Your alternative update on #COVID19 for 2021-01-22. Lockdown: journo’s duty to question it, expert at IC says it’s not working, German judge overrules it

For any of my subscribers who have not installed a Theta Edge Node on their computer, why the heck not? Get it from

It is a journalist’s duty to question lockdown (link).

‘Much of the press is all too happy to toe the government line’.

‘Understandably, many think questioning lockdown is as reprehensible now as it was in March. But asking questions and printing the answers (so the public can draw their own conclusions) is the whole point of journalism’.

‘Massive mistakes were made by the government when it first locked down. It was in an atmosphere of hysteria that hospital beds were cleared to make way for coronavirus patients. This meant elderly people – infected with Covid-19 – were sent back to care homes where infection with coronavirus was a death sentence. We know, now, that the virus poses a grave threat to the over-60s – especially men – and those with certain underlying health conditions. But is lockdown the best approach to protecting them until the vaccine can be given to all of us?’

UK Column News – 22nd January 2021. WHO states that careful interpretation of weak positive results is needed. The clinical trial study evaluating vaccine candidates is now in its third and final phase and is due to be completed by January 27, 2023 (website, youtube, bitchute).

Infectious Diseases Expert (at Imperial College) Says UK Lockdown Is Not Working (link).

Infectious diseases expert Professor Steven Riley says current data shows that the national lockdown in the United Kingdom is not working’.

‘Riley, who is professor of infectious disease dynamics at Imperial College London, cited a React study which shows “the prevalence of infection increased between 6 and 15 January,” after the national lockdown was announced on January 4’.

“It’s long enough that, were the lockdown working effectively, we would certainly have hoped to have seen a decline,” said Riley’.

‘The professor added that current research “certainly doesn’t support the conclusion that lockdown is working.”’

‘As we highlighted last week, a peer reviewed study by Stanford researchers found that mandatory lockdowns do not provide more benefits to stopping the spread of COVID-19 than voluntary measures such as social distancing.The researchers found “no clear, significant beneficial effect of [more restrictive measures] on case growth in any country.”’

‘While numerous studies show that lockdowns have no impact on reducing the spread of viruses, an avalanche of data shows that they cost lives’.

‘Academics from Duke, Harvard, and Johns Hopkins have warned that there could be around a million excess deaths over the next two decades as a result of lockdowns’.

‘Thousands of doctors and scientists are on record as opposing lockdown measures, warning that they will cause more death than the coronavirus itself’.

Corona Ordinance Unconstitutional : a landmark judgement in (Germany’s) Weimar District Court (link).

‘Working English translation by Howard Steen (using DeepL) of item reported on German Corona Committee news pages: Amtsrichter in Weimar: Corona-VO verfassungswidrig – 2020 NEWS posted Jan 21st, 2021’

A district judge in Weimar has acquitted a man who was to be fined for violating the Corona contact ban by celebrating his birthday with at least seven other parties from a total of eight households, six guests too many under Thuringia’s Corona ordinance. The judge’s verdict is scathing: The Corona Ordinance is unconstitutional and materially objectionable’.

For the first time, a judge has dealt intensively with the medical facts, the economic consequences and the effects of the specific policy’.

‘Part of the rule of law is the requirement that laws be definite. Laws may not simply make blanket decrees and thus encourage interpretation by the authorities according to gusto and thus arbitrariness. According to the Infection Protection Act, the “competent authority shall take the necessary protective measures”. In the normal course of events, this means that excretors or persons suspected of excretion can be isolated or contaminated premises closed’.

‘The Infection Protection Act does not provide for a general ban on contact that also covers healthy persons. However, as has been argued by many administrative courts to date, an overstepping of the regulatory circle of the Infection Protection Act beyond the normal course of events can be justified if it is an “unprecedented event” that is so new that the legislature could not possibly have made the necessary regulations beforehand’.

‘The judge does not accept this excuse: As early as 2013, the Bundestag prepared a risk analysis of a pandemic caused by a “virus Modi-SARS” with the cooperation of the Robert Koch Institute, in which a scenario with 7.5 million (!) deaths in Germany in a period of three years was described and anti-epidemic measures in such a pandemic were discussed (Bundestagsdrucksache 17/12051). In view of such an event, which was considered at least “conditionally probable” (probability of occurrence class C), the legislator could therefore have examined the regulations of the Infection Protection Act and adapted them if necessary. This policy failure, as a result of which Germany had run into the epidemic virtually unprepared – without legal precautions to combat it, without stocks of masks, protective clothing and medical equipment, could not now lead to politicians being allowed to close any regulatory gap as they saw fit’.

‘This is especially true since an epidemic situation, i.e. the basis for the extension of the proven infection control regulations, does not (no longer) exist. Already in the spring, the numbers of infected and ill persons had fallen, the lockdown had thus come too late and had generally been ineffective’.

Boris & Hancock Lies 🤬 Write Off 2021 🤦‍♂️ I’m Done 😡 ‘Lockdown Until May Say SAGE’ (link).

Are COVID-19 Swab Samples a Threat to Your DNA Privacy? (link, link).

‘Parents in New York City, along with some teachers, have asked a judge to suspend mandatory testing. Why? Doesn’t it make sense to test these pupils before they go back to school or while they’re in school, to make sure not only that they’re as safe as can be, but also — because kids don’t really get as sick from this virus — to protect teachers, janitors, administrators, food handlers, cleaners, and older people who are more at risk and are in the schools?’

‘Why sue about testing? What the parents and teachers realized is that when you get tested, there’s a swab taken of your nose — or pretty soon there may be a spit sample on a strip of paper — and it’s sent off to commercial testing labs. They have the samples and they also know a little bit about who’s positive. In theory, because they have your DNA, they or someone else could learn more. That’s what the parents and teachers are worrying about’.

The Coming New Order (link).

At that point, they realise that their foremost effort needs to be a push toward corporatism – the merger of power between government and business’.

‘This is a natural marriage. The political world is a parasitic one. It relies on a continual flow of funding. The world of big business is a study in exclusivity – the ability to make it impossible for pretenders to the throne to arise. So, big business provides the cash; government provides protective legislation that ensures preference for those at the top’.

‘In most cases, this second half of the equation does not mean a monopoly for just one corporation, but a monopoly for a cabal – an elite group of corporations’.

This corporatist relationship has deep roots in the US, going back over one hundred years. To this day, those elite families who took control of oil, steel, banking, motor vehicles and other industries a century ago, soon created a takeover of higher learning (universities), health (Big Pharma) and “Defense” (the military-industrial complex)’.

‘Through legislation, the US was then transformed to ensure that all these interests would be catered to, creating generations of both control and profit’.

‘Of course, “profit” should not be an evil word, but under crony capitalism, it becomes an abomination – a distortion of the free market and the death of laissez faire economics’.

Certainly, this sort of collectivism is not what Karl Marx had in mind when he daydreamed about a workers’ paradise in which business leaders retained all the risk and responsibility of creating and building businesses, whilst the workers had the final word as to how the revenue would be distributed to the workers themselves’.

‘Mister Marx failed in being objective enough to understand that if the business creator took all the risk and responsibility but gave up the ability to decide what happened to the revenue, he’d never bother to open a business. Even a shoeshine boy would reject such a notion and elect to go on the dole, rather than work’.

‘Mister Marx sought more to bring down those who were successful than to raise up those who were not, yet he unwittingly created a new idea – corporate collectivism – in which the very people he sought to debase used the appeal of collectivist rhetoric to diminish both the freedoms and wealth of the average worker’.

‘On the surface, this might appear to be a hard sell – to get the hoi polloi into the net – but in fact, it’s quite easy and has perennially been effective’.

Hitler’s New Order was such a construct – the promise to return Germany to greatness and the German people to prosperity through increasingly draconian laws, warfare and an economic revolving door between government and industry’.

‘Of course, a major influx of capital was required – billions of dollars – and this was eagerly provided by US industry and banks. Heads of New York banks not only funded Nazi industry; families such as the Fords, Rockefellers, Morgans, etc., sat on the boards of German corporations’.

West Midlands Police Send 20 Face-Nappy Yellowshirts Mob-Handed To Find Party That Didn’t Exist (link, link).

I guess there wasn’t any serious crimes out there for these 20 police officers to deal with.

YOUTUBE CAUGHT RED-HANDED Removing Dislikes from Biden White House Page — Anything to Fool the Proletariat (link).

‘During the White House presser, the American public was quick to downvote Psaki’s nonsense.  At 3 PM the video had 10,000 down votes’.

But by 7 PM YouTube came to the rescue and erased the downvotes by several thousand’.

The number at 7:31 PM had remarkably dropped to 3.1 thousand votes’.

This is more evidence of how the Tech Giants do anything they can to assist their ideological allies while they censor and delete conservative content and voices’.

Foreman laid off after quizzing COVID test? Ironworkers’ union says Joe was “not fired, Joe quit!” (link).

‘Ironworkers Local 721 union employee Joe MacDonald, foreman at Ontario Power Generation’s Darlington Nuclear Centre, has been laid off, after questioning the forced COVID testing of asymptomatic employees. Business manager Fred MacPherson said he filed a grievance on behalf of Joe, but told Tamara that Joe was “not fired, Joe quit!”’

National Guard Allowed Back Into Capitol After Eviction To Parking Garage; Trump Offers DC Hotel Rooms (link).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: