I went to a protest against Digital ID in Birmingham City Centre on 11 October, 2025. I have taken some photos and video for upload (the videos will be uploaded at a later date).
The themes of the protest were basically what you would expect. There were still quite a lot of references to the Covid issue and the vaccines. Rameece, a rap artist who had previously attended some anti-Covid events, did his rap song about the Covid vaccine.
One example among many of Covid themed signsRameece
Other themes that came up were 5G, the One Login system implemented by the government and its relation to digital ID, and other authoritarian surveillance legislation such as the Onljne Safety Bill. As well as usual themes of criticism of the claims of climate change, Agenda 2030, the UN, WEF, etc.
The attendance for this protest was a few hundred people. It looked like primarily the people who used to attend the anti lockdown protests, I recognised several faces from those events.
Politician Andrew Bridgen also attended the protest.
He said that he knows a Labour MP who has admitted he essentially votes with the Labour whip (for non UK readers, the ‘whip’ enforces voting with the party) without even reading the legislation.
Andrew Bridgen
There has been an update on Digital ID since my last post. This is the new digital Veterans ID where people can prove they served in the military to get certain benefits.
I would also recommend giving Iain Davis’ article on the Brit Card a look (linked above), where he argues that the Brit Card is a distraction (politically untenable) from the real digital ID that is/will be introduced.
We should still continue to make our voices heard against all forms of digital ID. I know I haven’t done many protests recently but I plan to continue being involved in this campaign where possible.
Back in February 2023, I wrote about a case from Jersey, where a severely autistic man injured by the MMR vaccine was being forced to take the Covid vaccine against the will of his parents. He was too severely autistic to make his own decision regarding the vaccine. The care home where he was living had denied him certain activities and essentially kept him in isolation from the other residents because he was not vaccinated.
Amother has launched a legal battle to stop the state from spiking her Down’s syndrome son’s drinks with sedatives so he can be jabbed with the Covid vaccine, The Telegraph can reveal.
Cups of tea and glasses of orange juice have been secretly laced with sedatives to subdue the man, in his thirties, so he can be given the vaccine and booster jabs.
I don’t have words for how utterly disgusting and repulsive this is. The people doing this are either psychopaths, or so sick in the head off the high of vaccinationism that they cannot even comprehend moral values any more.
Despite all the side effects of the covid vaccine, they are still pushing the ‘benefits outweigh the risks’ narrative as a justification to push the vaccine.
Here is a description of how the forced sedation was carried out from the above article.
As a “thank you” for having a mug of breakfast tea and a glass of orange juice brought into his room, Adam invariably hugged the staff he trusts so implicitly at his care home.
Unbeknown to him, on five separate occasions over the last 16 months those drinks were laced with a “covert anxiolytic medication” – a powerful sedative. Twice he became groggy before eventually succumbing to a deep sleep.
Each time, a team of senior carers, a nurse and the home’s manager stood quietly outside the room awaiting the nod to enter. One of them was armed with a syringe – kept well hidden due to Adam’s needle phobia – loaded with the Covid vaccine.
When the sedatives worked, Adam’s sleeve was quickly rolled up, the antiseptic wipe swiped over his upper arm and the needle inserted deep into his muscle as the plunger was pressed emptying the syringe barrel of its viscous contents. One carer made copious notes in readiness for a report which would be sent to the Court of Protection explaining how the procedure had gone.
The article further states that when Adam was given information relating to the vaccine, he said no to the vaccine.
One of the key aspects to vaccination is the aspect of ritual. The public practice and promotion of this ritual during the Covid-19 ‘pandemic’ shows some similarities with a previous public vaccination mass participation event: the Salk vaccine trials in the 1950s.
An Overhyped Disease
Without getting into the detail of what caused poliomyelitis (paralytic polio), whether it was the poliovirus, pesticides like DDT, both, or something else, the risks were generally overstated. If we go with the virus theory, the vast majority of people infected with the poliovirus had no symptoms even on the official version. For example, the NHS website states:
This was historically known as well. For example, an article published in 1916 states:
In a large aggregation of people, such as the population of a city with over 100,000 inhabitants, a county, or a State, epidemics seldom attack more than one in a thousand of the population, often not more than one in two to four thousand.
Objectively, many other diseases killed more people than polio did, even given that poliomyelitis could be fatal.
Covid-19 was also an overexaggerated threat. The government and media promoted the idea that Covid-19 was so dangerous that it justified lockdowns, forced masks and experimental ‘vaccine’ technologies. However, reality does not match that apocalyptic vision. In reality, excess deaths in the UK only increased after lockdowns were introduced, not before:
Unlike poliomyelitis, which mainly affected children, Covid-19 deaths were mainly among the elderly. It was rare for young and healthy people to die from Covid-19. The number of deaths from Covid-19 were exaggerated by media, by defining Covid-19 death as ‘death within 28 days of a positive test’ regardless of cause:
Science Saves the Day
In both of these cases, heroic vaccine scientists were portrayed as fighting the evil disease through their ingenuity. The key difference would be that in the case of polio, there was more focus on Jonas Salk, the creator of the first polio vaccine to be used on a mass scale, as an individual. Whereas, in the case of Covid-19, the inventors behind the vaccine were not mentioned, with the names invoked being that of pharmaceutical companies. This may indicate a changing of the times, in that science in general has come to rely much less on the individual ‘heroic inventor’ and more on mass bureaucracy.
Rushed Vaccine Approvals
Both vaccinations also had rushed approvals. After the success of the vaccine was announced at a press conference, the FDA approved the vaccine immediately. The Covid vaccines also had extremely short trial periods, but were pushed through under Emergency Use Authorisation under the guise of a ‘pandemic’ in the US and later formally approved.
Mass Participation
One of the key comparisons between these two vaccines was the opportunity for mass participation they provided. This was not just some sort of out there ‘science’ but a real opportunity to participate in the ritual aspects of vaccination practice. There are two key differences: in the Salk vaccine, the mass participation event was the clinical trial, whereas in the Covid case, the mass participation event was the roll out of the vaccine in December 2020. In the Salk case, the participants were children, whereas in the Covid case the participants during the initial furore were adults.
The Salk vaccine had a large number of participants:
Across the United States, 623 972 schoolchildren were injected with vaccine or placebo, and more than a million others participated as “observed” controls.
Children were put forward to participate in the trials by their parents, and were called the ‘Polio Pioneers’. They were given badges and certificates as a reward for being injected with the vaccine:
With Covid-19, the mass participation aspect, and the elements of ritualism, came after the clinical trials rather than before. Images were shown of people receiving vaccines, including seemingly gimmicky stories about a man named William Shakespeare receiving a Covid vaccine (complete with imagery).
Because Covid-19 vaccines allowed for adult participation, social media images were used as a means to demonstrate participation in the ritual of vaccination. Ordinary people were given options on platforms like Facebook to put a ‘I’ve had my Covid-19 Vaccine’ banner on their profile as a form of showing that they had taken part in the vaccine ritual.
Both of these strategies for vaccine promotion were dependent on mass technologies that reach the entire country. Mass newspapers, television, and social media were required to sustain this message. But they also required individuals (or their parents) to opt in to this ritual performance on the basis of this propaganda.
In both cases, we see this initial enthusiasm is not maintained. Many people gave up taking Covid vaccines after the first booster, and enthusiasm for the Salk vaccine also waned quickly. Problems such as the Cutter incident, in which the vaccine caused poliomyelitis, caused scepticism. In the US, it was replaced by the Sabin vaccine after this vaccine was field tested in countries like the USSR.
Conclusion
Vaccine campaigns in the 20th and 21st centuries have used mass media as a strategy to create emotional linkage to the idea of taking a vaccine. Encouragement to participate in such events are a means of manipulating the public into vaccination. The idea of ‘being part of’ such a mass project by opting in provides meaning and purpose, and allows the individual to believe that they are playing a part in the banishment of evil.
Vaccination was invented during the transition from the feudal age to the capitalist age, the transition from the spiritual age to the scientific age. As such vaccination is touted as one of the major achievements of that scientific age that is said to mark human progress. The official narrative regarding vaccination is this upward trajectory of saving lives through the conquest of disease. As Nature is subjected to conquest by the machines of the Industrial Revolution, and the ‘savages’ that represent Nature are subject to conquest by the gun, Nature’s ‘weapon’ against Man, disease, is subject to conquest by the needle.
Such a narrative, of course, is entirely reductionist: as the holistic skill of the artisan was reduced to excruciating specialism in a tiny part of a whole by the capitalist mode of production, the intricate complexity of the human immune system, with interlocking parts not fully understood by even the most advanced immunologist, is reduced to a crude production of antibodies by vaccination. The inevitable interplay of microbes and humans – distorted by the strain of industrial societies on the human immune system – is reduced to a one sided narrative of war.
Vaccination is the conquest of nature, but also represents the domination of man over woman, male supremacy. Before the modern era medicine was often the preserve of the wise woman or witch. The demonisation of such women was vital, crucial for the domination of the male doctor to fully emerge. Vaccination is merely the ultimate step in that domination. Forgive me a little psychoanalytic speculation – the injection is his hard, throbbing prick; through it the doctor spreads his seed and creates twisted, broken children in his image, this makes him a god. Mother speaks reality, ‘my child was not like this before the vaccine’, and the male doctor and the male medical establishment silence her.
The Cult of the Needle
Vaccination is nothing but an invention of the most dogmatic religion ever known to man. That religion is science, shall we say, science of a most specific kind. Not science in the sense of gathering of evidence and a critical mindset, but science as conquest. And not religion in the sense of spirituality, the perception of the Divine, or any such thing, but religion in the sense of a formal doctrinaire belief beyond question.
That science and that religion exist as a crude, one sided reduction of reality into terms that can be written in a slogan: ‘Vaccines save lives’, ‘Vaccines are safe and effective’, ‘Without vaccines we would all die of measles/polio/Covid’. Vaccines are not science, because vaccination never has to prove itself scientific. The crude, ridiculous, absurd, notion of vaccination – the fundamental lie – that needle = antibodies = protection – cannot be scientific in any sense other than that of the most vulgar scientism. That these antibodies exist is in itself considered proof of faith. No-one has to prove these antibodies mean anything – we found them, so that means vaccination works. Even in the absurd case with Covid – where the manufacturers stated that these antibodies are not a proven established correlate of protection – the vaccinal antibody is exalted as the ultimate evidence.
The Vaccination Cycle of Abuse
As vaccination spreads throughout society, becomes the norm, the accepted, the beatified, so develops the vaccination cycle of abuse. Those that are vaccinated as children become damaged by that vaccination. The toxins in the vaccines enter the brain and begin to wreak their havoc.
What happens to these people? I am not talking about those killed or severely maimed by vaccination here, but rather those who go on to have somewhat normal lives. They help to build the vaccination-industrial complex you see around you. They go to work in the hospitals which promote vaccination. They go to work in the schools that promote vaccination. They go to work in the GPs’ offices that dole out vaccination. They go to work at the universities that produce scientific papers justifying vaccination. They work at the Pharma companies that produce vaccination. They work at the banks that finance the vaccine companies. They work at other businesses involved in the supply chain of goods to these industries that promote vaccination, and more and more, with ‘covid’ directly promote vaccination themselves. They donate to charities that promote vaccination in developing countries. They vote for the politicians that promote vaccination. Their taxes fund vaccination. Their pension funds invest in vaccination. And most of all, they perpetuate the vaccine crime against their own children. Everyone who lives in Vaccine Society contributes to the perpetration of Vaccine Society, to a greater or lesser extent.
The collective immorality of this system in itself helps to sustain it. That something is so normalised makes it hard to believe that it could be so depraved. But it also binds us together by guilt – to take part in it is to be guilty – even to the extent that one has no choice to survive in the world. The people working in the healthcare institutions – the people who have the potential to see the most harm from vaccination – are those most intertwined with the guilt of producing the damaged goods on the vaccine conveyor belt, those who are most indoctrinated into the vaccination cult. A mixture of factors sustains this: denial being one of the most important. Some see it, but live that contradiction. Maybe they don’t directly give vaccinations and justify that their role in the system does more good than harm. Or perhaps it’s just self interest – everyone knows that questioning vaccines simply isn’t good for your career – and damn, years of your life went into making that career. For some, it is pure sadism, gratuitous pleasure in the cycle of abuse. And some will quietly exit, seek ‘oblivion in suicide’1 when they can no longer bear their role as society’s perverse god. Only a small number leave the mainstream medical profession and speak out and accept the demonisation of society.
To the extent that there is any hope for humanity the only solution can be vaccination abolition. The cult of vaccination must be broken.
Unfortunately many are still lost in the cult, and with the mRNA ‘vaccines’ and the risks of that poison getting into the germ line (we know it congregates in the gonads) that makes any task of saving humanity from this madness ever harder. It may already be too late for an unpolluted humanity to exist outside of Africa, which is very lightly ‘vaccinated’. In fact I think any salvation may rest on how many of those doses were saline (or so degraded to produce no mRNA biological effect) – I know there has been a large amount of speculation about this question. I take no position though the clear difference between batches and reported ‘vaccine’ injuries does prove that some doses are more dangerous than others (but doesn’t necessarily prove that the less bad batches contained saline or extremely degraded product). The possibility that babies from birth are spike protein factories as induced via their mother’s ‘vaccination’ for Covid is utterly horrifying but the idea must be broached. There could be other effects induced via the lipid nanoparticles as these could affect the ova and sperm in the gonads (even upon the theory that the Covid virus doesn’t exist although if that theory is true we are in a stronger position).
What must we do?
The first thing we have to do is look at ourselves. Obviously, we need to decline and reject every single vaccination for ourselves, our children. But much harder than this, we need to try and walk away from the system as much as possible. No-one can avoid some complicity in the system unless they are willing to starve to death. But you need to try and position yourself in a job role where you are doing the least amount of harm and have the least amount of complicity possible in vaccination. Certainly the vast majority of people working in healthcare – any mainstream medical institution – should leave and refuse complicity in the system any longer. If you donate to charity, you should stop, although I imagine that most people reading this don’t. This is because charities claiming to do good work abroad promote and push vaccination, and pretty much all of them promote the Covid ‘vaccine’. Many of them, such as National Autistic Society or Alzheimer’s Society, exist to normalise the effects of the poisoning we undergo. Even pet charities promote pet vaccination. There may be local/smaller groups that are an exception to this rule but the larger ones probably should be avoided.
The harder part is accepting our pariah status. The above things can be done quietly. If you talk about this issue you will become a pariah. There is no other choice. So psychologically prepare yourself for that role. Many people, of course, have already experienced this pariah status via their objection to the Official Covid Narrative and so are prepared to take their pariah status to the next level by becoming fully anti-vaccine. We must get as many of the people who questioned the Covid ‘vaccine’ (whether before, or after, taking it) over to the fully anti-vaccine side. People who have children and did not inject them with the Covid poison are top of this list (in order to protect the children from other vaccinations – sadly those fanatical enough to inject their children with the Covid shot probably cannot be saved. I want to save all children, of course, but I don’t have a practical solution on this point).
As for healing from vaccination damage? Of course, we should try to bend societal resources towards real help for the vaccine-injured. But for some of us, it is already too late. The poisons have already wreaked too much havoc, we are already too damaged to live in a sane, post-vaccine society. We cannot relate to healthy humanity, nor do we understand it. So the war cannot be for ourselves. It is for those for whom it is not too late, whoever that remains to be.
Thomas Szasz’s phraseology in The Manufacture of Madness, discussing the high suicide rate among psychiatrists. “The oppressor [becomes] a megalomanical, godlike figure. Once [the psychiatrist realises] that he is but a mockery of God, the result is often explosive violence…the victimiser [seeks] oblivion in suicide.”, Syracuse University Press, 1970, p. 41. Doctors are known to have a higher suicide rate than the general population. Mainstream opinion puts this down to higher exposure to death due to the profession. While death desensitation plays a role in suicide, in my opinion, Szasz’s theory is closer to the mark.
Image Source: Photo by Nataliya Vaitkevich on Pexels.com
I attended the conference ‘The Left Case Against the World Economic Forum’ on the 25th March in London. While I am not going to do an expansive write-up on the conference, I was drawn to respond to a comment made by Dr. Clare Craig in the Q&A portion of the panel regarding paediatric vaccines, as I have some quite significant issues with it.
The Context
Dr. Clare Craig gave a talk on the benefits and risks of artificial intelligence in healthcare (I’m not going to address that topic, transcript here for those that have an interest). An audience member (not me) asked her a question in the Q&A panel regarding traditional vaccines, stating that he read ‘Dissolving Illusions’ and that vaccines don’t have the effectiveness record that is claimed. Craig’s response to this question was that, paraphrasing, she has deliberately not got into the debate around other vaccines because we need to win people over on the issue of the Covid ‘vaccines’ first. Unfortunately there is no transcript/video of the q & a session available, so I am using memory and my instinct of what was said at the time and what went through my mind, after she said this. I did make notes on the day and the day after of what points I wanted to make in response, so hopefully this should be accurate.
I have several issues with this statement which I will outline below.
Loyalty to Truth
The first issue I have with this is the idea of loyalty to truth. The implications of this comment seem to be that we should put the question of truth of paediatric vaccine effectiveness to one side in order to prioritise the strategy of winning people over to the dangers of the covid jab. Let’s leave aside the question of whether this is a good strategy for a moment. If someone genuinely believes that paediatric vaccines do more good than harm, that is an honest position, if false (many people honestly believe this because of the relentless vaccine propaganda, though of course their unwillingness to question that propaganda is open to criticism). But to state that we should stay away from the issue, even if we are willing to question the claims around traditional vaccines intellectually, seems to me a like a dishonest position.
Is This a Good Strategy?
I also question whether this will be an effective strategy to win people over. Firstly, to a large extent, the battle over the Covid ‘vaccine’ is won, if not explicitly, then implicitly. Why?
As of March 21, 2023, only 16.4% of Americans were current with their updated (bivalent) booster dose, CDC data shows.
This number is very important. It demonstrates that even people who bought into the Covid scam and willingly got ‘vaccinated’ are not taking the bivalent boosters, and only a small hard core of Covid fanatics are still lining up for more doses. This is the same in lots of different countries, with doses administered flatlining in countries like Israel.
The question that logically follows is: why? If it is so ‘safe and effective’ why aren’t people still taking it? Again, these are the people who believed the CDC and trusted them on Covid, but when the CDC tells them to get the latest booster, they aren’t doing it. Because implicitly, even if they cannot admit it to themselves, they are subconsciously aware that this is a dangerous product. Of course, some are aware, having suffered consequences directly or indirectly from the ‘vaccine’ and have linked their and/or their family and friends’ misfortunes to the shot.
This makes it the perfect time to push back, strategically, and fight to destroy the vaccine cult as a whole. Millions of minds have been opened by the Covid jab debacle – and they would be willing to consider arguments about vaccination as a whole. There are already lots more parents stating they won’t vaccinate, or that they are considering not vaccinating, or they regret vaccinating. There’s also a smaller number of people who were injured by paediatric vaccinations who are speaking out but unfortunately this number remains very small for now (of course, those who were killed or severely injured by paediatric vaccinations cannot speak out). Now of course, if we do this they will smear us as ‘antivaxxer cranks’ or whatever, but the reality is, they are going to do that anyway. Even the mildest Covid ‘vaccine’ critics are called antivax by the establishment, so in this regard, it’s irrelevant whether we’re actually antivax or not in their eyes.
The only strategic reason to not push back against the whole vaccine paradigm at this point is because one wants to save it. Some people critical of the mRNAs fall into this category, like Alex Berenson. I don’t know whether Dr. Craig ultimately wants to save it or not, as she didn’t explicitly answer that question. But not addressing paediatric vaccine harms has that effect.
The Harm of Paediatric Vaccination Injuries
Dr. Craig did not say that paediatric vaccination injuries are not real, in fact she engaged with someone in the audience whose sister had been injured by the Smallpox vaccine. She also mentioned the Pandemrix vaccine which was famously pulled for causing narcolepsy. So to be clear I am not accusing her of stating that paediatric vaccination injury cannot happen. The question from the audience member was more framed around the issue of vaccine effectiveness (such as vaccination not deserving credit for wiping out diseases) and not vaccine injury (such as the vaccines cause autism debate). This was the sort of point the questioner was trying to make:
As such, I understand that Dr. Craig did not frame her answer in reference to paediatric vaccination injuries, but nevertheless, the topic cannot be avoided. If we assume that paediatric vaccination injuries, including severe injury and death, are real, than avoiding this topic helps to allow the injury to continue, regardless of intent. The reality of the autism epidemic is continuing to get worse, for example. As I said above, more than ever there are some people who are willing to listen on childhood vaccines (even if some will never listen). There might be parents who decide not to vaccinate their child with paediatric vaccines because they initially began questioning the mRNA/adenovirus vector products and saw people who spoke about about the mRNA/adenovirus vector also speaking out on childhood vaccines. This has the potential to save children from these horrific injuries.
I have tried to avoid an emotional response to the question also, but I do think we need to think through the implications from a perspective of someone who has childhood vaccine injuries. The strategic logic of only focusing on Covid ‘vaccination’ implies that people who have vaccination injuries from paediatric vaccines shouldn’t really be considered in the debate or that if we speak out we should be put to one side for strategic reasons. While this isn’t directly stated it is implied by the logic that we should focus only on the Covid ‘vaccines’.
Conclusion
I must fundamentally disagree with Dr. Clare Craig when she states that we should focus on getting the public on board with opposition to the covid ‘vaccine’ and avoid questions around the effectiveness of other vaccines. Instead I advocate opening up a debate around all vaccines, because, having come to come to the conclusion that the vaccine paradigm is entirely fraudulent that’s the only place I can be, on this topic.
Last year, I wrote a piece on ‘Complicity Theorists’ parodying the generic articles that the media puts out criticising conspiracy theorists. This article is the same sort of thing, except we are going to break down an article (with humour) rather than write a satirical essay. So let’s have a look on the ADL article on Conspiracy Theorists and see if we can’t have some fun with it:
Conspiracy Theories and How to Help Family and Friends Who Believe Them
Why assume we want your help?
Do you have someone in your life who has been drawn in by a conspiracy theory? Has their behavior changed and you’re not sure how you can help?
I was an obsessive weird loner before I became a ‘conspiracy theorist’, so yeah, don’t think I became one just because I watched too many videos from The Last American Vagabond and read too much Substack.
Perhaps your parents have ventured down the QAnon rabbit hole and have become obsessed with trying to decode social media posts by public figures. They send you a daily stream of articles and YouTube videos about how the government is controlled by pedophiles who are running a child sex trafficking ring, and they’re especially worried about the daycare center your kids attend.
I mean QAnon is a BS FBI psyop (no politician is gonna save you and that includes Donald ‘Warp Speed’ Trump), but has this person not heard of Jeffrey Epstein, Jimmy Savile, etc.?
When your family all got the Covid-19 vaccine, your mom warned you that the government implants chips in the vaccine to monitor people. Since your parents haven’t gotten the vaccine themselves because of this belief, you don’t visit them very often.
Sounds like the asshole in this scenario is the normie who doesn’t want to see his/her parents because they are not ‘vaccinated’.
Even though he doesn’t have children in the local school, your friend attends school board meetings because he is tired of “diversity” being taught to young children.
It’s not ‘diversity’ that’s the issue, people just don’t want sexualised drag queens performing in front of their kids.
You notice this friend has switched jobs every few months because he’s always getting into arguments with customers and his co-workers.
Ah yes all ‘conspiracy theorists’ argue about their politics at work.
Conspiracy theories can be defined in a variety of ways. In general, they reject established and accepted narratives, implying that sinister and powerful forces are manipulating various events and situations behind the scenes, usually for political gain.
Rejecting established narratives? Such as ‘Iraq has WMDs’, ‘Incubator Babies’ ‘Assad gassed his own people at Douma’, ‘Gulf of Tonkin’, those official narratives? How dare people think the people who pushed those narratives might be liars! How dare people question if, uh, Mike ‘We Lied We Cheated We Stole’ Pompeo is telling the truth?
As for ‘manipulation’ do people really believe that elites DON’T manipulate shit? ‘I can believe that so-and-so at work manipulates shit for petty office politics reasons, but that the most powerful people on the planet do this for their own political/economic gain, well, that’s beyond the pale.’
Conspiracy theories have been around for centuries, and often emerge from a need to make sense of the world around us.
No they emerge from the fact that official narratives don’t make fucking sense. Like the Skripals. Their own timeline that THEY put out THEMSELVES is nonsensical. We’re supposed to believe that Putin, allegedly the most competent 6d chess master on the planet, sent two cavorting assassins to Salisbury to smear the most deadly nerve agent on the planet on a doorknob and then hung around outside an antique shop rather than get the hell out of dodge. Just weeks before Russia was due to host the World Cup to promote itself on the world stage. I mean who could question this except someone who’s criminally insane?
Why do people get drawn into conspiracy theories?
Epistemic: This motivation is a need for knowledge, information and certainty. When a major event happens, people want an explanation for it and most importantly, they want to feel certain of that explanation. When people feel uncertain in specific situations or generally feel uncertain, they are drawn into conspiracy theories to help provide that certainty.
If they want ‘an explanation they can feel certain of’ surely they’d just believe the establishment narrative as those allow no criticism. Heck there is enough people who peddle the establishment’s crap who fall into that category.
Another key factor is people’s educational backgrounds; they may lack the critical thinking skills necessary to differentiate between credible and non-credible sources of information. As a result, they are looking for knowledge and certainty but do not have the tools and understanding to look in the right places.
Yeah those thick plebs don’t understand that the BBC and Reuters are supposed to be ‘trusted sources’ and you need to believe them without question, damn you!
Existential: This motivation drives the need for people to feel safe and secure in their world. People need to feel they have power over the things that happen to them and, conversely, they don’t like to feel out of control or powerless in their lives. Conspiracy theories help them believe that they have information that explains why they lack control in specific situations and more generally. Therefore, people who feel powerless tend to gravitate towards conspiracy theories.
The correct interpretation here: “People who have been screwed over by the establishment are more likely to consider perspectives that criticise the establishment.” Which is bleedingly obvious.
On an individual level, believing you have access to information and the truth, while others do not have that knowledge, gives one a feeling of superiority over others that can feed self-esteem.
Then why do ‘conspiracy theorists’ bash our heads against the wall trying to get normal people to see that, I dunno, the mRNA ‘vaccines’ are poison if all we want is for special knowledge to make us unique?
There are real reasons for people to distrust governments, corporations and other powerful figures and groups. Actual conspiracies and cover-ups occur quite regularly; Watergate, the Tuskegee experiments and COINTELPRO were all real events. However, while real conspiracies do exist, this doesn’t mean that every event or situation is the result of a nefarious plot or that powerful figures are always trying to hide the truth.
So conspiracies happened 50 years ago but don’t question if they are going on NOW you conspiracy theorist!
The Conspiracy Theory Handbook, published by Dr. Stephan Lewandowsky, a professor of cognitive science at the University of Bristol in the UK, and Dr. John Cook, a professor at the Center for Climate Change Communication at George Mason University, outlines seven traits of conspiratorial thinking, summarized with the acronym CONSPIR:
Contradictory ideas: People who have bought into conspiracy theories can simultaneously believe in ideas that contradict each other. For example, some believe that Covid-19 is a U.S.-created bioweapon but also that the virus is a hoax and doesn’t actually exist.
No, those are two separate theories that exist among those who question the Official Covid-19 Narrative. No one literally believes both. Someone might be willing to entertain both but that isn’t the same thing. Someone might say ‘On the balance of evidence I think 70% chance it is a lab virus, 30% it doesn’t exist’, that’s not the same thing either. In fact the ‘it came out of a lab’ people and the ‘no virus’ people will often argue with each other.
Overriding suspicion: Conspiracy theorists will dismiss “official” sources and any information that doesn’t “fit” neatly into the theory. They promote the idea that “traditional” sources of information–such as mainstream news outlets and academic researchers–are unreliable and are even “in on” the conspiracy, attempting to distract people from the truth.
Yes because official sources are full of fucking liars, see ‘Iraq has WMD’s’.
Journalists may sincerely believe establishment narratives, but they simply would not be hired if they did not, so mainstream media simply selects for the most dumb people on the planet who have a posh accent and sound like they know what they are talking about. Journalists are largely ‘useful idiots’ and aren’t important enough to be ‘in on the conspiracy’ a lot of the time (Dan Rather’s statement on Zapruder would be an example where the journalist was ‘in on the conspiracy’).
Nefarious intent: The people and groups behind these supposed conspiracies are always presumed to have nefarious intentions – their motivations are never benign.
Funny how all of their so called ‘mistakes’ have disastrous consequences for humanity though. I mean the guys that did Iraq then decided to go after Syria. You’d think if it was benign they’d have learned their lesson to not destroy countries?
Something must be wrong: Even if you can debunk a conspiracy theory, believers will still believe the theory because they fundamentally believe that “something must be wrong.” For conspiracy theorists, nothing is as it seems.
That’s because you probably haven’t ‘debunked’ it.
Persecuted victim: Conspiracy theorists believe that they are victims of the conspiracy. They also view themselves as heroes who are brave enough to stand up against the conspirators. If a fact-checker debunks a claim made by a conspiracy theorist, they’re seen as simply trying to discredit the believer and cast doubt on the truth.
Yeah because that’s the function of establishment funded fact checks.
I don’t think I’m important enough to be a ‘hero’, that’s generally the guys who go around talking about how they ‘destroy antivaxxers’ on Twitter, or whatever. Like that Ian Copeland guy.
Immune to evidence: Conspiracy theories cherry-pick “evidence,” selectively choosing bits of information that support the narrative and casting aside anything that contradicts the claim. Evidence that contradicts the conspiracy theory will be re-interpreted as originating from the conspiracy.
And the MSM doesn’t do this? No one is able to match up every single piece of evidence to a theory to 100% perfection (because reality is too complicated for this to be achievable), every theory has to emphasise or deemphasise certain facts. It’s about the theory that is most plausible. And conspiracy is the most plausible explanation in many cases (e.g. JFK assassination to take an obvious example).
Re-interpreting randomness: Conspiracy theories encourage believers to “do their own research” and collect their own “evidence” to prove the claim, looking for ways in which various events, people and situations are related. Events that have nothing to do with the conspiracy theory will be re-interpreted as being caused by the conspiracy.
As opposed to the establishment who tell you to uncritically believe everything out of their mouths. I know who I’m going with.
We can all fall for conspiracy theories and unintentionally aid their spread. That’s why it’s crucial for all of us to learn how to spot them. Here are some suggestions:
Check the source of the information. Additional red flags are raised when articles contain lots of grammatical errors, lack sources or are all written by the same author, or if a website contains an unusual URL or lacks an “About Us” section.
So if I get some guest authors I’m trustworthy then?
Check multiple sources. Are other, credible news outlets and experts sharing the same information? If a story is real, many publications will cover it. Have fact-checking sites like Snopes and PolitiFact refuted the claims?
Dr. Malone, Dr. McCullough, Dr. Kory, Dr. Yeadon, Dr. Bhakti, Dr. Vanden Bossche, etc, are all criticising mRNA jabs but they are all cranks according to you, despite the fact they are obviously credentialed experts. What you actually mean is if your ‘approved experts’ say something.
Evaluate photos and videos that accompany stories and social media posts. Conspiracy theorists will often use old and/or manipulated images to support their stance. Conduct a reverse image search on Google or TinEye to see if the image has shown up elsewhere and if it has been manipulated. If it has, there’s a good chance you’re being played.
What you can do (and not do) to help those who have fallen for conspiracy theories?
However, once a person has bought into a conspiracy theory, it can be difficult to help them see that the conspiracy theory is wrong, a lie and that it could lead to harm and danger.
“Once people have seen the evidence, it’s hard to stop making them see the evidence.” Well, no shit.
Learn more about the conspiracy theories: What are their central claims and where did they come from? This information puts you in a better position to understand what the person says and does.
Only make sure you read from ‘approved’ sources though, wouldn’t want to become a ‘conspiracy theorist’ yourself!
Don’t try to convince the person they are wrong, lying or ignorant. Many people think if they just send that person enough information to refute their claims, the person will change their mind. This denies the underlying need the person has to believe it and is unlikely to work. In fact, those who try to discourage a conspiracy theorist are often seen as being “in” on the conspiracy.
We don’t think you’re ‘in on the conspiracy’. We know you’re not that important.
Encourage the person to use critical thinking. You can do this by asking open-ended questions with genuine curiosity about what they believe and why. You can also encourage them to read different points of view on the topic.
Have you ever considered that we used to believe the establishment claims and then we learned more and then we rejected them?
Don’t come across as dismissive, judgmental or belittling.
If it becomes difficult to be around someone who has been drawn into a conspiracy theory, take a break. While you may take space away from the person, don’t close the door completely or cut them off. More than ever, they will need their loved ones when they stop believing the conspiracy theories.
Oh no, being around someone with different beliefs is just too hard, what am I going to do, BBC, SAVE ME!
I don’t usually put out short commentaries/news type posts as I generally like to keep the blog as a place for long posts or protest coverage. However in this case, this news story is so worthy of note, and I have seen very little on it out there so far, and I am so angry about it, that I am making an exception.
The media today in the United Kingdom have just reported the below story, headlined:
The 32-year-old, who can’t be named for legal reasons, spent lockdown in his room at a care home because his parents refused to let him be vaccinated, Jersey’s Royal Court heard.
To translate this from mainstream media bullshit to English, the care home locked him in his room because his parents did not want him to be harmed by a ‘vaccine’. When he had already been harmed by vaccines. His parents should have had him removed from the care home, if possible, although some of these care homes have put obstacles in the way of getting people out and I don’t know if that’s the case here.
Jersey’s Royal Court granted the vaccination order, saying that it was ‘the right best interests decision’ for B who had been in ‘groundhog day’.
In other words, this man is stuck because the care home won’t let him out because he’s not jabbed so they want to force him to be jabbed. When they could get rid of the problem by simply not treating him as subhuman for not being jabbed.
This also involves denying him treatments, according to the Times:
He is not able to attend the treatments, such as hydrotherapy, which soothe him, or the ones that cheer him, such as watching the Christmas lights being turned on, stuck in what his nurse describes as a “shrunken world”.
A dataset of deaths and sudden deaths provided by Patrick E. Walsh from Kilkenny, Ireland has been under-utilised by researchers investigating the surge in sudden death. However, this is a very useful dataset for researchers to examine to demonstrate a significant rise in all-cause mortality, as well as deaths classified as ‘sudden’ in a small region of Ireland. I have written this article to draw more attention to this dataset, as I have personally not seen it reported among the staples of statistical analysis in the Covid-19 ‘vaccine’ sceptic space.
What is the Kilkenny Dataset?
Recently, in response to British Parliamentarian Andrew Bridgen (who has recently become a fierce critic of the Covid-19 ‘vaccine’ in Parliament, demanding that the jabs be stopped) twitter user @_Richard_JG posted an extremely valuable article from Kilkenny, Ireland.
Look at Kilkenny, they have an 89.9% vaccine rate, deaths are off the chart.https://t.co/7qb8IqmyRU
(The source for the 89.9% ‘vaccination’ rate in Kilkenny is here. As an aside, that makes it a relatively low ‘vaccine’ uptake in comparison with other counties in Ireland!)
The article itself states:
A CONCERNED local man has emailed a group of what he terms ‘people who hold positions of influence and trust in Kilkenny’, bringing to their attention what he describes as important facts on deaths in Kilkenny, particularly sudden deaths.
Patrick Walsh has gone through the RIP.IE obituaries, to find both deaths and deaths which he classifies as ‘sudden’. He determined a sudden death by the criteria below:
Any explicit accidents or suicides are not included in ‘Suddenlys’.‘Suddenlys’ are identified by narrative or in condolences.
This follow up article contains data from Kilkenny for 6 months of the year, July to December, and compares 2018 to 2022. I have produced some graphs showing this data below.
The below chart shows the deaths by month for 2019-2022. (I excluded 2018 so the graph didn’t get too messy).
Here is the same data, in a different format, with each month rather than each year:
Here is the total deaths for the 6 month period, plotted on a chart, 2018-2022:
The Sudden Death Data
Here are the equivalent data for the sudden deaths only, as defined above.
The same data by month:
Graph Plot:
What’s Valuable About This Data?
The fact that all the obituaries are publicly posted on RIP.IE and can be searched by any individuals who are willing to do so. The critics of this kind of approach may say the data is fabricated, but this is very unlikely given that anyone can check it. For example, I checked the number of deaths for December 2022 and got the same amount as Walsh (128). As for sudden deaths, there are 11 obituaries that use the term ‘suddenly’ or ‘unexpectedly’, and several more that use the term ‘after a short/brief illness’ which can also sometimes be a code for ‘vaccine’ death. So 3 more cases from these or from comments left on the obituaries (which I did not check) means the 14 number given is reasonable, possibly slightly conservative.
This data is also good as it isn’t subject to too many biases. The deaths classified as sudden are done so in the obituaries themselves or condolences, which means they are not subject to the bias of the ‘vaccine’ sceptic who may possibly be over-eager (or be accused of being over-eager) to blame deaths on the ‘vaccine’. And it would be impossible to game obituary notices, after all, someone is either deceased or not. It is also valuable as it has a control group of ‘non-sudden deaths’ for comparison, that allows us to figure out if there is a comparative increase in death classified as ‘sudden’.
Breaking Down the Data
The graphs above clearly demonstrate that for 2022, both deaths and sudden deaths are showing a significant increase. Although there is a spike in death for November and December 2022, it is not possible to conclude from this that the number of deaths will continue to increase as this could be a seasonal spike.
I calculated the percentages of deaths for each month classified as sudden, and plotted them on a graph, seen below. As the sample size for each month is not that large (lowest = 55, highest = 128), caution is advised on that basis. Nevertheless, we see in increase in the percentage of deaths classified as sudden in 2022:
This is despite the fact that overall deaths also increased in 2022!
What is most striking about this data is there is no evidence of an increase in sudden deaths in 2021. This supports the integrity of the research itself, as anyone simply looking to manufacture data to vilify the ‘vaccine’ would start their ‘sudden death’ counting in mid-2021. This suggests that while some young and healthy people are dying immediately from the ‘vaccine’ (not shown by this data, but it is present in other datasets), significantly more relatively young and healthy people are ‘dying suddenly’ a long time after initial ‘vaccination’ (either because a booster tips the ‘vaccine’ damage calculus to fatal, or because of damage sustained by previous ‘vaccination’ doses does not immediately result in death).
That the sudden death problem is increasing is supported by evidence from the Mark Crispin Miller reports, as well as statistical analysis from sources such as Igor Chudov, who reports that the correlation between excess deaths and ‘vaccination’ rates is strengthening:
The linear regression above shows that the vaccination rate explains 49% of excess mortality and that the relationship is highly statistically significant (P < 0.0001 is extremely significant).
What is worse, compared to a similar analysis two months before, the relationship has gotten STRONGER in terms of explanatory power (R squared), as well as steepness of the slope.
This can be plausibly explained by at least three mechanisms. The first of these is the ‘subclinical myocarditis theory‘ put forward by Dr. Peter McCullough. McCullough argues that the spike proteins that are produced after an mRNA shot damage the heart in ways that may not be immediately obvious (e.g. the individual does not experience typical symptoms like chest pain). The heart damage in the presence of adrenaline (when playing sport, or when waking up) then tips the individual over the edge into cardiac arrest and sudden death. The second of these is ‘turbo cancer’, where the immune system’s ability to fight cancer is compromised, leading to rapid diagnosis of stage 4 cancer and death. The third mechanism is Ig4 immune tolerance to spike protein, which causes sudden death as it allows the spike to run rampant in the body, and the immune system does not fight the disease when exposed to Sars-Cov-2. This leads to a mild illness followed by sudden death.
How does this fit in with data showing a large number of deaths for 2021 from the ‘vaccine’, for example, VAERS? There are more overall deaths in 2021 than 2019, those deaths were simply no more likely to be classified as ‘sudden’. It’s likely some of this excess is ‘vaccine’ induced (as demonstrated by other sources), it is just not considered ‘sudden’ by the obituary writers. There may be multiple reasons for this, perhaps middle-aged and older people died more often early on from the ‘vaccine’ and their deaths were not considered ‘sudden’, while young people weathered initial ‘vaccine’ damage better, only to ‘die suddenly’ in 2022. Perhaps it is the booster – rather than dose one and two – that is the critical trigger for sudden death in a large number of cases, with the late 2021/early 2022 booster campaign proving the fatal factor.
Conclusion
Data from obituary analysis from Kilkenny, Ireland, shows a significant increase in sudden death for 2022 as opposed to previous years. This supports other sources of data that we have a significant sudden death problem in heavily ‘vaccinated’ countries. Patrick Walsh deserves credit for compiling this dataset for Kilkenny that provides yet another arrow in the bow of the ‘vaccine’ sceptic.
The Truth Be Told protests are focused on drawing attention to the horrific injuries some people have suffered after taking the Covid 19 ‘vaccine’.
The speakers were people who had been injured by these experimental injections, but most of them were unable to attend in person due to the severity of their injuries.
Listening to the speakers it was more than obvious that these ‘vaccines’ are a horror beyond comprehension. They are capable of the complete destruction of a human being not just via physical death.
The AstraZeneca Covid ‘vaccine’ was the culprit in the injuries outlined in the videos – all four speakers specified that they had AstraZeneca. The story behind the AstraZeneca jab is an interesting one in itself given that it has essentially disappeared from the market. While all of the Covid ‘vaccines’ are dangerous, all of the dangers were pinned on AstraZeneca (and in the US, J&J) despite Pfizer and Moderna causing the same effects. But there is no explicit acknowledgement that this product has been de facto pulled, and therefore no explicit acknowledgement that these individuals harmed were given a dangerous product.
After the speakers there was a march around town with leaflets being given out. There were other protests, a stall run by supporters of the official narrative on Ukraine and people who oppose the Iranian government. There was leafleting and handing out The Light Paper, not that many people wanted a leaflet unfortunately.
You can listen to the stories of the ‘vaccine’ injured on my Odysee channel.
2021 has been the year in which human beings have been subjected to the most intensive, most obsessive, and most outright nonsensical propaganda campaign in human history.
So how has that propaganda campaign held up in 2022? Fortunately, it has has been forced onto the back foot, at least to a degree. There have been victories against the narrative here in the UK, such as the NHS ‘vaccine’ mandate being rejected, the care home worker mandate being repealed, and no more lockdowns. Over here at least, there is only a small percentage of people still wearing a mask, and although the media does its best to fearmonger about Covid, people aren’t buying it any more.
On December 19, the most recent date for which reliable figures are available, just 14 Stoke-on-Trent residents were vaccinated – with one person receiving a first dose, three getting second doses and 10 booster or third doses.
There are, of course, still covid fanatics out there but they are becoming a minority.
The Bad News
There are however, new threats on the horizon. As I have said before, the point of the Official Covid Narrative is not the narrative itself. The point is to use the narrative to drive in an authoritarian, technocratic, transhumanist mass surveillance dystopia via digital IDs, Smart Cities, and Central Bank Digital Currencies. They can do this without Covid, for example, through narratives of ‘saving the planet’ or terrorism (the main narrative used to push mass surveillance prior to the Covid scam).
One of these threats is currently being pushed in Oxford:
Road blocks stopping most motorists from driving through Oxford city centre will divide the city into six “15-minute” neighbourhoods, a county council travel chief has said.
While this will be promoted as ‘saving the planet’ it is actually a form of controlling people’s movements, and will be used to normalise checkpoints through which you cannot pass if you are not the ‘right’ kind of person (whether that’s to do with ‘carbon credits’, ‘vaccination’ status, or political opinion) no doubt connected to one’s digital identity.
But there is something even more important that is worthy of discussion. The horror from this year can be summed up in two words:
Died Suddenly.
Those two words used to normalise mass deaths from the mRNA injections.
So let’s talk about died suddenly. ‘Died Suddenly’ is, in a large percentage of cases, a media euphemism for mRNA injection induced death. This largely but not entirely replaces its previous role as a euphemism for the manner of death for those that have killed themselves.
We have plausible mechanisms of mRNA ‘vaccine’ induced death. Even governments have admitted that these injections can damage the heart.Blood clots are another harm admitted by the establishment. There is significant evidence of myocarditis, pericarditis, stroke, blood clots, cardiac arrest, and heart attacks being caused by the injections – and these can lead to death.
So we have our deaths, our correlations, our mechanisms. But what I wanted to get to was the tsunami of news stories about those who ‘died suddenly’.
For the last few months, I have been working on the ‘In Memoriam of those who ‘died suddenly” project as started by Mark Crispin Miller. The project is a long compilation of deaths all around the world, posted every week, of those who ‘died suddenly’, often with no cause of death listed, or from the above listed causes that often indicate that ‘vaccination’ was involved in the death. As a result, every day I am searching for evidence of people who ‘died suddenly’ for this project.
I have my reasons for taking on this burden of death – to document this crime-in-progress of mRNA ‘vaccine’ mass murder, and other reasons and motivations I won’t get into. My experience doing this project is that it is everywhere. I focus mainly on countries with Russian-language media and Asian countries as well as the UK to a degree, but cases of people dying suddenly pop up from all over the world – either with no cause of death, or the telltale ‘cardiac arrest’, ‘blood clots’ or ‘stroke’ listed.
While the cases of young people dying of these conditions – which rarely affect them normally – are the most striking evidence of mRNA murder – we should not lose sight of the fact that this is a truly universal phenomenon. Male, female, black, white, Asian, old, young, middle aged, Western, Eastern – none of this matters. There are people in all these categories who have been killed.
People who aren’t watching this as closely as I am may not grasp the full implications of what we are witnessing. I’d like to offer some observations based on the reports I have found over the last four months:
Heart Attacks and Cardiac Arrest seem to be rampant in the 40-65 age demographic. Perhaps a slightly overlooked fact, given the more shocking cases among under 30s and sometimes teenagers.
There are a large amount of videos of people just dropping dead. Particularly from India. They are doing a normal activity like dancing and just drop.
There’s also a large amount of testimony of people just collapsing, having been fine the moment before, for example, I have found Russians dropping dead at bus stops.
I don’t believe we are getting anywhere near close to the death toll with the ‘Died Suddenly’ project. Obviously, a large number of cases are never reported anywhere. But even on top of that, there must be news articles that are never found that belong in the project. Most of the Russian ones are reported on local news media websites, for example. If one had the time to check Russian-language local news media across the whole country I reckon a lot more deaths would crop up. But no-one can feasibly manage that. Plus there’s cases excluded from the project due to ambiguity about the cause of death that may have been ‘vaccine’ related.
None of the media in any of the countries I have researched acknowledge there is even a problem, with the exception of India. Indian articles will sometimes state ‘There have been a large number of heart attacks recently’, or, ‘There have been a lot of people dying suddenly dancing at weddings, etc.’ In most cases they don’t blame the ‘vaccine’ but I have seen a couple of examples where the journalist, or who the journalist is quoting, question the ‘vaccine’.
The media is trying to blame anything but the ‘vaccine’ for these deaths, when it does acknowledge that the death was unusual more specifically. Blaming Covid is one strategy, blaming cold weather (or other random factors) for heart attacks instead of the ‘vaccine’ is another strategy. The nebulous ‘Sudden Adult Death Syndrome’ is another one.
When this fails the media accuses ‘anti-vaxxers’ of ‘weaponising’ the deaths of famous people by asking questions. I remember reading one comment that referred to us as ‘grave robbers’, showing disrespect to the deceased. Of course the true disrespect to the deceased is to refuse to ask these questions about what may have killed them.
Being honest, I don’t think this situation is going to improve, I think it will continue or get worse. Even if all ‘vaccination’ stops now, too many people have been damaged, as Dr. Peter McCullough has outlined, with subclinical heart damage that will lead to sudden death. This is where they have led us, where they watch the people that trusted them die. Us dissenters who did not take the injections – unless they resort to more extreme methods – are going to live, but what are we going to live with?
Cassandra's Box 
