restrictions could be targeted at a small number of people, and be more limited in time, while having maximum effectiveness. Perhaps tomorrow, thanks to digital technology, we will be able to regain our ‘physical’ freedoms more quickly, or even never give them up, and
have pandemics without lockdown….

There are many possible tools but, in the short and medium term at least, using the most obvious cases concerns monitoring compliance with rules aimed at limiting the transmission of the virus (health pass, curfews, lockdowns, quarantines, etc.), which implies connecting types of data: identification data, medical data, and location data  (from the most intrusive, with GPS tracking, to the lightest and most conditional access to certain places, and relative location data with contact tracing)….

For example, in the case of a rapidly spreading epidemic or one with a very high mortality rate, medial teams could go immediately to the homes of vulnerable people (or wherever they are), to vaccinate them, treat them or
make them safe. This is not a question of intervening with “all over-65s” or  “all the inhabitants of a given town”: the cross-referencing of data and the use of artificial intelligence make it possible to target extremely fine targeting. For example: – by using genetic data, it could be possible to immediately identify people who are receptive to a very rare variant of a virus by exploiting genetic data, it could be possible to immediately identify people who are receptive to a very rare variant of a virus, or to a particular vaccine or treatment, and thus to mobilise medical resources in a much more efficient way. Without going that far, the simple automated exploitation of the medical file of each individual of the targeted population could already permit a great deal:

– by exploiting data from connected objects,  which could also be accessible from the digital health space, it could be possible to intervene upstream of the onset or deterioration of symptoms: data from ECGs, connected scales, connected thermometers, thermal cameras detecting feverish symptoms, etc.;

– by exploiting mobility data, it could be possible to position teams (for information, testing, vaccination, etc.) at the right places and times to  reach as many people as possible  (a transport hub, a public gathering, etc.), who may have been warned in advance…

Finally, in the most extreme crisis situations, digital tools could enable effective, exhaustive control in real time of the population’s compliance with restrictions, with dissuasive sanctions, if necessary, and based on an even more exceptional use of personal data.

These tools are the most effective, but also the most restrictive
freedoms – but once again, it would be irresponsible not to at least consider them, if only to convince ourselves of doing  everything possible  to prevent this from happening. Many cases of use are possible, and in particular : – 

control of movement: electronic bracelet to monitor quarantine, deactivation of the pass for public transport, detection of number plates by speed cameras, electronic gates in shops, thermal cameras in restaurants, etc.

– health monitoring, via connected objects whose use would be compulsory this time, and whose data would be used for  control purposes;

– monitoring of social contacts, for example visiting a vulnerable family member when you are contagious;

– monitoring of transactions, for example imposing an automatic fine, detecting a medical purchase (which may suggest either infection or smuggling in times of shortage), or  the illegal pursuit of a business activity (trade, etc.) in spite of the restrictions.

…The greater the threat, the more societies will be prepared to accept
intrusive technologies, and greater restrictions on their individual freedoms – and this is logical.”

For further aspects of this see entry for 21/6/21 on this site-

Report by French senators proposes to remotely deactivate transport subscriptions, geolocate citizens and remove access to bank accounts in the event of a crisis


US:  American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), having previously denounced as dangerous and unnecessary attempts by the state to mandate, coerce, and control in the name of protecting the public from pandemics, declares itself in favour of developing totalitarianism

Data shows infections high among double vaxxed for those aged 40 to 79


France: minor clashes in Paris & Toulouse on anti-Health Passport demos (typo error for date of this link)

The official figure for demonstrators throughout France is 12`1,000. Taking the official figure (3,500) for Montpellier into account, I’d say even if you doubled the figures it’d be less than the amount of those that actually participated. The usual distortion.

Database of all ivermectin Covid studies – 72% improvement for early treatment


Moving French film about the disasters meted out to nurses etc and the dismissal of “heroic” nurses for  refusing to be treated as compulsory guinea pigs for the pharmaceutical industry plus other stuff (with English subtitles)

Not seen it all, but…


France: critical analysis of Health Passports and their prehistory (Deepl translation)

Details of how the Health Passport can allow aspects of the health history of each person checked to  be read by anybody checking them

“… the two-dimensional code on the passes, which is scanned at the entrance to various places, banalises a permanent and useless identity check…. the health pass … allows any person scanning the two-dimensional codes to consult the health data (in addition to the surname, first names, date of birth) of the persons holding the documents: date, place and type of RT-PCR test, result of the screening; name and manufacturer of the vaccine, number of doses received and number of doses needed, date of the last injection. ..the health pass data can be misused by any person scanning a health pass (including, of course, the people in charge of checking these passes at the entrance of a festival or a concert)….the impact assessment produced by the government itself considered that this risk of misapplication of the scan to divert data was serious and likely. This does not prevent the Council of State from judging that this risk “seems low”….the paper version of the health passes endangers in the same way the personal data contained in the two-dimensional code…”


Canada, Ontario: full vaccination required for funeral attendance

Wonder if this applies also to the deceased.

Criticism of study that says Covid is 4 times more dangerous than the vaccine (translated from a Hebrew Facebook page)

Translation of a Facebook post by Yafa Shir-Raz, 3/9/2021:

What lies behind the explosive headlines that “the largest study in the world has found that the risk of corona is four times higher than the risk of a vaccine”?

Do you know the story about Herschel’s telegram? One day Herschel learned that his brother, who lives in a remote town, was about to get married. He asked to send him a congratulatory telegram, in which he wrote: “My dear brother, congratulations on your marriage. I wish you and your bride all the best and that we will build an exemplary family and a good life.” But every word on the telegram costs a lot of money. And so Herschel found himself shortening the telegram more and more, until he was finally left with “my dear brother.” But then he thought that this too could be shortened, because, well, it is clear that his brother knows that he is dear to him, and no doubt he also knows that he is his brother, so why exaggerate? He decided to give up the telegram.

Why did I recall this story?
Because last Saturday, Dr. Yaakov Ophir and I asked to write a review article on the new study published in the journal NEJM, by researchers from Clalit Health Fund headed by Prof. Ran Belitzer, that found, at least according to media headlines, “that the risk is high 4 times the risk of the vaccine.”

Beyond the incredible timing – sheer coincidence of course – just after it was revealed that the FDA’s approval for Pfizer’s vaccine was actually accompanied by a warning against meningitis and myocarditis especially for teens and young men, the question arises is this really what the study found? Did the researchers prove that the risk of coronary heart disease is four times higher than the risk of the vaccine?

The disturbing feeling, that these bombastic headlines are manipulation of the media, was not the only concern in relation to the study, and Jacob and I were not the only ones who felt concerned. Independent researchers around the world have engaged in the last week and a half since the publication of the article examining the study, its methodology and findings, and many of them have posted on Twitter and Facebook serious reviews of various  roblems in it.

We decided, like other researchers, to send a review article to the journal itself. To our surprise, it became clear to us that, as in Herschel’s telegram story, we were forced, literally, to consider words, since the word budget that the NEJM allows for responses to articles published in it is, believe it or not, 175 words. Barely a paragraph.

In other words, the message is – forget about it, don’t send us a review.

Still we decided to try to meet the challenge and send one. What will happen to our review paragraph we do not know yet. We’ll live and see, but since who knows if and when it will be published, and in any case due to the suffocating brace, our article covers only three of the problems that undermine the validity of the study, I have added here additional criticisms, some of which have also been raised by other researchers:

1. Exclusion (or exclusion from the study) of populations that could have “destroyed” the results:

a. People who have a previous diagnosis of corona infection
b. Elderly people in nursing homes and people in institutions
c. People confined to their homes for medical reasons
d. People who have had a side effect that has been documented in the past in their medical file

Great, right? Precisely the most sensitive populations, which are the most interesting to know what their risk is, were excluded from the study. Also, disqualifying people with previous diagnoses may result in missing out and losing important data on the aggravation of existing conditions and diseases, a condition that has indeed been reported in the medical literature.

2. Discontinuation of follow-up after the first side effects

People who were diagnosed with corona – in the vaccinated group or the unvaccinated group – they simply stopped following them. What’s the problem with that? The problem is that this too can lead to missing out and losing important data on side effects.

3. Follow-up time is too short – only 21 days after the second dose:

a. It is not possible to compare follow-up for 21 days after the second dose, and follow-up for 42 days after infection with corona.
b. 21 days can by no means be long enough to identify medium-term risks such as myocarditis / pericarditis, whose diagnosis, as the research literature suggests, and also the findings in the field since the start of the vaccination campaign, is considered challenging, and often involves a lengthy process.

4. The argument that the vaccine is safer than getting Corona is problematic and defective:

a. No stratification is done according to age / sex – very problematic: how can one ignore age and sex, when it is explicitly known that there is a different expression of risk factors at different ages / sexes? For example, the risk of myocarditis is particularly high in adolescent boys and young men.
b. What about the booster? Each dose of vaccine involves a risk in itself, and even if we assume that the risk does not increase with each dose further, the renewed risk cannot be ignored each time.
c. It is now clear and well known that the vaccine does not protect against infection – vaccinated people become infected, and in high percentages. As I wrote this week, the evidence for this fact, which by the way Fauchi admitted as early as January, is being exposed in more and more studies, not to mention the reality on the ground in Israel.
The simple implication of this finding is that a person can suffer from both the side effects of the vaccine and the side effects of the disease.

5. The study did not include subjects aged 12-15.

This is despite the fact that it is now known that the risk of serious side effects in adolescents is the greatest, and the FDA in the accompanying warning approving the vaccine even admitted that the risk of myocarditis is highest at young ages.

6. Death is not included as a side effect!

Dr. Josh Guetzkow puts this critique: “If people who died after the vaccine were at higher risk of dying from one of the serious side effects the study addressed (such as heart attacks, strokes, myocardial infarction or pulmonary embolism) compared to those without vaccines, then the counting of side effects is skewed downwards for the vaccinated group.”

A quite possible speculation that he raises: perhaps the reason why we see more myocarditis in young people is simply that when this phenomenon occurs in the elderly, they are at high risk of dying.

The finding that vaccinated people had a lower risk of acute kidney damage, anemia, cerebral hemorrhage and lymphopenia (decreased lymphocyte count) and ‘other thrombi’ should serve as a bright red light for researchers and reviewers that there is a source of massive bias here, and not that they have discovered of some kind of fairy dust that cures these diseases”, says Dr. Getzko. “The irony is that the authorities dismiss the claims of a link between the vaccine and many different side effects as impossible, because there is no mechanistic explanation. But when it is claimed that the vaccine can work wonders simply ‘because’, no one doubts it.”

And back to the question – what is behind the headlines in the media, and whether the study really found a four times higher risk of myocarditis in the unvaccinated compared to the vaccinated – the answer is that this comparison is also problematic to say the least, as the study actually included two independent comparisons between two different follow-up groups – one sample in which a comparison was made between vaccinated and unvaccinated, and a second sample in which PCR verified and unverified were compared. Trying to compare the two samples and draw a conclusion from it, and one so decisive and resonant, is problematic, as the authors themselves write in the article. Who formulated this cheap manipulation and made sure that it was distributed in this way in all the media, and was it only due to the superficiality and lack of knowledge of the journalists? I’ll leave you to think about it.

Link to the research:

Israel: ivermectin v. ivermectin

Translation of a Facebook post from 3/9/22:

Well, such a thing I’ve really never seen before, neither in the context of the corona nor at all. It’s insanely delusional.

Two news reports on the same drug two days apart, the same presenter (Dany Kushmero), the same reporter (Yoav Even) and the same experts interviewed in the report(Prof. Amit Asa from Asuta hospital and Prof. Eli Schwartz from Sheba Hospital), in the same positions and even wearing the exact same clothes.

So what has changed in two days?

On 31.8.21 Ivermectin was introduced as “a favorite of anti-vaxxers”, with an FDA warning that it is intended for animals, reporter Yoav Even noted that ‘anti-vaxxers’ spread *false* rumors about it’s forbidden use even though it has been proven effective, and adds that the drug is not intended to treat corona. Prof. Eli Schwartz says that there’s no substitute for vaccine, that using Ivermectine means taking a drug over time, that it’s not possible to take a drug for years. He adds that even if the drug helps, he’s sure it will not be as helpful as the vaccine.

Two whole days have passed, 2.9.21, the same channel, the same major evening edition, the same players, the same medicine – the complete opposite message: This time they speak about how 9 months earlier, the same Prof. Eli Schwartz, a world-renowned expert on tropical diseases, did research on the same medicine (which already exists 40 Year) in 100 corona patients in a mild condition, and after 3 days (!!!) 95% of them stopped being contagious, compared to 50% in the placebo group. The same Eli Schwartz who two days earlier said that the drug should be taken for years, and who would even want to take it – now says that the drug is taken for only 3 days, and that’s according to a study he did 9 months ago! He adds  that the drug can get people out of quarantine on the fourth day, which is a tremendous social, and economic change.

That study also appears in this article published exactly a year ago, on 8.9.20 [in Hebrew]:

The reporter Yoav Even, who two days ago ridiculed ‘anti-vaxxers’ for jumping on a drug for animals and being hospitalized because of it, suddenly makes a U-turn and notes that according to studies done in Sheba hospital and around the world, not only does the drug prevent infection but can also prevent deterioration in corona patients.

Eli Schwartz appears again and says we have a treasure in hand that can prevent the congestion in the hospitals, but neither the Ministry of Health nor the HMOs were willing to help with that. Yoav Even concludes by saying that the professor is frustrated, because he really believes that the drug can help prevent infection and prevent the disease from deteriorating, and only lacks a large and comprehensive study to support the other studies that have already been done, only that “there is no funding for it”…

The irony is that the company producing this drug, “Merck”, is the biggest opponent of using the drug itself, because it is very cheap ($4 per pill abroad) and it is working on a new drug that has been promised a billion dollars by the health authorities in the US if it’s eventually approved.


Australian politician says don’t talk to anyone if you’re outside your home (from July)

Indian Council of Medical Research includes lvermectin as an essential medicine for COVID-19


Israel: Health Passport totalitarian madness extends to 3-year-olds

This, on the madness of totalitarian capitalism in this epoch, has some interesting things to say even if it also avoids many essentials (eg. the class struggle)

“Global capitalism has no fundamental values — other than exchange value, of course — and thus it is free to manufacture any kind of “reality” it wants, and replace one “reality” with a new “reality” any time that serves its purposes, like stagehands changing a theatrical set.”

This comment seems pertinent (not that some of the others aren’t).

A  way to seduce, rather force, the young into being vaccinated

This is Bill de Blasio, Mayor of New York City – speaking at 0.23 seconds in.

Future method of social control via vaccination history

This is from December 2019 and the above notion is a hypothetical extrapolation not said explicitly in the article.


France: clashes in 4 cities

“Châtelet les Halles, Paris. Hundreds of anti-sanitary pass protesters invaded the Forum des Halles, forcing their way into the shopping centre. A “flashmob demonstration from Bastille” is said to be the cause of the outburst. The police intervened to repel them. Gare Saint-Charles, Marseille. The procession started at the Vieux-Port and then moved towards the Gare Saint-Charles. The demonstrators forced their way through, pushing police officers aside, to invade the departures and arrivals hall.”

Slogans shouted in Montpellier (some of which rhyme in French but not in translation):

Prétexte sanitaire, état autoritaire !  ( Health pretext, authoritarian state!)

Macron, Le Pen, c’est du pareil au même !  ( Macron, Le Pen, it’s all the same!)

Le pass sanitaire, on n’en veut pas !
Le contrôle social, on n’en veut pas !
Reconnaissance faciale, on n’en veut pas !
Sécurité globale, on n’en veut pas !
Le fichage, on n’en veut pas !
Ségrégation sociale, on n’en veut pas !

( The health pass – we don’t want it!
Social control – – we don’t want it!
Facial recognition, we don’t want it!
Global security, we don’t want it!
Reducing us to bureaucratic files, we don’t want it!
Social segregation, we don’t want it! )

On est là, on est là !
Même si l’État le veut pas, nous on est là !
Contre le pass sanitaire et lois sécuritaires !
Même si l’État le veut pas, nous on est là !

(To the tune of a Yellow Vest song:

We are here, we are here!
Even if the state doesn’t want it, we are here!
Against the health pass and security laws!
Even if the state doesn’t want it, we are there! )

Pass sanitaire, mesure totalitaire ! Ségrégation sociale, outil du capital !

(The Health Pass, a totalitarian measure! Social segregation, a tool of capital! )

Non aux boucs émissaires, Soyons tous solidaires !  ( No to scapegoats, let’s all show solidarity!)

Le pass il sert à quoi ? Travaille, consomme et ferme ta gueule

(What is the purpose of the pass? Work, consume and shut up!)

US, Washington state: antifa and fascists clash

The choice between Statistdee and Statistdum.

Fact-Checking – The Inquisitors of Falsehood and Truth

Not a radical text by any means (ahistorical belief in some pre-Covid “good” journalism, often psychologistic, not searching for fundamental social reasons for the manipulations of the media, etc.) but it brings together some pertinent criticisms of how “fact checking” functions:

Frugal fact-checking: inconsistency in citing sources; Emotional fact-checking: announcing reason and brandishing emotion; One-sided fact-checking: the end of the dialectic; Defamatory fact-checking: the death knell of the medicine man; Self-contradictory fact-checking: the truth, when it suits us; No-questions-asked fact-checking: the case is closed!; Dramatic fact-checking: welcome to the Karpman triangle!

Opposition from some doctors etc. to the vaccination of children

“…According to the CDC, the cumulative data from February 2020 to May 2021 are as follows: for young people aged 0 to 17, out of 100 people, the risk of hospitalisation is 0.29 and the risk of death is 0.00. Where is the objectivity in claiming that a risk is low when it is close to 0 and on the other hand, in concealing a much higher risk linked to vaccination?
The above does not necessarily include long-term effects which may only become apparent after many months or even years. The experience with Sanofi-Pasteur’s dengue vaccine Dengvaxia illustrates the importance of being cautious. A mechanism identified in 1977(3) called ‘antibody-facilitated infection’, in which antibodies help the virus instead of inactivating it, led to the death of 600 out of 800,000 children vaccinated…(Carol Isoux : « Autopsie d’un vaccin. La course entre labos au risque du scandale sanitaire », revue XXI, numéro 52, automne 2020).  This antibody-facilitated mechanism of infection is known in coronaviruses. It is what prevented the production of vaccines against the 2002 SARS-Cov-1 (J.L.Bourdineaud, CRIIGEN,, juillet 2021). It is inconceivable to ignore this well-documented precedent!”


UK, London: clashes at Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency 


US,  Colorado: high school kids walk out of class in protest against compulsory masks  More here


“Mob mentality and the unvaxxed” – interesting text from Charles Eisenstein

Propaganda must facilitate the displacement of aggression by specifying the targets for hatred.”
– Joseph Goebbels

Contrary to the association of the unvaccinated with public danger, some experts contend that it is the vaccinated that are more likely to drive mutant variants through selection pressure. Just as antibiotics result in higher mutation rates and adaptive evolution in bacteria, leading to antibiotic resistance, so may vaccines push viruses to mutate. (Hence the prospect of endless “boosters” against endless new variants.) This phenomenon has been studied for decades, as this article in my favorite math & science website, Quanta, describes. The mutated variants evade the vaccine-induced antibodies, in contrast to the robust immunity that, according to some scientists, those who have already been sick with Covid have to all variants (See this and this, more analysis here, compare to Dr. Fauci’s viewpoint.)…

The science on the issue is so clouded by financial incentives and systemic bias that it is impossible to rely on it to light a way through the murk…The unreliability of the science…suggests that we take a hard look at the deadly social impulses that the science cloaks.

My point is that those in the scientific and medical community who dissent from the demonization of the unvaxxed contend not only with opposing scientific views, but with ancient, powerful psycho-social forces. They can debate the science all they want, but they are up against something much bigger.

Then as now, science was a cloak for something more primal. If the mainstream view on Covid vaccines is wrong, it will not be overthrown by science alone…It is important to recognize… what we are dealing with, so that we can creatively expand our resistance beyond futile debate over the issues.”

Note added 29/9/21: There are some aspects of this that should be doubted, which I’ll do at a later stage

Australia, NSW: truckers blockade major roads in anti-mandatory vaccine movement (29th – 30th August)…More here


SamFanto was born, and then he lived a bit but never enough.

Down with routine ritualised demos!

Leaflet distributed on 21st August in Montpellier, France.

Translated from here.

I’ve been to most of the demos against the Pass Sani-se-taire [i] in Montpellier. They’re a bit of a ritual. You feel you’ve got to be there to make up the numbers. And then become a mere number yourself. Although the numbers are certainly increasing, these demonstrations are more demonstrations of incredible confusion and dogma than much of a serious opposition to growing totalitarianism. It is inevitable to be confused by the enormous contradictions of this virtually unprecedented intensification of an already irrational daily life. But we need to wade through the confusion rather than assert dogmas against opposing dogmas. As one of its more devastating effects, Covid has everyone digging their heels into quicksand, whether Covid-denier or Covid exaggerator, total pro-vaxxer or total anti-vaxxer, conspiracy theory or anti-conspiracy “theory”. Everyone falling into positions that disappear like mirages on approach. Everyone becoming more furious than ever that they’re right but adopting a right that proves wrong so quick, having sped round a delirious circle of lies, half-truths, truths and 1½ truths.

And it all adds so much to the wear and tear of daily “communication”. The tendency of people to monologue with their already well-fixed ideologies does not make for a good discussion of the contradictions and miseries that the present development of capital is imposing with increasing force. The ideology of unity is both a way of saying “shut up!” about our differences, and also a way of merely making “opposition” a non-violent spectacle. We need to develop actions that extend and go beyond the attacks on vaccination centres that have been happening throughout France at the rate of 1 a day since mid-July if we are to stem the growing horror driving people to madness or suicide: for example, some persistent sabotage of QR technology, wildcat strikes, occupations, riots, etc. We are not weak because we are divided but divided because we are weak, and getting angry about this mad future as well as significant differences is also part of overcoming weakness. Unless people fundamentally challenge their own complicity with hierarchical authority and ideological half-truths, we shall only help to dig our own graves by keeping us separate.

So let’s name some of the confusing ideas and shitty politics amongst some of the participants in these demos.

There are the obvious ones – like the Ligue du Midi, who gratuitously thumped some members of a moronic Leninist organisation (ARM/Combat) on July 24th. Both are organisations that attract abject admirers of authority and those with delerious power-crazed fantasies of leading the masses. Whilst ARM is just ridiculous and largely insignificant, the LduM are a genuine physical danger to anybody trying to develop some autonomous opposition to this world as well as to migrants, muslims and any other convenient scapegoat for explaining why we’re miserable.

But they’re not the only far right danger. Given the largely pathetic nature of the Left, including much of the extreme left and apparently “anti-authoritarian” far left over the last 18 months since the start of this suffocating Covid epoch, the Right have been the main recuperators of dissent, hoping to opportunistically gain recruits for their sordid anti-life politics. Their “opposition” to Macron’s authoritarianism, when they’ve always submitted to and supported horrendous authoritarian politics in different forms, their calls for unity when their whole politics involves racial divide and rule – all this is a sick joke. If one limits opposition to a specific aspect of the State’s power, one can invariably ignore the hierarchical forms that are embodied in those who aim to become the State (e.g. treating those lower in their own hierarchies as mere members – the arms and legs, but never the heart or head, something which the useful idiots lower in such hierarchies willingly accept). Fortunately some people on these demos are aware of the danger of these groups, and managed to confront Action Francaise on 7th August, forcing them to lose their stupid national flags and some other equipment.

It’s a pity not more people critique the presence of France’s national flag on these demos. Some pretend it’s the symbol of the Revolution of the late 18th century, as if it hasn’t been something that the bourgeoisie has invariably used, including in its territorial massacres in Vietnam and Algeria. You can’t separate a symbol from its dominant historical meaning – it’d almost be like saying the Swastika is just a religious symbol coming from Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism. Macron too is happy to parade around with the tricolour. Likewise he sings the Marseillaise. On 7th August people singing the Marseillaise confronted by people singing the Internationale, though unfortunately they didn’t drown them out. National anthems show respect for the bourgeoisie’s property – the Nation. In this epoch, nationalist identity, though always an identification which connects you to your rulers or would-be rulers, is particularly submissive and unstrategic given the fact that the pass sanitaire is increasingly being imposed throughout the world. An international opposition is essential and borders are cages which keep us who have no control over our lives separate.

And then there are the conspiracy theorists. Let’s give them their due. Given that all criticism of the lies and mutual complicity between different arms of the ruling class (the media, the governments, the pharmaceutical industry, the WHO etc.) is caricatured as “conspiracy theory” it’s inevitable that many people would turn such a pejorative term into something positive. There’s been a massive intensification of lies that seems unprecedented, to the point where it is almost impossible to discern what is true, with experts changing their ‘facts’ from day to day, rather like in Orwell’s 1984, with what was said being put down the ‘memory hole’. Macron has called this so-called “health” crisis a war, and we know that in war the truth is the first casualty. Of course since the first world war, media lies have been used en masse to manipulate the proletariat, but this is a massive intensification of lies and irrationality so much so that the world seems to have leapt over the abyss into madness. But countering dominant madness with oppositional madness reinforces the very separations that the state and the ruling class want of us.

Such as reducing the development of this epoch to the Illuminati or to Soros and Bill Gates. But capitalism works not by conspiracy but by capitalising on the crises that are endemic to its dynamic development. Simplistic “answers” to the complexities of mutual capitalist interests between the State, private business and the professional liars of the media make these conspiracy theorists easy prey to right-wing demagogues who hope to use them for their future ambitions. Reducing questioning of the current Covid epoch to simplistic unnuanced answers makes such people as pliable as putty (see: Conspirouettes – These Right-wing politicians will also lie intensely as soon as they get some margin of power (just as they lie today about the undocumented etc.).

One can see in the hostility towards those who are highly suspicious of the ARNm vaccines a development of a kind of racism. Racism operates within a nationalist politics which excludes people through its borders and is based on previous imperialist conquest and current capital investments in poverty wages in “Third World “ countries that force people to try to find a better life elsewhere. Foreigners are blamed for the misery, such as reduced wages, inflicted by the rulers and by bosses. Likewise those who aren’t vaccinated will be treated as lepers responsible for the continuation of state-imposed restrictions, even though being vaccinated doesn’t stop the spread of the virus.

Satirical German graffiti: “Gas the unvaccinated”


Part of the ideology of this developing opposition is to refuse to discuss the vaccines other than to say that we’re being used as guinea pigs because the vaccine companies officially admit that the 3rd stage of their trials won’t be reached until 2023. For fear of alienating those who’ve been vaccinated but are against the Health Passport, discussion of the potential disastrous effect of these essentially new ARNm vaccines is largely closed down. But given that even these companies admit that these vaccines at best reduce symptoms, that you can still infect others and that there are many who’ve been vaccinated who die to not discuss the vaccine in the name of unity is tantamount to self-censorship. Thus the fact that some dissident genetecists, epidemologists and doctors speak of possible long-term disasters caused by the ARNm vaccine (possible creation of a super-virus vastly more resistant to anti-virals, potential weakening of the cell structure, all the various accumulated side effects such as potential infertility, miscarriages, cerebral thrombosis, etc.) and that there are other well-tried antivirals (ivermectin, Artemis Annua, etc.) has to be avoided because “we aren’t experts”. As if an expert is someone whose opinion should be automatically accepted without question (and this also goes for the dissident experts also – Raoult, Perronne, etc). In fact, the pharmaceutical companies don’t particularly care if their vaccines work or notthe point is to accumulate capital, to make billions in profits, and in this pursuit reifying humans as guinea pigs is a logical step. The means – extending the vaccine to kids as young as three, forcing people to have a 3rd jab, etc. – is essential for this goal. The fact that a majority of people have accepted to be locked down and now have been vaccinated is indicative of the power of the spectacle that colonises people’s emotions and heads with an ideology to justify submission to fear. Of all the passions, fear is the one that most assures submission to laws”, as Thomas Hobbes affirmed in Leviathan. Or as a survivor of the Nazi camps said, The modern system of terror amounts to the atomization of the individual…depriving them of the psychological means of direct communication…because of the tremendous communications apparatus to which they are exposed. The individual under terrorist conditions is never alone and always alone. …Thinking becomes a stupid crime; it endangers his life. The inevitable consequence is that stupidity spreads as a contagious disease among the terrorized population. Human beings live in a state of stupor—in a moral coma. What the terror aims to bring about… is that people shall come to act in harmony with the law of terror, namely: that their whole calculation shall have but one aim: self-perpetuation. The more people become ruthless seekers after their own survival, the more they become psychological pawns and puppets of a system which knows no other purpose than to keep itself in power” (Leo Lowenthal, Terror’s Atomization of Man, 1946).

Then there are the pro-vaxxers who invariably refer to the smallpox or polio vaccines as if the ARNm vaccines have anything in common with these tried and tested standard vaccines (those who have had the conventional Chinese vaccines against Covid are still not allowed a Pass Sanitaire, because tried and tested vaccines do not make billions for Pfizer and company).

The main reason for the Pass Sanitaire – more important than helping Big Pharma accumulate billions, and in addition to the destruction of all health privacy and of the Hippocratic Oath – is the intensification of social control, of tracking and tracing and of intensifying acceptance of being permanently surveilled “for our own good”. Which, surprise surprise, is for the good of our rulers who, should we decide to revolt as things get invariably worse, will have vastly intensified their means of repressing such revolt. And got people to acquiesce in such repression. An English anarchist expression “War is the health of the state” has now become “ “Health” is the war of the state”.

Added 31/8/21:

Please note: there’s an error here; Leo Löwenthal was not a survivor of the camps – he fled Germany when Hitler came to power in 1933.

iPlay on words – “Sanitiare” means “Health” – “se taire” means “shut up”

SamFanto was born, and then he lived a bit but never enough.

the delta variant in figures

Deeple translation of this:

The Delta variant in figures
Posted on 26 July 2021 by Gérard Maudrux

(published here for information’s sake, certainly not for any significant social critique)

What about this variant, which we are told is more contagious, more or less nasty, affecting only the unvaccinated, or both the vaccinated and the unvaccinated? It would be 1,000 times more contagious according to our minister, who is increasingly in the habit of quoting figures that mean nothing or are false, such as the 96% of non-vaccinated positives. 1000 times more contagious? At this rate, in 8 days France is 100% contaminated! And great, only the non-vaccinated will be affected since the vaccinated are not affected, which is only fair for our leaders, that solves all the problems! Not so simple, because the reasoning and the figures are wrong.

What is the reality? Two weeks ago, I wrote that it was probably more contagious, and probably less nasty, and that a natural contamination, more efficient and more durable than vaccination, was perhaps possible. Let nature take its course. I also wrote that we still needed a couple of weeks to be able to confirm it, it is almost done (even if there can always be a doubt with this damn virus). Facts, nothing but facts:

First point, a more contagious delta variant? Yes, it’s obvious, it has rapidly taken over everywhere, from 50 to 90%, it’s increasing every day. No need to flood you with examples or curves, no one denies it, no one needs to hide these figures. We are fast approaching the 90-100% variant delta, before the next one. This seems to give reason to those who, from experience, tell us that it is not the same epidemic, but successive epidemics, with different viruses, probably less and less virulent, to end up after 2-3 years with an endemic for a few years, with a variant virus that comes out here and there, as for seasonal flu.

An obvious example is the Spanish flu. More than likely with a very similar virus, a much more deadly epidemic than the current one. It disappeared gradually, no longer exists today, and without the need for treatment or a vaccine. Tomorrow we will be told that the disappearance of the current epidemic is thanks to the vaccine, whereas it is a natural phenomenon that has been recurring for centuries.

Does this variant only affect the unvaccinated? Apparently this is the case in only one country in the world, ours. Our minister says so, the press does not release any figures other than what he says, so it is the truth. Elsewhere, it seems that this is not the case, we must have a special climate. The countries that have vaccinated the most in the world are still facing this new wave, sometimes even more than the others. If it only affected the unvaccinated, it would not be the case. I’ve talked about it, with figures, in previous posts, this is the case of the Seychelles, Gibraltar, and many others, but also of larger and well-monitored countries, such as the United Kingdom or Israel. In these two countries, an average figure of 40-50% of infected people are vaccinated. As the rate of vaccinated people is around 50-60%, we can perhaps say that this variant affects both the vaccinated and the non-vaccinated, so it is not far from 50/50.

We are trying to hide it. Sir Patrick Vallance, the UK’s Mr Solomon, got things mixed up by trying to play down the facts, declaring in a joint press conference with Prime Minister Boris Johnson that 60% of people newly admitted to hospital had received 2 doses, only to say on twitter that it was a mistake but 60% of the non-vaccinated. In Israel, it’s clearer: according to the ministry, 5 days ago, out of the 143 hospitalised, 58% were fully vaccinated, 3% partially, 39% non-vaccinated. If we look at the new cases, rather than hospitalizations, since the beginning of the wave in May, 40% of the new cases are vaccinated with 2 doses. 1% of new cases had had covid before, having acquired antibodies through the disease (72 cases out of 7,700 infected since the beginning of the wave, compared to more than 3,000 vaccinated with 2 doses). This does not mean that the disease is 40 times more protective than the vaccines, because it must be taken into account that there are fewer former patients than former vaccinees. However, the country has 860,000 cases (add healthy carriers), i.e. 10% of the population, compared with 60% of those vaccinated, which brings the ratio down from 1 to 40 to 1 to 7. Immunity to the disease appears to be 7 times greater than that of the vaccine. I will therefore retain an average figure of 40 to 50% of vaccinated people in the new cases, which is not insignificant for judging the effectiveness of a vaccine, which is put forward to stop this variant!

Let’s add that the vaccinated are no less contaminating than the non-vaccinated. Few people say this in our country. On the other hand, look at what the President of the Order of Physicians in Rome says. Unthinkable in our country, with an Order under orders.

The less virulent delta variant? Now, with more hindsight, we can confirm this. With more hindsight, because there is a time lag, on average 15 days, between diagnosis and death (if that is the marker we use). The British started their third wave on 24 May (first day of re-ascension of cases), i.e. 2 months ago, which is more than enough time to judge the damage caused by the wave. Here are the superimposed curves of new cases and deaths in this country for the last 18 months.

Cases and deaths per million inhabitants

For the second wave, the shift in cases/deaths is clearly visible, and the two curves follow each other. For the third wave, the delta variant, the death curve no longer follows, and deaths are low compared to the second wave. For the first wave, the case curve is flattened and deaths are higher, due to the much lower number of tests at the beginning.

As a proportion of the number of cases, these curves show 15 times fewer deaths with the delta than with the previous variant. Another important observation is that the British began the end of the wave on 20 July, i.e. 5 days ago, and deaths should decrease in about ten days. The end of the wave, without having vaccinated more, and having reduced all the accompanying measures since 19 July. With the opposite of what we are doing in France, everything is going well with the delta in the UK. All this has been visible for a month, except to our leaders, our elected representatives and our press.

Israel follows with a one month delay, the same findings on cases and deaths.

Same thing in France, our wave started exactly on June 28, i.e. 4 weeks ago. Hospitalizations and deaths should have started up again 15 days ago, whereas they continue to fall or are in a low plateau (should rise again, in a proportion 15 times lower than in previous waves if we follow England and Israel). If this is confirmed, the result in 15 days. I would point out that 15 times less is less deadly than seasonal flu!

In the USA as in France, they try to minimize this situation, but the findings are the same as elsewhere, even if presented differently. There is a very interesting table in the New York Times (you won’t find it in Le Monde or Le Figaro), giving by region the % of delta variants and hospitalizations: the more deltas you have, the fewer hospitalizations there are! When there are only deltas, there will be few hospitalisations.

Does the vaccine protect against severe forms? A recent report from Public Health seems to show the opposite. From February to June, of the 257 people who died of covid in the UK, 163 had received at least one dose of vaccine, i.e. 63%. These figures show that mortality is much higher among the vaccinated than among the unvaccinated. Taken like that, it is tendentious, which would not bother Olivier Véran, if it were not the other way round. Indeed, it must be taken into account that the elderly dominate among the vaccinated, and the young among the non-vaccinated. In the event of infection, it is therefore normal that there are more deaths among the elderly, and therefore among the vaccinated. On the other hand, these figures do show one thing: vaccines do not protect (or only slightly) against severe forms of the disease, otherwise there would be fewer deaths among the vaccinated, who die just as much according to age.

Delta variant and treatments? If this variant seems to be very moderately sensitive to vaccines, what about medical treatments? India got rid of this home-grown variant very quickly, and the wave announced by all our newspapers as a coming catastrophe did not last long. In terms of intensity, the number of cases per million inhabitants was half that of France. This was probably due to the only weapon they had: ivermectin. The fully vaccinated represented 3% of the Indian population at the time of the wave.

It is interesting to compare two Indian states, Tamil Nadu, 68 million inhabitants, which refused treatment, and Uttar Pradesh, 204 million inhabitants, which massively distributed ivermectin. Both with 35,000 cases/day at peak, this is what the curve of new cases per million inhabitants gives, with treatment (Uttar Pradesh) and without treatment (Tamil Nadu), for the same variant: a wave 3 times stronger, twice as long.

Conclusions on this delta variant:

1) More contagious, much less virulent. Equivalent to seasonal flu?

2) Vaccine moderately effective, does not protect so much from severe forms.

3) Effective treatments. The figures say so. Does this deserve the drama we have been experiencing in France for the past two weeks, and which will leave its mark for decades to come?

SamFanto was born, and then he lived a bit but never enough.

august 2021 (Covid 1984)

JanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneJuly2020 here

This is a chronology not based on the date the information was published but based on the date  I received it.

Those who accuse this site of hyperbole would have thought that even suggesting the possibility of half of what’s happening today just over a year ago was hyperbolic and paranoid. The sleep of subversive reason is spawning an epidemic of monsters.

It should be clear that I am not  in accord with the ideological aspects of the content of many of the articles I link to. And, as with all information about Covid,  articles have to be filtered through a critical vigilance that I personally have sometimes not invariably exercised in relation to various articles, at least at the time of putting them up. I put them up because they seem to offer alternative sober  perspectives on what’s happening.

I should also add that there may well be some inconsistency and contradictory information here. That’s because it’s extremely difficult to sift what is valid,  what is speculation and what is manipulation. However, it seems more worthwhile trying to put forward some of what appears to be the more pertinent criticisms of what’s going on than remain silent before the overwhelming propaganda machine and wait a few years in order to be “correct” but too late. “The path toward simplicity is the most complex of all, and here in particular it seemed best not to tear away from the commonplace the tangle of roots which enable us to transplant it into another region, where we can cultivate it to our own profit. ” – here


Syria: regime uses WHO vaccination campaign to hunt down opponents

“In northeastern Syria, controlled by the Kurdish-dominated Syrian Democratic Forces, the WHO’s Covid-19 vaccination campaign is being conducted in collaboration with the Damascus regime. A threat to the thousands of displaced people hunted down by Bashar al-Assad’s forces.

Raqqa (Syria) – On 15 June, Ismael goes to work in a medical centre in the town of Al Mansoura, east of Raqqa. The 36-year-old is a member of an NGO set up in this centre to provide care for the most vulnerable people in this area of north-eastern Syria, controlled by the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) – an alliance between Kurds and Arabs – where 2.5 million people live, including many families who have fled Bashar al-Assad’s bloody repression.

That day, a Syrian medical team supervised by the World Health Organisation (WHO) was on site to vaccinate medical staff and people over 55 years old. “They offered to vaccinate me too,” says Ismael. “I was very happy to be able to get a first dose, given the very complicated health situation in north-eastern Syria. I thought I’d get the jackpot to protect myself and my family.

Without any fear, Ismael rolls up the right sleeve of his shirt so that the nurse can prick him and inject him with the first dose of AstraZeneca vaccine. A few minutes later, the medical team gives him two certificates: one is signed by the Syrian Democratic Forces, the second by the Syrian Ministry of Health and bears the regime’s seal: a golden falcon, its wings spread, encircling the flag with two green stars.

This symbol makes the thousands of Syrians who decided to rise up against Bashar al-Assad ten years ago tremble. “But no one had explained this to me before,” Ismael says with annoyance.

“At first, when I found myself with this certificate from the regime in my hand, I didn’t really realise. Then I asked this medical team who they were working for. They admitted that they were not from the WHO, but employed by the Syrian Ministry of Health, with which the UN agency has a partnership. Before the vaccine, they recorded a lot of details on a computer: my name, my address, my number. I also said how many children I had. This regime terrifies us. Having given all this information to Bashar al-Assad, it scares me a lot”, confides the father.

Since then, he has been afraid to use his phone for fear of being bugged or having his data hacked. “I have always been an opponent of the regime. Honestly, I would never have agreed to be vaccinated if I had known that Assad was involved in this. Really, I’d rather be vaccinated by the devil than have a dose that comes through Bashar and his gang.”

Last spring, the WHO allocated 203,000 doses of AstraZenaca vaccine to Syria, which has been fragmented after ten years of relentless war. About 17,000 were sent to the SDF-controlled northeast.

According to the latest figures, across Syria, nearly 26,000 cases of Covid-19 have been reported and 1,930 people have died after contracting the virus. These figures are far from the reality in a country where the hospital system has been shattered by war and, more recently, economic collapse.

The first WHO vaccination campaign was launched in June, the second at the beginning of August, always on the same model: the vaccinated people all receive a certificate from the Damascus regime after having communicated information about their personal situation beforehand.

Contacted by email, the WHO confirms this partnership with the Syrian authorities. “The Covid-19 vaccination campaign is coordinated and administered by the Ministry of Health of the Syrian Arab Republic. It includes distribution, conversation, certification and vaccination cards,” says the Geneva-based organisation.

All those injecting the vaccine in Raqqa or Deir Ez-Zor are sent and paid by the Syrian Ministry of Health.

While many countries have closed their embassies in Damascus and severed all ties with Bashar al-Assad’s regime, all UN agencies, including the WHO, continue to cooperate with the Damascus regime, the only government in Syria recognised by the international community to date. The country has been a member of the WHO Executive Board since the spring of 2021, and will remain so until 2024. Its representative is the regime’s Minister of Health.

What will happen to the information gathered during this campaign? To this question, which is essential for the safety of thousands of Syrians, the WHO ignores it: “Vaccination certificates and cards are issued to people after they have been injected. WHO has no information to confirm or not that the data collected through the cards and the vaccination certificates are sent to Damascus.

This non-response adds to the total lack of clarity in the vaccination centres opened in the heart of the SDF-controlled area. “All the people who inject the vaccine in Raqqa or Deir Ez-Zor are sent and paid by the Syrian Ministry of Health. I saw them arrive,” says Mohamed, a doctor in a hospital in the Deir Ez-Zor area. The SDF are just there to supervise the campaign, but they print and then hand out the vaccination cards from the Syrian Ministry of Health.

You can’t separate the Ministry of Health from the system set up by the regime. They are all complicit.

The doctor finally agreed to be vaccinated, but he took a risk by giving information about his precise location: since 2011, the Syrian regime has been conducting a merciless crackdown on medical personnel based outside the territories it controls.

Mohamed is aware of this, but he has chosen to protect his family and the patients he sees every day. The Syrian Ministry of Health staff who came to vaccinate us only accepted official identity papers, where our place of residence is indicated. They wanted to know where we lived. For me, this is not a vaccination campaign, it’s an information gathering. The Syrian secret services have long been able to go anywhere in the country to arrest or kill people. This is known. But here, we are helping them to collect information on civilians, who are just asking to be protected against this virus!

The Syrian Ministry of Health, which signs the vaccination cards and certificates, is one of the branches of the Damascus regime’s repressive apparatus.

Samer Aldeyaei is the co-founder of the Free Syria Lawyers Association (FSLA). He and his teams have been investigating crimes committed by Bashar al-Assad’s men since the start of the revolution in 2011. “You can’t separate this ministry from the system set up by the regime. They are all accomplices,” said the Syrian lawyer.

“This ministry has been linked to the secret services since the beginning. For example, it was the ministry that transmitted to Bashar al-Assad’s security forces the names of Syrians injured and hospitalised during the first demonstrations. Officials of this institution also falsify autopsy reports of prisoners who died under torture in Damascus. They write that they died of a heart attack, or some other illness, without ever referring to the marks left by torture on the bodies,” adds Samer Aldeyaei.

Last spring, a photo of an ambulance taken in Hamah made the rounds on social networks: the vehicle is covered at the front with a portrait of Bashar al-Assad. On the side, in blue, is written “WHO” in blue. The picture triggered a wave of indignation in the Syrian opposition.

On 9 August, Ismael again came across one of the ministry’s medical teams, sent to his town near Raqqa for the second part of the vaccination campaign.

When I explained to them that I had torn up the certificate with the regime’s seal and thrown it in a bin, I asked them if I could still have the second dose,” explains the father. But they refused and yelled at me, explaining that the Damascus regime was the only one that could vaccinate me. So Ismael went home without the second dose, which is essential to protect him from the virus.”

Already, back in April 2020, the WHO effectively collaborated in the Syrian regime’s brutal policies towards the Kurds – see this.


Australia: extraordinary report (maybe fake) of 2 kids dying after 24,000 children are herded into stadium for vaccineor maybe it’s this horror that happened (kids fall into coma)

The way the first one is written makes it sound dubious. Not sure if the 2  refer to the same incidents and the first has got its facts wrong.  Update 2/9: in fact this may well be fake news, but it’s not entirely certain. Dominant attacks on this story say that the kids did not die, but they don’t seem to deny that they fell into a coma (see this).

From Australia’s Herald Sun (apparently at least, though nowadays it’s easy to fake these things, and I haven’t the time or energy to check this out)

France: strikes against Health Passport in libraries of 4 cities

More totalitarian censorship

Detailed article on mRNA vaccines, their relationship to eugenics and many other contradictions in their use and justifications

How technically the vaccines are not classified as “gene therapy” even though they are

“In EU, there is one exclusion criterion that explicitly vetoed a product from being classified as a gene therapy: those products aimed at the treatment or prophylaxis of infectious diseases. These products would be classified as vaccines, even if the product meets all of the necessary criteria to be considered an advanced therapy (European Medicines Agency, 2015). For instance, a modified vaccinia virus ankara (MVA) into which two genes have been placed for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer is classified as a GTMP (Gene Therapy Medicinal Product), but if these genes lead to foreign protein expression for the treatment of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) disease, the product will not be considered an advanced therapy, but a vaccine (European Medicines Agency, 2016bDraper and Heeney, 2010). The same principle applies to non-viral vectored products such as most plasmid DNA- or RNA-based products. For instance, Trimix is a mixture of mRNAs encoding for antigen presenting cell activation molecules. If this mixture of mRNAs is combined with tumor-associated antigens for the treatment of melanoma, the therapy is classified as a GTMP, but if these mRNA are combined with mRNA encoding for HIV antigens, the therapy will be considered a vaccine (European Medicines Agency, 2016b). In the US, it is not specifically mentioned as an exclusion criterion, but prophylaxis or therapeutic vaccines for infectious diseases have their own guidances for development, and these products are typically reviewed by the CBER/Office of Vaccines Research and Review (OVRR) and not by the OTAT (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2007). Therefore, the criterion for excluding a product from being classified as a GTMP in both regions is directly related to the indications of the product.”


Greece, Athens: clashes on demo against mRNA vaccine programme


UK, London: large demo against vaccination passports

France: anti-Health Passport demos throughout countryMontpellier: victory for antifas – fascists from the Ligue du Midi decide not to participate in demos after previous clashes

More on this latter here.

” “Freedom alone can be neo-liberalism. Freedom does not come without solidarity. The real problem today is solidarity. Social justice! Tax justice! Climate justice! The rest follows from that! : these few sentences resounded very loudly on Saturday, at the beginning of the seventh Montpellier rally against the health pass. These few sentences were pronounced by a Yellow Vest from Gignac, among the speeches preceding the demonstration. …If diverse and open speeches were heard on Saturday 28 August in Montpellier, this went hand in hand with the lifting of a debt weighing heavily on the movement: the ousting of its leader until then, Christophe Derouch, and his companions from the Ligue du Midi, a group with ultra-violent methods, on openly fascist, identitarian, racist, sexist and homophobic ideological bases. Directly neo-Nazi formations distinguished themselves again on Saturday. The anti-fascists had to disperse them again, more clearly victorious than ever. …no tolerance can be conceded to the violent presence of fascist militants practising aggression and intimidation within a social movement (and even less at the head of this movement). …And from history, it is already time to draw some lessons. At least submit them to debate. For example, the illusion that a movement will win through sheer force of conviction in numbers. Numbers alone do not frighten the powers that be, but the power of initiative, the strength and audacity of actions, the refusal that they be ritualised, repetitive, only ordered and predictable in every respect. This also requires open, contradictory, direct discussion, which broadens the meaning of the struggle, sharpens the political sense, and does not submit to the monologue of self-proclaimed leaders. Even if they are not victorious in their announced objective, social movements grow through the richness of their experience and the maturation of their awareness. This happens through debate…”

A word on the use of fear by the state

Page 49 of France’s Senate report (2009_2010) of the Commission of Inquiry into the role of pharmaceutical companies in the government’s management of swine flu (H1N1) says “The communication and lobbying strategy adopted by the ESWI, as it appears in particular in the debates of the working group meeting on 23 January 2009 in Brussels, underlines the link between the population’s fear and the marketing of pre-pandemic vaccines. When asked “what would be the benefit of such a pre-pandemic vaccine?” one of the participants, Jonathan Van Tan, Professor of Health Protection at the University of Nottingham, replied: “It depends on when you give it and how scared the population is when you give it.” This observation was made a few months before the outbreak of the influenza A (H1N1) pandemic.”

No official autopsies for those who die shortly after being vaccinated

McKinsey, consulting firm that advises Macron on its Covid strategy, involved in corrupt advice that led to nearly ½ million deaths in USA

“…The prestigious consulting firm McKinsey has agreed to pay 573 million dollars to settle lawsuits launched by US states that accused it of contributing to the opioid crisis through its advice to pharmaceutical groups including Purdue Pharma, the manufacturer of Oxycontin…The terms of the agreement, announced Thursday by New York prosecutor Letitia James, indicate that McKinsey has neither acknowledged nor denied the facts of the case, a position that allows the group to avoid third parties to use the compromise to attack it in turn in court….”McKinsey’s cynical and deliberate marketing tactics helped fuel the opioid crisis by helping Purdue Pharma target doctors they knew were over-prescribing opioids” …McKinsey advised Purdue Pharma, which pleaded guilty last year in the case, to help boost sales, according to New York State. It recommended that the drug company focus on the high dosages considered most lucrative, according to court documents produced by the plaintiffs….In addition to the financial penalty, McKinsey also agreed to future restrictions on the scope of its business: the firm will no longer advise any firm on the development, manufacture, promotion, marketing, sale or use of an opiate or any narcotic…Nearly half a million Americans died from overdoses caused by both prescribed and illegally sold opioids between 1999 and 2018, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.”

Just to remind you:

The son of the President of the Constitutional Council (the mass murderer Laurent Fabius, famous for knowingly allowing HIV contaminated blood to be given to haemophiliacs in the 1980s, when over 1000 died)  is a director of McKinsey.


Portugal, Lisbon: youths throw bottles and stones at cops closing down bars in enforcement of Covid rules

“Several youths threw stones and bottles at Public Security Police (PSP) officers on Friday night in Cais do Sodré, Lisbon, due to an enforcement operation regarding rules imposed to close bars due to the Covid-19 pandemic… there were “light injuries to police officers” and “damage to police material”… the injured police officers “did not require treatment”. “After the closure of all establishments, the police tried to prevent gatherings between groups of hundreds of people in Cais Sodré, having been met with the throwing of paving stones and glass bottles, and to stop these disorderly and violent behaviours, the police proceeded to disperse people, using coercive means of low lethal potential, including the firing of two less lethal ammunition,” the entity said. …Regarding the rules in force, this authority also states that it will have “special attention” to the following:

“The prohibition of consumption of alcoholic beverages on public roads;
The mandatory use of masks in the public thoroughfare whenever it is not possible to comply with the recommended physical distance;
The advice not to concentrate people in the public thoroughfare and legitimacy of the security forces and services, to disperse concentrations of more than 15 people.””

Israel: researchers find immunity acquired via infection from Covid-19 is superior to immunity from Pfizer vaccine


US: Delta airline imposes $200 extra health insurance contribution per month on its non-vaccinated wage slaves

France, Loire-Atlantique: following demonstration and blockade on 21/8/21, Health Passports no longer obligatory in shopping centres

3 French texts about the Health Passport which are more or less ok:


Tract PASS SANITAIRE 21 août 2021


Interesting analysis comparing, amongst other things on the development of totalitarianism in the UK,  the Third Reich with the current situation – written at the end of August 2020

Long, not exactly written within a consistent revolutionary perspective but definitely worth reading, even if at times rather hyperbolic.

An Italian has his QR code tattooed on his arm

Self-managed Auschwitz..? Health Passports Macht Frei.

US, Texas: massive nursing shortage in Houston after hospitals fire 150 unvaccinated workers


UK, London: anti-mRNA vaccine protesters  occupy ITV news and Channel 4 news 

In typical Orwellian Newspeak these protesters are caricatured, in what is  now an automatic put-down,  in this  Guardian article  as conspiracy theorists and “anti-vaxxers”. The article offers no evidence of this so I cannot say whether this has the remotest truth to it or not.  See Part 1 of this.


Spain, Basque Country (San Sebastien): 5th night of riots against Covid restrictions

“Violence increases in Donostia with smashing of shop windows, robberies and burning of containers. At least ten people have been arrested and three police officers have been injured in a new night of altercations in the Old Part and the Centre…

Zara shop window in the city centre completely broken after the riots

…. The fifth night of riots and arrests in the Old Town and Downtown have resulted in ten people arrested….several acts of vandalism and even robberies have been committed in some of the most important shops in the commercial area of San Sebastian, such as Zara. The police forces that ensure compliance with covid-19  health regulations in front of the covid-19 have come up against the youths, who have met the Basque police by  throwing of “all kinds of objects”…they have also dragged containers across the roads, burning some of them, in the main streets of the city centre and have broken shop windows in the same area..This increase in violence has resulted in three police officers being injured. But the images of the videos that are circulating on social networks go much further. Young people using fences to break the window of one of the main shops in the centre of Donostia and, once they have achieved their objective, they enter to take various fashion items, taking advantage of all the chaos…After recalling that incidents involving people who “refuse to comply with the regulations” in the face of the pandemic and confront the police have occurred this summer in other parts of the Basque Country and other regions of Spain, he stated that, with the data currently available, it cannot be said that the events that have taken place in the capital of Gipuzkoa over the last week “are the result of a planned, perfectly coordinated strategy of urban guerrilla actions, of a clear and undeniable social or political design”…”

Australia, Queensland: vaccination compulsory for “essential workers”

Canada, Toronto:  hospital workers told they’ll be fired if they don’t get vaccinated


Down with routine ritualised demos! Leaflet distributed on 21st August in Montpellier, France.

Clashes with fascists in Montpellier

Ligue du Midi thugs forced out of the demo after having tried to lead it. A lot of plastic bottles thrown from both sides. Officially, nationally  175,503 people were on the demos throughout France. Double that to get closer to the real figure. A lot of crap of course (eg “the forces of order with us”).  A lot of shouts of “Liberty!” without anybody trying to define it outside of the limits of an already unfree system even before this suffocating Covid-inspired development of capital.  See the above leaflet – Down with routine ritualised demos! – I wrote.

In Paris, the media concentrate on the demo lead by Phillipot, a politician of the extreme Right   – but there were 3 other demos there – including 2 Yellow Vest demos (one official – ie the authorities were announced of it beforehand, the other a wild demo trying to go to bourgeois areas).

GPs in France have now been told they’ll be suspended if they don’t get vaccinated.


Australia: clashes in Sydney & Melbourne over “health” measures

Guadeloupe (French overseas territory):  prisoners offered sentence reduction if they agree to be vaccinated 

Apparently they had to backtrack on this, though there are parts of the world where I’ve heard this happening (e.g. here).

New Zealand: just 31 cases and this becomes a pretext to  extend lockdown and to put this in the headlines

Am I missing something here, or is this just a blatant pretext to take a massive sledgehammer to crack a very tiny nut?  And to make it out as something significant. In 2003 about 200 people died each week from flu in New Zealand. I somehow doubt that The Guardian deemed it worthy of comment. And the 31 people mentioned today are just cases (or at least deemed to be cases – though the PCR test is not reliable, and besides, many of these cases are likely to be asymptomatic, so something that wouldn’t be registered if it had been flu). NZ’s state has an ideology of wanting zero cases, and will continue to apply heavy measures until they achieve this – ie for eternity, because this is as unlikely as  eradicating the flu (and it seems that, though the Delta variant is a great deal more contagious than the “normal” Covid, it’s probably as much as 15 time less severe than the original Covid and less severe than seasonal flu).  In a world that is truly upside down, the insignificant becomes significant and the significant (like Colombia’s uprising) is ignored.


Critique of the glorification of “Science”, comparing attitudes to GMO products and those towards vaccines

“There are strong similarities between the issue of genetically modified organisms (GMO) in agriculture and the COVID ‘pandemic’ in terms of the framing of debates in both fields: a type of ‘the science is decided’ mentality and a smearing of critics in an attempt to demonise and close down debate.

Some years ago, Robert T Fraley, Monsanto’s former vice president and chief technology officer, asked on Twitter:

    Why do people doubt science?”

Accompanying his question was a link to an article that implied people who are suspicious of vaccines, GMOs, climate change or fluoridated water are confused, adhere to “conspiracy theories”, are motivated by ideology or are simply misinformed.

But science is not the giver of ‘absolute truth’. That in itself should allow us to develop a healthy scepticism towards it. Scientific knowledge is built on shaky stilts that rest on shifting foundations.

Science historian Thomas Kuhn wrote about the revolutionary paradigm shifts in scientific thought, whereby established theoretical
perspectives can reinforce prevailing paradigms and serve as a barrier to the advancement of knowledge, until the weight of evidence and pressure from proponents of a new theoretical outlook is overwhelming.

The old faith then gives way and the new ‘truth’ changes.

The manufacture of scientific knowledge involves a process driven by various sociological, methodological and epistemological conflicts and compromises, both inside the laboratory and beyond.

Why do people doubt science?

Not because they are ill-informed or have read Kuhn or some sociology journal, but because they can see how science is used, corrupted and manipulated by powerful corporations and governments to serve their own ends.

Take US Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, for instance. He once called for “sound science” to underpin food trade that involves GMOs. Despite what Vilsack would have us believe – that there are no concerns about GMOs – many studies show that they present risks to human health and are having serious environmental, social and economic consequences.

“Sound science” and the GMO agritech sector are too often perfect strangers. The industry carries out inadequate, short-term studies and conceals the data produced by its research under the guise of ‘commercial confidentiality’, while independent research highlights the dangers of its products.

It has in the past also engaged in fakery in India, bribery in Indonesia and smears and intimidation against those who challenge its interests as well as the distortion and the censorship of scientific findings that undermine its agenda.

In the US, policymakers released GM food onto the commercial market without proper long-term tests, citing the belief that it is “substantially equivalent” to ordinary food. But foreign genes are being inserted into organisms that studies show make them substantially non-equivalent.

“Substantial equivalence” is a trade strategy on behalf of the GMO sector that neatly serves to bypass science by removing its GMOs from the type of scrutiny usually applied to potentially toxic or harmful substances.

Ultimately, it is not science itself that people have doubts about but “science” that is pressed into the service of immensely powerful private corporations and regulatory bodies that are effectively co-opted and adopt a ‘don’t look, don’t find approach’ to studies and products.”…

The ‘technological salvation’ argument being put forward in favour of the vaccines is also present with GMOs: the technology is needed to ‘feed the hungry’ or ‘save dying children’. When an argument cannot be won using rational debate and science, we usually see the emotional blackmail fallback position and ad hominins against critics.

Whether it is GMO crop technology or COVID vaccines, we are seeing a huge unscientific experiment using people as human guinea pigs to rake in massive profits.

In the case of the vaccines, there is also a wider agenda involving a ‘great reset’ of the economy and labour’s relationship to an increasingly authoritarian state whose role is to produce the conditions that will subordinate ordinary people to the ‘new normal’ required by private capital: mass surveillance, worklessness and the eradication of civil and political rights in favour of technocratic rule. In fact, genetically engineered food and crops are an integral part of this reset.”

It should be pointed out that GMOs reduce fertility, reduce natural immunity and vastly destroy biodiversity. And that’s on top of the fact that the pesticides that they encourage use of are highly carcenogenic.

Fully vaccinated adults can harbour virus levels as high as unvaccinated

So what else is new? This has been revealed time and again over the last 6 weeks and suddenly they think it worthy of headlines.


Evaluation of Strategies to Fight COVID-19: The French Paradigm

Haven’t yet read most of this but it may be of interest. It focuses mainly on a comparison between Paris and Marseille. Should be pointed out that Raoult, despite certainly treating far more people having Covid than other hospitals in the first 6 months or so of Covid, is being pushed out of his position (link to the usual type of conformist rubbishy mainstream article referring to very dubious trials of hydroxychloraquine, many financed by Gilead, the producer of the truly toxic and expensive remdesivir).

France, Pau: a hundred or so anti-Health Passport demonstrators have sit-in in hospital

This took place on Monday 16/8/21.

France, near Toulouse: all 3,500 of the vaccines at a vaccination centre destroyed as centre is vandalised

Happened on the night of 16-17th August. Seems like this is happening quite a lot all over the place. One TV programme said that there’s been 1 attack per day since the middle of July, just after the “Health” Passport was announced by Macron. For instance, this one over last weekend.

Greece: against mandatory vaccination & its crusaders


UK: article from February  about conspiracies: “Cui Bono? – the Covid19 conspiracy”

A long article. But this quote alone is interesting:

“We know now that Government strategies for responding to a viral epidemic that had been in place for years were abandoned in favour of the historically unprecedented policy of national lockdown.

  • We know that Government contracts for the campaign of propaganda worth £119 million were signed with PR firms 3 weeks before the first lockdown.
  • We know that, in April 2020, the Cabinet Office approved over £216 million for advertising on what it called the ‘COVID-19 Campaign 20/21’.
  • We know that the criteria for attributing deaths to COVID-19 were changed back in March to exaggerate the official number of fatalities.
  • We know that 95 per cent of the deaths attributed to the disease are of people with pre-existing health conditions like cancer, dementia, heart disease or diabetes.
  • We know that 84 per cent are over 70 years of age, and that the average age of those whose deaths are attributed to COVID-19 is the average age of death in the UK.
  • We know that, a year into this so-called ‘pandemic’, just over 600 patients under the age of 60 without a pre-existing health condition have had their deaths in English hospitals attributed to COVID-19.
  • We know that, in April last year, the World Health Organisation issued instructions to medical practitioners that, if COVID-19 is merely the ‘suspected’ or ‘probable’ or ‘assumed’ cause of death, it must always be recorded as the ‘underlying cause’ on death certificates, whether this is ‘considered medically correct or not.’
  • We know that the WHO’s recommendations on the use of face masks by the public changed in June following political lobbying by the governments of, among other countries, the UK, and that even then it was primarily to encourage compliance with other restrictions on our rights and freedoms.
  • We know that the first and only randomised control trial of the effectiveness of face masks in stopping coronavirus transmission, which was rejected by several leading medical journals, when finally published reported that the benefits were ‘not statistically significant’.
  • We know that, for a long time, the UK Government deliberately exaggerated the number of so-called ‘COVID-19 deaths’ by including anyone who has tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, no matter how long afterwards they died and of what illness.
  • We know that, even now, anyone who tests positive within 28 days of their death is still recorded as a ‘COVID death’.
  • We know that, since August 2020, anyone who tests positive within 60 days of their death is also recorded as a ‘COVID death’.
  • We know that, according to the WHO, 30 per cent of infections, even in high GDP countries like the UK, are contracted in intensive care units, meaning anyone dying in a UK hospital has an equivalent chance of being designated a ‘COVID death’.
  • We know that, even with the withdrawal of medical care for nearly 68 million people for the best part of a year, the age-adjusted mortality rate in 2020 was the highest in only 12 years, and that the population fatality rate from the coronavirus ‘epidemic’ is equivalent to a bad season of influenza.*
  • We know that, as even these inaccurately identified deaths have fallen, the Government has turned to the promotion of RT-PCR tests for the virus that, according to its own advisors at SAGE, have a false-positive rate higher than the percentage of the UK population testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 with these tests.
  • We know that between 20 and 80 per cent of infections with SARS-CoV-2 are asymptomatic, and therefore calling them ‘cases’ is medically inaccurate.
  • We know from a study of nearly 10 million residents in Wuhan, the epicentre of the infection in China, that asymptomatic transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is statistically non-existent.
  • We have known for the past 55 years that at least four coronaviruses circulate freely in UK on a seasonal basis, providing prior immunity to SARS-CoV-2 in around 30 per cent of the population before it reached these shores.
  • We know that any RT-PCR test reliant on encoding the spike protein unique to coronaviruses can incorrectly detect as SARS-CoV-2 anyone having a common cold from other coronaviruses at the time of sampling or carrying traces of dead and therefore non-infectious virus.
  • We know that, despite this, the governments of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are using these meaningless statistics to impose tiered lockdowns across the UK, in further violation of our human rights and civil liberties.
  • We know that this is being done under legislation that only authorises such actions when justified by medical evidence that has not been produced for Parliament but merely alluded to in press conferences.
  • We know that the predictions of escalating infections and increased numbers of deaths by senior medical figures employed by the Government have been shown time and again to be wildly inaccurate fabrications based on predictive models challenged by the most eminent scientists around the world.
  • We know that, as of publication, 351 coronavirus-justified Statutory Instruments have been made into law without a draft being presented to Parliament in advance for debate, without medical or other proof being provided of their justification or proportionality, and without an assessment being made of their impact, and that every one of these pieces of legislation requiring it has been rubber stamped in retrospect by virtual sittings of that Parliament.
  • We know that £22 billion of public monies has been awarded in coronavirus-justified contracts without prior competitive tender to privately-owned companies with financial links to members of Parliament, the Government and their business colleagues.
  • We know that more and more of the functions of the state are being outsourced to private companies unaccountable to the public that provides the money with which they are paid.
  • We know that the coronavirus-justified restrictions imposed on the UK population since March 2020 have cost the country £280 billion, the equivalent of £4,112 for every man, woman and child in the UK.
  • We know that, in contrast, the wealth of the world’s 2,200-plus billionaires increased by 20 per cent and US$1.9 trillion in 2020, more than in any previous year in history.
  • We know that, by the end of 2020, the number of people in low to middle-income countries facing acute food insecurity will double to 265 million as a result of coronavirus-justified restrictions.
  • We know that, under the cloak of this crisis, the Government and its financial partners have massively expanded the surveillance, monitoring and control of UK citizens through regulations, programmes and technologies that are implementing the UK biosecurity state.
  • We know that, at the peak of deaths attributed to COVID-19 in April, more than 40 per cent of acute care beds in NHS hospitals were unoccupied.
  • We know there is strong evidence that, at a conservative estimate, at least half the 80,000 deaths attributed to COVID-19 in 2020 were caused by lockdown restrictions that denied UK citizens emergency, elective, social and community care in order to free up hospital beds for an epidemic that was never in danger of arriving.
  • We know that the renewal of lockdown over the winter of 2020-2021 is killing thousands more.
  • We know that this lockdown was decided back in July, before the manufactured rise in so-called ‘cases’ consequent upon a huge rise in RT-PCR tests producing an even greater rise in false positives.
  • We know that over the next five years, hundreds of thousands more people in the UK will fall into poverty, unemployment, bankruptcy and despair that will shorten their lives by many tens of thousands of years because of restrictions justified by these manufactured figures.
  • We know that, although the GDP of the UK is rising slowly back to pre-crisis levels, the restrictions that continue to be imposed on the population are redistributing wealth from the public purse into the pockets of the rich and the powerful on a scale never before seen even in the UK.
  • We know that the mental health of millions of UK citizens is being deliberately and systematically attacked through Government-funded campaigns of terrorism, fearmongering and lies designed to reduce the population to compliance, obedience, resignation and despair.
  • We know that self-harming and thoughts of suicide, particularly among British children, are increasing.
  • We know that the fines for the newly-created crimes of not wearing a mask, meeting friends or leaving our home without permission have been raised and will continue to be raised to levels sufficient to financially ruin anyone who disobeys Government regulations.
  • We know that non-compliance with certain coronavirus-justified Regulations can now be punished with up to 10 years in prison.
  • We know that the Government has looked at the legal barriers to making vaccination compulsory for a disease with a fatality rate of 0.23 per cent across the population and 0.05 per cent for those under 70, and has not ruled out making taking such a vaccine a condition of access to public life.
  • We know that UK police forces are being given more power with reduced accountability to enforce these regulations with increased brutality and greater impunity from prosecution.
  • We know that the legal profession, the media, the press, academia, the medical profession, the pharmaceutical industry, the financial and banking sector, the passenger transport industry, the civil service, the security services, the armed forces and every other public institution are collaborating in affecting the revolution of the UK into a biosecurity state.
  • We know that this state is being implemented through the private sector as much as through the public sector, with the information technology industry, the healthcare industry, the education industry, the tourism industry, the hospitality industry and the retail industry all being compelled by coronavirus-justified regulations to enforce compliance with the technologies and programmes of the biosecurity state as a condition of using their services.
  • We know that these technologies will not stop there, but under the guise of monitoring and protecting our biosecurity, not only from SARS-CoV-2 but from any other virus designated a threat to public health in the future, are penetrating and influencing every aspect of our private life, biological existence and social behaviour.”

It also says this (and remember – this was written in February): “If I risk looking into the future, I’d imagine a system of social credit based on that in China will be implemented on the back of some form of Universal Basic Income. This will essentially be an extension of our current benefits system of Universal Credit, but which will be tied to digital currency and whose ‘awarding’ will be additionally contingent upon our compliance with every demand and requirement of the UK biosecurity state. This will include tracking our every movement, interaction and contact through QR-codes; regularly updating our health status into a centralised data base; annual vaccination made either compulsory or a condition of returning to work; regularly submitting biometric samples for testing; carrying digital health passports at all times in order to access public services like travel, medical care and welfare benefits; the automation and regulation of the home as a quarantine block; mandatory mask-wearing in all public places; payment with blockchain currency programmed with conditions of use and traceable to the behaviour and health status of the user; and, of course, obedient acceptance of whatever new ‘rethink, reskill, reboot’ job the state assigns the millions of unemployed and impoverished workers granted a Universal Basic Income. In case we’re not clear what that will involve, it won’t mean a career in cyber-security, as the Government’s ill-advised propaganda campaign by the National Cyber Security Centre tried to suggest last year with a spectacular lack of success. A more representative job would be a worker operating in tandem with mobile robots to locate, retrieve, sort and package pharmaceutical products in one of Amazon’s new warehouses.”

*SF: This needs to be more nuanced, as officially there have been possibly 5 times more deaths from Covid than from the flu epidemic of 2017-18. I emphasise “officially”. And I suspect that, even taking into account the deaths falsely attirubuted to Covid and other aspects of manipulation mentioned here, there have been considerably more deaths than from flu. However, severe flu symptoms are usually treated with anti-virals – not at all recommended or offered to those suffering from Covid, who were (and still  are) told to go home, take paracetomol (dangerous to take as it attacks symptoms but weaken the body’s ability to fight the virus) and only go to hospital as a last resort (ie when they’re almost on the point of dying).  Whether these policies were deliberate or not it certainly helped terrify people to have films of loads of people dying in hospital.


France: Pfizer vaccine only 42% effective against Delta variant


France: official figures say there were 214,845 demonstrators against the Health Passport throughout the country

Probably a lot more – say 429,691½.

The more transmissible Delta variant makes the goal of herd immunity probably impossible

Certainly the pharmaceutical industry hopes so. But many doctors say that the Delta variety, though far more contagious, is far less lethal, less so than seasonal flu. Some compare it’s infectiousness and dangerousness with Chickenpox, which kills about 4200 people each year throughout the world.  Compared with almost every other danger, this is very low on the list.

Report comparing Iceland with Gibraltar, Malta and Israel

“Achieving herd immunity through general vaccination is out of reach. Iceland’s chief epidemiologist, Þórólfur Guðnason, was blunt on Sunday night in drawing the consequences of the spectacular outbreak of Delta infections in his country, which is among the most highly vaccinated in the world: 93% of the population over 16 years old is fully vaccinated. In July, the daily flow of infections was almost 0.1% of the population, one of the highest rates in the world. Þórólfur Guðnason believes that the ability of vaccines to prevent re-infection of inoculated people is far too low and that people should be allowed to become naturally infected in order to achieve herd immunity in the long run. At the same time, vulnerable groups should be carefully monitored, as vaccines protect them from severe forms of the disease. Iceland would then be the first country to change its tune among Western countries determined to vaccinate everyone willingly or unwillingly in order to “move on”. But other countries and territories are casting doubt on the ability of vaccines to stop the spread of the Delta variant. Gibraltar, where 99% of the population has been fully vaccinated for two months, and Malta (82%) suffered an atypical wave of infections in July. In less than ten days, the flow of infected people increased by a hundredfold, but there was no increase in severe cases. This wave, the seventh in the case of Malta, fell back as quickly as it came in these two countries, but not in Iceland. The vaccine, in this case almost exclusively from Pfizer, seems to have done its job of protecting against severe forms, since the flow of deaths, which was almost zero, did not increase in these three countries. In Gibraltar, no one has even been hospitalised for Covid since January. There are no very convincing scientific explanations for either the rise or the fall. It is difficult to imagine a seasonal factor for a phenomenon that lasts barely four weeks. Could a sudden influx of tourists during June have been responsible? If so, the wave would not have subsided in Malta and Gibraltar. In addition, tourists had to be vaccinated, or undergo a recent PCR test and quarantine.

The situation is equally disturbing in a more demographically significant country, Israel. The flow of infection there has increased threefold between mid-July and today. This fifth wave, which shows no sign of abating, has prompted the authorities to re-impose the wearing of masks outdoors and to recommend teleworking from this Monday. The authorities and health experts have also been preparing people’s minds for a reconfinement for several weeks, while Israel is, after Iceland and the United Arab Emirates, among the countries in the world where the proportion of adults vaccinated is the highest (80%, or even 92% for the population at risk, over 60 years). While it is normal, given the size of the population, for the vaccinated to be in the majority among people hospitalised, their high proportion among adults in emergency care (72% of the 260 cases recorded) raises questions. On the other hand, this country of nine million inhabitants has only twenty serious cases of under-fifties, of which only one was vaccinated. And the daily flow of deaths remains blocked at… one.”


Australia: armed police patrols and checkpoints in clampdown on those who defy lockdown, already over 7 weeks long in some cities

“Restrictions will be tightened in Sydney, Australia’s largest city, which is entering its eighth week of containment, authorities said on Saturday, calling it “the most worrying day since the pandemic began”. Australia, long spared by the pandemic, has been hit by a surge in infections, driven by the Delta variant, which threatens its “zero Covid” strategy. More than 10 million people in the country are confined, particularly in the country’s two largest cities, Sydney and Melbourne, as well as the capital, Canberra. From Monday, people who fail to comply with the draconian restrictions will face heavy fines, as measures taken so far have failed to stop the spread of the epidemic…The containment measures have also been extended to the entire state of New South Wales for the first time this year. They came into effect on Saturday afternoon for a minimum of seven days. Police patrols and checkpoints will be stepped up, while hundreds of military personnel will be tasked with ensuring strict compliance with the containment.”

France: man who put up poster with Macron as Hitler to be prosecuted



A German contact writes to me about Ivermectin:

A good start to read on the whole topic is the text “the drug that cracked covid” from the journalist Michael Capuzzo. Even though the writing and how the facts are presented is quite “American” nevertheless you will get some understanding of … Ivermectin therapy and why it isn’t known more broadly.
Here as text:
Here as pdf:

On this site all studies on Ivermectin are collected:

If you ask, who is it doing on that website, in their FAQ they write:

Who is @CovidAnalysis?
We are PhD researchers, scientists, people who hope to make a contribution, even if it is only very minor. You can find our research in journals like Science and Nature. We have little interest in adding to our publication lists, being in the news, or being on TV (we have done all of these things before but feel there are more important things in life now).

Why should we trust @CovidAnalysis?
There is no need to. We provide organization and analysis, but all sources are public and you can easily verify everything. For the meta-analyses, all data required to reproduce the analysis is contained in the appendix, with direct links to the original source papers.

If you are interested in individual studies on Ivermectin the youtuber/nurse (who is quite pro-measures and vaccine) has done several videos on single studies: (and in the meantime he seems a bit concerned that most of this videos which are merely a presentation of the content of actual studies get fact-checked and censored on Facebook for example).


SF writes: re. Youtube censorship – in France even non-political videos of empty cafes (empty due to the compulsory Health Passport) in the Champs Elysees are taken off  Youtube after a few hours. At the same time videos of problems hospitals have with the Health Passport get censored, problems such as an old man needing chemotherapy being harassed by hospital staff because he didn’t have the passport or a test. Also happening in France is that families of people dying in  hospitals are being denied access to their parents or whatever because they don’t have the Health Passport.


Lithuania, Vilnius: serious anti-lockdown riots


France: 198 demos against the Health Passportclashes in 3 cities

Officially there were 237,000 demonstrators, 33,000 more than the official figure for the previous Saturday. But the figures are obviously manipulated – sometimes I’ve seen figures that were 10% of the actual number. Of course, it’s hard to know how many there were – but the official figure for Montpellier was 8,000, whereas there were probably closer to 13,000. Numbers are not enough, of course.  And there was a lot of bullshit on these demos, surprise surprise. Fortunately some people in Montpellier managed to confront Action Francaise (fascist-cum-royalist organisation), forcing them to lose their stupid national flags and some other equipment. Also  people singing the Marseillaise were almost drowned out by people singing the Internationale.


Dealing with the new (ab)normal – a situation report

A balanced anarchist assessment of some of the contradictions of the moment.


France: dictatorship of the bourgeoisie decides that its dictatorship is democratic and constitutional

Surprise surprise – the Constitutional Council has decided that its “Health” Passport is constituional and democratic! Well , that decides it then. Let’s all give up, go home and rest in peace. The President of the Constitutional Council is the mass murderer Laurent Fabius, famous for knowingly allowing HIV contaminated blood to be given to haemophiliacs in the 1980s. Over 1000 died. His son is a director of McKinsey, an organisation giving Macron advice about the vaccination strategy (as well as other aspects of his political strategy). 4 of the 8 other members of this Council were appointed by Macron, the others appointed under Hollande and Sarkozy during their previous presidencies (including a previous Chirac-appointed Prime Minister, Alain Juppé, previously convicted for corruption ). Democracy moves in mysterious ways.


France: indefinite strike of health workers against obligatory vaccinationalso firemen

For a critique of the CGT (with an appendix on Sud) see this.

France, Nantes: an indication of the misery permitted by increasing fascist participation in the anti Health Passport  demos (31st July)

Provisional text from a friend:

👉 Since Macron’s announcements on 12 July – formalising the move to a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie under the pretext of health – hundreds of thousands of people have been regularly mobilising in the streets to oppose the health passport and compulsory anti-covid vaccination.

👉 A part of the far right is taking advantage of the opportunity to take to the streets and try to recuperate the protest for its own benefit – while sometimes trying to commit abuses on other demonstrators in the very heart of the processions. In Montpellier, Rennes and elsewhere, nationalist identitarians, royalists and other inbreds marched last Saturday – sometimes discreetly in small groups, sometimes openly.

👉 The far right has no place in the street. Those who, in all their components, have denounced for decades the “laxity” of successive governments and hypothetical “red judges”   now claim to regret living in a dictatorship? Those who count in their ranks many police officers and gendarmes (without even mentioning the countless informers) who have repressed without qualm the Yellow Vest movement and the one against the pension reform claim to have had a sudden revelation and claim to now side with Freedom?

👉 In reality, the fash are the useful idiots of successive French governments: as their traditional security agenda was taken up & implemented by the UMP [Sarkozy’s former party], PS [Socialist Party], LREM [Macron’s party], the far-right have pushed its liberticidal proposals ever further, conveniently allowing the governing parties to continue to pass for “moderates”.

👉 Moreover, the presence of anti-Semites, racists and other Dupont-Lajoie [reference to film – “The Common Man” – about a café owner] escaped from the Café du Commerce in the processions of the past weeks – even if it was a very small minority – offers a golden opportunity for the government to try to discredit the mobilization against the sanitary dictatorship by presenting it as the work of “extremists”… If the Patriots, the UPR, DLF [right-wing political rackets], did not exist, LREM would be necessary to invent them.

👉 Banking on the disappearance of collective intelligence, the fash shamelessly pretend to oppose today’s Macronist crimes in the name of ancient crimes (Nazism, Fascism, Petainism, Francoism…). Fighting an authoritarianism in the name of other authoritarianisms is a fatal impasse in which opponents of the health passport must not engage.

👉 Following the example of the setbacks suffered in its ranks in Nantes and Toulouse last weekend, the far right has just realised that ambiguity can only be overcome to its detriment. This necessary political clarification must continue.

➡️➡️ The “nation” is a cage invented by the bourgeoisie! Down with all the extreme right-wingers! FASCISTS – OUT OF OUR LIVES, OUT OF OUR STRUGGLES!

France, Marseille: woman to be treated for cerebral thrombosis and epilepsy for the rest of her life after vaccine


France: build-up of pressure from base of unions, launching possible national strike of hospital workers against compulsory vaccinations starting 4th August…More here

“In Marseille, the APHM represents 13,000 employees. The Edouard Toulouse hospital has 1077 employees. The two organisations (at least their Sud Santé union) have joined forces for this movement. According to Kader Benayed, deputy departmental secretary of Sud Santé, “The rate of absenteeism has been high since the vote on the law obliging healthcare workers to be vaccinated: departures, notice of departure, unpaid leave, sick leave…”. Sud santé has filed an unlimited strike notice from 4 August at the APHM, and from 9 August for Edouard Toulouse. Two rallies are planned for Thursday 5 August at 11am. One at the North Hospital, the other in front of the Timone. This movement is based on eight demands (extracts):

The systematic declaration of work-related accidents for the Covid-19 disease
Non-suspension of hospital workers who have not been vaccinated against Covid-19 and respect for the laws and constitutions regarding the decision of each worker to be vaccinated against Covid-19
The respect of the free choice of each agent to be vaccinated without constraint or threat of dismissal. Each non-vaccinated agent will continue, as since the beginning of the crisis, to carry out his or her duties with the appropriate protective equipment, while respecting the social distancing
The possibility to choose which vaccine will be inoculated and when, if the agent so chooses
Protection of personal data and respect for medical confidentiality regarding the vaccination status of employees
Working conditions that respect our physical and psychological health without aggravating suffering at work with a diversion of our public service missions at the service of citizens, whatever their vaccination status
Non-discrimination of patients: we refuse to sort them at the entrance of our public health establishment
The respect of the public service mission accessible to all without any distinction”

Obviously criticisable, but I’ll leave it at that for the moment.


Israel: nasty details of Pfizer trials for 12-15-year-olds and those 16 and over

[Posted by Yaffa Shir Raz – member of the newly formed “Professional
Ethics Front”, 30 July 2021]

Revealed: Pfizer publishes results from a 6-month follow-up trial:

44,165 participants aged 16 and over, and 2,264 aged 12-15, divided into
two groups –
Vaccinated vs. placebo:

Death: 15 vs. 14
Death from Covid 19: 1 vs. 2
Cardiac arrest: 4 vs. 1

No doubt- unprecedented efficiency! Hurry and get your third dose today!

These findings, by the way, you will not find in the abstract, which only subtly mentions that there is a “declining trend in efficiency.” To find the table shown here you will need to dig into the appendix (p. 12).

[Posted by Yaffa Shir Raz – member of the newly formed “Professional
Ethics Front”, 31 July 2021]

The amount of manipulation revealed in clinical trials of the miracle shot has already become a joke – only it’s a macabre joke, and it’s at our expense.

After yesterday we saw how in the new trial, which followed for 6 months the study population that received the Pfizer injection, compared to the
placebo group – the table with the data indicating zero mortality prevention was well buried – so that only with a deaf watchmaker’s glasses it can be found on page 12 in the appendices, It turns out that this was only the more innocent manipulation.

Because as some smart people here have rightly remarked – right after the trial Pfizer offered the participants in the placebo group the miracle shot, for ethical reasons of course, so as not to leave them exposed to the deadly virus that has only 99.98 percent survival.

In doing so, as Dr. Peter Dushi from the BMJ wrote, Pfizer actually blocked the way for real follow-up trial, which would make it possible to examine the differences between the trial group and the placebo group – because there is no more placebo, and of course no more blindness (when neither the researchers nor Subjects know who received what) – a critical condition for clinical trials, particularly in stage 3, to prevent foreign influences.

So how could they possibly compare the research group to the placebo group?

Well, it turns out that in the chapter on side effects, the researchers added a note, which says that during the blindness period, 15 participants who received the injection and 14 who received the placebo died. But – during the open-label period, that is, the period in which the researchers and the subjects already knew who received what, and the placebo subjects actually went on to receive the injection – another 5 participants died. And guess what? It turns out that these five participants actually received the injection – three of them received the injection during the blinds period and the other two were originally in the study group, but were later injected as well.

Meaning – in fact 20 people who received the shot died, compared to 14 in the placebo group.

The amazing thing is that at the end of this paragraph, the authors refer to Table S4 – the same table from page 12 in the appendix I posted here yesterday – but this table, as you can see, lists only 15 deaths in the injected group. So where did these 5 go?

Although the authors claim that none of these five deaths were considered by the investigators to be related to the injection – what justification do they have for removing them from the table?


Australia: Forced transfer by the police to Covid-hotels of those staying near “verified Covid cases”

Also here.

The South Australian county government, Adelaide, has passed legislation
in the past year (and even added regulations last week) that allow
police to evict civilians from their homes and transfer them to a
guarded, fenced-off Covid-hotel because they were near persons tested

Until last week, the hotel policy was valid only for Australians
returning from abroad, who are required to stay in the hotel and pay an
Australian $ 3000 for their stay until two negative tests are received.
As of this week, the hotel policy has also become legal for those who
are in the vicinity of verified Covid cases.

And so, last Sunday. After two ‘positives’, a brother and a sister, were
found in a local winery (South Australia is famous for its wineries),
all visitors to the same winery were gathered from their homes by the
police and taken to hotels (or ‘medi-hotel’ according to the local
terminology). Although they have been found to be negative in the tests,
they are still quarantined until further negative results are obtained.
No one asks them, or allows them isolation at home. That’s the law from
now on.

Imagine that you are going on a family visit to the winery during the
weekend with your family, and a report on a verified Covid case in that
place is enough for the police to come to your home later, take you out
of your house, load you into a bus of those being taken to quarantine
and transfer you to quarantine in a guarded and fenced-off “hotel”.

This slippery slope, which was legally approved this week, allows the
police to remove family members from their homes, separate them and
transfer them to a medi-hotel (children of verified Covid cases,
separation between spouses, etc.), all because one of the family members
is verified.

In practice, two verified cases were found on Sunday at the same winery.
As a result, one hundred (100!) people found themselves being
transferred from their homes to a secured facility, a medi-hotel,
because they visited the same winery that day.

Legislation similar to quarantine in hotels has also been approved in
the county state of New South Wales, with Sydney as its capital.

This news story passed quietly in Australia. South Australia, which had
been closed for a week, had already canceled it, but the “detainees” who
visited the winery were still quarantined in a Medi-hotel and awaiting a
further test.

And what if next the police evict people from their homes and separate
family members regardless of “verified cases” but according to other

Does this sound far away to you, because it’s in Adelaide and has
nothing to do with our lives? As an Australian Israeli, all my life I
have thought that Australia is the safest place in the world. I can’t
believe to what a degree of loss of individual liberties they have
reached here on the continent and at such a great speed. You think this
cannot happen in the Holy Land? Suddenly there is a knock on the door
and the police under the auspices of the law and medical regulations
will not be able to take you out of the house and transfer you to a
secured facility?


France: clashes in 6 towns on large mid-summer anti-health passport demos (31st July)clashes in La Reunion (French overseas territory)Martinique (French overseas territory): vaccination centre torched during overnight riots against Covid-imposed curfew (31st-1st)

“It was a night of burning bins, organised looting, and five cars set on fire…For several days now, an appeal has been circulating on social networks. A group of individuals, to protest against the reinforcement of the restrictive measures, and in particular the curfew, launched the idea of a parade on Saturday 31 July in the evening. A demonstration organised despite the curfew-related  ban on movement. At around 10pm, clashes broke out when the wild demo arrived on Maurice Bishop Avenue, not far from the CMA-CGM premises. The police used tear gas to disperse the crowd…Several businesses were set on fire: a pharmacy, the Sainte-Thérèse vaccination centre of the Regional Health Agency (ARS) and five cars set on fire…”

It seems worth pointing out that a few years back the French government imposed 11 compulsory vaccinations on the newly-born throughout France and its territories, 3 of which the WHO deemed quite dangerous, and this without opposition (probably due to the lack of  much knowledge of the fact). The take-up of the 1st dose of the vaccine in Martinique is just 20%. Plus they have suffered from a high level of carcenogenic pesticides, which apparently tends to make them suspicious of chemicals in general. Resistance to the curfew and compulsory vaccination in a part of France that is particularly impoverished and treated like a colony is a minimum affirmation of humanity.

See also this in French: Sortons de l’impasse sanitaire !

Germany, Berlin: clashes, man dies, 500-600 arrests on anti-Covid rules demoafter Berlin court bans anti-lockdown protests

This is presented by the media as a right-wing demo, though it’s very unlikely that only the right were involved.

The following is a leaflet, 1000 copies of which were distributed on a demo in Berlin on 13th March, directed against the new regime that was and is being introduced with what the authors call “the royal flu” (a joke based on the word “Corona”) . Translated from this:

Against the dictation of fear. The plague is the state.

If the world was already horrible before Corona, it has darkened now completely. With the royal flu, the caste consisting of politics, media and science has realized the dream of every ruler: to exercise absolute social control without having to take immediate violent action. In essence, the state wants to prevent people from physically meeting each other at all. Therefore, it is necessary to come together and, already by doing so, to carry protest against the measures into the streets and all other places. Wherever the hygiene dictate is resisted, the contact ban is circumvented and the viral fear is rejected, the Corona totality breaks open. To hell with the expert committees, journocops and political apparatchniks, who want to establish the state of emergency permanently and thus consolidate their power!

However, the lockdown policy can only be enforced so smoothly because a large mass of people still prissily comply with the most absurd regulations or even voluntarily go beyond it. Many people want the restrictions on freedom because they are doomed to survive as a superfluous appendage of an overarching social machinery anyway. Saving lives by wearing masks and observing hygiene rules is more tempting to believe than facing the bitter reality that in this world it is not the individual who counts. Loneliness and isolation, by which many are now crushed, have been massively intensified by the state of emergency, but have their origin not in a disease, but in the capitalist mode of production, which demands the separation of people from each other. Before Covid, competition and resentment were already the determining mode, but since a flu virus was turned into a plague, everyone can blithely act out their hostilities and fears and is even congratulated by the state for doing so. It is not the virus that threatens life, but the conditions in which it is hyped up to a global catastrophe – and it is these conditions themselves that must be fought, along with the Corona policy.

In order to get any possibility at all that people associate themselves in the direction of freedom, first of all the mass hysteria must be countered and the prohibitions overturned. Where people no longer physically meet, look at and grasp each other, there is no freedom, but only the mute, digital compulsion. But even if the measures were to be seriously withdrawn once again, the panic inside people would not disappear in the end: as long as we live in capitalism, everyone must fear for their individual future, if they are granted a halfway decent existence at all.

The many who (can) hide behind a mask or in front of a laptop at home out of sheer fear have made their peace with this society. They have shown that they will let themselves be given any injection and swallow any pill, no matter how bitter. Beginning with the further dismantling of the welfare state and the health care system, to the command order for digitalisation, to the disenfranchisement through climate regulations: every further anti-life agenda can now be safely put into practice by the state and its agents. Enough is enough – not just with the Corona spectacle.

Down with the Covid regime! For the association of free people! (13.3.2021)

“…overthrow all relations in which man is a debased, enslaved, forsaken, despicable being….. “ – Marx

Querdenken caricatured as “covid denialist” and put under political surveillance by German state.

Greetings from “New Normal” Germany! Comparison between the unvaccinated and the Jews in Germany in the 30s. A contact writes about this text that  it “is more or less accurate – apart from the small but significant fact that in Germany today, a “Covid denier,” an “anti-vaxxer,” a “conspiracy theorist,” or whatever dissidents to the “new normal” are called, can always decide to give up his or her critical attitude and adapt to the habits of the rest of society and is thenceforth safe from being persecuted – while the Jews in Hitler’s Germany didn’t have such a choice.”

SF: Similar attitudes might well develop in France and elsewhere. Already they’re developing in Israel – I have 2 Israeli friends who were stuck there for 5 months before being able to return to Europe where they live, and the heavy mentality from their families was unbearable. And I myself was accused on a UK-based forum (libcom) of contributing to endangering the lives of 10s of 1000s of people because
I questioned the efficacy of masks. And then had a link to this taken off as it was deemed Covid denialist and conspiracy theorist (thus proving the validity of what was critiqued in that text). Glorious times.

“The criminalisation of dissent” – on this repressive measure in Germany and elsewhere.

Querdenken means “lateral thinking”.

From a contact:

Re the Querdenken-movement: I don’t think that these people are exclusively right wing. I think, it is a confused mixture of people of different political orientations. A couple of friends of mine attended the Querdenken-demo in Berlin on March 13. They distributed 1.000 copies of an improvised leaflet, had some good discussions and made some contacts. …they there filmed and denounced by some so called antifascists who observed the demo and in fact, did the job of informers for the state.

A group of leftists called “freie Linke”, who oppose the lockdown measures, attended the big Querdenken-demo of 20.000 people in Kassel on March 20. In their report, they write:

“As with the other anti-lockdown demonstrations, the participants came from the middle of society. Any right-wingers were not to be seen on the Schwanenwiese. I even have the impression that the people in Kassel came more from the left spectrum of society than at other demos. This was evident not only from the habitus, but also from the many rainbow flags.  That the event was a Nazi demo is, in view of the speakers and participants, an absurd lie of the neoliberal Antifa.”

On the other hand, the same group reports that two of their members were physically attacked by nazis on this demo later on. Thus, fascists are definitely present on these events, but as far as I can judge, they do not make up the majority of the participants and it is possible for leftists and revolutionary critics of society to act in this milieu – though it is risky.

…In Dortmund, some anarchists and leftists started an initiative for a solidarity network to help people who are in trouble due to corona or the anti-corona measures – buying food for old or sick people, supporting people who lost their jobs or have nobody to look after their children. They formed a telegram group which spread very quickly and put leaflets on the walls of several neighbourhoods, but there have been only very few actual requests for help up to now. Meanwhile, the local football ultras (“apolitical”, but somewhat left-leaning in Dortmund) started their own solidarity network, too.

Interesting reflections on Delta variant from French doctor

Points out that the current wave provoked by the delta variant, 15 times less lethal than the original form of Covid, is “less deadly than seasonal flu”.

Israel, Jerusalem: director of hospital says that 90% of those hospitalised for Covid are over 70 and have been vaccinated

The guy says that “ the vaccine dissipates in front of our eyes… Dr. Kobi Habib said that there is a significant jump in the number of difficult patients, who are hospitalized in the hospital he runs….Dr. Habib said that he opened another corona ward at the hospital after the first one began to fill up: “The jump is significant, something that has not happened to us for several weeks. …Hospitals are still far from collapsing, but the situation is getting worse. The infection rate today is above 1.3, which means that if nothing is done now, the situation will continue to get worse“. At the same time he declares total support for the vaccine. Of course, without knowing exact figures  comparing with figures for previous hospitalisations (90% of 100 is clearly different from 90% of 1000), this doesn’t say an enormous amount other than the vast limits of the vaccine.i

SamFanto was born, and then he lived a bit but never enough.

la vaccination obligatoire et le code d’ “éthique médicale” de Nuremberg de 1947

  Version pdf: La vaccination obligatoire et le code d’”éthique médicale” de Nuremberg de 1947 2

Traduction Deepl d’ici:

Récemment, à la télévision française, un homme qui critiquait la propagande visant à rendre le programme de vaccination obligatoire a mentionné le code de Nuremberg et a été immédiatement interpellé et empêché de parler par des journalistes ignorants qui lui ont demandé comment il osait comparer la situation actuelle avec les nazis. Ce dont ce type essayait de parler, c’était du Code de Nuremberg sur l’éthique médicale, datant de 1947, et non du procès des dirigeants nazis de 1945-46.

Quelques jours plus tard, sur la même chaîne, un journaliste et un économiste se sont déchaînés, suggérant que ceux qui n’ont pas été vaccinés ne devraient pas avoir les mêmes droits que ceux qui l’ont été, qu’ils devraient être séquestrés et même envoyés en prison. Pendant ce temps, le ministre français de la santé a menacé de contacter tous les médecins généralistes pour qu’ils lui fournissent une liste de tous leurs patients qui n’ont pas été vaccinés. Voilà pour le serment d’Hippocrate. Le virus de la vaccination a clairement dépassé les proportions d’une pandémie. Même un marxiste apparemment anti-étatique – S.Artesian – en est infecté et préconise la vaccination obligatoire. Cela rend tous ceux qui sont infectés par le Vaccinationavirus encore plus mauvais que le Conseil de l’Europe qui, le 28 janvier dernier, a au moins déclaré qu’il ne devrait pas y avoir de discrimination sociale ou professionnelle contre ceux qui refusent les vaccins disponibles, bien que cela soit clairement en contradiction avec l’introduction du “pass sanitaire” français, de plus en plus utilisé pour des événements tels que des concerts ou d’autres rassemblements que cette société promeut sans cesse comme une source apparente de plaisir. Sous le règne de “l’urgence sanitaire”, l’Etat développe manifestement un totalitarisme sans précédent, pas aussi grossier que le nazisme ou le stalinisme, mais envahissant des aspects de la vie que ces formes archaïques de contrôle social capitaliste n’avaient pas osé ou même pensé pouvoir envahir. Le résultat est plutôt un goulag de la capacité critique des gens, l’emprisonnement de leur capacité à penser et à agir par eux-mêmes, même de façon marginale, plutôt que des camps de concentration au sens propre. Ceux que l’État souhaite détruire, il les rend d’abord fous de confusion.

“Mon pass sanitaire? Voici!”

La plupart de ces développements sont en contradiction – du moins à un niveau superficiel – avec le Code de Nuremberg de 1947. Le tribunal établi en 1947 était américain, sans la participation des trois autres puissances qui avaient été partie prenante des premiers procès de Nuremberg en 1945. Auparavant, par exemple, dans la seconde moitié du XIXe siècle, des chercheurs hospitaliers de Lyon utilisaient sans état d’âme des orphelins abandonnés comme cobayes. Et en Indochine française, Alexandre Yersin, l’un des responsables de l’Institut Pasteur, a inoculé le bacille de la peste à des prisonniers cochinchinois. Il y a environ un an, deux hauts responsables de l’INSERM ont suggéré que les vaccins soient expérimentés en Afrique sur des Africains. Ils ont dû retirer leurs commentaires quelques jours plus tard après des dénonciations de racisme, mais pas pour cause de contradiction avec le code de Nuremberg.

Ce code avait pour but d’interdire le type d’expériences médicales qui avaient eu lieu dans les camps nazis. Du moins les plus insoutenables, car nombre d’entre elles faisaient partie intégrante, depuis la fin du XVIIIe siècle au moins, de la médecine expérimentale, y compris sur le territoire des États-nations modernes, comme les États-Unis, et dans leurs colonies. Le code de Nuremberg présentait la médecine nazie comme l’infâme exception à la règle générale de l’éthique médicale, le fameux serment attribué à Hippocrate. Une falsification qui fait l’impasse sur la façon dont les défenseurs des adeptes du docteur Mengele [i] au procès ont parfois rappelé les expériences encore menées à l’époque aux États-Unis. Comme l’étude Tuskegee, qui a permis à des dizaines de métayers noirs de mourir de la syphilis non traitée. Ils leur donnaient des choses comme des repas chauds, etc. en échange d’être des cobayes. Des choses similaires se produisent aujourd’hui dans des pays comme Israël : par exemple, les municipalités distribuent aux enfants des friandises telles que des glaces, des billets de cinéma, etc. avec des affiches, conçues pour donner l’impression que tout cela est amusant, les invitant et les encourageant à se faire vacciner.

Entre les années 1950 et 1970, au cours d’une épidémie d’hépatite, le Dr Saul Krugman a délibérément infecté des enfants en bonne santé de l’école Willowbrook pour les “retardés mentaux”, à New York, avec le virus de l’hépatite, arguant “qu’il était justifié d’inoculer le virus de l’hépatite aux enfants retardés de Willowbrook parce que la plupart d’entre eux contracteraient l’hépatite de toute façon”. De même, entre 1951 et 1974, le Dr Albert Kligman a soumis près d’un millier de détenus de la prison de Holmsburg, en Pennsylvanie, à des produits chimiques toxiques afin de voir comment la peau réagissait à ces produits. Il a déclaré : “Tout ce que je voyais devant moi, c’était des hectares de peau… C’était comme un fermier voyant un champ fertile pour la première fois.” Un exemple de l’objectivité de la science bourgeoise : elle voit les gens comme des objets, comme de simples hectares de peau, comme des choses. Le fait est que les gens ne sont pas des choses. Et quiconque a un peu de bon sens voit que le programme de vaccination actuel est similaire à ces formes précédentes de fonctionnalisation des personnes, et que ses méthodes et sa mentalité de “taille unique”/ “une taile pour tous” sont totalement et dangereusement indifférentes aux différences, qu’en tant que cobayes, ils sont simplement utilisés comme un moyen pour atteindre une fin totalement hors de leur contrôle, au profit du capital. Et l’acceptation de cette logique rend les individus incapables de voir, ou même de vouloir voir, si la vaccination est pertinente pour eux ou non, et encore moins capables de s’informer des risques et/ou des bénéfices potentiels.

Le Code de Nuremberg stipule que “certains types d’expériences médicales sur des êtres humains, lorsqu’elles s’inscrivent dans des limites raisonnablement bien définies, sont conformes à l’éthique de la profession médicale en général”. Les juges ont justifié leur position “en se fondant sur le fait que de telles expériences produisent des résultats pour le bien de la société, qui sont impossibles à obtenir par d’autres méthodes ou moyens d’étude” [ii]. En outre, le code précisait que ces règles déontologiques ne s’appliquaient qu’au “territoire des États concernés”. Cela revenait à autoriser lesdits États à continuer d’utiliser les territoires qu’ils contrôlaient dans le monde, à commencer par leurs colonies, comme champs d’expérimentation médicale.

A partir de telles règles de morale commerciale, il ne restait plus qu’à quantifier, au plus près, le degré de souffrance acceptable et accepté au nom du “progrès de la condition humaine”. C’est pourquoi les juges ont accepté l’idée même d’une expérimentation humaine hiérarchisée, sans parler de l’expérimentation animale qui ne pose évidemment aucun problème de conscience. Ils ont énoncé “les principes fondamentaux” à respecter ” pour répondre aux notions morales, éthiques et juridiques “, à savoir : “L’expérience doit être fondée sur le consentement volontaire et éclairé du sujet humain”“L’expérience doit être conduite de manière à éviter toute souffrance inutile et tout dommage physique et mental” … “Le niveau des risques à prendre ne doit jamais dépasser celui de l’importance humanitaire du problème que l’expérience doit résoudre”, etc. Étant donné que la notion d’“importance humanitaire” dans le contexte de la pratique médicale conventionnelle, et conventionnellement non critique, est celle de l’État et du capital, le Code de Nuremberg a laissé la porte ouverte à de nombreuses expériences, dans les laboratoires et ailleurs, menées par les wo/men en blouse blanche et de facto contraires aux tables de la loi bioéthique qui étaient censées les sanctionner. Comme le déclarait Guy Vallancien, professeur à l’Université Descartes, Paris, et membre de la Société de médecine prédictive et personnalisée, lors d’un congrès en 2016, à Montpellier : “L’éthique n’est que le miroir de l’évolution d’une société, elle vient après, elle n’est pas le fer de lance. Si on la mettait devant la science froide et amorale, on arrêterait tout.”

Par ailleurs, la notion de “consentement éclairé et volontaire du sujet”, posée en termes de formalisme juridique, élude de facto celle du contenu. D’abord, même si les tests ont été, et restent, réalisés par des expérimentateurs qui en soulignent le caractère incertain et même parfois dangereux, comment des cobayes humains peuvent-ils en saisir les nuances, les modalités et les conséquences ? Ils ne peuvent le faire qu’en termes vagues et probabilistes. En définitive, la plupart des gens, dépourvus de toute connaissance complexe, ne peuvent que prendre au mot le savoir médical. Car là où il y a de prétendus sujets, il y a aussi des maîtres. Les conventions qui ont suivi Nuremberg, comme celle d’Helsinki en 1964, n’ont fait qu’affiner encore le Code et ont insisté, au niveau formel, sur la prise en compte des “exceptions”, notamment celles concernant le “consentement volontaire” en introduisant l’idée que l’expérience pouvait être acceptée par les responsables légaux des cobayes humains, comme les mineurs, malades ou non, ou les personnes incapables de prendre des décisions pour elles-mêmes [iii] ! [On constate à l’époque actuelle que l’on passe de l’utilisation comme cobayes des personnes en marge ou en bas de la hiérarchie de la société “correcte” (orphelins, prostituées, handicapés mentaux, prisonniers, etc). [iv]C’est un progrès !

Il est clair que la peur de mourir, parfois pour des personnes en sursis, joue souvent le rôle de facteur décisif dans l’acceptation des propositions des expérimentateurs et des règles de bioéthique censées encadrer leurs actions. Et ce, dans la situation actuelle, malgré les risques que le vaccin accélère la mort de personnes à l’espérance de vie réduite, ce dont les médias dominants ne parlent guère [v]. “De toutes les passions, la peur est celle qui assure le plus la soumission aux lois”, comme l’affirmait Thomas Hobbes dans le Léviathan [vi]. Dans des circonstances normales, antérieures à la période covide, les individus testés par les laboratoires sont, en règle générale, rémunérés, ce qui en France est légal, du moins en dehors du cadre hospitalier. Ce qui explique qu’ils soient issus des couches les plus pauvres de la population. À l’époque actuelle du Covid, personne n’est payé – le monde est un laboratoire sans risque et sans coût pour les sociétés pharmaceutiques (les différents États, plutôt que les sociétés elles-mêmes, couvrent tout coût potentiel de compensation légale pour les “effets indésirables” tels que la mort, bien que des preuves non scientifiques et purement anecdotiques suggèrent que la compensation pour la mort n’a pas été une véritable compensation pour la victime).

Certains aspects de tout cela apparaissent très clairement dans le programme de vaccination actuel, pour lequel la troisième phase de l’essai n’a pas été limitée à, disons, 30 000 volontaires, mais a été étendue au monde entier. En fait, la troisième phase ne se termine officiellement qu’en 2022 pour certains vaccins et en 2023 pour d’autres. De plus, en allongeant l’intervalle entre la première et la deuxième dose de 3 semaines à 3 mois, et en autorisant des vaccins différents pour la deuxième dose de la première (par exemple Moderna pour la première, Pfizer pour la deuxième), les autorités utilisent le monde comme leur laboratoire d’une manière qui va même à l’encontre d’un protocole scientifique déjà suspect. Et Pfizer est également allé à l’encontre de son propre protocole en administrant le vaccin à des enfants psychologiquement vulnérables.

La notion de “consentement éclairé” est désormais une plaisanterie de mauvais goût : 99,9% des informations sont celles que l’État et le capital autorisent. C’est d’autant plus vrai avec la censure rampante actuelle sur Facebook [vii], Youtube, Vimeo et ailleurs. Et le reste du 0,1% est automatiquement parodié comme “théorie du complot” ou “anti-vaxxer”, qu’il rentre ou non dans ces catégories.

Ce texte dit que “Notre Ministre de la Santé, dans une lettre au président du CNOM, décharge les médecins de bien informer les patients des risques de la vaccination. Je le cite « La responsabilité des médecins ne pourra être engagée au motif qu’ils auraient délivré une information insuffisante aux patients sur les effets indésirables méconnus à la date de vaccination ».Que penser de la connaissance des médecins sur le sujet, quand ils n’ont droit qu’à une seule source d’information, l’officielle, toute autre étant méchamment vilipendée ou censurée. L’information officielle ? Celle des seuls laboratoires déjà multi condamnés pour avoir caché leurs effets secondaires dans d’autres affaires. De plus, l’information est édulcorée par les autorités. Un exemple : l’ARN messager reste dans le muscle deltoïde, dixit l’Inserm et les autorités. Qu’ont écrit Pfizer et Moderna dans leurs études que les autorités ont occultés ? « Nous avons retrouvé nos billes dans tous les organes, y compris reproducteurs ». Alors, bien « éclairé » le consentement ? Quand un vaccinateur dit aux patients que les vaccins sont sans risques, fabriqués comme les autres à partir de virus atténués, le responsable qui doit éclairer les autres est-il lui-même bien éclairé ?

Notre Ministre, le même, vient de menacer les soignants dans les ehpads de rendre leur vaccination obligatoire s’ils ne se vaccinaient pas plus. Dans le « consentement éclairé », il y a le mot « consentement ». Qu’est-ce qu’un consentement sous la menace, sous un chantage ? Est-ce un consentement ? De plus quelle justification scientifique et médicale à ce chantage quand 90% des pensionnaires sont vaccinés, donc protégés ? (Rappelons que le vaccin est efficace à 98%…  )

Sommes-nous dans l’esprit du code de Nuremberg ? Il précise dans son premier article que : « Le consentement volontaire du sujet humain est absolument essentiel. Cela veut dire que la personne concernée doit avoir la capacité légale de consentir ; qu’elle doit être placée en situation d’exercer un libre choix, sans intervention de quelque élément de force, de fraude, de contrainte, de supercherie, de duperie ou d’autres formes sournoises de contrainte ou de coercition «.

Toujours dans sa lettre évoquée plus haut, le Ministre parle de l’indemnisation des victimes du vaccin anti-covid. Habituellement, c’est le laboratoire qui est responsable des conséquences de ce qu’il commercialise, il fait donc attention avant de lancer son produit sur le marché. Ici, l’Etat a passé contrat avec les laboratoires, en « prenant à sa charge » la responsabilité et l’indemnisation des éventuelles conséquences. Les laboratoires ont donc moins de précautions à respecter, leur portefeuille n’en souffrira pas en cas d’insuffisances. Ils ont déjà été condamnés à des milliards d’euros d’amendes ces dernières années, pour avoir caché des informations et des défauts, ce qui n’empêche pas nos autorités, non seulement de leur faire confiance les yeux fermés, mais en plus de les décharger de leurs responsabilités.”

Une partie de cet article est tirée de “Des souris et des gènes” d’André Dréan, mais la formulation est entièrement de moi.


En Galice, en Espagne, les vaccins sont devenus obligatoires, avec des amendes pouvant aller jusqu’à 60 000 euros en cas de non-respect. Plus d’informations ici.

Et l’Indonésie a menacé d’un an de prison et d’une amende de 7 000 dollars ceux qui ne se feraient pas vacciner.

Traduction Google :

” Alors que dans la plupart des pays du monde, le critère pour recevoir les vaccins corona est la vieillesse ou les maladies de fond, en Indonésie, ces jours-ci, la situation est inverse. Cet immense pays, qui compte 267 millions d’habitants sur un vaste territoire composé de milliers d’îles, a décidé que l’un des premiers groupes à se faire vacciner serait… toute personne âgée de 18 à 59 ans. Le raisonnement qui sous-tend cette approche est que ce groupe est le “moteur” de la peste corona – de nombreux patients asymptomatiques, qui ont de multiples connexions sociales … 36 000 résidents sont morts jusqu’à présent dans l’épidémie en Indonésie, sur 1,3 million de résidents infectés par Corona. Comme en Europe, en Indonésie, la deuxième vague enregistrée en décembre-janvier était beaucoup plus importante que celle enregistrée au début de l’épidémie, mais la morbidité a diminué ces dernières semaines. L’Indonésie a acquis la plupart de ses vaccins auprès de la Chine, qui a été le premier pays à développer un vaccin contre le corona, bien que son utilisation n’ait pas encore été approuvée par les autorités médicales occidentales. Le vaccin a été développé par SinoVac et est largement utilisé en Chine même. La campagne de vaccination en Indonésie a débuté le 13 janvier et vise depuis lors à vacciner environ 1,3 million de professionnels de la santé ainsi qu’un groupe de policiers, de fonctionnaires, d’enseignants, de sportifs, de journalistes et autres (estimés à 17 millions de personnes). Tout le monde recevra le vaccin gratuitement, subventionné par les autorités. Mais l’une des différences notables par rapport à d’autres pays est que le vaccin est défini comme “obligatoire”, même si l’on ne sait pas encore quelles sanctions seront imposées à ceux qui ne se font pas vacciner. Un ministre du gouvernement a déclaré que la peine fixée par la loi pour ceux qui ne se font pas vacciner est un an de prison et une amende de 7 000 dollars, mais le gouvernement doit encore proposer le vaccin en quantité suffisante pour s’assurer que les habitants ont la possibilité de se faire vacciner. Amnesty International a critiqué les déclarations du gouvernement, affirmant que la vaccination était “contraire aux droits de l’homme”. … il est possible que, dans les semaines à venir, les jeunes et les adultes sans maladie de fond commencent également à recevoir les vaccins. Ce groupe compte environ 150 millions de personnes, et le pays espère mettre fin à leur vaccination d’ici à la fin de 2021. Vacciner d’abord ceux qui sont importants pour l’économie… Selon les critiques, le gouvernement a décidé d’agir ainsi pour tenter de préserver l’économie en vaccinant d’abord les travailleurs en âge de travailler, les plus efficaces.”


Les extraits suivants, tirés d’un article rédigé par K, sont également pertinents dans le contexte d’une critique de la séparation entre l’éthique et la science, même s’il ne s’agit pas de la science médicale :

“À la fin des années 1800, la baisse de la fertilité des sols en Europe a motivé à la fois la recherche scientifique et l’accaparement des terres par les impérialistes. La recherche d’un moyen de fixer chimiquement l’azote atmosphérique, principal composant de ce qui allait devenir un engrais à base d’ammoniac, était le Saint Graal de la chimie moderne. Le procédé qui a permis de sortir de l’impasse, et qui est toujours utilisé aujourd’hui, a été baptisé procédé Haber-Bosch, du nom des deux hommes qui l’ont créé et perfectionné. Le premier, Frtiz Haber, a inventé la méthode en laboratoire et le second, Carl Bosch, a été chargé de sa mise au point à l’échelle industrielle. Les deux hommes étaient des employés de l’entreprise chimique allemande Badische Anilin und Soda Fabrik, ou BASF.

Au cours des deux premières années de la guerre plus longue que prévu avec la France et la Russie, la Deutches Heer avait désespérément besoin de nourriture et de munitions en raison du blocus naval des ports allemands par l’Entente. En augmentant la productivité de l’agriculture allemande et en fournissant une source immédiate d’acide nitrique utilisé dans les explosifs, le procédé Haber-Bosch a répondu à ces deux besoins et a considérablement prolongé la guerre. En 1932, Carl Bosch déclarait : “Je me suis souvent demandé s’il n’aurait pas été préférable que nous ne réussissions pas. La guerre se serait peut-être terminée plus tôt, avec moins de misère et dans de meilleures conditions. Messieurs, toutes ces questions sont inutiles. On ne peut pas arrêter les progrès de la science et de la technologie” (Hayes 356). Non seulement le travail de Bosch a été directement responsable du nombre massif de morts, de la génération des traumatisés et des amputés qui ont résulté de la première guerre, mais pour Bosch, ces résultats étaient d’une importance secondaire par rapport au progrès de la technologie. Les motivations et les intentions de Bosch peuvent être décrites uniquement en termes de développement scientifique, d’efficacité industrielle et commerciale et d’efficacité de gestion. …

La complicité de Bosch dans l’horreur de la guerre ne s’arrête pas là. Grâce à son succès dans la synthèse de l’ammoniac, Bosch est promu président de BASF. Ses ambitions au service du progrès le conduiront à jouer un rôle déterminant dans la création de la première itération mondiale du complexe militaro-industriel et de la plus grande entreprise chimique de l’époque, le conglomérat allemand IG Farben. Sous la direction de Bosch, IG Farben a développé l’hydrogénation du charbon, un procédé chimique de synthèse de l’essence similaire à la synthèse de l’ammoniac, ainsi que les moyens de produire du caoutchouc synthétique. …

Avant l’armement de la machine de guerre allemande, avant la planification industrielle des occupations en Ukraine et en France, avant le développement, la production et la vente du Zyklon B à la Schutzstaffel ou la construction d’une usine de caoutchouc synthétique à côté d’Auschwitz, les cadres d’IG Farben, Carl Bosch et son protégé Carl Krauch, étaient intimement familiarisés avec la mort et la destruction. En 1921, l’explosion de l’usine chimique BASF/IG Farben à Oppau a fait 561 morts, 2000 blessés et 7000 sans-abri (Hayes 358). Sous la direction de Krauch, l’usine a retrouvé sa pleine capacité de production en trois mois. Cette insensibilité préfigurative aux coûts humains de l’industrie n’est rien en comparaison du massacre efficace de l’holocauste. De plus, après l’incident d’Oppau, il n’y a pas eu d’équivalent des procès de Nuremberg pour attribuer les responsabilités et pendre les jugés. Et pourtant, ce dommage collatéral du progrès, plus acceptable socialement, met en évidence la vacuité morale des justifications de Bosch, précisément parce qu’il est inhérent à la production industrielle. Si le progrès ne peut être arrêté, alors la pile de cadavres qui le précède et le suit ne doit pas être prise en compte.

Après la fin de la seconde guerre, IG Farben a été divisé en ses parties constituantes, dont BASF et son équivalent pharmaceutique, Bayer [viii]. Le centre mondial de la synthèse de l’ammoniac s’est déplacé de l’Allemagne vers une ancienne filiale forcée d’IG Farben, la société norvégienne et concurrente de BASF, Norsk Hydro. Aujourd’hui, Norsk Hydro est connue dans le monde entier sous le nom de YARA et ses activités en Amérique du Nord produisent plus d’ammoniac synthétique que toute autre entreprise sur la planète. Bayer, l’ancien fabricant d’armes chimiques, distributeur d’héroïne et cofondateur d’IG Farben, possède actuellement Monsanto et est l’une des plus grandes entreprises pharmaceutiques et agroalimentaires du monde. L’héritage scientifique, industriel et même commercial du processus Haber-Bosch est toujours présent.

Alors que certains chercheurs soutiennent qu’il est impossible de nourrir la population mondiale actuelle et future sans la synthèse chimique de l’ammoniac (Smil), d’autres mettent en garde contre ses effets néfastes cumulés qui contribuent à la crise existentielle d’une économie et d’un mode de vie basés sur l’industrie et la pétrochimie. La concentration continue d’azote dans nos sols et nos eaux crée des conditions toxiques et abiotiques, et la libération d’oxyde nitreux par la dénitrification de l’ammoniac contribue à l’effet de serre (Duke), sans parler du dioxyde de carbone produit pendant le processus de synthèse. En outre, l’application inadéquate de l’ammoniac anhydre, une forme courante d’engrais ammoniacal, peut entraîner une évaporation qui accroît la pollution, la destruction des semences, la formation d’ampoules sur la peau et la détérioration des tissus pulmonaires. À la lumière de ces faits, même l’augmentation de la production alimentaire associée au travail de Bosch ne peut être jugée historiquement neutre. Nous avons ici un autre résultat, dont le poids enterre les intentions de ses auteurs et piège nos imaginations entre une famine de masse et un effondrement environnemental inévitable. Une dissection des arguments autour des faux choix de l’agriculture industrielle basée sur la pétrochimie est le sujet de son propre essai, mais le rôle partisan des propagandistes des entreprises dans la conversation publique est central à celui-ci.

…Monsanto se présente, non pas comme un annonciateur complice de la fin du monde, mais comme une source de nourriture vivifiante dont les produits sont nécessaires dans un monde où la population humaine ne cesse de croître. Contrairement à cette présentation de relations publiques, en 2019, Monsanto a été poursuivie devant un tribunal civil pour, entre autres, avoir manipulé le processus de publication scientifique, s’être entendue avec les régulateurs gouvernementaux et avoir infiltré les médias. Dans un incident qui rappelle la tristement célèbre subversion du mouvement suffragiste par Bernays avec son coup médiatique des “torches de la liberté” (Century), Monsanto a payé de faux reporters pour qu’ils diffusent des informations erronées aux vrais reporters et enrôlent ainsi des médias légitimes dans leur guerre de propagande (Gillam). Peu importe que les produits Monsanto, tout comme les cigarettes, provoquent le cancer. … une recherche scientifique qui a permis la guerre et le génocide au siècle dernier menace la base même de la vie au siècle prochain.

Les procès de Nuremberg n’ont finalement pas condamné les dirigeants allemands d’IG Farben pour leur rôle dans l’holocauste. Les quantités massives de particules inodores commercialisées comme pesticides et vendues à la bureaucratie nazie étaient insuffisantes pour justifier une pendaison (Jessbenger). L’utilisation supposée de ce pesticide était le maintien des ghettos juifs dans des conditions d’exiguïté. À Nuremberg, cette intention a été jugée comme moins intrinsèque au résultat du processus génocidaire que le gazage lui-même. Il semblerait que les auteurs de la justice militaire alliée aient été d’accord avec Bernays, sans surprise, plus qu’avec Marx. Dans une autre contorsion notable de l’histoire, le brevet du Zyklon B était détenu par la Deutsche Gesellschaft für Schädlingsbekämpfung mbH (“Société allemande de lutte contre les parasites”), ou Degesch en abrégé. Degesch étant contrôlée par IG Farben et sa société mère Degussa, qui était à son tour présidée par nul autre que le lauréat du prix Nobel et juif nationaliste allemand, Fritz Haber. Haber a notoirement tenté de créer de l’or à partir d’eau de mer afin de payer les réparations allemandes de la première guerre. Cette alchimie moderne s’est avérée être une proposition irréalisable, dont l’improbabilité est tempérée par le succès tout aussi ambitieux de Haber dans la création d’explosifs à partir de rien. L’ancien collaborateur de Haber, Carl Bosch, échappa complètement au jugement des tribunaux, mourant dans l’obscurité de l’alcoolisme et d’une mauvaise santé en 1940. L’un des contemporains de Bosch et membre du conseil d’administration d’IG Farben, Fritz ter Meer (, membre du parti NSDP, fut condamné à seulement sept ans d’emprisonnement et fut réélu président de Bayer à sa libération.

Nuremberg a soulevé la question de la responsabilité individuelle pour les crimes sociaux et ses réponses utilitaires ont favorisé des personnes comme Meer et Wernher von Braun de la NASA. Un grand nombre de ses procès se sont soldés par des acquittements et des peines d’une brièveté choquante. La montée de l’autoritarisme, la dislocation massive, la faim, la maladie et les conflits mondiaux suggérés par notre absence de réaction à la dégradation et à l’effondrement de notre biosphère constituent un parallèle qui rejoint les tragédies épiques des guerres mondiales en termes d’échelle, sinon en termes de jugement historique. Les générations futures convoqueront-elles leurs propres tribunaux ? Trouveront-elles une utilité aux technocrates et aux organisateurs de la mort industrielle ? Ou décideront-elles d’arrêter définitivement notre marche régulière vers le bord d’une falaise ? Seul le temps nous le dira, mais l’isolement de l’intention par rapport au résultat démontré par les générations précédentes a certainement atteint sa date d’expiration en tant que mesure utile de la responsabilité et de la valeur. En effet, l’examen critique de ce que nous produisons et de la manière dont nous le produisons est une tâche à entreprendre de toute urgence.”

Notes de bas de page

i En janvier 1937, la même année où il adhéra au parti nazi, Mengele rejoignit l’Institut de biologie héréditaire et d’hygiène raciale de Francfort, où il travailla pour le Dr Otmar Freiherr von Verschuer, un généticien allemand particulièrement intéressé par la recherche sur les jumeaux. Mengele s’est concentré sur les facteurs génétiques qui entraînent une fente labiale et palatine, ou une fente du menton. Sa thèse sur le sujet lui a valu un doctorat en médecine cum laude (MD) de l’université de Francfort en 1938, l’année même où il a rejoint les SS. On pense généralement, dans le monde scientifique, que les travaux publiés par Mengele étaient conformes au courant scientifique dominant de l’époque et qu’ils auraient probablement été considérés comme des efforts scientifiques valables même en dehors de l’Allemagne nazie. Pourquoi mentionner cela ? Parce qu’il y a des gens qui pensent que l’exactitude et les articles fondés sur des preuves correctes sont les critères essentiels pour juger la science, et que les utilisations pratiques de ces idées sont quelque chose de distinct.

ii Ils affirmaient ici l’idéologie classique de l’utilitarisme benthamite, prenant pour critère de moralité et de législation “le bonheur du plus grand nombre”, même si cela signifie, en cas de “nécessité”, le malheur infligé au “plus petit nombre possible”. Il prétendait pouvoir calculer le rapport entre les joies et les peines du point de vue des statisticiens (comme Petty), la combinaison des intérêts individuels aboutissant à l’intérêt commun de la société, et donc à celui de l’État.

iii Par exemple, les expériences actuelles de thérapie par cellules souches sur les tout-petits, ou les expériences présentées comme leurs préalables, avec les risques parfois énormes qu’elles comportent, sont tolérées et même encouragées dans le cadre d’un tel code.

iv Il convient de souligner que des catégories arbitraires de la population – et pas seulement celles qui se trouvent au bas de l’échelle – ont parfois fait l’objet d’expérimentations en secret, mais pas à une telle échelle, ni ouvertement et publiquement. Bien qu’elle ne soit pas du tout directement liée à la science médicale, l’opération LAC, menée dans les années 1950, a consisté pour l’armée américaine à pulvériser des zones entières des États-Unis (et même de la Grande-Bretagne) avec du sulfure de zinc et de cadmium, dont l’exposition à long terme ou répétée a des effets nocifs sur les reins, les os et les voies respiratoires, entraînant une déficience rénale, l’ostéoporose et une inflammation chronique des voies respiratoires. Cette opération a été réalisée pour tester les modes de dispersion et la portée géographique des armes chimiques ou biologiques. Des moyens et des fins en parfaite harmonie !

v Les personnes ayant une espérance de vie très courte ont peu à gagner à être vaccinées…, notant un risque réel que le moment du décès soit avancé et qu’elles subissent des réactions indésirables au vaccin dans les derniers jours de leur vie. Les avantages de la vaccination pour les personnes très fragiles ayant une espérance de vie très courte doivent donc être soigneusement évalués par rapport aux risques associés, et il peut souvent être préférable de ne pas vacciner”. Malgré cela, il semble que la partie du code de Nuremberg qui stipule que “des préparations appropriées doivent être faites et des installations adéquates doivent être fournies pour protéger le sujet expérimental contre toute possibilité, même lointaine, de blessure, d’invalidité ou de mort” soit le plus souvent ignorée.

vi Leviathan , publié en 1651, l’année où les tendances radicales (auxquelles Hobbes était totalement hostile) de la guerre civile anglaise ont été écrasées. Hobbes y définit les bases de la souveraineté de l’État moderne, né de la contre-révolution.

viiConcernant la censure de toute mention des effets secondaires sur Facebook, la censure n’est pas seulement une suppression pure et simple, mais pour chaque mention de tout ce qui est lié à la couronne, ils ajoutent une bannière avec une “recommandation” sur laquelle vous pouvez appuyer et qui mène aux sources officielles. En outre, pour les messages ou les liens plus “controversés” partagés – pour certains seulement lorsque vous essayez vous-même de “partager” ce message controversé – ils ajoutent un avertissement qui vous dit quelque chose comme “cette information pourrait être trompeuse ou contredire le consensus scientifique concernant Covid19, êtes-vous sûr de vouloir continuer ?” et on vous propose alors soit de continuer, soit d’appuyer sur l’autre bouton qui vous mène aux sources officielles ou aux “vérificateurs de faits”. Aujourd’hui par exemple, cela s’est produit lorsque j’ai essayé de partager le post d’un type sur les effets secondaires des vaccins, dans lequel il discute et montre des données tirées directement et uniquement du site du CDC, en fournissant la source…

Quelque chose de similaire m’est arrivé lorsque j’ai partagé un article du Lancet datant d’environ 6 mois que j’ai vu récemment sur le site de Sam, cette colonne d’opinion affirmant qu’il s’agit d’une syndémie et non d’une pandémie (c’est-à-dire que le virus est dangereux principalement pour les personnes les plus touchées par notre mode de vie actuel). Donc, vous n’êtes même pas censé parler de ce dont ils parlent eux-mêmes. Rien que de l’autorité.

Ministère de la Vérité

viiiBayer est maintenant impliqué dans le programme de vaccination Covid, mais avec une société relativement inconnue – CureVac. Référence :

SamFanto was born, and then he lived a bit but never enough.


A collection of links, quotes and comments about them taken from this site over the last 6 months or so, put all in one place for convenience. Also worth looking at this.

Israel: nasty details of Pfizer trials for 12-15-year-olds and those 16 and over

[Posted by Yaffa Shir Raz – member of the newly formed “Professional
Ethics Front”, 30 July 2021]

Revealed: Pfizer publishes results from a 6-month follow-up trial:

44,165 participants aged 16 and over, and 2,264 aged 12-15, divided into
two groups –
Vaccinated vs. placebo:

Death: 15 vs. 14
Death from Covid 19: 1 vs. 2
Cardiac arrest: 4 vs. 1

No doubt- unprecedented efficiency! Hurry and get your third dose today!

These findings, by the way, you will not find in the abstract, which only subtly mentions that there is a “declining trend in efficiency.” To find the table shown here you will need to dig into the appendix (p. 12).

[Posted by Yaffa Shir Raz – member of the newly formed “Professional
Ethics Front”, 31 July 2021]

The amount of manipulation revealed in clinical trials of the miracle shot has already become a joke – only it’s a macabre joke, and it’s at our expense.

After yesterday we saw how in the new trial, which followed for 6 months the study population that received the Pfizer injection, compared to the
placebo group – the table with the data indicating zero mortality prevention was well buried – so that only with a deaf watchmaker’s glasses it can be found on page 12 in the appendices, It turns out that this was only the more innocent manipulation.

Because as some smart people here have rightly remarked – right after the trial Pfizer offered the participants in the placebo group the miracle shot, for ethical reasons of course, so as not to leave them exposed to the deadly virus that has only 99.98 percent survival.

In doing so, as Dr. Peter Dushi from the BMJ wrote, Pfizer actually blocked the way for real follow-up trial, which would make it possible to examine the differences between the trial group and the placebo group – because there is no more placebo, and of course no more blindness (when neither the researchers nor Subjects know who received what) – a critical condition for clinical trials, particularly in stage 3, to prevent foreign influences.

So how could they possibly compare the research group to the placebo group?

Well, it turns out that in the chapter on side effects, the researchers added a note, which says that during the blindness period, 15 participants who received the injection and 14 who received the placebo died. But – during the open-label period, that is, the period in which the researchers and the subjects already knew who received what, and the placebo subjects actually went on to receive the injection – another 5 participants died. And guess what? It turns out that these five participants actually received the injection – three of them received the injection during the blinds period and the other two were originally in the study group, but were later injected as well.

Meaning – in fact 20 people who received the shot died, compared to 14 in the placebo group.

The amazing thing is that at the end of this paragraph, the authors refer to Table S4 – the same table from page 12 in the appendix I posted here yesterday – but this table, as you can see, lists only 15 deaths in the injected group. So where did these 5 go?

Although the authors claim that none of these five deaths were considered by the investigators to be related to the injection – what justification do they have for removing them from the table?


Significant flaws in the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine trial

“First, the efficacy of the vaccine in preventing the spreading of the virus and reducing infectivity, which is the most important factor in its ability to ameliorate the devastating effects of the pandemic, was not tested. Quite surprisingly, the effect of vaccination on overall number of virus-shedding individuals was not assessed, even though it is established that a significant fraction of the infected population capable of transmitting the disease are asymptomatic…The adverse effect section of the paper conspicuously lacks any laboratory studies, which is surprising based on the fact that in the phase I group there were abnormalities of blood counts …there is an unexplained discrepancy between the number of patients with AIDS that are reported as participating in the study and the number of such patients for whom there is available safety data (only one).”

Side Effects of Pfizer  vaccine: 45% of participants in trials had to use pain medication after vaccine (from December 2020)

Chart of side effects during Pfizer trials

Serious violations and manipulations of trial protocol: How Pfizer obtained FDA emergency authorization for children


Analysis and comparison of the review document submitted by Pfizer to the US Food and Drug Administration, on the basis of which the FDA gave the green light to expand the emergency permit for vaccination also for children aged 12-15, as opposed to the study protocol in children, reveal concerning findings,  including violations of the protocol established by Pfizer itself, and no less serious, designing the trial protocol in a way that will allow the company to present as positive findings as possible in terms of vaccine safety in children….According to the review document submitted by Pfizer to the FDA, four of the 1,131 children in the study arm who received Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine suffered from serious adverse events (“SAEs”) – that is, events in which at least one criterion was met: caused death, is life-threatening, requires hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, results in persistent disability/incapacity, or congenital anomaly/birth defect. Of these four children, three had such severe depression that they were hospitalized shortly after vaccination (in the first 7 days after the first dose, in the second only one day after the second dose, and in the third 15 days after the first dose, respectively)….if Pfizer were so negligent that they included subjects with a psychiatric background in the experiment – contrary to the protocol they themselves established – it means that the subjects’ well-being is not their main concern. As Pfizer itself notes in the protocol: such a background may increase the risk of study participation. And if they do not adhere to ethics in recruiting subjects, who can assure us that they adhere to ethics in other sections of the study – for example, analysis of results?”

Pfizer was fined $60m. by US regulators for bribing doctors and government officials in eastern Europe, Asia and  in the Middle East in the decade up until 2006.

Israel: vaccine may cause myocarditis in some young men

Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine is likely responsible for deaths of at least 10% of  elderly patients  of those who died following vaccination

“The expert group was established at the end of February 2021 to look into the cause of the first 100 reported deaths of nursing home residents who had received the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. …Although the mortality rate in nursing homes is generally very high and the deaths of some nursing home residents after vaccination was anticipated, the Norwegian Medicines Agency wanted to determine whether the vaccine had possibly hastened any deaths and to gain a clearer understanding of the risks and benefits of its use in frail elderly people. The review reported on 19 May and concluded that a causal link between the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine and death was considered “likely” in 10 of the 100 cases, “possible” in 26 cases, and “unlikely” in 59 cases. The remaining five were deemed “unclassifiable.””

In other words, probably at least 10%  and possibly as many as 36% of elderly people who died after having been vaccinated were killed (or had their deaths “hastened”) by the Pfizer vaccine. This report is already almost 2 weeks old and yet has been given virtually NO publicity in the media. Imagine how this might be replicated on a global scale. And yet any critique of this by the holocaust deniers is  put down as being “anti-vaxxer”.


Just received: Belgium: Pfizer announces that people will probably be invited 
for a third vaccine shot  “to protect from the new variants”

Pfizer forecasts $26bn of Covid-19 vaccine revenue after first-quarter success

Israel: Pfizer’s CEO gives national broadcast just before the official Israeli Independence Day ceremony (April 14th)

Pfizer forecasts $26bn of Covid-19 vaccine revenue after first-quarter success

Interview with doctor critiquing not just AZ but also Pfizer and all the mRNA vaccines, explaining the complexity of the mRNA vaccines




Israel: 29 page document criticising the Pfizer-Natanyahu vaccination programme

“The Israeli People’s Committee has uncovered a multitude of malfunctions and failures at the administrative, ethical and legal levels during the COVID-19 vaccination campaign at the beginning of 2021 in Israel. In this document, we aim at presenting and elaborating the main features of these malfunctions, which have led to severe damages in many Israelis in the short term, and sadly to possible future damages. It seems that the entire country got caught up in a medical-social chaos, where the leadership has enabled a situation of fear and uncertainty to run its course out of control, and even contributed to its further enhancement. But most of all, we cannot ignore severe suspicions shared by all the committee members, that the fundamental sin, which led to the chaos and its casualties, is the way in which two very powerful personages, prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Pfizer CEO Dr. Albert Bourla, agreed upon a massive vaccination campaign in Israel that is unprecedented in scale and nature. A vaccination campaign that lacks effective safeguards for public safety, that is devoid of any concern for people who may be harmed by the vaccine, and that has allegedly guaranteed to encompass populations, for which the safety of the vaccine has not been tested (pregnant women and their fetuses), and later also children, for whom the need to be vaccinated is totally unclear, while pushing aside any safety considerations. From this exact episode, where both parties came to an agreement regarding the vaccination campaign, which involved a wide variety of ethical and safety violations, an unrestrained drama was initiated that has revealed itself to be impulsive, neglectful and reckless. The agreed upon vaccination campaign concerns matters of life and death, yet is being conducted in an amateurish, irresponsible and aggressive manner, and it led to the political arena taking over the medical arena and bending it to its needs, while paralyzing all alarm systems, monitoring measures and open scientific discussion. Unfortunately, most of the medical system collaborated with this unsupervised process, starting with the higher ranks, and ending with field doctors – some actively, some by keeping quiet from fear of reprisal.”


Significant flaws in the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine trial – letter sent  to The Lancet but never published

T. writes:

The following letter was sent to The Lancet at the end of last December, by Michal Haran, M.D., Yitshal Berner, M.D. MPH, Moshe Royburt, MD, MHA:

Michal Haran is an Israeli Hematologist (with an immune-deficiency disease – or something similar, I’m not 100%  sure – due to which she’s wheel-chair ridden) who I just recently heard about, following her involvement in the Corona debate in general and the debate about the Pfizer vaccine specifically. I respect her very much, especially her delicate and emphatic way of debating and the simple and down-to-earth way in which she presents her thoughts (mostly in Hebrew-language platforms). Needless to say, she’s ostracized by many of her colleagues and presented by most of the mainstream media as a “Corona denier” and “anti-vaxxer”…

About her:
“I am a senior hematologist. My areas of interest are: Thrombosis and hemostasis; Malignant and non-malignant abnormalities of the immune system with emphasis on CLL; Mitochondrial dysfunction in hematological malignancies; Environmental exposure and nutritional interventions in both hematological and neurological disorders. I am also interested in the humanistic aspects of medicine and the way in which we can preserve them in the face of the growing complexity of medical systems.”

The letter:

Significant flaws in the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine trial

Michal Haran, M.D., Yitshal Berner, M.D. MPH, Moshe Royburt, MD, MHA.

The global Covid-19 pandemic has not only led to a harsh medical reality, more so in some countries than others, but has also devastated the economies of multiple parts of the world. It is therefore not surprising that a rush to develop vaccines for the disease has engulfed the world. Pfizer was the first to complete a (shortened) phase 2/3 trial, the results of which were reported in the New England Journal of Medicine 1. Unfortunately, this article reveals significant flaws in the conduction, analysis and reporting of the data and departs significantly from the usually high standards of this prestigious journal.

In fact, to the best of my knowledge it is unprecedented that the corresponding author of this paper is an employee of the sponsoring company. This immediately casts a long shadow on the objectivity of reporting in the paper and the editorial decision to publish it 2. Indeed, a careful reading of the work reveals multiple problems.

First, the efficacy of the vaccine in preventing the spreading of the virus and reducing infectivity, which is the most important factor in its ability to ameliorate the devastating effects of the pandemic, was not tested. Quite surprisingly, the effect of vaccination on overall number of virus-shedding individuals was not assessed, even though it is established that a significant fraction of the infected population capable of transmitting the disease are asymptomatic 3. Only a very narrow endpoint, of patients who meet both being symptomatic and having a positive PCR test was chosen. This does not take into account the significant inaccuracies of the PCR test 4. In fact, even the large group of patients with symptoms compatible with Covid-19 but PCR-negative (not mentioned in the paper but reported in the Pfizer FDA briefing document (, with very minor differences between the vaccine and placebo groups) was ignored. Thus, we are presented in this paper with a seemingly very impressive relative efficacy of 95%, which in fact gives us no information regarding absolute risk (…, nor infectivity of the patients and very limited data regarding clinically significant end-points of severe disease, ICU admission or mortality. There is also no data regarding immunological studies in the various groups of patients. This data was only provided on a very small group of young and healthy patients in the phase I paper 5. This is important not only for efficacy, but also for assessment of the risk of unintended immunological sequelae. One cannot assume, based on such a small and selected group of patients, that there will be a good titer of virus-neutralizing antibodies and a favorable Th1/Th2 response in elderly patients or those with comorbidities known to have an effect on immune function.

The adverse effect section of the paper conspicuously lacks any laboratory studies, which is surprising based on the fact that in the phase I group there were abnormalities of blood counts 5. It is also known that mRNA vaccines can be transferred to the liver 6, thus one would expect that all blood chemistries including liver and renal function tests would be evaluated to ensure that indeed there is no risk of end-organ damage.

Understandably, the brief period of this clinical trial, two months, was an outcome of the general urgency caused by the pandemic. However, to conclude that “Safety over a median of 2 months was similar to that of other viral vaccines” is highly misleading. The mRNA vaccine technology is novel and as opposed to other vaccines, involves the transfection of cells with genetic material , and only phase I studies of such vaccines have been reported prior to this work. One significant and recognized risk of the expression of a foreign protein on self-cells is the induction of severe auto-immune reactions 7. Since there is no information on the distribution of the vaccine in different cell types and organs following intramuscular injection (in contrast, for example, to another vaccine candidate, for which such detailed information has been published 6), it is very difficult to assess the relevant risk. Certainly, a very short follow-up period does not provide a long enough time window to conclude that the risk for auto-immune reactions does not exist. The paper totally ignores this aspect.

The paper only briefly mentions the highly recognized risk of vaccine-mediated disease enhancement, which the authors are fully aware. They wave this risk off as “theoretical”, and assess it to be unlikely based on data from 10 patients over a very short period of time. Clearly, this significant risk should have been much more fully addressed.

Finally, the fast pace of the publication of this work has led to multiple inaccuracies. For example, it is unclear how two patients in the vaccine group who, as reported in the FDA briefing document (, were hospitalized with respiratory symptoms and findings in imaging studies, are not reported in the paper as severe adverse events. Also, there is an unexplained discrepancy between the number of patients with AIDS that are reported as participating in the study and the number of such patients for whom there is available safety data (only one). This is very important, as the inclusion of a significant number of HIV-positive patients purportedly alleviates the concerns of the potential risks in this patient population. These risks stem from with the significant immune dysregulation in these patients, as well as the potential reverse transcriptase activity that could inadvertently lead to the unwanted incorporation of the genetic material of the vaccine into the genome.

In Summary, the way in which the data is presented in the paper creates a false sense of security regarding the efficacy and safety of the mRNA vaccine. This is extremely concerning, as the publication of this paper is important in promoting the rapid approval of the vaccine in numerous countries. I believe that due to the enormous effect the results of this trial have on the entire population world-wide, steps should be urgently taken to clarify all those issues. …


1. Polack FP, Thomas SJ, Kitchin N, et al. Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine. N Engl J Med 2020.

2. Haque W, Minhajuddin A, Gupta A, Agrawal D. Conflicts of interest of editors of medical journals. PloS one 2018;13:e0197141.

3. Moghadas SM, Fitzpatrick MC, Sah P, et al. The implications of silent transmission for the control of COVID-19 outbreaks. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2020;117:17513-5.

4. Woloshin S, Patel N, Kesselheim AS. False Negative Tests for SARS-CoV-2 Infection – Challenges and Implications. N Engl J Med 2020;383:e38.

5. Walsh EE, FrenckFrench video of March 6th conference of dissident doctors RW, Jr., Falsey AR, et al. Safety and Immunogenicity of Two RNA-Based Covid-19 Vaccine Candidates. N Engl J Med 2020;383:2439-50.

6. Zhang NN, Li XF, Deng YQ, et al. A Thermostable mRNA Vaccine against COVID-19. Cell 2020;182:1271-83 e16.

7. Pardi N, Hogan MJ, Porter FW, Weissman D. mRNA vaccines – a new era in vaccinology. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2018;17:261-79.

Official (possibly) UK government report on  side effects of Pfizer vaccine lists 227 deaths amongst other horrors

Not absolutely sure that this is a genuine report from 9/3/21  (61 pages long ) or a fake one, as it’s not easy to check. But it’s the first thing that comes up if you type:  UK reports received between 9/12/20 and 28/02/21 for mRNA Pfizer/BioNTech into Google. It’s been there for 3 days; given that Google seems to be vigilant about anything they consider is fake news, I’d have to say that  this is genuine. Even more so given that  this claims to be a government report, preceded by  a standard government https: . If it was fake, given that it pretends to be an official government report, you’d have thought that Google would have pretty quickly taken it off. But I’m obviously not 100% sure.

It  claims to cover all UK reports received between 9/12/20 and 28/02/21. Here are the essential results:

Blood disorders – 1 death, 2294 having various listed problems.

Cardiac disorders: 26 deaths, 1153 having various listed problems.

Congenital disorders: 0 deaths, 5 having various listed problems.

Ear disorder: 0 deaths, 819 having various listed problems.

Endocrine disorders; 0 deaths, 12 having various listed problems.

Eye disorders: 0 deaths, 1398 having various listed problems, including 15 becoming blind.

Gastrointestinal disorders: 12 deaths, 10,534 having various listed problems.

General disorders: 114 deaths, 28,195 having various listed problems.

Hepatic disorders: 0 deaths, 18 having various listed problems.

Immune system disorders: 0 deaths, 528 having various listed problems.

Infections: 38 deaths, 2059 having various listed problems.

Injuries: 1 death, 458 having various listed problems.

Investigations (not sure what this means): 0 deaths, 1073 having various listed problems.

Metabolic disorders: 1 death, 587 having various listed problems.

Muscle and tissue disorders: 0 deaths, 12,823 having various listed problems.

Neoplasms: 0 deaths, 24 having various listed problems.

Nervous system disorders: 17 deaths, 18,059 having various listed problems.

Pregnancy conditions: 1 death, 34 having various listed problems, including 18 spontaneous abortions.

Product issues: 0 deaths, 14 having various listed problems.

Psychiatric disorders: 0 deaths, 1409  having various listed problems.

Renal and urinary disorders: 0 deaths, 212 having various listed problems.

Reproductive and breast disorders: 0 deaths, 389 having various listed problems.

Respiratory problems: 14 deaths, 3986 having various listed problems.

Skin disorders: 1 death, 6809 having various listed problems.

Social circumstances (not sure why this is listed): 0 deaths, 20 having various listed problems.

Surgical and medical procedures (not sure why this is treated as a specific category): 0 deaths, 58 having various listed problems.

Vascular disorders: 1 death, 1119 having various listed problems.

Total: 94,809 non-lethal side effects of drug; 227 deaths (these are out of 33,207 reports)

It lists all those things  under “Reaction Name”. I would have thought this meant a reaction to the vaccine not just something that happened to those who had the vaccine which would have included things that may have happened without the vaccine: the word “reaction” implies that. Particularly as they included things like “Surgical & medical procedures” and 1 case of “verbal abuse” under the heading “criminal activity”, a subheading of “Social circumstances” (in fact, many of the things under this latter heading seem bizarre). I admit the whole report isn’t clear and is quite ambiguous. Why for instance, under the heading “Tobacco use” (within the general category “Social circumstances”) do  they list 2 reactions for  “Non-tobacco user”? Does this mean that 2 non-tobacco users took up smoking in reaction to  the vaccine? Why under the general heading “Surgical & medical procedures” do they have “Contraceptive methods male” for which “Condom” is given for 1 person vaccinated? Does that mean he decided to wear a condom as a result of the vaccine?

Nevertheless, despite these specific  peculiar “reactions”  remember – this is only the results after almost 3 months, short-term immediate effects. According to Pfizer itself their trials only officially finish in 2022.

Norway doesn’t alter its policy towards Pfizer vaccine despite deaths (from end of January) More here (Norway May Refine Vaccine Strategy After Elderly Deaths, PM Says)

“Having weathered the pandemic better than most, Norway suddenly made international headlines this month after revealing that more than 30 people — all over 70 and all already sick — died not long after being vaccinated against Covid-19. Solberg says the intense global interest in the news was “exaggerated” as she tries to ensure the development doesn’t put people off inoculation. “We don’t believe there’s any problem with the safety of the vaccines,” Solberg said in an interview with Bloomberg Live that aired on Tuesday. “But we will maybe not give them to the most vulnerable of the elderly, because that might speed up a process where they were what we would say at the end of life phase anyway,” so, “that probably is not what we will continue to do.”

How Much Did Pfizer Pay Israeli Doctors, and for What?

“On February 4 a meeting was held at the Ministry of Health, dealing with vaccines against the coronavirus. At the meeting, Prof. Galia Rahav, the head of the Infectious Diseases Unit at the Sheba Medical Center, said that unless children are vaccinated too, we cannot vanquish the epidemic, and suggested proposing to Pfizer to conduct an experiment in which it would vaccinate Israeli children…She has received payments, in exchange for counseling and lectures (not on the coronavirus). This is disclosed at the bottom of articles she publishes in medical journals, which routinely require authors to disclose their funding sources. The problem is that the public which gets her professional recommendations through newspapers and television is not privy to this information. Rahav didn’t feel the need to provide such disclosure, and it seems that her interviewers were unaware of the situation….the financial links definitely place in her a situation of potential conflict of interest. This should at least be put on the table: but in Israel, financial ties between doctors and drug companies are kept shrouded, and Rahav is not an exception. Another senior physician who spoke before a Knesset committee, arguing in favor of a vaccine against cervical cancer, did not bother telling lawmakers that he had received funding from two makers of this vaccine, MSD and GSK. When I asked him about this, he gave the following explanation: “I give full disclosure in places where it is customary to do so, such as in lectures I give to physicians. I don’t declare a conflict of interests when I go shopping at a supermarket.” That’s how a senior physician treated the debate on vaccination policies in parliament….many studies have proven that money can produce bias in doctors’ considerations, whether they are aware of it or not. No one would accept a situation in which journalists reporting on the coronavirus also work for Pfizer, for money, at the same time, without informing readers. And these are just reporters. What physicians decide and do directly impacts public health, sometimes on matters of life and death. This certainly applies to people advising the government on policies. The public has the right to know exactly how much parties with vested interests are paying the physicians. Prof. Rahav told me that the amounts involved were peanuts, but she did admit that due to the modest wages she and her colleagues receive at the hospital, they need to supplement their income. Prof. Ron Dagan, her colleague in the team advising on the vaccine, also received money from Pfizer and other companies in the past. A few years ago, when I asked exactly how much he received, he got angry: “I won’t tell you how much I get from a drug company without a law requiring me to do so.” Actually, in the United States there is a law requiring drug companies to maintain transparency, and one can find at a keystroke exactly how many dollars any doctor has received and from which company. This transparency allows one to see whether it’s a matter of trifles, or of perks that could bias one’s judiciousness. It’s time for similar legislation to be enacted in Israel.”

From here: “According to data from Pfizer , 0.6% of vaccinated subjects presented “serious adverse events” and 0.1% “life-threatening events”. So far, official statistics say that  2.22% of those who have Covid die. On that basis you could say that Covid is roughly 22 times more lethal than the potential effect of the vaccine on the 109 million people (roughly 1.4% of the world’s population) who officially have had Covid. However, 2.22% of 1.4% = 0.0311%. That is, so far just over 0.03% of the world’s population has died from Covid. On that basis Pfizer’s vaccine could potentially kill a bit over 3 times more people than Covid has killed for the moment, but Pfizer would have to vaccinate the whole world, and Covid would have to stop infecting people totally, for the comparison to be valid.

France: reports coming in of severe flu-like symptoms as side effect of AstraZeneca jab and high blood pressure from Pfizer-BioNTech

According to some TV coverage, such effects amongst healthcare workers (in particular in Rouen, Poitiers and Brest) are making many of them decide not to have the second dose.

Delaying second dose of Pfizer jab may leave elderly at risk of catching South African variantor worse

Rough translation of article by Dr. Gerard Delepine on dangers of Pfizer vaccine.

“…the societal argument: “we vaccinate ourselves to protect others” is … irrelevant, since it is far from being demonstrated that the vaccine is able to prevent or slow down viral transmission. In the current state of knowledge, the vaccination of older people with risk factors (population where an effective and safe vaccine could be useful) has not been properly evaluated, because the trials refuse to include this population at risk. ..Norway has just issued an alert on January 15 after the observation of 23 deaths possibly linked to the Pfizer vaccine in elderly people in nursing homes. Of those deaths, 13 were autopsied, with the results suggesting that common side effects may have contributed to serious reactions in frail elderly people…”

Rough English transcript of video by Christian Vélot, molecular geneticist, looking at the dangers of PfizerBioNTech, AstraZeneca, Moderna and Sputnik vaccines following explanation of  the complexities of viruses and vaccines

“…Another risk related to vaccines using a virus as a vector, like the Adenovirus, which is foreign to our body, is that it can trigger unwanted immune reactions than can disturb the desired vaccine response. The body, not knowing what it is dealing with, feels overwhelmed and can attack anything and everything. …With PfizerBioNTech, Moderna, AstraZeneca and Sputnik vaccines there’s a risk of viral recombination, where viruses of the same kind share/exchange genetic material (which is the reason that normally RNA cannot be inserted int DNA and vice versa). So the question is of 2 RNA viruses or 2 DNA viruses . Recombination (exchange of genetic material) is most common amongst viruses of the same type/family, though not exclusively. It’s less frequent, but such recombination (not of same type or family) can make the virus either more dangerous or less dangerous – but unpredictably. Swine flu (H1N1) was a triple recombinant. For this to happen, a cell must be infected by 2 viruses at the same time – which is very unlikely. But this – the vaccinating genetic material and the infecting genetic material = a recombinant virus. The frequency is extremely low. 1 in 10 million to 1 in 100 million. For an individual the risk is so low as to be negligible. But at the level of the population of the whole world it’s a significant risk when you vaccinate a billion people. So 10 people could have this recombinant virus that intrudes into the DNA from the RNA – and thence infect others with a potentially more virulent virus. The consequences could be global! Since this is new and not been tried on a general global population it only makes sense to use the tried and tested vaccine methods. The Chinese at least used technology previously tester over years and years even if they didn’t complete phase 3 of the clinical trials before putting it on the market. 3 people in the same area and the same age can have very different symptoms. So add to that a new unpredictable virus with a new unpredictable vaccine method and….”

Switzerland: rumors of Pfizer vaccine causing death denied

“If there is one thing more dangerous than a bad virus, it is a bad vaccine” – Dr Mike Ryan, Executive Director at W.H.O.

France: Five deaths after vaccine, no link proven

“In Europe, there have been 71 deaths reported following a Covid-19 vaccination – including from across the UK, Germany, Norway, and Denmark. Almost all were people aged 75 or over. The European Medicines Agency has so far said: “No death among these elderly people has been attributed to the [Pfizer/BioNTech] vaccination at this stage.” In total in France, 139 cases of severe or unexpected side-effects have been reported since the start of the vaccination campaign.”

Norway: the Pfizer vaccine is possibly responsible for the deaths of about 30 old people

“Norwegian health officials reported a small number of deaths among older people on Sunday who received the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine and suffered side effects. While the Norwegian Medicines Agency is now investigating the deaths — estimated to be about 30 — the regulator and Australian authorities have been quick to play down any serious safety concerns. “This group of people who had these adverse effects, and unfortunately some died, were very, very old and frail,” Professor Brendan Murphy, secretary of the Department of Health… In the US, where more than 11 million people have received at least one dose of the vaccine, health authorities are beginning to see rare instances of severe (though treatable) allergic reactions to some of the COVID-19 vaccines. They’re also investigating the case of a doctor who developed an unusual blood disorder shortly after receiving the Pfizer jab, and later died. It’s not yet known whether the COVID jab is linked to his illness.”

Note the secretary of the Department of Health’s words “This group of people who had these adverse effects, and unfortunately some died, were very, very old and frail”. They were in their 80s. The King of Norway is 83.  If he’d died after being vaccinated, would the secretary of the Department of Health have simply said “This man  who had these adverse effects, and unfortunately  died, was very, very old and frail”? Maybe Pfizer should change its name to Pfizeuthanasier or even Pfizeuthanazier and nazier.

See also this and  this. “Norway expressed increasing concern about the safety of the Pfizer Inc. vaccine on elderly people with serious underlying health conditions after raising an estimate of the number who died after receiving inoculations to 29. The latest figure adds six to the number of known fatalities in Norway, and lowers the age group thought to be affected to 75 from 80. While it’s unclear exactly when the deaths occurred, Norway has given at least one dose to about 42,000 people and focused on those considered most at risk if they contract the virus, including the elderly. Until Friday, the vaccine produced by Pfizer and BioNTech SE was the only one available in Norway, and “all deaths are thus linked to this vaccine,” the Norwegian Medicines Agency said…“Most people have experienced the expected side effects of the vaccine, such as nausea and vomiting, fever, local reactions at the injection site, and worsening of their underlying condition.” Official reports of allergic reactions have been rare as governments rush to roll out vaccines”.

Spain, Benidorm: huge outbreak of Covid in nursing home AFTER Covid jab

“In a massive blow to Spain’s Pfizer vaccination plan, more than 65 residents and ten staff have tested positive for coronavirus at the Foietes nursing home in Benidorm just days after receiving the first Covid-19 vaccine. According to official sources, the residence previously hadn’t registered any cases for months, and most residents and staff had negative PCR tests shortly before the vaccine drive began on January 4.”

Spain: Valencia: man dies of Covid after receiving first dose of Pfizer vaccine

“The retired Spaniard had received his first dose of the vaccine on December 29, along with the rest of the privately-run home. Within days of receiving the jab, the man ‘suffered an accident’ and was transferred to a hospital where a routine COVID-19 test detected the disease.The rest of the care home was tested and an outbreak was confirmed after several more residents and employees tested positive. The home had managed to not register a single case among its staff or residents throughout the whole pandemic. It comes after another home in Vinaros, also in Castellon, reported 21 coronavirus cases on Monday after all residents had been vaccinated on New Year’s Eve. On January 4, a general screening was carried out and all residents and workers tested negative. But after a resident presented symptoms, a new screening was carried out on January 9, revealing positive cases among 14 residents, five workers and two nuns. The first dose of the vaccine does not guarantee immunization, meaning you can still become infected and infect others until after you receive the second dose. While the first dose has suggested it can decrease the severity of symptoms in some cases, it is not guaranteed.”

Not sure whether this shows that testing is crap or that there’s something dangerous in the Pfizer vaccine.

Some interesting criticisms  of Pfizer on left section of UK’s Labour Party site by ex-soldier

Much of this article is about Pfizer’s bribes to various medical authorities and doctors around the world, and about its grotesque manipulation of prices, but the following seems most pertinent  in relation to whether or not to trust its vaccine:

“Pfizer’s biggest scandal involved defective heart valves sold by its Shiley subsidiary that led to the deaths of more than 100 people. During the investigation of the matter, information came to light suggesting that the company had deliberately misled regulators about the hazards. Pfizer also inherited safety and other legal controversies through its big acquisitions, including a class action suit over Warner-Lambert’s Rezulin diabetes medication, a big settlement over PCB dumping by Pharmacia, and thousands of lawsuits brought by users of Wyeth’s diet drugs. Also on Pfizer’s list of scandals are a 2012 bribery settlement; massive tax avoidance; and lawsuits alleging that during a meningitis epidemic in Nigeria in the 1990s the company tested a risky new drug on children without consent from their parents.”

SamFanto was born, and then he lived a bit but never enough.

Ivermectin: Can a Drug Be “Right-Wing”?

I’ve reproduced this from here because you can only access the whole of the article if you pay for it.

See also this

A potential Covid-19 treatment has become hostage to a larger global fight between populists and anti-populists

Matt Taibbi Jun 25

On December 31st of last year, an 80 year-old Buffalo-area woman named Judith Smentkiewicz fell ill with Covid-19. She was rushed by ambulance to Millard Fillmore Suburban Hospital in Williamsville, New York, where she was put on a ventilator. Her son Michael and his wife flew up from Georgia, and were given grim news. Judith, doctors said, had a 20% chance at survival, and even if she made it, she’d be on a ventilator for a month.

As December passed into the New Year, Judith’s health declined. Her family members, increasingly desperate, had been doing what people in the Internet age do, Googling in search of potential treatments. They saw stories about the anti-parasitic drug ivermectin, learning among other things that a pulmonologist named Pierre Kory had just testified before the Senate that the drug had a “miraculous” impact on Covid-19 patients. The family pressured doctors at the hospital to give Judith the drug. The hospital initially complied, administering one dose on January 2nd. According to her family’s court testimony, a dramatic change in her condition ensued.

“In less than 48 hours, my mother was taken off the ventilator, transferred out of the Intensive Care Unit, sitting up on her own and communicating,” the patient’s daughter Michelle Kulbacki told a court.

After the reported change in Judith’s condition, the hospital backtracked and refused to administer more. Frustrated, the family turned on January 7th to a local lawyer named Ralph Lorigo. A commercial litigator and head of what he calls a “typical suburban practice,” with seven lawyers engaged in everything from matrimonial to estate work, Lorigo assigned one of his attorneys to review materials given to them by the family, which included Kory’s Senate testimony. The associate showed Lorigo himself the the material next morning.

“I was so convinced by what Dr. Kory was saying,” Lorigo says. “I saw the passion and the belief.”

Lorigo immediately sued the hospital, filing to State Supreme Court to force the facility to treat according to the family’s wishes. Judge Henry J. Nowak sided with the Smentkiewiczes, signing an order that Lorigo and one of his attorneys served themselves, and after a series of quasi-absurd dramas that included the hospital refusing to let the Smentkiewicz family physician phone in the prescription — “the doctor actually had to drive to the hospital,” Lorigo says — Judith went back on ivermectin.

“She was out of that hospital in six days,” Lorigo says. After a month of rehab, his octogenarian client went back to her life, which involved working five days a week (she still cleans houses). Her story, complete with photo, was told in the Buffalo News, causing Lorigo’s phone to begin ringing off the hook. Doppleganger cases soon began dotting the map all over the country.

One of the first was in nearby Rochester, New York, where the family of Glenna Dickinson went through an almost exactly similar narrative to the Smentkiewiczes: they read about ivermectin, got a family doctor to prescribe it, saw improvement, only to later have the hospital refuse treatment. Again Lorigo intervened, again a judge ordered the hospital to treat, again the patient recovered and was discharged.

Hospitals fought hard, hiring expensive law firms, at times going to extraordinary lengths to refuse treatment even with dying patients who’d exhausted all other options. At Edward-Elmhurst hospital in Chicago, a 68 year-old named Nurije Fype was admitted, put on a ventilator, and again, as all other treatments failed, her family got a judge to order the use of ivermectin. Lorigo claims the hospital initially refused to obey the court order, which led to the filing of a contempt motion, which in turn led to a pair of counter-motions and another confrontation before another befuddled Judge named James Orel.

“Why wouldn’t this be tried if she’s not improving?” the Chicago Tribune quoted Orel as saying. “Why does the hospital object to providing this medication?”

“He basically said, ‘What do you have left?'” Lorigo recounts. “No one would administer the ivermectin. It’s as safe as aspirin, for Christ’s sake. It’s been given out 3.7 billion times. I couldn’t understand it.”

Stories like these aren’t proof the drug works. They don’t even really rise to the level of evidence. People recover from diseases all the time, and it doesn’t mean any particular treatment was responsible. Short of the gold standard of randomized controlled trials, there’s no proof.

However, anecdotes have a power all their own, and in the Internet age, ones like these spread quickly. Lorigo estimates he now gets “10, 15, 20” calls and emails a day. At this level, at the bedside of a single Covid-19 patient who’s already received the full official treatment protocol and is failing anyway, the decision to administer a drug like ivermectin, or fluvoxamine, or hydroxychloroquine, or any of a dozen other experimental treatments, seems like a no-brainer. Nothing else has worked, the patient is dying, why not?

Telescope out a little further, however, and the ivermectin debate becomes more complicated, reaching into a series of thorny controversies, some ridiculous, some quite serious.

The ridiculous side involves the front end of Lorigo’s story, the same story detailed on this site last week: the censorship of ivermectin news that, no matter what one thinks about the evidence for or against, is clearly in the public interest.

Anyone running a basic internet search on the topic will get a jumble of confusing results. YouTube’s policies are beyond uneven. It’s been aggressive in taking down videos containing interviews with people like Kory and doling out strikes to independent media figures like Bret Weinstein, but an interview with Lorigo on TrialSite News containing basically all of the same information is still up, as are clips from a just-taped episode of the Joe Rogan Experience that feature both Weinstein and Kory. Moreover, all sorts of statements at least as provocative as Kory’s “miraculous” formulation in the Senate still litter the Internet, many in reputable research journals. Take, for instance, this passage from the March issue of the Japanese Journal of Antibiotics:

When the effectiveness of ivermectin for the COVID-19 pandemic is confirmed with the cooperation of researchers around the world and its clinical use is achieved on a global scale, it could prove to be of great benefit to humanity. It may even turn out to be comparable to the benefits achieved from the discovery of penicillin…

There clearly is not evidence that ivermectin is the next penicillin, at least as far as its effects on Covid-19. As is noted in nearly every mainstream story about the subject, the WHO has advised against its use pending further study, there have been randomized studies showing it to be ineffective in speeding recovery, and the drug’s original manufacturer, Merck, has said there’s no “meaningful evidence” of efficacy for Covid-19 patients. However, it’s also patently untrue, as is frequently asserted, that there’s no evidence that the drug might be effective.

This past week, for instance, Oxford University announced it was launching a large-scale clinical trial. The study has already recruited more than 5,000 volunteers, and its announcement says what little is known to be true: that “small pilot studies show that early administration with ivermectin can reduce viral load and the duration of symptoms in some patients with mild COVID-19,” that it’s “a well-known medicine with a good safety profile,” and “because of the early promising results in some studies, it is already being widely used to treat COVID-19 in several countries.”

The Oxford text also says “there is little evidence from large-scale randomized controlled trials to demonstrate that it can speed up recovery from the illness or reduce hospital admission.” But to a person who might have a family member suffering from the disease, just the information about “early promising results” would probably be enough to inspire demands for a prescription, which might be the problem, of course. Unless someone was looking for that information, they likely wouldn’t find it, as mainstream news even of the Oxford study has been effectively limited to a pair of Bloomberg and Forbes stories.

Ivermectin has suffered the same fate as thousands of other news topics since Donald Trump first announced his run for the presidency nearly six years ago, cleaved in two to inhabit separate factual universes for left and right audiences. Repurposed drugs generally have had a hard time being taken seriously since Trump announced he was on hydroxychloroquine last year, and ivermectin clearly also suffers from its association with Republican Senators like Ron Johnson. Still, the drug’s publicity issues go beyond the taint of “conservative” news.

The drug has become a test case for a controversy that’s long been building in health care, about how much input patients should have in their own treatment. Well before Covid-19, the medical profession was thrust into a revolution in patient information, inspired by a combination of Google and new patients’ rights laws.

Just as the Internet allows ordinary people to DIY their way through everything from stock trading to home repair, they now have access to tools to act as their own doctors, from caches of medical papers at sites like to symptom-checkers to portals giving them instant looks at their own test results — everything they need, except of course the years and years of training, experience, and practice, and therein lies the rub.

In the waning days of the Obama administration, in December of 2016, Congress passed the 21st Century Cures Act. The New York Times headline, “Sweeping Health Measure, Backed by Obama, Passes Senate,” told the story, noting that Obama signed it over the objections of “many liberal Democrats and consumer groups,” adding rapturous praise of its bipartisan spirit that is weird to read now:

In many ways the bill, known as the 21st Century Cures Act, is a return to a more classic approach to legislation, with policy victories and some disappointments for both parties, and potential benefits for nearly every American whose life has been touched by illness, drug addiction and mental health issues. Years in the making, the measure passed 94 to 5 after being overwhelmingly approved by the House last week.

A lot of things were in the bill, but it was pitched as a win-win for both pharmaceutical companies and patients “desperate for cures.” Essentially, the law cut away procedural requirements in the name of speeding access to pharmaceuticals, including the waiving of “informed consent” in cases where clinical testing “poses no more than minimal risk to the human subject.”

On page 149, section 4006, the law also contained a passage — Empowering Patients and Improving Patient Access to Their Electronic Health Information — that would have serious consequences for some hospitals. The section required that providers create a portal with a “single, longitudinal format,” through which patients would have access to their medical information, including test results. The idea, promoted by Obama throughout his presidency, was to create partnerships between doctors and patients, giving people more of a say in their own care.

In theory, patient access sounded great. In practice, results have been all over, with some doctors cheering and others wanting to strangle the authors of the bill. There are tales of patients learning from their phones they have cancer or other terrible diagnoses before a human being can tell them — “not always, but not infrequently, either,” is how one E.R. doctor put it. In other cases, patients see their bloodwork as they wait and Google their way into states of panic, or compiling lists of (often irrelevant) questions before their doctors return, which not only chews up care time but in some cases triggers intense disputes over treatment. A typical picture might involve doctors refusing patient demands for antibiotics or other drugs they think are indicated.

Mostly the change just added to tensions long ago ushered in by the age of “Dr. Google,” but in the Trump age there’s been a twist, as patients now not only question the competence of their doctors, but also their rectitude. Are they being billed deceptively? Given brand name drugs when there are generics available? Upsold unnecessary procedures? In the age of swindlers like Martin Shkreli and impossible drug prices like the $84,000 course of Solvadi, patients with some justice have learned to believe by default that the health care system is probably lying to them somewhere.

In one of Lorigo’s cases, a doctor prescribed ivermectin but refused to submit an affidavit to the court to that effect. Here, the Cures Act became a weapon for a patient to strike back against an intractable hospital system. “The patient’s husband went into her portal, and we submitted that information to the court,” Lorigo says.

The pandemic struck in the middle of a society-wide collapse in trust in institutions. Fewer than one in ten Americans, for instance, have a great deal of trust in either the FDA or pharmaceutical companies, according to an Axios/Ipsos survey last year. In a Reuters/Oxford survey of 46 countries that just came out this week, the United States ranked dead last in terms of trust in news media, with just 29% of Americans saying they trust the news. This is a particular problem with ivermectin, which through no fault of its own has become a symbol of the public’s changing attitudes in both arenas.

Doctors around the world have expressed frustration at the “populist treatment,” as it’s become common in Central and South America in particular for poor people to defy authorities and self-medicate with ivermectin. Experts frequently associate the drug with “pharmaceutical messianism,” i.e. politicians promising panacea cures, often in conjunction with rhetoric bashing experts and credentialed authorities. In the Philippines, for instance, President Rodrigo Duterte threatened the population with jail if they didn’t get vaccinated or take ivermectin, saying of people who avoid vaccines, “I will have Ivermectin meant for pigs injected into you.”

This phenomenon goes both ways. Just as medical authorities used the crudity of Duterte or Trump to argue that “populist” cures must be hoaxes, ivermectin advocates point to the constant shifts and deceptions of medical authorities to argue for ivermectin. When Kory and Weinstein went on with Rogan this week, Kory pointed to the shifting official guidance on seemingly obvious issues like whether or not Covid-19 could be spread by means of airborne transmission, or whether or not it was feasible to investigate a lab leak hypothesis when searching for the pandemic’s origin.

“To me,” said Kory, referring to the public shift on the lab leak question, “that’s an example of what’s called disinformation.” He went on to argue that when “science runs counter to the interests,” institutions lie. Kory presented this tendency of officials to disinform as part of his explanation for the suppression of ivermectin.

The drug has as a result ended up caught between two political movements — one populist, which believes officials are prone to lying and can’t be trusted, and one anti-populist, which associates theories about unapproved cures with political theories of stolen elections and other crazes. The former movement is sure the pharmaceutical companies are suppressing the drug because it’s been off-patent since 1996 and would imperil billions in revenues for vaccines and $3000-a-pop drugs like remdesivir if proven effective. The latter movement assumes ivermectin advocates are political grifters, cynically riding mistrust of the drug for votes, for headlines, and to undermine the authority of experts.

Caught in between are ordinary people and doctors like Bruce Yaffe, a New York physician known for a political discussion group he’s been holding since 1979. Yaffe (disclaimer: I first met Bruce decades ago) came across ivermectin as many physicians in the last year did, spotting the small Australian study showing that the drug seemed to inhibit the virus in vitro. He treated one patient, seemed to get results, and over the course of the next year treated a few dozen more, seeing enough good results that he felt more studies were at least warranted. “I don’t want to make any claims,” Yaffe says, “but I’ve been frustrated… I’ve been lobbying for someone to do a more aggressive study.”

The politically liberal Yaffe tried to contact various academic institutions to generate interest in starting trials, but hasn’t had luck. Politically liberal, he’s been dismayed to see the way the drug has become politicized, noting that even QAnoners are now taking up the cause.

It’s a vicious cycle: the more companies like YouTube suppress discussion of the drug, the more oxygen the topic gets with figures like former Trump lawyer Sidney Powell, which in turn creates more resistance as ivermectin gains a reputation as a “right wing drug.” This in turn accelerates the censorship Whac-A-Mole factor, which has the downriver effect of preventing stories like Judith Smentkiewicz’s from happening, because step one in each of those tales was a patient or a doctor spotting something on the Internet that, increasingly, isn’t there anymore, at least not for followers of mainstream media.

A secondary consequence: while there are plenty of doctors of all political persuasions showing interest in researching the drug, the public voices on the subject are almost exclusively either conservatives or denizens of alternative media. It’s no accident that Lorigo, in addition to being ivermectin’s de facto litigator in America, is also the Chairman of the Erie County Conservative Party. “Outside of Fox News, no one is covering it,” Lorigo sighs.

Should people on their deathbeds be allowed to try anything to save themselves? That seems like an easy question to answer. Should the entire world be allowed to practice self-care on a grand scale? That’s a different issue. Some would say absolutely not, while others would say the corruption of pharmaceutical companies and the medical system unfortunately make it a necessity. The world is increasingly divided along this trust/untrust axis.

Eventually, researchers like the Oxford group will complete their studies, and the public will have an answer. But this is going to take longer than it should, because of the one thing the ivermectin story has already proved: in a world split more and more into groups that don’t agree on anything, it’s nearly impossible to get everyone to agree on something, even if their lives depend on it.

SamFanto was born, and then he lived a bit but never enough.

july 2021 (Covid1984)

JanuaryFebruaryMarchAprilMayJuneAugust2020 here

This is a chronology not based on the date the information was published but based on the date  I received it.

Those who accuse this site of hyperbole would have thought that even suggesting the possibility of half of what’s happening today just over a year ago was hyperbolic and paranoid. The sleep of subversive reason is spawning an epidemic of monsters.

It should be clear that I am not  in accord with the ideological aspects of the content of many of the articles I link to.

I should also add that there may well be some inconsistency and contradictory information here. That’s because it’s extremely difficult to sift what is valid,  what is speculation and what is manipulation. However, it seems more worthwhile trying to put forward some of what appears to be the more pertinent criticisms of what’s going on than remain silent before the overwhelming propaganda machine and wait a few years in order to be “correct” but too late. “The path toward simplicity is the most complex of all, and here in particular it seemed best not to tear away from the commonplace the tangle of roots which enable us to transplant it into another region, where we can cultivate it to our own profit. ” – here


Google mandates ALL of its 130,000 employees to get vaccinated

Israel: vaccination authorised for 5-11 year olds


France, Montpellier: Football fans against the Health Passport

“After more than a year away from the stadiums, the ultra supporters’ movement is faced with a terrible dilemma: return to the stands… provided they accept the health pass. Ultrasupporters (inspired by the Italian tifosi) have always fought against restrictions of freedom and against the registration of fans. This population, often caricatured by the media, has been a laboratory for repression techniques. Today, the two Montpellier groups, the Butte Paillade 1991 and the Armata Ultra 2002, take a clear position: “hold on and don’t give in”!

A line that is not at all obvious, since other groups have finally accepted to bend to the constraints, such as the Indians from Toulouse or the Lingon’s Boys from Dijon. Let’s remember that in the middle of the confinement, many ultras groups, notably from Montpellier, had shown their solidarity with the medical staff by organising a collection to support them. Today, the choice of a coherent and firm position in the face of unprecedented restrictions on freedom shows the way – let’s hope that other groups will follow suit.”

Translation of  communiqué:

“We, the ultras of Montpellier,  have decided not to bow down before the liberticidal measures engendered by the Health Passport. As a whole, we are neither “conspiracy theorists” nor conformists, neither anti- nor pro- vaccination. Over and above the political and financial considerations connected to Covid,  we simply refuse putting in place an insidious dictatorship, the dictatorship of “it’s for your own good”. As ultras we have always fought against measures that we consider to be liberticidal. The health passport alone brings together the various abuses we have fought against over the years: restrictions on freedom of movement, filing, digital identification, mass surveillance. How can we, who have never agreed to show an identity document to enter a stadium, accept such measures to identify and classify people? As citizens we refuse: to access a personal pleasure, even if passionate;  to legitimise measures that amount to a form of social credit. We want to show solidarity, and not get down on our knees, even if it means depriving ourselves of places of conviviality that we cherish we cherish like the stadium at Mosson. We will not support the development of a 2-speed society, with its pariahs and its  Good Pupils. We hereby send a clear message to our sympathisers: stand firm and concede nothing. Our future freedoms, those of our children, are at stake. Let’s be realistic: such measures, if endorsed by the masses, will never be questioned, and will be considered as a new normal for decades. The virus of numeric and health control of people is a lot more dangerous than any “variant”. Let’s not pay for pseudo security with our freedom. In addition, we will be regularly present on the outskirts of the stadium in order to meet up in a warm atmosphere and maintain connections which unite us. Non-digital connections, real connections, at a single speed”


France: Ministerial adviser promises “a shit life for the unvaccinated”

France: despite necessity of being vaccinated or having PCR test to enter discotheques, increasing clusters of Covid found there

France: some clear comments from a radical group


Dictatorship, Work in progress, #2

19 July 2021

The sinister Laurent WAUQUIEZ wants to experiment with facial recognition devices in trains and stations in the Auverge-Rhône-Alpes region;
He wants to install 10,000 additional cameras in the region, develop “intelligent video protection” and experiment with innovative systems (biometric technology);
He wants to deploy “video protection” (sic) inside school and intercity buses and continue equipping regional trains with “real-time video protection cameras”.

Source :
Dictatorship, Work in progress, #1

16 July 2021

Ban on going to shopping centres, restaurants, cafés, cinemas, sports halls and any other establishment open to the public (ERP) for people who do not have a health passport;
Six months’ imprisonment and a €10,000 fine for people inspected without their health passport in establishments open to the public;
Possibility for private sector bosses and public employers to suspend treatment and then to dismiss the refractory among the millions of employees now concerned by the compulsory anti-covid vaccination and/or health passport;
Mandatory isolation of those who test positive, with random checks by the police or gendarmerie

Source :

This is not a dictatorship

16th July 2021

Democracy’, as we have known it since our childhood, is gradually disappearing and dying. Political liberalism is in its death throes and, under the pretext of a health crisis, a new regime is being set up. Yet no one says it, no one sees it, everyone pretends that nothing is happening and that, once covid has been defeated, we will return to the world of before. Journalists, the self-proclaimed watchdogs of democracy, are there to reassure us and, far from denouncing the incredible brutality of the current anti-democratic regression, they are pushing it to the limit.

One day we will have to realise that journalism, as it is practised in so-called democratic countries, is not an obstacle to the rise of totalitarianism but its instrument, and that as freedom retreats and tyranny takes hold, journalists change the definition of these terms in order to make people believe that we are still in a democratic and temperate state governed by the rule of law.

Thus, the criteria for freedom are systematically lowered and those for tyranny are raised. To use a metaphor, the thermometer is changed every time the temperature rises, to suggest that the temperature remains constant and that the regime has not changed its nature.

Whatever measures the regime takes, the “thermometer of democracy” that is journalism (but also the various “control” and “defence of liberties” bodies) will tirelessly indicate “Room temperature: 20 degrees; moderate regime, any comparison with non-democratic regimes prohibited”.

Indeed, for journalists, one does not resist a “democratic” regime and one does not contest its democratic character. For them, resistance is always in the past tense, or it only applies to those who claim to conjugate it in the present tense. They are the fascists, the conspiracy theorists, the populists, the negationists, who must all be lumped together. The “duty to remember”, as applied by the media-political class, only serves to consolidate the dominant order, presented as unsurpassable, democratic by nature and preferable to anything that may have existed in the past.

In the meantime, with new laws, new decrees and new technological applications, a new Leviathan is rising, gradually swallowing up our last freedoms and giving itself an overwhelming, immense, implacable power, such as no other state in history has ever had. The covid-stage of capitalism is the end of political liberalism and the entry into a new totalitarianism with a digital face. While journalists and “democrats” look the other way, we will denounce and analyse each step of the implementation of this new iron heel, in order to help overthrow what is in reality a colossus with feet of clay, built on our renunciations and resignations.

General text on situation from anarchists in Greece – Our dignity in quarantine

“Never let a crisis go to waste”


France, Montelimar: hospital personnel on unlimited strike against compulsory vaccination for hospital staff

This is a CGT-led strike, been going for a few days now. Not very likely to lead to any victory, given their history. See this.


Brazil, San Paolo: clashes as hundreds of thousand demonstrate throughout country against Bolsonaro’s handling of Covid

“Bolsonaro’s government is being harshly questioned by suspicions of corruption in the purchase of vaccines, which have been uncovered by the investigations being carried out by a Senate commission and which have put even the president himself under the eye of the Attorney General’s Office. The far-right leader’s denialism in dealing with the pandemic and the alleged corruption at the expense of covid have raised calls in Brazil for his impeachment, driven by the opposition. Huge banners with the slogans “Bolsonaro out!” “Vaccine for all now!” and “Bolsonaro genocidal” were the common denominator of the protests, which only registered acts of violence in Sao Paulo. At the beginning of the night, when the marches were already dispersing in the São Paulo capital, the police fired tear gas after being attacked with stones by a group of hooded men, who also destroyed the facade of a bank.”

France: minor clashes in Paris and Lyon on anti-health passport demos, as 100s of thousands demonstrate round the country in mid-holidaysand in Nancy

“During the rally, the police were also targeted. According to a source, they were targeted by projectiles including firecrackers and smoke bombs, but also by insults. The window of a pharmacy was also damaged, as well as the Covid-19 screening tent in front of it.”

Obviously it’s impossible to say how many demonstrated, but given the massive presence in the cities I’ve heard about, it’s clear that the media figure of 165,000 people demonstrating in 170 towns and cities throughout France is an absurd underestimate, even by traditional manipulative standards.


Deepl translation of part of this article, including link to research,  showing the uselessness of masks:

“Professor Ari Joffe of the University of Alberta in Canada describes in his study COVID-19: Rethinking the Lockdown – Groupthink (Joffe AR (2021) COVID-19 : Rethinking the Lockdown Groupthink. Frontiers in Public Health 9:625778. doi : 10.3389/fpubh.2021.625778) , on the disastrous effects of lockdowns, several cognitive biases, including:

Anchoring bias, which consists of preferring the initial hypothesis and ignoring evidence that refutes it;

Commitment escalation in which investments in a defined course of action are maintained, even in the face of evidence of better options, thus respecting previous decisions;

Superstition bias which postulates that action is better than non-action (even in the absence of evidence), as it reduces anxiety;

The present bias, which favours immediate benefits over even greater benefits in the future (measures that would prevent more deaths in the long term seem less attractive);

And the identifiable lives bias which includes the identifiable casualty effect (neglecting invisible death statistics, such as collateral victims of measures, reported at the population level) and identifiable cause and effect (prioritising efforts to save lives from a known cause, even if more lives were saved by alternative responses).

These various biases, among many others, seem to me to explain in part not only the steps taken by various governments, but also the establishment and maintenance of a certain narrative, one that has come to captivate an overwhelming majority of the population, not sparing even those with a scientific background.

Such prohibitive measures could never have been imposed without the construction of this narrative, which finds its foundation in a serious threat, relayed and amplified by the traditional media. The latter maintained it by morbidly disseminating daily figures of COVID-19 deaths, and subsequently figures of contaminations. The narrative thus gradually took hold by means of several methods, including the dissemination of a single message through all channels of communication, spreading through society in the form of doxa (or the set of opinions received without discussion, as self-evident, in a given civilisation –

It is striking that the notion of war is evoked in the context of the pandemic… For propaganda has always been a fundamental tool in warfare, and one of its practices is censorship. In our digital age, it takes the form of fact checking. On 25 November 2020, I posted an article on Facebook entitled Are Face Masks Effective? The Evidence published on Swiss Policy Research (SPR) (an independent, non-partisan, non-profit organisation that investigates geopolitical propaganda)(Swiss Policy Research : The article cited ten studies that concluded that masking is not effective against the spread of SARS-CoV-2, along with ten other aspects to be considered when assessing the effectiveness of masks. To supplement this information, the article even included and analysed seven studies that showed the proven effects of masks on the spread of the virus. This article was not just an unfounded opinion, but a position based on references, and yet Facebook labelled it as false information. The link provided by this fact-check was to the Lead News website, which claimed that several sources confirm that masks work against the spread of SARS-CoV-2 while citing only one source, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (Facebook fact-checking  on the  site of Lead News : ! Upon further investigation, it turned out that Facebook was fighting misinformation by conducting fact-checks with the help of so-called independent source checkers. But the famous Lead News (which is funded solely by Facebook) is a branch of another group, the Credibility Coalition, which is itself funded by Facebook, Google and Twitter, among others (Credibility Coalition, to which the Lead News belongs:

More recently, on YouTube this time, the video of the Great Debate ( organised by Kairos did not even last 24 hours before being withdrawn on the grounds of medical misinformation. As a reminder, a series of scientific experts and representatives of the Belgian government had been invited to debate with six other speakers (including myself) from different scientific and medical backgrounds, but none accepted the invitation. The debate therefore took place more in the form of an exchange of views. When looking for the reason for the banning of the video, YouTube informed that it does not allow content that spreads incorrect medical information contradicting that of the local health authorities or the World Health Organisation (WHO) regarding COVID-19. Examples of prohibited content include those that claim that a specific treatment or drug guarantees a cure for COVID-19 and those that contradict the consensus of local health authorities or the WHO regarding the COVID-19 vaccine (I invite readers to read the list of prohibited content under this reference – List of forbidden content on YouTube :

This phenomenon of fact-checking is not limited to social networks, as traditional media are also involved. La Libre Belgique has created a section called La Source dedicated to checking sources. In an article entitled Do PCR tests overestimate Covid-19 cases? published on 4 April 2021 (, La Libre Belgique analysed Prof Martin Zizi’s LinkedIn publications on two claims:

PCR positive ≠ infection

PCR positive ≠ contagiousness

Rather than presenting possible references contradicting these statements, The Source was satisfied with comments from expert Dr. L. Cornelissen. Prof Zizi, for his part, verified the sources of the La Libre Belgique article, maintaining his position and thus fact-checking La Libre’s facts (giving rise to the article PCR useless if asymptomatic  – It is regrettable that La Libre did not read the article COVID-19: “effet de la vaccination sur le risque de transmission” published on the Chirec Pro website (, in which the supposedly beneficial effects of vaccination on the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 are highlighted. The article states:

The presence of virus detected by PCR is not synonymous with a risk of transmission since PCR is likely to identify low viral loads and therefore not necessarily sufficient to be responsible for possible transmission, this being confirmed by the overall reduction in viral load in vaccinated subjects.

The reference cited for this assertion is of poor (or even weak) quality to support the hypothesis that vaccination would decrease the spread. Note the three major problems with this source:

The referenced scientific article – explicitly states that this preprint reports new research that has not been certified by peer review and should not be used to guide clinical practice,

the study does not directly compare vaccinated people with a control group, but merely assesses the efficacy of a vaccine on hypothetically vaccinated people…

The researchers compare PCR-positive data (with the methodological biases mentioned above) from one age group with another age group, thus establishing an additional methodological problem.

Thus, Chirec similarly asserts to Prof Zizi that a positive PCR is not synonymous with contagiousness… but cites much less reliable references. What would The Source say about this?

If fact-checking existed before the current health crisis (becoming a more debated topic during the term of President Trump, who is known for his controversial statements), it has become a real reference tool to suppress anything that is deemed questionable. But this raises several questions, such as:

what content can be verified and identified as established fact? Is it legitimate, for example, to censor arguments on evolving scientific subjects under the pretext of a challenge from local authorities and the WHO (who have already proven their ignorance and error about the nature of SARS-CoV-2 on several occasions)?

Is fact-checking objective when verification on social networks is done partly by software (given the large amount of information put online every day) (Hard Questions : How Is Facebook’s Fact-Checking Program Working ? ) and by verifiers, who are themselves paid by the social networks (

And these questions raise an even more crucial question (which seems to be frequently postponed): what function do social networks have in the public arena? The head of Facebook, Marc Zuckerberg, has repeatedly said that Facebook is not a form of media ( Is censorship of content then justified on the grounds that Facebook calls itself a technology company and collaborates with governments to reduce the spread of misinformation (  & ) while sharing allegedly anonymous data of their users with the authorities to combat the spread of the coronavirus ( And what about journalism, which was once considered the fourth estate that was supposed to watch over the excesses of the other three embodying the state (executive, legislative and judicial), and which has never ceased from the beginning of the crisis to give voice to the state’s experts acting as authority figures during this health crisis and to defend them at all costs?

The establishment of a narrative through all these means of communication became perhaps most visible during the COVID-19 vaccination campaign. In addition to the increased censorship on social networks of any arguments against these vaccines (whose real effectiveness and risks of side effects are still debatable – , the medical profession also participates in influencing public opinion without any visible debate on the traditional media. Even mental health professionals are working on ways to get the population to accept measures, including vaccines, and recommend techniques such as nudging (= persuading someone to do something, gradually or by flattery; gently encouraging someone to do something) ( or outright using fear as leverage (–L6zGzkc9k95omQHMgbY9QcqMic4JXiEzNe0). And it is probably in the case of vaccines, where the economic interests of this health crisis are most identifiable.

In a debate with French essayist Idriss Aberkane, public health doctor Martin Blachier asserted the absence of pharmaceutical industry (specifically Pfizer) interests in this crisis (Youtube – LES DÉBATS – Martin Blachier vs Idriss Aberkane at 29min : ). But some quick research shows that Pfizer’s revenue for the first three months of 2021 is $3.5 billion and the estimated revenue for the year 2021 for the vaccine alone would be $26 billion (or two-thirds of their annual revenue) ( Recall that their annual revenue in 2019 was $41.17 billion. In 2020 it was $41.9 billion (an increase of 1.79% over 2019, rather than a loss of sales) (Youtube – LES DÉBATS – op. cit.)… And there is likely to be seasonal demand for its COVID-19 vaccines in the coming years (like the seasonal flu vaccine) (…”

Video from September 30th 2020

(apparently contested here, though it seems it says only that masks do not protect against most aerosols other than the large ones – spit)


Two Facebook posts from the last week about Israel.

Facebook post from 14/7/2021:

Given that most adults are vaccinated I find nothing interesting in this
statistic that Inbar Twisser presents as  interesting  – a reporter for N12 News, who tweeted that “this morning there are more fully vaccinated severe Covid patients in the hospitals than unvaccinated ones, 45 to 25”.

What IS interesting:

This situation where some of the population is vaccinated and some are not, is of great concern to the Ministry of Health because it creates two comparable groups: an experimental group and a control group. And that’s how easy it is to unveil the bluff. To illustrate:

When adolescents do not end up in the hospitals even though they are not vaccinated, it is clear to any reasonable person that the vaccine is unnecessary for them. On the other hand, if they do not get to the hospitals after they are vaccinated – the masters of mind-conditioning (and they are masters!) will tell us that it is thanks to the vaccine.

They are most disturbed by those who recover. These are not contagious, not sick and certainly not dead, and I fully understand why it was so important to vaccinate them in at least one dose. This is just another attempt to neutralize the control group and in this case it is a
particularly disturbing control group.


Facebook post from 20/7/2021:

“How they are messing with our minds.

The media has been publicizing for some time that the percentage of vaccinated tested positive is 40%.

This figure in itself raises questions about the efficacy of the vaccine. We are also told that an almost absolute majority of new critically ill patients during this period are also vaccinated.

I checked the data on the official website of the Ministry of Health and found updated data for the first week of July. The numbers there are interesting :

The left column is of people tested positive who have been vaccinated with a second vaccine over twenty days ago. The right column is of
unvaccinated who tested positive.

If you look at the total, you find that 50.2% of the positive cases are vaccinated. No longer 40% as reported in the media.

If we leave out the children up to the age of 19 (the vast majority of them without any symptoms anyway, but simply came out positive for the PCR test) we will actually find that from the age of 20 and up, the percentage of vaccinated out of the positive cases stands at 85.1%. Do you understand? 85.1% of the new positive cases are fully vaccinated!

For what reason did we rushed to get vaccinated?

So they said we would at least spare ourselves a serious illness, but even that is no longer true. After all, it is reported that most new severe patients are vaccinated.

We’re in big trouble.”


T writes:

I don’t know how much hard “scientific” conclusions can be drawn from all this about the efficiency of the vaccine, but it does makes things interesting. Also, the Health authorities representatives are now explicitly saying that natural immunity due to exposure to the virus is better than the immunity from the vaccine (and the data shows it as well – there are hardly any hospitalization or infections among people who were already exposed to the virus, vaccinated and unvaccinated alike) – the exact same people who explicitly lied earlier when they said that there are no reasons to believe that natural immunity will last and that the immunity from the vaccine is most probably a lot better – and this against all scientific knowledge up to 2020.

Greece: clashes on demos against mandatory mRNA vaccine, including clashes between anti-authoritarians and right-wingers


France, Chambery: as National Assembly pass Health Passport law 300 demonstrators against it invade the prefecture and take down portrait of Macron

“A lie repeated 1000 times becomes a truth”

According to this, this sticker, amongst innumerable others, has been produced by an extreme right wing group, though the name “la rose blanche” (“The White Rose”) is the name of a group of students who resisted the Nazis between July 1942 and February 1943 in Germany, distributing dissident leaflets. The students wrote pacifist and anti-fascist slogans on the walls, collected bread for concentration camp inmates and looked after their families. The actions of the White Rose were taken as an example from January 1943 by intellectuals in southern Germany and Berlin. The line “A lie repeated 1000 times becomes a truth” is taken from Goebells. I suspect that most people reproducing this sticker have no knowledge of what the group “the white rose” is nor the history of where the name was taken from. If this group is, as the article states, a group of Trump QAnon supporters it’s also indicative of how recuperative the Right have become: the sticker – without the Covid references – could have been produced by anarchists in previous epochs. It’s also indicative of how this epoch is confusing to almost everyone and that trying to untangle the massively proliferating mystifications is one of the tasks of those who want to stop the movement towards totalitarianism.

Former Vice President and Chief Science Officer at Pfizer’s Pfizer’s allergy and respiratory research division speaks out against vaccination of those with no need to be vaccinated, against Health Passports and other things

Yet another video censored/removed  by YouTube.  Speaks about the Nuremberg Code. Also questions the idea of asymptomatic people with Covid infecting others and even the idea of being asymptomatic with Covid rather than presymptomatic (ie the few hours before symptoms kick in). And confirms coagulation of blood as significant possibility. Says that variants are almost the same as the original virus (ie 99.7% the same) and they’re not an additional  health problem at all. And that the FDA and the EMA have not required the top-up vaccines for the variants to be tested because they’re so like the normal pre-top-up vaccines.

Apparently this guy’s views have been taken up by lots of right-wingers.  But that doesn’t mean that he’s wrong on all counts, any more than when leftists say something that means you have to take up either their viewpoint or the opposite viewpoint. As I’ve  said so often, Hitler’s scientists said tobacco caused cancer. Which, if you take the opposite viewpoint of your enemy, would mean you should support smoking tobacco. Of course, he may have significantly demagogic reasons for what he says. But it remains to be seen what is valid and what is crap in such things.


Martinique (French overseas territory); 2nd night (18th July) of riots against curfew, health passports, etc.

“It was in this working-class district of Fort-de-France that the clashes between the police and mobile gangs took place, with a majority being young  according to witnesses. At around half past midnight, a house caught fire on Avenue Jean Jaurès, where several cars were burnt….On the night of Sunday 18 to Monday 19 July 2021, the police had a hard time repelling uncontrolled gangs at the start of the curfew introduced at 9pm. Retreating to Terres-Sainville in the middle of the evening, it was the main thoroughfare of the district, Avenue Jean Jaurès, which was the scene of new confrontations for the second consecutive night, after the city centre the day before….Beforehand, some public buildings such as the courthouse and the prefecture were secured. As a result, several projectile throwers (including fireworks mortars), always ready to fight visibly with the mobile forces, decided to set fire to at least 3 cars…Meanwhile, the security forces used stun grenades with a blast effect to try to disperse the troublemakers. A helicopter from the national gendarmerie came to reinforce the set-up, using a powerful searchlight to sweep the whole area for more than an hour, the time it took to bring the fire under control. Wheeled armoured vehicles were also deployed by the soldiers on the ground, in order to evacuate the burning cars, to avoid new fires on the boulevard…According to other testimonies, there were no victims during this very agitated night…”

Leaflet from France: l’insupportable obeissance


Unbearable obedience

After   compulsory wearing of masks, social distancing, the retreat to digital-television-work,  confinement, the curfews, travel with authorisations, the incitement to download tracking applications, thus to denounce, making everyone a snitch, the fines and the arrests, here is now the phase of the compulsory Health Passport!

This recent announcement, made by the experts in the zombification of the masses, imposes a Health Passport at the entrance of commercial, cultural and social establishments. Anyone who fails to comply with this rule will be punished, and will have to stay at home!

The right to rationally choose a treatment (vaccination), in conscience, is granted to us. The threat of punishment is the hallmark of totalitarian regimes, which only use coercion and repression to maintain themselves. The deprivation of freedom to come and go as one pleases without control is thus imposed on all, this freedom having become a fault! The repeated injection of fear and the anaesthetisation of brains makes us the willing actors of general control.

The servility of certain cultural decision-makers, museums, theatres and festivals, more ready to obey the power on which they depend than to make a real commitment to the advent and survival of the cultural values on which true democracies are based, participate in the fracturing by bending to the demands of the Health Passport.

Connecting, gathering, sharing, exchanging through the arts are the very essence of living societies. To exclude them on the pretext of not presenting a passport, even a health one, is to go against these values, culture not being compatible with the suppression of freedom.

We can already see festival organisers coming in to reinforce the health order, turning into contamination cops, indicating in addition to the booking fees the places for “screening” and the vaccination centres nearby!

This suicidal, collaborationist turn we are witnessing tells us enough about the future of this drifting society.

One of the characteristics of dictatorships is that they claim to have values but act in the opposite way: they claim to fight against exclusion but divide and separate through more control, they claim to protect but subject everyone to the worst interferences, they claim to care about health but make real care impossible through dehumanisation, they replace solidarity with competition, they promise security but create conditions that produce insecurity, etc. Each of these successive contaminations has been the result of a different approach. Each successive contamination, whether viral or radioactive, systematically leads to restrictions on our freedoms, destroying and/or banning spaces and places. This makes us guilty victims, forcing each of us to take responsibility for the consequences of technological decisions imposed for the benefit of the powers that be, without real justice.

To resist and put a stop to the machine that crushes life, whether we are a simple customer in a bar or restaurant, a spectator or listener participating in live performances, against and before generalised facial recognition, permanent tracking in the private sphere and intrusion into the body through tracking: disobedience is a duty.

17 July 2021

SF: Obviously such appeals to “the cultural values on which true democracies are based” are meaningless crap, which anyone can see from the development of bourgeois democracy onwards has largely meant culture as a form of anaesthetisation and domestication for a democracy that means a choice between different forms of the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie’s commodity economy (money, wage labour, commodity consumption, etc.). Nevertheless, resistance to the attack on even bourgeois freedoms and to the fact that this is now not merely limited to your financial means but to your submission to being injected with a vaccine that is being increasingly shown to be hardly effective and resisting having to carry around a method of tracking your movements is potentially the start of a more general resistance to  a world and life accelerating at ever faster speeds out of the control of the vast majority.

Cyprus, Nicosia: attack on TV station following demonstration against health vaccination passport (18th July)

“…around 2,500 protesters went to the network after a larger protest outside the presidential palace against a Covid “Safe Pass” and force vaccination. Some of the protesters attacked the TV facilities…broken glass around the building, several broken windows and four Sigma-branded cars in various states of damage, one completely burned-out….cars burning in the car park and smashed up furniture apparently inside the building’s lobby, with police sirens wailing in the background.”

Clashes in London on anti-lockdown demo

Anarchist report on reactions to vaccine certificates for crowded spaces in UK


How drug trials underestimate side effects


Thailand, Bangkok: clashes over government handling of Covid

Significant riot in Martinique (overseas territory of France)

“During this night of confrontations between the forces of order and anti-curfew demonstrators, others took advantage of it to attack in particular jewellery shops in Fort-de-France…A jeweller’s shop in the rue Lamartine was stormed shortly after 10pm. It was opened, emptied and set on fire at around 2am on Sunday, according to our journalists on the spot. …Later, at around 4am, a group of at least four people tried to break into another jeweller’s shop on Rue Lamartine but the security system resisted…By retreating far from the prefecture, small groups who intended to fight with the forces of order caused fires that the fire brigade was able to extinguish under the protection of police and gendarmes.

♦Bin fire in Victor Sévère street

♦Car set on fire on boulevard du Général de Gaulle

♦Fire in the jewellery shop on rue Lamartine, (mentioned above)

♦Bin fire in rue Perrinon

♦Car set on fire in Victor Sévère street

♦Fire in the hall of the Edf building in Place François Mitterrand

♦Bin fire in Place François Mitterrand

♦Brush fire on the Savane
Several barricades still smoking on the boulevard at 6am on Sunday morning …In addition, some videos posted on social networks show an attempt to burn down the courthouse. People can be seen in possession of incendiary devices…”

“Macron allows the poor to go through the bins for free”

Indonesia: despite mass vaccination country’s cases of Covid rise above those of Brazil

Indonesia has had compulsory vaccination since the beginning of March:

Indonesia threatens 1 year in prison plus a  $7,000 fine for those who don’t get vaccinated (March 2021)

Google translate:

While in most countries of the world the criterion for receiving corona vaccines is old age or background diseases, in Indonesia these days the picture is the opposite. The huge country, which has a population of 267 million people on a vast area of ​​thousands of islands, has decided that one of the first groups in line for vaccines will be … everyone over the age of 18 to 59. The rationale behind this approach is that this group is the “engine” of the corona plague – many asymptomatic patients, who have multiple social connections …36,000 residents have died so far in the epidemic in Indonesia, out of 1.3 million residents infected with Corona. As in Europe, in Indonesia the second wave recorded during December-January was much larger than that recorded at the beginning of the epidemic, but morbidity has been declining in recent weeks. Indonesia has acquired most of its vaccines from China, which was the first country to develop a vaccine for corona, although it has not yet been approved for use by medical authorities in the West. The vaccine was developed by SinoVac and is widely used in China itself. The vaccination campaign in Indonesia began on January 13, and since then aims to vaccinate about 1.3 million health care workers as well as a group of police officers, public servants, teachers, athletes, journalists and more (estimated at 17 million people). Everyone will get the vaccine for free, subsidized by the authorities. But one of the significant differences compared to other countries is that the vaccine is defined as “mandatory”, although it is not yet clear what sanctions will be imposed on those who do not get vaccinated. A government minister said the penalty to be fixed by law for those who do not get vaccinated is a year in prison and a $ 7,000 fine, but the government still needs to offer the vaccine in adequate quantities to make sure residents get the chance to get vaccinated. Amnesty International has criticized the government’s statements, saying the vaccination was “contrary to human rights”. … it is possible that in the coming weeks young people and adults without background diseases are also expected to start receiving the vaccines. This group numbers about 150 million people, and the country hopes to end their vaccinations by the end of 2021. Vaccinate first those who are important to the economy … Critics said the government decided to do so in an attempt to preserve the economy by first vaccinating the most efficient, working-age workers.”


France: clashes on demos against “health passport” in Metz & Strasbourg…and Lyon

The media use their classical manipulative stereotyping of the demos as being “anti-vax” when it included some who’ve been vaccinated (but are opposed to such a tyrannical forcing of vaccination) and many – probably the majority – who are not anti-vaccination as such. It should be pointed out that many “revolutionaries” also use this term in order to block themselves against seeing and thinking and acting critically. Official figures say that 18,000 demonstrated in Paris. A lawyer demonstrating there said that there were more like 350,000. Who knows? There was one placard with a photo of the gates of Auschwitz and the words “Arbeit Macht Frei” changed to “Vaccins Macht Frei”. Of course one can be pedantic and say this totalitarian development is not at all like classic fascism or Nazism, which is true (for one thing, passive demos were not allowed under fascism) . However, this intellectual precision misses the emotional point: people are aware that these authoritarian developments are moving more and more towards the eradication of even bourgeois freedoms for increasing amounts of people.

Large poster of Macron, in Toulon: “Obey – get vaccinated”

Videos of demosPhoto report of Montpellier in English

Isere: vaccination centre vandalised and tagged

Article critiquing medical research in relation to Covid

“…Many medical journals now charge authors thousands of dollars to publish their research. This ensures that it is very difficult for any researcher, not supported by a university, or a pharmaceutical company, to afford to publish anything, unless they are independently wealthy. Driven by financial imperative, the research itself has also, inevitably, become biased. He who pays the paper calls the tune. Pharmaceutical companies, food manufacturers and suchlike. They can certainly afford the publication fees….”


France: opposition to totalitarian “health passport” in 14th July Bastille Day demos throughout France …More here, here and  hereMartinique (overseas territory)

“On the margins of the demonstration of several hundred people last night (13 to 14 July 2021), around the prefecture in Fort-de-France, slight clashes pitted a group of people against the forces of order… a dozen people threw empty bottles at police officers in front of the Fort-de-France prefecture. The police immediately retaliated by throwing tear gas, which dispersed the crowd. …Despite this intervention by the police, the people continued to throw bottles before moving away. As they withdrew, they burnt some bins in the centre of Fort-de-France. ..Many people had responded to the call launched on social networks against the new health measures. Several hundred of them gathered in front of the gates of the prefecture on Tuesday evening (13 July 2021) under the theme “Freedom – we are not guinea pigs!”.


Not that you’d know it from the link, but the station forecourt was occupied for at least 20 minutes, and the main shopping centre near the main square was closed for fear of an invasion of demonstrators.


“Buses and cars set on fire..Cars were also set on fire during the evening and night, as here in Vaulx-en-Velin.”


“In the early afternoon, a thousand people gathered in front of the Haute-Savoie prefecture. This unexpected mobilisation had not been declared to the authorities. The call for the rally was spread directly on social networks. In the crowd, many signs denounced the deprivation of individual freedoms. The demonstrators chanted “Macron resign” and “No to the health pass”… the entrance gates of the prefecture were broken. About 200 demonstrators entered the courtyard and occupied the staircase, without going inside the building. ..At around 4.30pm, the crowd moved towards Annecy town hall, blocking for a long time the traffic between the prefecture, the Bonlieu centre and the town hall. “

Given that Macron announced this compulsory “health passport” some 38 hours before the demos and at the start of the summer holidays when half of France leave home for a few weeks, these demos have been organised pretty spontaneously. Nevertheless, these  obviously involve a massive mix of people, including conspiracy theorists, right-wingers and anti-semites, but also anarchists, ultra-leftists, etc. Whilst purism remains aloof from any possible gropings towards some contestation, and cedes the terrain to the right, participation that’s indifferent to these significant contradictions is also dangerous (remember that in Weimar Germany, the Communists and the Nazis sometimes joined together against the cops and Social Democrats – and with what result ultimately?).

Pasteur Institute report on testing of ivermectin on hamsters shows definite positive results

“Ivermectin could then be considered as an encouraging therapeutic agent against Covid-19, without impacting SARS-CoV-2 replication but alleviating inflammation and related symptoms. “Our results provide a significant advance and demonstrate that ivermectin belongs to a new class of anti-Covid-19 agent in an animal model. This work opens the way for the development of better treatments against Covid-19 in humans””

US: report from June of 153 hospital employees in Houston who refused  vaccine being forced to resign or fired

Gibraltar: 10 Covid deaths for the whole of 2020, 70 deaths after 3 weeks of vaccination in January 2021


Israel: 25% higher death rate among women aged 40-49 than perennial average?

Translation of a Facebook post by Yaffa Shir Raz, 15/7/2021:

Why is the death rate among women aged 40-49 25% higher than the
perennial average?

This finding revealed by Yariv Hammer is based on an analysis he
conducted based on official data from the Central Bureau of Statistics

In absolute numbers: compared to the perennial average, which stands at
202 deaths in this group from January to early June, this year 252 women
aged 40-49 died in the corresponding period – 50 more women.

The finding is particularly interesting, since, as can be seen from the
charts, the over-mortality of women in this age group parallels the
injection operation among those aged 40-49. More than that, two waves of
mortality can be seen, corresponding to the two doses of injection, and
especially to the second one.

And it’s even more interesting because we seem to be starting to see a
phenomenon with a recurring pattern – over-mortality that parallels the
injection waves.

Yariv Hammer and Ran Israeli found that from February to April there was
a significant increase in mortality among young people aged 20-29 – 43%
more than the average of the last five years in the same period, and
this increase was also equivalent to the injection campaign in this
group (in absolute numbers – 143 deaths Compared with the average 100.2
in the last five years).

To these horrible data must be added the findings of Prof. Retzef Levy,
who showed, based on Magen David Adom [MDA – Israel’s national emergency
medical, disaster, ambulance and blood bank service – Tal] readings, a
25% increase in heart attacks and cardiac arrest between the ages of
16-39 – also in an amazing correlation to the injection operation.

For those who want to claim that the excess mortality among women is due
to Corona – well, no. According to the Ministry of Health’s control
panel, 33 women aged 40-49 died this year “from Corona” (or with Corona,
maybe one day we’ll know). However, 23 of them died in January-February,
while, as mentioned, the highest mortality rate was in March. According
to the control panel, 6 women died “from Corona” in March, 4 in April
and 0 in May.

Nor can you claim that the excess mortality is due to road accidents,
since according to the CBS report, two women aged 40-49 were killed in
road accidents this year. One in March and one in May.
So what is the reason?

Among young men we know that one of the reasons is myocarditis, for
which there is also a huge under-reporting and concealment of most cases
by the health authorities. But what is the reason for this significant
excess mortality among women aged 40-49? Maybe it has to do with the
many clotting / bleeding events that Dr. Josh Guetzkow wrote about in
his report?

To find out the explanation for this phenomenon we will need more
information on the serious and fatal side effects, segmented by age and

I’m reminding all my doctor, researcher and scientist colleagues –
inquiry and questioning are at the heart of science. Science is neither
an institution nor an authority, and an imaginary “consensus” does not
create such an authority. It is the questions that form the basis for
all scientific inquiry and for all scientific progress. It’s time for
you to start asking too.


Greece, Athens & Thessaloniki: 1000s demonstrate against health passports

Video of doctor explaining disastrous side effects of mRNA following the fact that only 25% of vaccine stays in the arm, etc.

Says that microscopic blood clots are happening in 62% of people vaccinated, causing permanent damage (massive reduction in “effort tolerance”), including high blood pressure in their lungs, possibly causing death within 3 years. This doctor was removed from hospital duty following his criticisms of vaccine side effects.

How Covid and state responses to it are indirectly encouraging an increase in even worse respiratory illnesses amongst the under-5s

“Infections other than COVID fell over the past year due to limits on socialising, improved hygiene and mask wearing. This reduced the build-up of antibodies that protect people against illness, creating what experts are calling an “immunity debt”. The UK is already beginning to see an uptick in respiratory illnesses such as RSV, a common respiratory virus that causes bronchiolitis. More than three in five children usually catch RSV by their first birthday, but public health officials believe that lockdowns and school closures meant many have escaped infection. That means fewer children are immune to RSV, which in turn has led to a rise in cases as restrictions are lifted. In the week to 4 July, RSV positivity in England increased to 3.4% from just 0.1% two months earlier…As early as May, PHE issued a warning about a potential surge in cases in the coming autumn and winter. Its modelling suggests that between 20% and 50% more cases will need hospitalisation, requiring a doubling of paediatric intensive care beds later in the year, according to reporting by the Health Service Journal. RSV is more deadly for young children than COVID. It accounts for more than 5% of global deaths in under-fives [i.e. roughly 1.28 million – SF]…A similar surge is expected in flu cases, which have been in the low single figures in England over the past year”

2 points here:

There’s an implicit  idea here that Covid is deadly amongst under-fives, when in fact it’s only when children of that age have other very serious health problems that then also get Covid which allows the “health” statisticians to attribute death to Covid.

The idea that death from flu has been down to single figures indicates another statistical manipulation: in the UK in normal years flu kills 10,000 or so people. Almost certainly those who have died of flu have had their death attributed to Covid, possibly even amongst those who haven’t also had Covid.

Yet another Covidiotic vaccinationalism


France: Macron announces further step towards Covid-justified slavery-cum-apartheid/vaxscism

“All healthcare and non-healthcare staff (clinics, retirement homes and establishments for the disabled) will have to be vaccinated against Covid-19. “You will have until 15 September to be vaccinated. From 15 September onwards, checks will be carried out and penalties imposed”, said the Elysée Palace President, who spoke of the need to impose vaccination on all French people. The caregivers who have not been vaccinated by 15 September will no longer be able to work and will therefore no longer be paid,.. Specific vaccination campaigns for schools will be organised at the beginning of the school year…The health pass, in force since last Friday in discotheques, will be extended “at the beginning of August” to cafés, restaurants, shopping centres, as well as to planes, trains, long-distance buses and medical establishments. ..”

On Google’s (and Wikipedia’s) ties to the pharmaceutical industry

In 2017, the search engine blacklisted, a natural health advocacy organization that reports on controversial health topics including vaccine safety, GMOs, and pharmaceutical experiments, de-indexing over 140,000 of their webpages.

In a 2019 article, the founder of NaturalNews, Mike Adams, had this to say about Google (emphasis in original):

Make no mistake: Google is pro-pharma, pro-Monsanto, pro-glyphosate, pro-pesticides, pro-chemotherapy, pro-fluoride, pro-5G, pro-geoengineering and fully supports every other toxic poison that endangers humankind.”

Google’s ties to Big Pharma are well-known. In 2016, Google’s parent company, Alphabet, partnered with GlaxoSmithKline to create a new company focused on research into bioelectronics – a branch of medical science aimed at fighting diseases by targeting electrical signals in the body. GSK also works directly with Google thanks to a deal between the two companies that allows GSK full control over the data that they use. What data? Whose data? That isn’t disclosed….it has recently come to light that Google’s charity arm,, provided funding for research and studies carried out by Peter Daszak and his charity, EcoHealth Alliance – the same charity that previously worked with the Wuhan lab involved in so-called ‘gain of function’ research.”


LinkedIn deletes account of mRNA vaccine pioneer who questioned risks of COVID-19 shots

See this for a discussion involving this guy. And look at entry for 21/6/21 for summary of much of the content of this discussion.

UK’s Transport Secretary  says: “We know that double vaccinated, fully vaccinated people are much more likely to get coronavirus” (video)

Probably meant “less likely” – but who knows what’s likely or not?

UK’s quarantine hotels


What are we actually up against?

“…At the start of the coronavirus crisis, I pointed out that the authorities will never let a crisis go to waste when it can be used as an opportunity to leverage it to implement a pre-planned or even a semi-planned agenda. I naively thought that many anarchists would instinctively get this and start to ask some difficult questions regarding what was being done to and planned for us. By and large, that didn’t happen. When the crisis broke, far from any questioning as to how it was being leveraged, instead, the anarchist movement fell into lockstep with the implementation of lockdowns. Truly bizarre behaviour for a movement that’s supposed to have a revolutionary cutting edge….”

And this from the same site

“…There have been a few eyebrows raised at my attending these #UniteForFreedom protests.The issue of elements of the far right attending these events in the hope of exploiting people’s anger at what lockdowns have done to their lives was raised. I’ve been asked, ‘do I feel comfortable with this?’ Let’s turn this around.I’ve been on more left organised marches than I care to remember to hand out anarchist propaganda. Have I felt comfortable being on the same protest as the likes of the SWP (rape apologists)? No I haven’t! …Yes, there have been a few very dodgy elements attending the #UniteForFreedom protests, I’m not going to deny that. Yes, I did take the few precautions required to avoid flagging up on their radar. By and large, when I’ve been handing out Estuary Stirrings on these protests, I’ve had a very positive reception from a very wide range of people. The point is that if there are a few iffy elements sniffing around, it’s vital that anarchists attend and engage people with their propaganda rather than dismiss the entire anti-lockdown / anti-great reset movement out of hand…”

Report on a protest in Bristol in August 2020

The Impact of Lockdown on UK Housing

“While capitalising on this crisis to outsource more functions of the UK state to its corporate partners, the Government has taken this opportunity to vastly increase its own powers to monitor and control the lives of British people in perpetuity. As expected of a country in which the single largest fixed monthly expenditure for most households is on the costs of accommodation, housing is at the heart of this transition to what is already the most authoritarian state in British history, the effects of which are widening the already-existing inequalities in UK society. Here we list some of the negative effects the lockdown has had on UK housing, while making some predictions about the future that awaits us.

1. The Increase in Housing Poverty and Homelessness…

2. The Transformation of the Home…”

The problem with distractions…

On some of the contradictions of anti-lockdown protests and the reactions to them.

“…having a pop at the leadership behind today’s protest is like shooting fish in a barrel. Because of some of the questionable speakers, it’s such an easy target to hit. The problem is that some of the people having a pop at the organisers of and speakers at these protests are lumping everyone who attends in with them. Which means the legitimate concerns and fears people have end up being summarily dismissed when they should be engaged with…”

Critique of  “The Great Reset”

Followed by a list of articles on “The Great Reset” (not all of which I’ve read yet)

“There is a massive overlap between those behind this insidious scheme and the Climate Capitalists whom we and others have previously exposed. The scam is essentially the same: using a façade of combatting climate change, or a virus, or even social injustice, this criminal mafia intends to force us, our children, and our children’s children into a miserable future of slavery, while they install themselves as undisputed rulers of the world.”

An abridged version of the same subject:

What are they trying to do to us?

The Great Reset can be found here: COVID-19_-The-Great-Reset-Klaus-Schwab, but keep a spare paper bag near you if you read this nauseously written attempt to dress up tyranny in nice “we’re so very concerned for you poor things” humanist language with its public front of exquisite social sensitivity, sustainability and exemplary altruism.


Covid vaccinated: what now?

Rough translation:

More and more people are being vaccinated, 2/3 of the adults in our   country [France – SF], which should logically slow down any evolution of the epidemic. Unfortunately it seems that this is not the case, maybe the opposite. Without vaccines, last summer was more serene, with 4 months of holidays (May to end of August), less than a month this year. There are no more seasons!

In the panoply of treatments, France has chosen only one, imposing it exclusively. This is what most countries do, under pressure from powerful lobbies. We have the European Medicines Agency (EMA), 85% of which is financed by those to whom it issues marketing authorisations (!!). (This is why ivermectin has no chance, as it cannot finance the EMA because it is in the public domain, and no laboratory will apply for a marketing authorisation…), headed by the biggest laboratories, vaccine manufacturers, and the WHO, whose main financier is Bill Gates ($194M in 2019), his foundation investing heavily in vaccines. On BioNTech alone, he multiplied his stake by 10  (Don’t make me say that everything he does is wrong, on the contrary, but here he is “seriously” wrong and deceives others).

Bill Gates said: “Celebrating success is good, but it is more important to learn from failure”. I would add, especially when success is not forthcoming. This beautiful success scenario, vaccines = end of the pandemic, has unfortunately seized up. It was predicted and foreseen by the health workers, not by our “specialists-decision-makers”. The virus mutates, it is in its nature, and variants that are not sensitive to a too narrowly targeted vaccination are appearing more and more and more quickly. I had already written a few weeks ago that a good third of the vaccinated can be contaminated, plus with delta, delta plus, and tomorrow lambda and epsilon, already out. The authorities, who claimed like the labs 95% protection now recognize it without problem: the vaccine does not prevent you from catching the disease, from contaminating. The latest official speeches speak of 65% coverage. As for the unvaccinated, you must keep on with the mask and all the protective measures, be confined or even quarantined, revaccinated if in contact, and if you want to travel, for example, a test is more valuable than a vaccination certificate.

After this observation and these lamentations, being admitted that the vaccinated catch and will catch more and more of the new variants, let’s be constructive and positive: these vaccinated people who catch the covid, what do we do with them? They were promised a cure, they followed through, what do we give them now that they are sick? A third dose? A fourth? It’s planned, it’s ordered, but will they follow? They thought they would be protected the first time, what will they do the second, the third? What have our authorities planned in the face of this growing problem? Will they finally look elsewhere, open other avenues?

Today, the response of our authorities is still on the same line, with blinkers on, without looking for other ways: in the face of the epidemic, let’s increase the rate of vaccination. If we could exclude the problems of side effects, they bring some things, we cannot deny it. But very logically, in the face of this supposed drastic drop in efficiency with these variants that are increasingly insensitive to vaccines, can we keep the same line without taking this into account? We are told that at least it protects against severe forms. On this subject, this is not what all the studies say.

Some say there are more, others less. We lack a bit of hindsight and, above all, reliable statistics (which we don’t have or don’t give) to be able to say one way or the other without being mistaken. In the nursing homes in the Landes, all vaccinated, (almost) all contaminated, and some deaths. A priori, there would be neither more nor less serious forms, which the English seem to show. On the other hand, what is undeniable is that there are globally fewer serious forms of the disease with delta, but both among the vaccinated and the non-vaccinated (who remain in the majority). In France, 50% of positive cases are due to delta, and yet hospitalisations, cases of resuscitation and deaths continue to fall. Delta therefore seems more contagious, but less nasty. Under these conditions, does it make sense to vaccinate for a virus that is not very aggressive, with a vaccine that does not work very well, exposing us to side effects that are, to say the least, a bit serious, not to mention the long term ones that are not yet known?

Under these conditions, in order to obtain the famous herd immunity, would it not be better for everyone to catch the delta, which is not very serious, than to be vaccinated! Yes! This is what the study just published in Nature on 8 July shows. This study compares the sensitivity of the delta variant to monoclonal antibodies, to antibodies of infected and convalescent people, and to antibodies of vaccinated people. I quote: “Serums from people who received a dose of Pfizer or AstraZeneca vaccines barely inhibited the Delta variant.” Bamlanivimab, totally ineffective, as for the serum of infected people (up to 12 months after the disease), it is 4 times less effective on the delta than on the alpha. Better to have delta antibodies than alpha. Of course it is better with two doses, but is it between the two doses that the variants explode, confirming an old forgotten rule: you don’t vaccinate in the middle of an epidemic?

This variant will quickly contaminate everyone, it is to date the least toxic variety, and the immunity acquired by the disease is far superior to that acquired by vaccination, which cannot lead to sufficient immunity to be collective/herd. And with a little Doxy and ivermectin, it won’t even be seen, probably less than seasonal flu.

With the benefit of hindsight, we can now look at what is happening in countries that have vaccinated faster and stronger than us. The first example is England, which despite vaccination is already suffering a wave that is higher than the second one in October-November, even though there was no vaccine! At the time, there were 25,000 cases per day, today England is at 32,000 cases per day on 8 July, 35,200 yesterday, and it is still rising. Who can objectively speak of the results of vaccination? In terms of severe cases, yes, but isn’t the delta the primary cause of this result? If there are fewer hospitalizations and deaths, the 2/3 of the patients who are not vaccinated should fill the hospitals, which is not the case! (a few more days to be more affirmative).

I regularly follow the Seychelles, a small country, quite isolated and therefore relatively protected during periods of confinement and reduced transport. I follow it because it is the country that has vaccinated the most in the world and quickly, which gives some hindsight. 70% of the population has received two doses, enough to be comfortably in the zone of herd immunity. It’s nothing: quiet last year, its problems started at the beginning of January with the first vaccines (as almost always, with rare exceptions). Here’s where they are now:

You will tell me that 375 is a small number of cases. No: in relation to the population, the wave is much higher than what is happening in France, it is a very big wave. It’s as if we had 50 or 60,000 cases a day, despite 70% of people being vaccinated!

Patrice Gibertie seems to find the same thing in Malta, which he thinks is more vaccinated than the Seychelles (personally my sources give 1% less than the Seychelles). Their wave is however fresh, one week, for one month in England and 3 months in the Seychelles. Same scenario to come?

So what are these countries going to propose to their population, now that the vaccine card has been used? A third dose pushed by the laboratories? Errare humanum est, perseverare diabolicum (*)? I know what I would do, but it is true that I am not under any pressure. I hope I am wrong about the effectiveness of vaccines, I hope I am not wrong about the aggressiveness of the delta, but the facts and figures are there, stubborn, they are moving forward and I am only looking at them. Facts, nothing but facts.

(*) “To err is human, to persevere is diabolical” falsely attributed to Seneca. One might prefer Saint Augustine in his sermons: “Humanum fuit errare, diabolicum est per animositatem in errore manere”: “To err is human, but to persist in error through arrogance is diabolic”.

N.B. I would point out to the global anti-vaxers that there are other places to express themselves. It is one thing to oppose vaccines or covid pseudo-vaccines because of their defects, which can be serious; it is another thing to oppose vaccination in general, which takes us away from the current problems, which I do not wish to do here.

Israel – Pfizer’s third shot

Translated by T:

Yaffa Shir Raz / Eran Hildesheim, 09/07/2021:

How did Netanyahu’s seemingly innocent statement demanding that the entire population be vaccinated become within a week an official request from Pfizer submitted to the FDA?

Join Eran Hildesheim who presents an interesting and especially suspicious chain of events that took place this week:

  1. We will start first at the end of February [2021], when Netanyahu, still as Prime Minister, surprises members of the government. “We will be required to renew the vaccine every six months” – he told them. It is not clear how Netanyahu, who is not an epidemiologist, could even then have predicted with such certainty something that even the major health bodies in Israel and around the world could not know regarding the effectiveness of a vaccine that was then barely two months in use?

  2. About four months later, on July 1, Thursday night – Netanyahu, no longer Prime Minister and still without a PhD in medicine, comes up with a new online video. He reiterates his call to vaccinate all citizens in a third dose as early as August despite continued medical opposition from the medical community to the move. He claims he came to this conclusion after talking to the best experts in the world (on behalf of Pfizer?). In any case, he did not give their names.

  3. Three days later – on July 4, Sunday – in almost perfect coordination with Netanyahu’s statement, Yoav Even announces in News 12 that against the background of rising “morbidity” [the inverted commas are my addition – T] in Corona in Israel, the Ministry of Health is considering removing their opposition and allowing the entire population to be vaccinated with the third dose. Then they will go back on it.

  4. The next day, July 5 – The Ministry of Health, which until this week has been fighting anyone who doubted the effectiveness of the vaccine, crosses the line and is quick to publish a puzzling figure according to which the effectiveness of the vaccine in preventing infection has dropped to 64%. The figure has been sharply criticized by many experts. The criticism even reached CNN where they said: “The Israeli Ministry of Health simply published the numbers and did not say how it got to them, because they simply published the data without any research, without any information, which experts said was very unprofessional.” Additional data released by the ministry the day after only increased the question marks surrounding the truth of this figure.

  5. The next day, July 9, between Thursday and Friday – exactly one week after Netanyahu’s statement and just days after the puzzling data presented by the Ministry of Health – the ground was prepared for Pfizer’s announcement: “As we see in world evidence published by the Israeli Ministry of Health, the effectiveness of the vaccine declined six months after the vaccine, just at a time when the Delta variant is becoming dominant in the country.” [translation from Hebrew and not a direct quote – T] The company has announced that it will apply to the FDA for an emergency vaccination permit. The FDA has already announced that it sees no reason at present for a third vaccine. The request will be submitted in any case by Pfizer in the month in which Netanyahu said that vaccination should begin – in August.

So it is possible that all these events that took place within a week are the product of a coincidence and that Netanyahu is actually a prophet. On the other hand, it is possible that someone here is doing shady business deals on our backs and our health, after all, dark agreements between large corporations that want to make a profit for regulators and legislators is not something we do not see in our world. I’m not saying this is what happened here, but if one wants to dispel the cloud and understand the story one must reveal the confidential agreements with Pfizer. It is also possible to blacken trade secrets in them so that there is no excuse to prevent advertising. It is known that Netanyahu insists on not publishing them. It is not clear just why Bennett [new Prime Minister – T] and Horowitz [new Health Minister, from the Social-democratic party Meretz – T] are collaborating with him.


And my addition [Shir Raz ]:

Article 6: Prof. Itamar Grotto [previous Health Ministry deputy chief – T] yesterday in an interview with Radio 103: “I do not think it is worth asking the seller how long the product is valid. There are tools to check it. Of course to do so contrary to the manufacturer’s instructions is risk taking, but sometimes you have to take risks.”


Some Israeli vaccine-recruitment posters aimed at kids:

A selection of Israeli children-vaccine propaganda posters, June-July 2021

Almost all of the below are produced in collaboration with the Ministry of Health, whose logo appears on most of the posters

  1. Bney Brak

“Green Summer in Bney-Brak

Bney-Brak chooses a green summer!

Get vaccinated and enjoy to the fullest [literally it says “enjoy up to the heavens/sky” – (Bney-Brak is mostly an ultra-orthodox city) ].

Children from the age of 12 to 16 come today to the vaccination centers …

Get vaccinated and enjoy a huge and amazing amusement park

Flood of experiences up to the heavens at Biluna [the name of the amusement park] for you – free!

* [below] The campaign runs until Friday 9.7.21

2. Clalit HMO (the largest of Israel’s four state-mandated health service organizations, charged with administering health care services and funding for its members (all Israeli citizens resident in the country must be a member of one of the four providers)

Right-side photo: “without vaccine”

Left-side photo: “with vaccine”

[clearly the vaccine gives you an instant sex change, yet another side effect  they’ve kept quiet about so far]

“So that your summer vacation will go into quarantine

Getting vaccinated now, also from the age of 12″

3. Tel Aviv-Jaffa

“Municipal booths for corona vaccines

4-8 July, 17:00-23:00″

Middle, in purple: “Vaccine, ice cream and free entrance ticket to one attraction in the city”

4. Carmi’el

“Vaccination site for teenagers in Carmiel

At the bottom, in red:

“Free movie ticket for everyone vaccinated

For ages 12-18″

Other posters offer kids ice lollies, a DJ  Rave [Israel’s not the only place to use this – see this video from Belgium],  a lottery with prizes, multimedia games, entrance tickets to the municipal swimming pool,  pizza slices and a drink for each vaccinated. Nevertheless, despite the propaganda and shoddy bribes,  apparently only 13 percent of parents are willing
to vaccinate their children.


Kenya, Nairobi: clashes with cops over Covid restrictions and cop savagery towards youth

Video here

On the risk of death by Covid for children 

“To sum up, covid is not a threat to children. At least not more of a threat than many other risks we take for granted and happily let our children take, like riding in cars and crossing streets. …Since it is at present far from clear that vaccination is less risky to children than infection, it is deeply unethical to vaccinate them.”

Not conforming to consensus described as being “Down the Rabbit Hole”

According to this piece by the NY Times, “critical thinking isn’t helping in the fight against misinformation”, so just read and believe what you’re told is true and don’t worry about it.

Putting Covid in context – the dramademiology of Covid

(January 2021 article by doctor)

“Overhyping and distorting what is already intrinsically dramatic does not garner more respect for the menace, it garners distrust of the message. A consistent, willful want of context that amplifies portents of doom propagates anxiety and dread among those predisposed to take the bad news seriously, and disdain among those predisposed to suspect deceit.  Harm is actually done in both directions, to both camps.”


The Illusion of Evidence Based Medicine

Video about research papers on medical journals and the fact that they’re often  ghost-written by the drug companies, with reputable names signing the paper as theirs’ –  “….It very often turns out to be the case that none of these people have actually reviewed the data – all they’ve done is read the paper and agreed to put their name on it…”.

It quotes Richard Horton, current editor of The Lancet as saying, “Medical…journals have devolved into information-laundering operations for the pharmaceutical industry”.

Most of the anomalies in the trials and secret funding were only discovered through litigation as a result of significant adverse side effects. Also talks of how doctors and hospitals  are effectively “bribed” by Big Pharma (e.g. in 2013 Big Pharma paid $3.5bn to doctors and hospitals). And also how high-ups in the FDA or the CDC who gave approval to drugs then retire from the FDA or CDC and take up high positions in the pharmaceutical industries whose drugs they’d just given approval to.

Sent by T:

Two relatively short texts by Dr. David Katz that  provide more contextual reference to the pandemic (not so much of a radical critique, but in these days even the things he says here could be considered radical…).

Gaps in the Tale of COVID’s Long Tail (on the phenomenon of “long covid”)…/

The Dramademiology of COVID: A Pandemic Manifesto of Here and Now…/

“My own respect for the pandemic was never in question, and has been informed by a front line view, and now a new, particular intimacy. As I write this, I almost certainly have COVID. My son, two of my daughters, and my wife are all sick and have tested positive, and we all have much the same array of symptoms (none too bad, I hasten to note). I await my confirmation by test result, but you know what they say when it flaps like a duck and swims like a duck and quacks like a duck.

I respect this contagion and have from the start. I also resent the drama.

While public policy and coordinated crisis response have been wanting, the media response has been a veritable feeding frenzy, and the systematic extraction of every droplet of drama to keep it going. As the saying goes: never waste a good crisis. My contention is that a thick overlay of drama where unencumbered data ought to be is among the reasons we have so horribly wasted this one. We are mired in the dramademiology (my own neologism) of COVID. If there is to be a field of COVIDramademiology- and there should be, when this crisis is subject to its post-mortem exam- it will require us to study the impacts of pandemic distortion on human populations. They will, when we finally look back with clarity and dispassion, prove quite massive.”

2009 article about Pfizer

Fear and Loathing in the Age of COVID

From a forum, T. writes:

Fear in its many aspects is one thing I find to be at the heart of much of this ongoing period. There was an interesting yet way too academic and philosophical text by Agamben that I read a few months ago but that I only found in French translation. Anyway, this piece from Montreal Counter-info offer some good points for reflection:

“Back in March 2020, a group of behavioural scientists penned an open letter urging the U.K. government to use evidence-based techniques to influence the public to comply with its commands. Their letter states: “those essential behaviour changes that are presently required… will receive far greater uptake the more urgent the situation is perceived to be.”

It seems so benign when they put it that way, but it would seem to me that what is being proposed is the state uses psychological manipulation to frighten the populace so that they are more compliant.

Other examples make a pattern clear. According to an article in Die Welt, headlined “The German Government Ordered Scientists to Produce Data to Scare Citizenry”: “a group of German lawyers has been pushing for the Koch Institute to disclose correspondence with the German Home Office in which the latter demanded that “scientists” create “scientific” documentation to scare the populace… The document, published just weeks later, finally identified a worst-case scenario in which more than a million people could die from the coronavirus.”

The same article goes on to note that fear-conditioning seems to be widely accepted. It notes that “on the website of one of the largest and best known institutions of higher learning in the US, Cornell University, the following study was found: “Modelling the role of media induced fear conditioning in mitigating post-lockdown COVID-19 pandemic: perspectives on India”.

This study (which has not been peer-reviewed) finds that “fear conditioning via mass media (like television, community radio, internet and print media),” along with positive reinforcement, resulted in “significant decrease in the growth of infected population.”

Basically, this study advocates for the use of fear-mongering propaganda in the name of Public Health, specifically through the formation of conditioned reflexes. … Are we being conditioned to have automatic, unconscious reactions to certain stimuli as part of a propaganda campaign?

According to the study, the answer to this question is yes. It states: “Modelling studies have shown that fear has a major influence in reducing the impact of a pandemic. Fear was shown to be directly associated with increased social distancing, as well as increased security measures… Thus, reflex fear production through incoming information, combined with other techniques, can increase social distancing and cautious behaviour. Fear conditioned reflex production, a subspecies of classical conditioned reflex production, is the making of a connection between unpleasant events and a stimulus from the environment.””

Israel: The Ministry of Health vs. The Ministry of Health

A year ago myocarditis amongst the young was the great threat hanging over those inflicted with Covid, with potential very long-term effects, according to the Ministry of Health. But myocarditis resulting from the vaccines is presented by the same Ministry of Health as largely benign, with short-term effects.

From a thread on a forum, T. writes:

Rough translation of a Facebook post of an Israeli health journalist, recently fired from the lifestyle magazine in which she worked in order to “make it lighter” according to the magazine:

Basically, the question is not whether you believe independent doctors and researchers, who have nothing to gain from warning you about the serious side effects of the vaccine such as myocarditis, and putting their good name and careers at risk to do so, or the Ministry of Health officials, some of whom at least are in significant conflicts of interest and not declaring it.

The question is do you choose to believe the Ministry of Health … or the Ministry of Health?

Do you choose to believe the Ministry of Health 15.7.2020:
“Corona disease can cause long-term disabilities even in young and healthy populations, and even in those who have suffered only a mild disease … myocarditis is a complication in some corona patients … Following inflammation, myopathy of the heart muscle may develop, accompanied by some cardiac disorders … It is possible that these damages are in some cases even irreversible.”

Or  the Ministry of Health 1.6.2021: “There is a likelihood of a link between receiving a second dose of vaccine and the onset of myocarditis …. The link is stronger in young people aged 16-19 relative to other ages … In most cases it is a mild disease that passes within a few days.”

Mild illness or irreversible damage ???
Anyone who still believes the information coming out of the Ministry of Health in the context of Corona or the experimental genetic therapy mistakenly called “vaccination”, or at all, is welcome to ponder this a little more.

When you lie without a break and the lies get complicated

Source for document of Ministry of Health from (in Hebrew):

Violence in Modern Medicine

Chapter written by two doctors influenced by Ivan Illich on the topic — from the book “Science, hegemony and violence: A Requiem for Modernity” .
SK writes:
Probably the most noteworthy aspect of the text are all the examples of doctors refusing treatments for themselves, on the basis of the cure being worse than the disease, which are routinely prescribed for ignorant laypersons.

Some interesting comments from an interview with the editor of that book. Particularly noteworthy here is the proposal that not merely the context (capitalism, say) but the text of science itself is problematic, and his relation between officially sanctioned dissent (eg. most leftist criticism of unequal access to vaccines), widely tolerated, and dissent relating to the basic assumptions of the game (eg. radical critique of modern science and medicine), suppressed as lunatic.

´I became interested in the culture of science itself. The question of properly scientific creativity and the destructiveness of science…The psychology of politics had already taken me in that direction of understanding violence. And ultimately this became a kind of swing and my increasing preoccupation came to be with the sources of human creativity and destructiveness. This led to my more general investigations on the destructiveness of science and a search for a radical critique of science that would focus not only on the critique of its ‘faulty’ context but would examine the very text of science itself. I found it increasingly difficult to believe that it was merely the context that accounted for its problems and that there was some thought police guarding the borders of the text itself, as it were. That took me to different kinds of knowledge systems which had different kinds of starting points and different baselines…different points of departure…One, that in the ultimate analysis, dominance is not ensured through political economy, though it manifests itself through it; it is also not ensured through superior technology a point made in “Witches, nurses and midwives” regarding the hegemony of modern medicine. It is mainly ensured through categories. If you can generate categories which marginalize the categories of others, then you have forced them to play your game. And as long as that can be ensured, you can be pretty sure that your dominance will not be challenged, because that game is yours.

Take for instance, something like healing systems…We take recourse to these traditional systems all the time. But at the same time there is a healthy and robust skepticism regarding these – all healing systems – often expressed in common Sanskrit saying that circulate at a popular level, to the effect that the vaidya a traditional healer kills by the hundreds, while the doctor kills in thousands. This robust skepticism began to fascinate me because I noticed that this skepticism was absent in modern medical culture. One third of all medical reference in North America are iatrogenic – that is one third of all diseases reported are either drug induced or doctor induced.

Not that there is no skepticism in the mainstream medical culture…but that’s repressed.  Ivan Illich has given some instances and Manu Kothari too has given some very telling examples…For instance, one of the instances he has given is that of surgeons who operate on intestinal ulcers. The rate of surgeons prescribing surgery to themselves or to their family members is one-third the rate they prescribe to others and these are cases of elite hospitals. In fact one survey says very explicitly that by standard medical conventions, doctors would routinely under-prescribe drugs for themselves and their kind and similar is the case also with surgical interventions. So I became interested in this…I began to think that talking of a science like medicine…It enjoys a kind of sanctity and once you say that ‘science says this’ then everybody takes it as gospel truth. So this is one kind of way in which the text is also contaminated.

All large, dominant systems also create a space for dissent – in a kind of ‘Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition’ style – using the same language, same conventions, to establish that dissent is sane, normal, reasonable and well intentioned. But I don’t think that the oppressed have any obligation to follow the rules of the game – and they do not. In a society where such sanctioned forms of dissent are prevalent, there will of course, be people in large numbers who will go towards them, but there will always be people who defy these and try to subvert the given mode of dissent and of course, they will not be seen as dissenters; they will be seen as lunatics. They will be seen as being outside the ken of conventional rights granted to dissenters. So for instance, sixty percent of the Americans believe today that torture is justified, especially, say while dealing with a ‘terrorist’ who apparently knows about an impending terrorist attack. Obviously, terrorism – rightly or wrongly, that is not the point – happens to represent then a new kind of dissent. The kind that does not conform to laid out criteria and there is always a scope that such dissent also represents a search for a different kind of world and challenges the dominant in a much more radical fashion – and the real test of tolerance and democracy comes there.´

T. writes:

As for “All large, dominant systems also create a space for dissent – in a kind of ‘Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition’ style – using the same language, same conventions, to establish that dissent is sane, normal, reasonable and well intentioned. But I don’t think that the oppressed have any obligation to follow the rules of the game – and they do not. In a society where such sanctioned forms of dissent are prevalent, there will of course, be people in large numbers who will go towards them, but there will always be people who defy these and try to subvert the given mode of dissent and of course, they will not be seen as dissenters; they will be seen as lunatics. They will be seen as being outside the ken of conventional rights granted to dissenters.”

See this astounding piece of scientific research:
“Sociopathic traits linked to not wearing a mask or social distancing during pandemic: study”…

Also, according to this piece by the NY Times, “critical thinking isn’t helping in the fight against misinformation”, so just read what you’re told is true and don’t worry about it:…

SK writes:

Key sentence — “Antisocial personality disorder occurs in about 1% of the U.S. population, and is more common in men. “

When the occupy movement chanted we are the 99%, this is who they were aiming at. And this 1% are certainly not protesting against covid measures.

T. writes:

“Science can’t be seen to change (it has: but don’t tell the public) …which is why the parameters of the dialogue are so tightly controlled. If the paradigm of science changes: all other paradigms have to shift to accommodate it. That is because the principles of the scientific paradigm are the foundation of all other paradigms. And the foundational principle of control.

If all paradigms shift – as Thomas Kuhn made clear – we will be living in a new world. One with us included in it. The regimes of power and knowledge require we are excluded by scientism and historicism. You would not want love, compassion, altruism, and socialised communities of mutual aid ruining two and a half millennia of the ruling value-ethics of individual rationalisation of greed, would you now?”

(from the comments section of OffGuardian, about a year ago)

The 1990 CBC Massey Lectures, “Biology As Ideology”

“Richard Lewontin is a prominent scientist — a geneticist who teaches at Harvard — yet he believes that we have placed science on a pedestal, treating it as an objective body of knowledge that transcends all other ways of knowing and all other endeavours.“Science is a social institution,” he writes in this collection of essays, which began their life as CBC Radio’s Massey Lectures Series for 1990. “Scientists do not begin life as scientists, after all, but as social beings immersed in a family, a state, a productive structure, and they view nature through a lens that has been molded by their social experience … Science, like the Church before it, is a supremely social institution, reflecting and reinforcing the dominant values and vices of society at each historical epoch.” In Biology as Ideology Richard Lewontin examines the false paths down which modern scientific ideology has led us. By admitting science’s limitations, he helps us rediscover the richness of nature — and appreciate the real value of science.”

SK writes: In Biology as Ideology Richard Lewontin examines the false paths down which modern scientific ideology has led us. By admitting science’s limitations, he helps us rediscover the richness of nature — and appreciate the real value of science.

SF: Not directly related to Covid, but still pertinent. A section of his book about DNA can be found here on this site.


Israel: as expiry dates on vaccines approaches, propaganda to vaccinate kids intensifies (sent by email)


One of the reasons (perhaps the main one) for the rush to vaccinate 12-5 year olds in Israel his last month, with the renewed obsession with PCR testing everyone (especially children) and the renewed fear campaign full of disinformation and blatant lies, is that there’s a stock of the vaccines that’s gonna expire very soon (I think they said around 9/7, although some officials claimed that the expiration date can be somehow prolonged, without really explaining it). But what do you know? They may have found a solution: giving this stock as a third shot for vaccinated adults and 16+s . This may have to do with the fact that despite the massive contradictory propaganda for vaccinating your children so they will not infect adults –  with a vaccination that doesn’t prevent infection and infecting others – there wasn’t enough enthusiasm on behalf of parents to vaccinate their kids. We already saw in the Belgian documentary that I sent how before the vaccination campaign started the EMA purchased something like 1.8 billions of vaccines (maybe I don’t remember accurately), which they probably won’t want to waste either… From what I understand from the contradictory statements of different actors such as the new Prime Minister and some of the so-called Health journalists – it’s pretty obvious that Pfizer will provide more vaccines when needed. So when the Prime Minister is directly urging children in a recent video to get vaccinated “before it’s too late and the vaccines are expired and you won’t be able to” – it’s probably a maneuver to create panic and to rush people, whether the current stock of vaccines is really going to expire or not (about which I’m not really sure). 

This screenshot from Israeli news says:
A third Corona shot already in the next few days?”
If the third vaccine is approved: Hundreds of vaccines will not be thrown away


Ivermectin: Can a Drug Be “Right-Wing”?

I’ve reproduced this article  because you can only access the whole of it if you pay for it. It’s about how hospitals in the US fought hard, hiring expensive law firms, at times going to extraordinary lengths to refuse treatment using ivermectin even with dying patients who’d exhausted all other options, and even though ivermectin had been shown to be very helpful in aiding recovery in the patients who were then subsequently refused it.  Also about how this  potential Covid-19 treatment has become hostage to a larger global fight between populists and anti-populists.

“At Edward-Elmhurst hospital in Chicago, a 68 year-old named Nurije Fype was admitted, put on a ventilator, and again, as all other treatments failed, her family got a judge to order the use of ivermectin. Lorigo claims the hospital initially refused to obey the court order, which led to the filing of a contempt motion, which in turn led to a pair of counter-motions and another confrontation before another befuddled Judge named James Orel. “Why wouldn’t this be tried if she’s not improving?” the Chicago Tribune quoted Orel as saying. “Why does the hospital object to providing this medication?” “He basically said, ‘What do you have left?’” Lorigo recounts. “No one would administer the ivermectin. It’s as safe as aspirin, for Christ’s sake. It’s been given out 3.7 billion times. I couldn’t understand it.””


This is not a conspiracy! A video

T. writes:

Was made by an ex-journalist.

English subs (man-made, not auto-generated) available if you choose it in the options.

It’s not the Society of the Spectacle or anything, and is made in the common fashion of documentaries of that sort, but still provides good insights into how different players played their role (notably the media, but also the virologists), and manages not to be hysterical or sensationalist.

SF: Although the perspective is far from being a radical critique and doesn’t say much that’s new, it brings together lots of aspects of the situation that are usually considered separately, and in doing so generates a feeling of thoughtful anger that makes it well worth watching. Most interesting bit for me was an interview with a doctor who worked in an Intensive Care Unit  who was sacked merely for his critical views, just in the middle of an epidemic when hospitals apparently needed people like  him the most. Amongst other things, this doctor pointed out that the immune system is very sensitive to fear. Another interesting bit was the fact that in Belgium they used young good-looking actors with make-up supposedly on ventilators in ICUs to convey the image of the virus attacking young people. It also talks about a  Ministry of Health press conference and extensive headlines about a 3-year-old dying of Covid, when the child was already dying of neuromuscular disease when she caught Covid. The father’s complaints about the child being instrumentalised for propaganda purposes were ignored. Also the irony of Facebook allowing Flat Earthers to share their delerium but discussions about Covid outside of the consensus are censored. And another thing: a government adviser suggested that 50 additional cases a day should mean the continuation of Covid regulations and no “return to normal”, when very often  there are 150 new cases of flu a day without any restrictions (though this is not entirely comparable as Covid is proportionally more fatal than flu, though maybe that’s because severe cases of flu are usually treated with anti-virals, whereas Covid isn’t).


The contradictions of protests against lockdown in Brazil

“Many people must have invested such money in a small enterprise in an attempt to make some money at the end of the year in order to try to survive in the hard times that will come. These people saw such source of income disappear and were left without any alternative. For these reasons, and not because of pandemic denialism or stupidity, but out of sheer necessity, that there was a crowd of workers together with business owners in downtown Manaus on December 26 blocking traffic during the whole day in several roads and making barricades until the governor retreated….the foundation and form of the movement is that it is not made of manipulated and ignorant people, and that it has some roots among urban workers and considers itself legitimate….When the movement speaks about the “balance between economy and health” it is talking about a simple reality: it is not possible to stay at home and take care of people’s health without the proper conditions. Why was it necessary to carry out demonstrations, close highways and make barricades for the governor and the mayor to take these basic measures that minimally help people to stay at home? People need to eat and need to take care of their health. Those things cannot be in opposition to one another A lockdown without social and economic protection measures is a repressive farce. People will revolt against such a situation — and it will be a legitimate revolt.”

Many protests today, and even historically, have had an element of cross-class composition. Few movements don’t involve, in some way, elements that have interests outside of and against  attempts to confront the miseries imposed by capital and the state. Which is certainly not a reason to dismiss them but is a reason to point out the dangers inherent in not challenging such contradictions. The stupidity of those who insist on lockdown across the board is that it’s a “one-size-fits-all” top-down imposition not, by any means, always applicable and an invariably hierarchical imposed  constraint. No-one with any sense wants people to have to work in unhealthy conditions that could threaten their lives (even though many have done so before, and continue to do so during, the Covid epoch) but all “solutions” within the logic of this society, which itself created the health aspect of what is fundamentally a social problem and exacerbated it in the first place, not only aren’t solutions but invariably impose miseries and confused responses that have almost no possibilities of leading to going beyond the false choices imposed by capitalism, a perspective that mainly needs to be developed from critiquing equally lockdown and simplistic anti-lockdown reactions. This is not something that will come from “the Left”, of which this text wants to consider itself a part – the text  says “It is up to the left to … demand social protection measures in order to reassure the protection of the health of poor people who depend on their own economic activities.”.  If the state comes to offer “social protection measures” it will only be for reasons that have nothing to do with the welfare of the poor – either as a means of pacifying and recuperating revolt, or because it needs a relatively healthy workforce for other reasons such as fighting a war. If revolt is strong enough to force the state to reverse its neoliberal perspectives it would equally be strong enough to establish the basis for the development of a non-capitalist form of social life: yet again allowing the state to buy time by accepting the provision of  some form of Welfare State would  be to allow history to repeat itself (see “the welfare state isn’t now, and never was, a “genuine gain for the working class”). Such a mirage of victory would only be temporary and giving in to it would allow our enemies to go on to reverse it as they’ve done before.

Almost invariably “the Left” has been thoroughly abject in its inability and fear  of questioning anything  other than the most obvious during this Covid epoch, though perhaps this text expresses a slight exception to this general trend. But the inability and fear  of questioning anything  other than the most obvious has  been its historic comportment for more or less a century, representing proletarian critique in lieu of actually contributing to it. And now in this Covid epoch most of the Left, “libertarian” or otherwise, don’t even begin to represent discontent: most merely echo the dominant discourse.


Other “Coronacrisis”-related pages on this site:

The contradictions of herd immunity 

The politics of large numbers

India: Covid & ivermectin

Conspirouettes (may 2021)

Ivermictine (april 2021)

Better to be sorry than safe (February 2021) (on the  vaccination programme)

Coronavirus in France (March 2020)

  Czaravirus May 2020 (about the situation in Russia)

Cameravirus, April 2020 (facial recognition cameras, masks and the global development of totalitarianism from China to the rest of the world)

Leftist bollocks from the usual suspects (December 2020)

and also, on aspects of  the search for vaccinations, see this (September 2020)

Also “The ‘C’ word”

Also see these from earlier phases of this madness: Letter from a comrade in China (March 2020) & Social Contagion (February 2020) (I have minor qualms about what could be interpreted as some nostalgia for welfare state capitalism, but it’s not explicit and is not in any way the main aspect of this text; for a critique of welfare state capitalism see this)

SamFanto was born, and then he lived a bit but never enough.

mandatory vaccination & the 1947 Nuremberg “medical ethics” Code


Much of the following is probably pertinent more to France than to other countries. This might well be due to the fact that there seems to be marginally more skepticism amongst the French towards Covideologies than in many other countries and that France has a marginally greater history of recent resistance to the state than many other countries.

On French TV recently a man critical of the propaganda moving towards making the vaccination programme compulsory mentioned the Nuremberg Code and was immediately shouted down, and prevented from speaking, by some ignorant journalists saying how dare he compare the current situation with the Nazis.  What this guy was trying to talk about was the Nuremberg Code on medical ethics, dated 1947, and not the 1945-46 trial of Nazi leaders.

A few days later on the same channel a journalist and and an economist went ballistic, suggesting that those who haven’t been vaccinated should not have the same rights as those who have been, that they should be sequestrated and even sent to prison. Meanwhile, France’s Minister of Health has threatened to contact all GPs to provide the Ministry with a list of all their patients who have not been vaccinated. So much for the Hippocratic Oath.  Vaccinationavirus has clearly surpassed pandemic proportions. Even an apparently anti-state marxist – S.Artesian  – is infected with it, advocating mandatory vaccination. This makes all of those infected with the Vaccinationavirus even worse than the Council of Europe that on 28th January this year at least said that there should be no social or professional discrimination against anyone refusing the available vaccines, though this clearly contradicts the introduction of France’s  “passe sanitaire” – the “Health Passport”, increasingly being used for events such as concerts or other gatherings this society promotes endlessly as an apparent source of pleasure. Under the reign  of the “health emergency” the state is obviously developing an unprecedented totalitarianism, not as crude as Nazism or Stalinism, but invading aspects of life that these archaic forms of capitalist social control hadn’t dared or even thought they could invade. The result is more a gulag of people’s critical capacity, the imprisonment of their ability to even marginally think and act for themselves rather than literal  concentration camps. Those whom the state wish to destroy they first drive mad with confusion.

Much of these developments conflict – at least at a superficial level – with the 1947 Nuremberg Code. The court established in 1947 was American, without the participation of the three other powers who had been a party to the first Nuremberg trials in 1945. Previously, for example, in the second half of the 19th century hospital researchers in Lyon used abandoned orphans as guinea pigs without any misgivings. And in French Indochina Alexandre Yersin, one of the heads of the Pasteur Institute, inoculated the bacillus plague into Cochin-Chinese prisoners. About a year ago 2 high-ups in the state-run INSERM (France’s state organisation that tests and then allows or disallows medical products to be used by the general public) suggested that vaccines should be experimented with in Africa on Africans. They had to withdraw their comments a few days later after denunciations of racism but not on the basis of conflicting with the Nuremberg Code.

The code was intended to prohibit the type of medical experiments that had taken place in the Nazi camps. At least the most unsupportable ones because many of them were an integral part, from the end of the 18th century at least, of experimental medicine, including in the territory of modern nation states, such as the United States, and in their colonies. The Nuremberg Code presented Nazi medicine as the infamous exception to the general rule of medical ethics, the famous oath attributed to Hippocrates. A falsification that misses out how defenders of the followers of Dr. Mengele* at the trial occasionally reminded people of the experiments still being carried out at the time in the United States. Such as the Tuskegee Study, which allowed dozens of black sharecroppers to die from untreated syphilis.  They gave them stuff such as hot meals etc. in exchange for being guinea pigs. Similar things are happening now in places such as Israel: for example, municipalities are giving away treats for children such as ice-cream, movie tickets etc. with posters, designed to look like it’s all a bit of  fun,  inviting and encouraging them to be vaccinated.

Between the 1950s and 1970s,  during an outbreak of hepatitis Dr. Saul Krugman deliberately infected healthy children at Willowbrook School for the “mentally retarded”, New York, with the hepatitis virus reasoning “that it was justifiable to inoculate retarded children at Willowbrook with hepatitis virus because most of them would get hepatitis anyway”. Similarly, between 1951 and 1974 Dr. Albert Kligman subjected nearly a thousand inmates of Holmsburg Prison, Pennsylvania, to toxic chemicals in order to see how skin reacted to them. He said All I saw before me were acres of skin…It was like a farmer seeing a fertile field for the first time.” An example of how objective bourgeois science is: it sees people as objects, as mere acres of skin, as things. The thing is, people aren’t.  And anyone with a bit of sense would see that the current vaccination programme is similar to these previous forms of functionalising people, and that its “one-size-fits-all” methods and mentality are utterly and dangerously indifferent to differences,  that as guinea pigs they are being merely used as a means to an end totally out of their control, to the profit of capital.  And acceptance of this logic makes individuals incapable of seeing, or even wanting to see, whether vaccination is pertinent for them or not, let alone capable of informing themselves of potential risks and/or benefits.

The Nuremberg Code stated that some types of medical experiments on human beings, when they are inscribed within reasonably well-defined limits, conform to the ethics of the medical profession in general”. The judges justified their positions on the basis that such experiences produce results for the good of society, which are impossible to obtain by other methods or means of study” [i]. In addition, the code specified that such rules of ethics only applied to the territory of the States concerned”. This amounted to authorizing the said States to continue to use the territories they controlled around the world, beginning with their colonies, as fields for medical experimentation.

From such rules of commercial morality, all that was left was to quantify, as closely as possible, the degree of suffering acceptable and accepted in the name of the progress of the human condition”. This is why the judges accepted the very idea of hierarchically-directed human experimentation, not to mention animal experimentation which obviously did not pose any problem of conscience. They laid down the fundamental principles” to be observed in order to respond to moral, ethical and legal concepts”, namely: The experiment must be based on the voluntary and enlightened consent of the human subject” … The experiment should be conducted in such a way that all unnecessary suffering and all physical and mental harm is avoided” … The level of risks to be taken should never exceed that of the humanitarian importance of the problem which the experiment should solve”, etc. Given that the notion of humanitarian importance” in the context of conventional, and conventionally uncritical, medical practice  is that of the state and capital, the Nuremberg Code left the door open to a lot of experiments, in laboratories and elsewhere, carried out by the wo/men in white coats and de facto contrary to the tables of bioethics law that were supposed to sanction it. As Guy Vallancien, Professor at the Descartes University, Paris, and a member of the Society of Predictive and Personalised Medicine, declared at a congress in 2016, in Montpellier: “Ethics are only the mirror of the evolution of a society, it comes after, it is not the spearhead. If we put it before cold and amoral science, we would stop everything.”

In addition, the notion of informed and voluntary consent of the subject”, posed in terms of formalistic legal terms, evades de facto that of the content. Firstly, even though the tests were, and remain, carried out by experimenters who underline its uncertain and even sometimes dangerous character, how can human guinea pigs grasp their nuances, modalities and consequences?  They can only do so in vague probabilistic terms. Ultimately, most people, lacking any intricate knowledge, can only take medical knowledge at its word. Because where there are so-called subjects, there are also masters. The conventions that followed Nuremberg, such as that of Helsinki in 1964, only refined the Code further and insisted, at a formal level, on taking into account “exceptions”, in particular those concerning “voluntary consent” by introducing the idea that the experiment could be accepted by those legally responsible for the human guinea pigs, such as minors, sick or not, or those incapable of making decisions for themselves! [ii] We can see in the current epoch a development from using those at the margins or bottom of  “polite society”‘s hierarchy (orphans, prostitutes, the mentally retarded, prisoners, etc.) as guinea pigs to using the whole population as guinea pigs**. That’s progress!

It is clear that the fear of dying, sometimes for people on borrowed time, often plays the role of the decisive factor in the acceptance of the proposals of the experimenters and the rules of bioethics which are supposed to frame their actions. This, in the current situation, despite the chances of the vaccine hastening the death of people with a short life expectancy, something which is kept largely unspoken of in the dominant media [iii]. “Of all the passions, fear is the one that most assures submission to laws”, as Thomas Hobbes affirmed in Leviathan [iv]. In normal, pre-Covid circumstances, individuals tested by laboratories are, as a rule, paid, which in France is legal, at least outside the hospital setting. Which explains why they have been from the poorest sections of the population. In the current Covid epoch nobody is paid – the world is a costless risk-free laboratory for the pharmaceutical companies (the various states, rather than the companies themselves, cover any potential cost of legal compensation for “adverse effects” such as death, though unscientific and purely anecdotal evidence suggests that compensation for death has not been much genuine compensation for the victim).

Aspects of all this is being made abundantly clear in the current vaccination programme, for which the 3rd stage of the trial has not been restricted to, say, 30,000 volunteers but has been spread to the whole world. In fact, the 3rd stage officially doesn’t end until 2022 for some of the vaccines and 2023 for others. Moreover, in extending the gap between first dose and the second from 3 weeks to 3 months, and in allowing different vaccines for the 2nd dose from the 1st one (eg Moderna for the first, Pfizer for the 2nd), the powers-that-be are using the world as its laboratory in ways that even go against a scientific protocol that is already suspect. And Pfizer has also gone against its own protocol in giving the vaccine to psychologically vulnerable children.

The notion of “informed consent” is now a sick joke: 99.9% of information is that which the state and capital permits. This is especially so given the current rampant censorship on Facebook, Youtube, Vimeo and elsewhere. And the rest of the 0.1% is automatically parodied as “conspiracy theory” or “anti-vaxxer”, regardless of whether it fits into these categories or not.

This French text says that France’s “Minister of Health, in a letter to the President of the CNOM [Conseil National de l’Ordre des Médecins – National Council of the Order of Doctors], relieves doctors of the responsibility to inform patients of the risks of vaccination. I quote: “Doctors cannot be held liable on the grounds that they have provided insufficient information to patients about adverse effects unknown at the time of vaccination”. What are we to think of doctors’ knowledge on the subject, when they are only entitled to one source of information, the official one, any other being vilified or censored. The official information? That of the only laboratories already multiply condemned for having hidden  side effects in other cases. Moreover, the information is watered down by the authorities. An example: the messenger RNA remains in the deltoid muscle, according to Inserm and the authorities. What did Pfizer and Moderna write in their studies that the authorities did not mention? “We found elements of the vaccine in all organs, including reproductive ones”. So how “informed” is consent? When a vaccinator tells patients that vaccines are safe, made like others from attenuated viruses, is the person in charge who must enlighten others well informed? Our Minister, the same one, has just threatened to make vaccination compulsory for carers in nursing homes if they do not vaccinate more. In “informed consent”, there is the word “consent”. What is consent under threat, under blackmail? Is it consent? Moreover, what scientific and medical justification is there for this blackmail when 90% of the residents are vaccinated and therefore protected? (Remember that the vaccine is 98% effective…). Are we in the spirit of the Nuremberg Code? It specifies in its first article that: “The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person concerned must have the legal capacity to consent; that he or she must be placed in a position to exercise free choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, coercion, trickery, deception or other underhand forms of constraint or coercion.” In the above-mentioned letter, the Minister also talks about compensation for victims of the CVI vaccine. Usually, it is the laboratory that is responsible for the consequences of what it markets, so it is careful before launching its product on the market. In this case, the state has entered into a contract with the laboratories, “taking responsibility” for liability and compensation for any consequences. The laboratories therefore have fewer precautions to respect, their portfolio will not suffer in case of shortcomings. They have already been fined billions of euros in recent years for withholding information and defects, but this does not prevent our authorities from not only trusting them with their eyes closed, but also from relieving them of their responsibilities.”

Some of this article comes from “Des souris et des gènes” (“Of mice and genes”) by André Dréan, though the wording is entirely mine.


In Galicia in Spain vaccines have become compulsory; fines of up to 60,000 euros for non-compliance. More here

And Indonesia has threatened 1 year in prison plus a  $7,000 fine for those who don’t get vaccinated

Google translate:

While in most countries of the world the criterion for receiving corona vaccines is old age or background diseases, in Indonesia these days the picture is the opposite. The huge country, which has a population of 267 million people on a vast area of ​​thousands of islands, has decided that one of the first groups in line for vaccines will be … everyone over the age of 18 to 59. The rationale behind this approach is that this group is the “engine” of the corona plague – many asymptomatic patients, who have multiple social connections …36,000 residents have died so far in the epidemic in Indonesia, out of 1.3 million residents infected with Corona. As in Europe, in Indonesia the second wave recorded during December-January was much larger than that recorded at the beginning of the epidemic, but morbidity has been declining in recent weeks. Indonesia has acquired most of its vaccines from China, which was the first country to develop a vaccine for corona, although it has not yet been approved for use by medical authorities in the West. The vaccine was developed by SinoVac and is widely used in China itself. The vaccination campaign in Indonesia began on January 13, and since then aims to vaccinate about 1.3 million health care workers as well as a group of police officers, public servants, teachers, athletes, journalists and more (estimated at 17 million people). Everyone will get the vaccine for free, subsidized by the authorities. But one of the significant differences compared to other countries is that the vaccine is defined as “mandatory”, although it is not yet clear what sanctions will be imposed on those who do not get vaccinated. A government minister said the penalty to be fixed by law for those who do not get vaccinated is a year in prison and a $ 7,000 fine, but the government still needs to offer the vaccine in adequate quantities to make sure residents get the chance to get vaccinated. Amnesty International has criticized the government’s statements, saying the vaccination was “contrary to human rights”. … it is possible that in the coming weeks young people and adults without background diseases are also expected to start receiving the vaccines. This group numbers about 150 million people, and the country hopes to end their vaccinations by the end of 2021. Vaccinate first those who are important to the economy … Critics said the government decided to do so in an attempt to preserve the economy by first vaccinating the most efficient, working-age workers.”


* In January 1937, the same year he joined the Nazi party, Mengele joined the Institute for Hereditary Biology and Racial Hygiene in Frankfurt, where he worked for Dr. Otmar Freiherr von Verschuer, a German geneticist with a particular interest in researching twins. Mengele focused on the genetic factors that result in a cleft lip and palate, or a cleft chin. His thesis on the subject earned him a cum laude doctorate in medicine (MD) from the University of Frankfurt in 1938, the same year he joined the SS.  It’s generally thought, in the scientific world, that Mengele’s published works were in keeping with the scientific mainstream of the time, and would probably have been viewed as valid scientific efforts even outside Nazi Germany. Why mention this? Because there are some people who think that  accuracy and correct evidence-based papers are the essential criteria for judging science, and the practical uses of such ideas are something separate.

i Here they affirmed the classic ideology of Benthamite utilitarianism, taking as their criteria the morality and legislation of the happiness of the greatest number”, even if this means, in case of necessity”, the misfortune inflicted on the smallest number possible”. He claimed to be able to calculate the ratio between joys and penalties from the perspective of statisticians (like Petty), the combination of individual interests resulting in the common interest of society, and therefore that of the State.

ii For example, current experiments in stem cell therapy on toddlers, or experiments presented as their prerequisites, with the sometimes enormous risks that they involve, are tolerated and even encouraged within such a code.

**  It’s worth pointing out that arbitrary sections of the population – not just those at the bottom of the hierarchy – have secretly been subject at times to experimentation, though not on such a grand scale, nor openly and publicly. Although not directly related to medical science at all, Operation LAC in the 1950s, involved the US military spraying whole ares of the USA (and even Britain) with Zinc cadmium sulfide, whose long-term or repeated exposures  have harmful effects on the kidneys, bones, and respiratory tract, resulting in kidney impairment, osteoporosis, and chronic inflammation of the respiratory tract. This was done to test dispersal patterns and the geographic range of chemical or biological weapons. Means and ends in perfect harmony!

iii “People with a very short life expectancy have little to gain from being vaccinated…, noting a genuine risk that the time of death will be brought forward and that they will experience adverse reactions to the vaccine in the last days of their life. The benefits of vaccination for very frail people with very short life expectancy should therefore be carefully assessed against the associated risks, and it may often be better not to vaccinate”. Despite this, it seems that the part of the Nuremberg code which says Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death” is mostly being ignored.  

ivLeviathan , published in 1651, the year the radical tendencies (to which Hobbes was totally hostile) in the English Civil War were crushed. Hobbes defined the bases of the sovereignty of the modern state, born out of the counter-revolution.


The following extracts from a paper written by K, is also relevant given the  context of a critique of the separation between ethics and science, even though this does not refer to medical science:

“By the late 1800’s, declining soil fertility in Europe drove both scientific research and imperialist land grabs. The search for a means of chemically fixing atmospheric Nitrogen, the main component of what would become Ammonia based fertilizer, was the holy grail of modern Chemistry. The process which broke the deadlock, and which is still in use today, was named the Haber-Bosch process after the two men who created and refined it. The former, Frtiz Haber, invented the laboratory-based method and the latter, Carl Bosch, was responsible for its engineering on an industrial scale. Both men were employees of the German chemicals company Badische Anilin und Soda Fabrik, or BASF.

Within the first two years of the longer-than-expected war with France and Russia, the Deutches Heer was in desperate need of both food and munitions due to the Entente’s naval blockade of German ports. By increasing the productivity of domestic German agriculture and supplying a ready source of the Nitric Acid used in explosives, the Haber-Bosch process provided for both necessities and considerably prolonged the war. In 1932, Carl Bosch reflected, “I have often asked myself whether it would have been better if we had not succeeded. The war perhaps would have ended sooner with less misery and on better terms. Gentlemen, these questions are all useless. Progress in science and technology cannot be stopped” (Hayes 356). Not only was Bosch’s work directly responsible for the massive death toll, the shell shocked and amputated generation which resulted from the first war, but for Bosch these outcomes were of secondary importance to the progress of technology. Bosch’s motivations and intentions can be described solely in terms of scientific development, industrial and commercial efficiency, and managerial efficacy. …

Bosch’s complicity in the horror of war does not end there. Due to his success with Ammonia synthesis Bosch was promoted to chairman of BASF. His ambitions in the service of progress would lead him to play an instrumental role in the creation of the world’s first iteration of the military-industrial complex, and the largest chemical company of its time, the German conglomerate IG Farben. Under Bosch’s leadership, IG Farben developed Coal Hydrogenation, a chemical process for synthesizing gasoline similar in nature to Ammonia synthesis, as well as the means of producing synthetic rubber. …

Before the armament of the German war machine, before the industrial planning behind occupations in the Ukraine and France, before the development, production and sale of Zyklon B to the Schutzstaffel or the construction of a synthetic rubber factory next to Auschwitz, IG Farben executives Carl Bosch and his protégé Carl Krauch were intimately familiar with death and destruction. In 1921, an explosion of the BASF/IG Farben chemicals plant at Oppau killed 561, wounded 2000, and left 7,000 homeless (Hayes 358). Under the direction of Krauch, the plant was restored to full production capacity in three months’ time. This prefigurative insensitivity to the human costs of industry pales in comparison to the efficient slaughter of the holocaust. Additionally, after the incident at Oppau there was no equivalent of the Nuremberg trials to assign blame and hang the judged. And yet, this more socially acceptable collateral damage of progress exposes the moral vapidity of Bosch’s justifications precisely because of its inherency to industrial production. If progress cannot be stopped, then the pile of bodies in front of and behind it must not be accounted for.

After the conclusion of the second war, IG Farben was broken up into its constituent parts including BASF and its pharmaceutical equivalent, Bayer [v]. The global center of Ammonia synthesis moved from Germany to a former forced subsidiary of IG Farben, the Norwegian company and BASF competitor Norsk Hydro. Today, Norsk Hydro is known to the world as YARA and its North American operations produce more synthetic ammonia than any other company on the planet. Bayer, the former chemical weapons manufacturer, heroin distributor, and co-founder of IG Farben, currently owns Monsanto and is one of the world’s largest pharmaceutical and agribusiness companies. The scientific, industrial, and even corporate legacy of the Haber-Bosch process lives on.

While some scholars argue for the impossibility of feeding the world’s current and projected population without the chemical synthesis of Ammonia (Smil), others warn of its compounding detrimental effects which contribute to the existential crisis of an economy and way of life based on industry and petrochemicals. The continued concentration of Nitrogen in our soil and water creates toxic, abiotic conditions, and the release of Nitrous Oxide through the denitrification of Ammonia contributes to the greenhouse effect (Duke), to say nothing of the carbon dioxide produced during the synthesis process. In addition, the improper application of anhydrous ammonia, a common form of ammonia fertilizer, can result in evaporation leading to more pollution, seed destruction, skin blistering and lung tissue damage. In light of these facts, not even the increased food production associated with Bosch’s work can be judged as historically neutral. Here we have yet another outcome, the weight of which buries the intentions of its authors and traps our imaginations between mass starvation and inevitable environmental collapse. A dissection of the arguments around the false choices of petrochemical based industrial agriculture is the subject of its own essay, but the partisan role of corporate propagandists in the public conversation is central to this one.

…Monsanto promotes itself, not as a complicit harbinger of the end of the world, but as a source of life-giving nourishment whose products are necessary in a world with an ever-increasing human population. Contrary to this public relations presentation, in 2019, Monsanto was sued in civil court for, among other things, manipulating the scientific publishing process, colluding with government regulators, and infiltrating media outlets. In an incident which calls to mind Bernays’s infamous subversion of the suffragist movement with his “torches of freedom” media stunt (Century), Monsanto paid fake reporters to spread misinformation to real reporters and thus conscript legitimate media outlets in their propaganda war (Gillam). Never mind that Monsanto products, just like cigarettes, cause cancer. … a scientific pursuit which enabled war and genocide in the last century threatens the basis of life itself in the next.

The Nuremberg trials did not ultimately convict the German executives of IG Farben for their role in the holocaust. The massive quantities of an odorless particulate marketed as pesticide and sold to the Nazi bureaucracy were insufficient to justify a hanging (Jessbenger). The purported use for the pesticide was the maintenance of Jewish ghettos with their cramped conditions. At Nuremberg, this intention was judged as somehow less intrinsic to the outcome of the genocidal process than the gassing itself. It would seem that the authors of Allied military justice agreed with Bernays, unsurprisingly, more than Marx. In yet another noteworthy contortion of history, the patent for Zyklon B was held by Deutsche Gesellschaft für Schädlingsbekämpfung mbH (“German Corporation for Pest Control”), or Degesch for short. Degesch being controlled by IG Farben and its parent company Degussa, which in turn was chaired by none other than Nobel laureate and German nationalist Jew, Fritz Haber. Haber notoriously attempted to create gold from seawater in order to pay German reparations for the first war. This modern alchemy was an ultimately unworkable proposition, the improbability of which is tempered by Haber’s equally ambitious success in creating explosives from thin air. Haber’s former collaborator Carl Bosch escaped the judgment of tribunals altogether, dying in obscurity of alcoholism and ill health in 1940. One of Bosch’s contemporaries and fellow IG Farben board members, NSDP party member Fritz ter Meer (, was sentenced to a mere seven year’s imprisonment and upon his release was re-elected as chairman of Bayer.

Nuremberg raised the question of individual responsibility for social crimes and its utilitarian answers favored the likes of Meer and NASA’s Wernher von Braun. Significant numbers of its trials ended in acquittal and shockingly brief sentences. The rising authoritarianism, mass dislocation, hunger, disease and global conflict suggested by our continued non-responsive orientation to the degradation and collapse of our biosphere provides a parallel that meets the epic tragedies of the world wars in terms of scale if not in terms of historical judgement. Will future generations convene their own tribunals? Will they find any use for the technocrats and organizers of industrial death? Or will they decide to finally halt our steady forward march over the edge of a cliff? Only time will tell, but the isolation of intention from outcome demonstrated by previous generations has surely met its expiration date as a useful measurement of responsibility and value. Indeed, the critical examination of what we produce and how we produce it is a task to be undertaken with utmost urgency.”

Other Covid-related pages on this site:


(month-by-month links to various articles and comments)


(month-by-month links to various articles and comments)

Ivermectin: Can a Drug Be “Right-Wing”?

the contradictions of herd immunity (June 2021)

The politics of large numbers (June 2021)

India, Covid and Ivermectin contd.

PCR tests are useless if you’re asymptomatic

Conspiriouettes…(may 2021)


Better to be sorry than safe

Coronavirus in France (March 2020)

Czaravirus May 2020 (about the situation in Russia) …

Cameravirus, April 2020 (facial recognition cameras, masks and the global development of totalitarianism from China to the rest of the world)…

Leftist bollocks from the usual suspects (December 2020)

Also, on aspects of  the search for vaccinations, see this (September 2020)

Also “The ‘C’ word”

Also see these from earlier phases of this madness: Letter from a comrade in China (March 2020) & Social Contagion (February 2020)


v Bayer is now involved in the Covid vaccination programme, though with a relatively unknown company – CureVac. Reference:

SamFanto was born, and then he lived a bit but never enough.

the politics of large numbers (june 2021)


But what do these averages prove ? Only that one abstracts more and more from mankind, that one dismisses more and more real life…Averages are real offenses inflicted upon real, particular individuals.”

– Karl Marx – 1844 Manuscripts

(quote not in original)

Deepl translation of the first article here

From the outset, the management of the Covid-19 epidemic by the authorities has been logically marked in our latitudes by a predominance of economic imperatives and the preservation of the social order, which even the much-invoked medical reason of the State no longer manages to conceal.

But what is also striking is that the infinite forms of self-organisation that could have arisen from individual singularities to face the virus and continue to act in spite of it, were immediately paralysed by the quicksand of contradictory recommendations and staggering figures: mortality and lethality rates, positivity rates, incidence rates, emergency room and reanimation occupancy rates, persistent antibody rates, re-infection rates… and so on. This highlights once again that by taking the field of the politics of large numbers rather than starting from oneself – with one’s doubts as well as one’s burning desires – the rethinking generally ends up getting bogged down in a managerial logic, where productive calculation quickly takes the place of life and its dispersive excesses. There are no thirty-six solutions to break the very pattern that presides over any statistical reduction of human complexity, to make uniqueness exist beyond averages and to recreate diversity by undoing the aggregates of data. This is the very terrain in which each individual is summoned to bow to a collective higher interest that must be rejected. It is the individual’s own sensitive relationship with life, death, illness, the risks to be taken, mutual aid, the stars to be picked, that must be defended in the face of the social demand to sacrifice it on the altar of quantity. Whether this quantity is called homeland, economy, common good… or even collective immunity.

If the medical method of statistical apprehension is certainly constitutive of the contemporary relationship with epidemics, as shown by the old debate between contagionists and infectionists during the Cholera epidemic of 1832 (some advocating that the disease is transmitted by contact with the sick, others by insalubriousness), it is not surprising that the medical method of statistical apprehension is not used, The first mathematical modelling based on the plague epidemic in India (1927), this authoritarian relationship that encapsulates singularities has even more distant roots. It could perhaps even be traced back to the origins of writing in Lower Mesopotamia, where this invention was not conceived as a means of representing language, but directly for the lowly purposes of administrative and commercial accounting, intrinsically linking the first numbers engraved on tablets to the emergence of state domination (with its need to enumerate, tax, measure, classify, uniformise, manage and discount). So much so that one might even wonder whether it was not with the very notion of calculation and the desire to quantify the world that the process of domesticating our senses began.

Today, it will surprise no one that in medical matters as in many others, this statistical policy of large numbers has become a master in the administration of our lives by the powerful, as the Covid-19 epidemic has once again revealed. In the case of the public approval of vaccines (and drugs), the criterion is quietly called the benefit/risk ratio, basing the studies on small, representative samples, from which extrapolations are then projected onto all of our fellow human beings, reducing living beings to a collection of more or less standardised and functional machines. Even if it means turning the world’s population into guinea pigs in a giant experimental laboratory with mixtures based on genetic chimeras, one of the current scientific miracles of which is not to prevent those vaccinated from being contaminated or contagious, but only from developing serious forms of the disease.

By the same token, in order to sort out vital, heavy, expensive, emergency or crisis care, between who might survive and who is no longer worth it anyway, statisticians in white coats assign personal scores to patients on a daily basis. These scores are of course not related to the complexity of each individual, which the hospital factory does not bother to consider anyway, but to the average probability of potential survival at the time of this decisive selection: there is the frailty score (from 1 to 9, with the last steps attributed according to “statistical life expectancy at 6 months”), the WHO score (from 1 to 4, for example based on the fact that one remains bedridden “more or less than 50% of the day”) and the GIR score (from 1 to 6, determining the level of dependence, linked to the fact that an individual can carry out a certain number of tasks “spontaneously, totally, correctly or usually”). It is this combination of scores, which is as performative as it is arbitrarily normative, that officially determines who can live or die, here between a Covid patient and a person who has suffered a car accident or a heart attack, and there between two Covid patients. This sorting is known as selection or prioritisation, and it is better to know the evaluation grids in advance in case of concern.

Of course, it is possible to point out that these management tools, which claim to be scientific and objective, are above all the reflection of a world which has driven out quality and the individual to the benefit of efficiency and mass, after having deprived each person of all autonomy, within an environment which is increasingly degraded and which, in turn, calls for a multiplication of crisis or emergency situations. And that when fear and death loom, it is certainly more reassuring for many to take refuge behind the known of the cold state rationality than to face the experimental unknown of individuals freely associated to face it. To which one could retort with a little smile, that when one has no pretension nor will to manage the existing shit on a level as global as that of a society, including in an alternative way, one can on the other hand self-organise to try to put an end to it.

* * *

Now, this authoritarian relationship of the quantitative does not only concern the immediate clinical management of the current unstable situation – which also involves the absolute priority given to Covid-19 over other serious illnesses with heavy consequences postponed in time, but also includes another dimension whose premises are barely glimpsed: the rapid adaptation of the state apparatus to an epidemic that is not ready to stop, creating a new type of sanitary and productive order marked for a little more than a year by an acceleration of the technological artificialisation of our lives.

Leaving aside China, which is too easily made into a convenient scapegoat, the very democratic South Korea, for example, established total contact tracing of the population in March 2020 by exploiting data such as bank statements, detailed telephone bills, geolocation history, public video surveillance images or information transmitted by administrations and employers during vast health surveys. The information is collected and then integrated into a national and freely accessible register, indicating the nationality of the persons, their age, their sex, the place of their medical visit, the date of their contamination, and more precise information such as their working hours, the respect of the wearing of masks in the metro, the stations used, the bars and massage parlours frequented. This is a fine example of the coupling of computer algorithms to build an epidemiological model and allow for optimal management by the authorities, complemented by compulsory individual quarantines, implemented via a geolocation application that rings and alerts the police directly if the individuals concerned move, or if their smartphone is switched off for more than 15 minutes, to form an ‘electronic fence’ around the plague sufferers, with random police calls and SMS notification to the neighbourhood of the presence of a contagious person.

As caricatural as this real-life example is, it is perhaps no coincidence that a senatorial report released in early June in France to outline some prospects for future epidemics (or “natural or industrial disasters, and terrorist attacks”) requiring mass confinement, has also just put forward some proposals in this direction. In the age of permanent connection, when everyone is already voluntarily walking around with an electronic bug in his or her pocket, and is gradually getting used to teleworking, telemedicine and distance learning, what better way to achieve this totalitarian dream of every digital democrat than to finally be able to deactivate a person’s computer, What better way to achieve this totalitarian dream of every digital democrat than to be able to remotely deactivate transport passes, turn smartphones into electronical bracelets (with selfies to the police to prove one’s presence) or issue/withdraw all kinds of different passes in the form of QR codes thanks to a centralised Crisis Data Hub?

For those who, for example, began to disguise themselves when they saw police drones patrolling during the Great Containment; for those who froze when they saw new devices for controlling bodies in public space, such as thermal detectors, travel certificates and vaccination certificates, added to the intrusive video surveillance cameras; for those who concluded more often than not that it was better to be alone and safe than accompanied by algorithmic nets. … it is certainly high time to look up at those great copper cables stretched across the sky or to bend over all those gullies where the chains of the twenty-first century are spinning under our feet at the speed of light.


SamFanto was born, and then he lived a bit but never enough.


The Aston Luxury Residence

| Căn Hộ Astral City Thuận An | Danh Khôi Miền Nam