Did The First Lockdown Trigger The Second Wave?


The good news? If Trump wins, they won’t be able to stop that great awakening from spreading. Nor will they escape accountability.

Mark Gray image

Re-Posted from the Canada Free Press By  —— Bio and ArchivesSeptember 24, 2020

Did The First Lockdown Trigger The Second Wave?

COVID-19’s second wave will fail worse than the first. Politicians will use it to justify further tyranny now, but as the second wave recedes it will leave fully exposed the dark heart of evil that runs our lives. Our “leaders” will eventually rue the day they embraced totalitarianism.

If the answer to the title question is yes, the coming “second wave” is an “unexpected consequence” of the lockdown as we were told we’d be “safe” if we agreed to an aggressive response that included shutting schools, parks, and businesses down, quarantining the healthy, and following some sketchy safety guidelines.

Original COVID-19 models were critically flawed, producing alarming projections at odds with reality

We now know beyond any reasonable doubt that the original COVID-19 models were critically flawed, producing alarming projections at odds with reality. That panicked alarm, not the ignored reality, is what spread across the globe like wildfire, and in doing so created the “need” for a strong political response explicitly designed to “save” us.

The politicians who swallowed the COVID Kool aid, which is to say, all of them, leapt into action with liberty shredding decisions to shut down this, lock down that, and coerce abeyance with idiotic “safety” guidelines. Putting on a mask to enter a restaurant only to pull it off at the table, for example, makes no logical sense. It obviously isn’t about safety, which means it must be about the rule, or more specifically, the right to enforce the silly rule.

The entire political response—every rule, regulation, law, mandate, and guideline—was designed to save us from a false perception, not the underlying reality of a greater than 99.9% survival rate. Building solutions based on seriously bad information will always lead to “unexpected” consequences because the problem being solved doesn’t exist. This ignorance ensures policy failure, essentially guaranteeing harsh, negative consequences for us all.

If you prefer images, picture a surgeon removing the wrong limb as an example of bad information driving negative consequences.

First Wave Consequences, Second Wave Troubles

It is important to note that many of the first wave lockdown consequences were fully expected, and because of their ferocious impact, were initially sold as a short term, temporary solution. The politicians knew locking everything down would lead to massive job losses, personal and business bankruptcies, misdirected taxpayer resources, a loss of health services, which is a real health crisis, and a gross violation of civil liberties. They knew their decisions would hurt, yet they proceeded without hesitation. They knew then, and they know even better now. And yet?

The media’s second wave reporting has focused heavily on the recent rise in “number of cases” across the country, stoking fears on the assumption of a direct, causal relationship between cases and deaths.  This thinking makes sense on the surface as deaths quickly followed the rise in first wave cases, but this case-death correlation doesn’t show up in the second wave statistics, an indicator the virus is struggling to find viable victims.

This hasn’t slowed the media’s frantic fear mongering in the slightest, and they continue to press the idea that further lockdown measures are a political necessity because we face another wave of viral massacre. However, if the second wave rise in cases is an “unexpected” consequence of the first’s mistaken lockdown, something that shouldn’t have occurred, then its value to the decision-making process is also suspect and should be reviewed.

So, is there any evidence that indicates the “second wave” is a negative consequence of misguided “first wave” lockdown policies?

The Data Damns Our Decision Makers

The first two charts compare Daily COVID-19 Deaths between lockdown UK and non-lockdown Sweden, which allows us to explore the impact UK lockdown policies had on deaths.  The second two charts add the number of daily cases into the mix, allowing us to evaluate the relationship between cases and deaths for the UK and Sweden in both the first and second waves.

Daily New Deaths In United Kingdom

Daily New Deaths In Sweden

 

Although the UK and Sweden took different routes, the similarity between the lockdown and non-lockdown death curves is apparent, as is the inference that lockdowns had little effect on the lethality of the virus.

Now, let’s take a peek at the Daily Case numbers.

Daily New Deaths vs Cases in United Kingdom

Daily New Deaths vs Cases in Sweden

Fight ELITIST SUPPRESSION—Make CFP Your Go-To Home Page!There is a substantial difference in the Daily Case curves between the UK and Sweden, suggesting that although lockdown policies have little impact on daily deaths, they do have a significant effect on how the virus spreads.

While Sweden’s decision to remain open delayed the peak of their first wave Daily Cases curve, the chart shows deaths peaked and began dropping long before the virus finished spreading at its quickest. The chart shows Sweden’s second wave arrived and departed between August and September without causing a respective rise in deaths. In fact, the Daily Death curve shows no upward bounce at all.

The UK’s Daily Cases, strangely enough, began climbing after their summer mask mandate. However, the “expected” rise in Daily Deaths failed to materialize.

So,

  • Lockdown policies did set the stage for a second wave.
  • COVID-19 has lost its lethality and any rise in “second wave” deaths will likely resemble a ripple rather than a tsunami.
  • The political/media complex want us to live in lockdown. (Evil a hard pill to swallow?)

News vs Fake News

Generally speaking, the purpose of “News” is to inform. It may enhance the value of that information by adding context related analyses but by and large, News occurs after the act has happened and does its best to bring perceptions in line with reality.

Conversely, because Fake News eschews reality, it must lead with a lie of desire rather than follow the truth of events. Its success is determined by how well it is able to convince people to believe things that aren’t true, such as COVID-19 being the worst viral bug since the early 1900s, and then exploiting that belief to force political action, which then “legitimizes” the Fake claim and fuels the next News cycle. From that point there is only one acceptable direction: Forward!

Belief is key, because once set it automatically protects itself by immediately rejecting contradictory facts and figures that would destroy it. How else can we rationalize mask mandates for populations with survival rates over 99.99%, like the 8 provinces not named Quebec and Ontario? How does the call to shut down schools and mask-up children comport with this report showing zero deaths, none, out of over 48,000 cases in US Universities?

The logical disconnect is obvious, but it still isn’t enough to unseat the Fake belief “we’re all gonna die”. This leaves us fearful and exploitable. Share some COVID-19 truths with a masker then sit back and watch. You will often see the alarm grow in their eyes as the cognitive dissonance sets in. Unfortunately, that alarm is typically silenced by rejecting the painful truth and ending the discussion.

Why are western societies across the globe teetering on the brink of totalitarian terror? Because Fake News, evil as it is, works! We either eliminate it from our lives or it will continue to eliminate freedom from ours.

The world really is in an existential battle between good and evil. The rioting, lockdowns, and hatred roiling the globe are not signs of a revolution so much as they are panicked signals the corrupt cabal running things is being systematically exposed. They will get uglier.

The good news? If Trump wins, they won’t be able to stop that great awakening from spreading. Nor will they escape accountability.

COVID vaccine clinical trials doomed to fail; fatal design flaw; NY Times opinion piece exposes all three major clinical trials


Or, do the vaccine manufacturers have a devious trick up their sleeves?

Jon Rappoport image

Re-posted from the Canada Free Press By  —— Bio and ArchivesSeptember 24, 2020

 

COVID vaccine clinical trials doomed to fail; fatal design flaw

PART ONE: THE FAILURE

Peter Doshi, associate editor of the medical journal BMJ, and Eric Topol, Scripps Research professor of molecular medicine, have written a devastating NY Times opinion piece about the ongoing COVID vaccine clinical trials.

They expose the fatal flaw in the large Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Moderna trials.

September 22, the Times: “These Coronavirus Trials Don’t Answer the One Question We Need to Know”:

Clinical trials are dead in the water

“If you were to approve a coronavirus vaccine, would you approve one that you only knew protected people only from the most mild form of Covid-19, or one that would prevent its serious complications?”

“The answer is obvious. You would want to protect against the worst cases.”

“But that’s not how the companies testing three of the leading coronavirus vaccine candidates, Moderna, Pfizer and AstraZeneca, whose U.S. trial is on hold, are approaching the problem.”

“According to the protocols for their studies, which they released late last week, a vaccine could meet the companies’ benchmark for success if it lowered the risk of mild Covid-19, but was never shown to reduce moderate or severe forms of the disease, or the risk of hospitalization, admissions to the intensive care unit or death.”

“To say a vaccine works should mean that most people no longer run the risk of getting seriously sick. That’s not what these trials will determine.”

This means these clinical trials are dead in the water.

There is no need to create a vaccine that prevents mild cases

(Read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed)

The trials are designed to show effectiveness in preventing mild cases of COVID, which nobody should care about, because mild cases naturally run their course and cause no harm.  THERE IS NO NEED FOR A VACCINE THAT PREVENTS MILD CASES.

Now let’s go deeper.  Read the next section from the Times piece, and then I’ll make comments.

“The Moderna and AstraZeneca studies will involve about 30,000 participants each; Pfizer’s will have 44,000. Half the participants will receive two doses of vaccines separated by three or four weeks, and the other half will receive saltwater placebo shots. The final determination of efficacy will occur after 150 to 160 participants develop Covid-19…”

Here’s how it works.  The vaccine companies are looking for a total of 150 (mild) COVID cases to occur, combined, in the two groups; those receiving the placebo and those receiving the vaccine.  How would that happen?  The researchers believe ‘the coronavirus is spreading everywhere and it will pounce on some of the volunteers in the clinical trial.’

Let’s say that, during the trial, 100 people receiving the placebo develop mild COVID-19, and only 50 people receiving the vaccine develop mild COVID.

The vaccine companies would say, ‘We just proved the vaccine is 50% effective in preventing COVID, and that’s all we need to do, in order to win authorization from the FDA.  Release the vaccine.  Inject the world.’

The irrelevant outcomes for 150 people equal ‘let’s shoot up seven billion people.’  That’s staggering.

But it gets even worse.  The magic number of 150 COVID cases?  How is a COVID case defined?  The authors of the Times piece have the answer:

“In the Moderna and Pfizer trials, even a mild case of Covid-19 – for instance, a cough plus a positive lab test – would qualify and muddy the results. AstraZeneca is slightly more stringent but would still count mild symptoms like a cough plus fever as a case.”

But wait.  The NY Times itself recently published an article stating that up to 90% of US COVID cases could very well be false positives—-in other words, not cases at all.  Why?  Because the diagnostic PCR test, as it is performed by many labs, is too sensitive.  It registers ‘positive for COVID’ when it shouldn’t.

So, in these vaccine clinical trials, the whole process of determining that ‘150 people developed COVID-19’ is completely unreliable, useless, absurd, and nonsensical.

Other than that, the clinical trials are perfect.  Yes, perfectly ridiculous.

There is much more in the Times opinion piece, but I’ll leave it there.

“So the magic number is 150?  That’s the number that will decide the immediate fate of the planet?”

“Of course.”

“And these 150 people, who you say develop COVID-19…you really can’t confirm that because the definition of a COVID case is so vague and the PCR test is so unreliable.”

“Correct.”

“And come to think of it, the people receiving the vaccine in the clinical trials could develop symptoms indistinguishable from COVID-19, as a result of the effects of the vaccine.”

“Yes, that’s right.”

“But you’re very confident in the success of the vaccine.”

“Indeed.”

“Why?”

“I have to be confident.  If we’re exposed as incompetent frauds, our bottom line will take a huge hit.”

“Thank you, sir.  And that’s tonight’s news.  Make sure you take the vaccine, everyone.  It’s vital.  This is Fred J Clown, for CBS-NBC-ABC-CNN-FOX-PBS-AP-Reuters and all official news sources East, West, North, and South.  The News, brought to you by Venom-X-2, a medicine that has only 463 adverse effects.  Ask your doctor if Venom is right for you.”

PART TWO: THE DEVIOUS TRICK

Now I’m going to go over the vital information again, but this time I’m going to show you how…

The vaccine companies can use the fatal flaw in their protocol design to…

Actually win approval of their COVID vaccine.

Stick with me.  This is big.

Only 150 people are needed to make the major clinical trials of a COVID vaccine look like a success.

Out of 30,000 volunteers in a trial, researchers are waiting for 150 people to “come down with COVID-19.”  MILD cases.  They assume this will happen because they believe the coronavirus is everywhere, and it’ll infect their volunteers.

Of course, their definition of a mild case of COVID-19 is meaningless.  Cough plus fever, and a positive PCR test.  The test spits out false positives like a rigged slot machine, and the visible symptoms could result from flu, polluted air, or too many candy bars.

Nevertheless, the researchers are waiting for a total of 150 people to “catch a mild case of COVID.”  When that number is reached, everything stops.

Now comes the big moment.  How many of those 150 COVID cases occurred in the group that received the vaccine, and how many in the group that received the placebo shot of salt water?

Let’s say only 50 COVID cases occurred in the vaccine group, and 100 in the placebo group.  The researchers pop champagne corks.  They say, “Look, the vaccine is 50% effective at preventing COVID, and that’s all we need to win authorization from the FDA.”

BUT suppose 70 cases occurred in the vaccine group and 80 in the placebo group?  No good.  No good at all.  No way to call the vaccine effective.

Now comes the “reshaping of the data.”

HERE WE GO.

Fight ELITIST SUPPRESSION—Make CFP Your Go-To Home Page!

Vaccine Companies want success and money now.  They want to win the race

The researchers say, “Wait.  Thirty of the COVID cases in the vaccine group were REALLY just adverse reactions to the vaccine.  They weren’t cases of COVID.  You see, the vaccine can cause symptoms that are indistinguishable from mild COVID.  Cough, fever, chills.  ACTUALLY, there were only 40 cases of COVID in the vaccine group.  Half as many as in the placebo group.  The vaccine IS 50% effective.  We don’t really need to wait until we have a total of 150 COVID cases.  We’re good.  We’re golden.  We can get authorization from the FDA right now to shoot up everybody in America!”

Vaccine manufacturers HAVE KNOWN ALL ALONG that they could pull this trick.

Why leave things to chance?

Why risk a few hundred billion dollars of profit on a random distribution of mild COVID cases among the volunteers in their clinical trials?

There is yet a further devious twist.  The New York Times article I just analyzed torpedoed the vaccine manufacturers for designing their trial protocols to prevent MILD cases of COVID.  Why?

Because no one needs a vaccine that can do that.  Mild cases are not a problem or a threat.  They cure themselves quickly.  No vaccine is necessary in the first place.

BUT the definition of a mild COVID case is EXACTLY what the vaccine manufacturers needed.  It enabled them to hatch a plan, to make sure they didn’t fail.

They could pawn off a MILD case of COVID on a vaccine reaction.  They could fake that without causing ripples.  The FDA would say, “The vaccine reactions aren’t serious.  All right, no problem.  We’ll approve this vaccine for emergency use.”

However…If the manufacturers designed their clinical trial protocol to prevent serious cases of COVID, they would be waiting to see 150 cases of really sick people to occur.  That might never happen.

If it did happen, and the manufacturers had to pull their devious switcheroo trick and blame the vaccine for some of these SERIOUS cases…

They would have to tell the FDA that their vaccine was causing life-threatening pneumonia; and the FDA, under a lot of scrutiny these days, would find it very difficult to overlook that.

FDA: “We can’t approve this vaccine.  It could cause a few million cases of dire pneumonia…”

The vaccine companies didn’t make a titanic stupid mistake in their protocol design.  In gearing the protocol to prevent MILD COVID cases, they did what they did on purpose.  It allows them to “reshape their data” and win FDA approval for their vaccine.

These companies have no intention of failing, starting over, and spending a year recruiting 30,000 new volunteers.  They want success and money now.  They want to win the race.

And they could win, if the truth isn’t known and shared widely.

(The link to this article posted on my blog is here.)

Senator Rand Paul Confronts Dr. Anthony Fauci For Months of Lies and Manipulative Statements….


Senator Rand Paul confronted Dr. Anthony Fauci today about his history of false claims, lies and manipulative statements surrounding the COVID-19 virus and direction for U.S. mitigation efforts.  It’s about time someone called the baby ugly.

Anthony Fauci, a political ideologue and leftist advocate, was the primary government influence that has led to trillions in economic damage and impacted the lives of all Americans with false assertions and brutally political virus mitigation efforts.

.

COVID-19 hype was a political effort with assistance from U.S. media.

“Fish do not know they are in water”  ~Sundance

 

How CDC/WHO will fake the effects of the COVID vaccine to make it look like a success


And appointing official mouthpieces to carry lies to the public is as easy as training little Faucis to sit up and bark

Jon Rappoport image

Re-Posted from the Canada Free Press By  —— Bio and ArchivesSeptember 22, 2020

How CDC/WHO will fake the effects of the COVID vaccine to make it look like a success

Making a vaccine look like it’s a champion isn’t difficult for public health agencies.  There are a number of strategies.

Of course, these fraudulent strategies would be serious crimes.  But when has that stopped the CDC or the World Health Organization?

In no particular order——

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed)

ONE: Rework the definition of a “COVID case.” Presently, the CDC absurdly allows doctors to diagnose a person with COVID who has a cough, or chills and fever, and lives in an area where cases are being claimed.  No test necessary.

So change this practice, once the vaccine is approved.  Demand testing for a diagnosis.  State that cough alone is not enough.  Chills and fever must also be present.  Require fever to be above 100.

These and other changes would automatically shrink the number of cases.  The drop in numbers would be attributed to the vaccine.

This “definitional shrinking” was, in fact, deployed in the 1950s, after the introduction of the polio vaccine.

TWO: Order a change in the way the PCR diagnostic test is done.  The practice of amplifying the original test sample from the patient occurs in cycles, or jumps.  The greater the number of cycles, the more likely the test will result in a COVID diagnosis.  Therefore, order a reduced number of cycles for all testing labs.

Outcome?  Fewer COVID diagnoses.  Fewer case numbers.  “The vaccine is working.”

THREE: Quietly restrict the present hospital practice of arbitrarily writing “COVID” on patient case and death files.

FOUR: Cook up and publish false studies showing more and more people are developing immunity to the virus.  Attribute this to the vaccine.

FIVE: Another type of false study—-“the transmission of the virus from person to person is slowing, thanks to the vaccine.”

SIX: Pump up the success of issuing Immunity certificates after vaccination. “People are feeling safer now.  More businesses are reopening…”

SEVEN: Using the compliant press, simply issue bald declarations that the vaccine is a success.

EIGHT: Hide the many instances of injury and death from the vaccine. When necessary, claim COVID was the cause.

NINE: Warn that the wonderful vaccine-derived immunity is not permanent, and frequent booster shots are necessary.

TEN: Rework the definition of “vaccine-acquired immunity.” Even a very weak antibody response from the shot would qualify as “protective immunity.”

ELEVEN: Huge numbers of people with ordinary flu-like illness, pneumonia, and other traditional lung infections are being called “COVID.”  Change this practice.  Go back to calling many of these people “flu,” “pneumonia,” etc.  COVID case numbers will drop.  Claim the drop is the effect of the vaccine.

TWELVE: Presently, millions of so-called COVID cases have “co-morbidities.”  These are prior serious health conditions which are, in fact, the true causes of illnesses and death.  Of course, this is denied.  But after the vaccine is introduced… scale back the practice of counting all these ill and deceased co-morbid patients as “COVID.”  Case and death numbers will drop.  Claim the vaccine is the reason.

THIRTEEN: After the vaccine is introduced, slow down testing for a brief period.  This will automatically reduce the rate of new cases.  Attribute the decline to the vaccine.

Committing these crimes are a walk in the park for public health agencies.

And appointing official mouthpieces to carry lies to the public is as easy as training little Faucis to sit up and bark.

(The link to this article posted on my blog is here.)

The New Norm – OMG


The Economist just ran a story that summarized the change in work that “people particularly fond of their pyjamas [sic] have for decades been arguing that a lot of work done in large shared offices could better be done at home. With covid-19 their ideas were put to the test in a huge if not randomized trial. The preliminary results are now in: yes, a lot of work can be done at home; and what is more, many people seem to prefer doing it there.”

The collapse in security in major cities such as New York have led to only 54% of companies expecting to return to New York City. In fact, only 8% of employees have returned to the office as of mid-August. Based upon a very RELIABLE source, the violence in the cities has been encouraged by Democrats for more than just trying to overthrow Trump. This has also been part of the agenda to end commuting by car to reduce CO2. They have deliberately sought to end commuting to save the planet. The problem has been that these Democratic mayors are ignorant of the real objective and think they are helping to just overthrow Trump. What they have failed to see is the bigger picture. People are fleeing the big cities and moving out to the suburbs. Real estate in the suburbs has risen in price while city properties are collapsing with no-bid.

According to the FT, Covid19 has given the world 3 years more oil supply.
The editor of the London Financial Times sent out this letter:

“It has been just over six months since London went into lockdown and the FT newsroom changed overnight from a bustling, crowded office to a dispersed, digital workplace. The Covid-19 pandemic has been an unparalleled test for organisations and governments around the world — and to all of us as parents, colleagues and friends. I hope the FT has passed this test by delivering the news, insight, analysis and intellectual stimulation you need to navigate this fast-changing world.

Looking ahead to the coming months, the FT aims to be your trusted guide to the new normal. We have passed through the first wave of the global crisis. Now, we face the new reality of living with the virus. Local and national outbreaks will continue to disrupt the fragile economic recovery. Crucial policy decisions on travel, employment support and stimulus occur with dizzying speed.”

Indeed, the New Norm is intended to bring in the Great Reset whereby offices vanish, commuting comes to an end, and travel will be forever restricted. However, vital to pulling this off is continued social distancing and masks. Why? This is being employed to combat civil unrest. It is also intended to separate the mindless sheep who obey whatever the government, says which complies with Stanley Milgram’s studies on Obedience to Authority.

The Germans put on trial after World War II said that they were just following orders. This inspired Milgram to investigate because many argued that the Germans were just different and could kill the Jews without remorse. At the Nuremberg Trials, those Germans simply said they were just following orders.

Stanley was perhaps the most important psychologists of all time as far as I am concerned. Instead of coming up with a theory, Stanley actually investigates and arrived at a conclusion nobody suspected was even possible. He hired actors to pretend to be shocked by a person whenever they lied. Stanley took random people off the street in the United States and elsewhere to see if the Germans were really a different species. He discovered that people would shock others in a torture setting as long as they were told that was what they had to do.

Stanley concluded his studies which shocked the world. They were published in his book – “Obedience to Authority.” I bring this up now BECAUSE this is precisely what is being carried out today. We have people wearing masks when there is no serious pandemic and yelling at others who do not. Some are violently attacking people who do not have a mask.

 

What is being carried out is a well-defined psychological tactic because they instill fear in the mass herd of human sheep and then they count on the obedience of authority to control society. I have stated before, a friend of mine grew up behind the Berlin Wall. When the wall fell, his father went an got his Stasi file. He was shocked to discover everyone he thought was a friend was telling the government everything he had to say against the government. When he came home, my friend thought his father went mad. He began punching holes in the walls and ripping out microphones. Until his death, he refused to ever speak to anyone outside his immediate family.

This is the reasoning being the social distancing and wearing masks. This (1) provides justification to arrest people who try to gather together to resist, and (2) as in France, they can put you in prison for 6 months for not wearing a mask or in Melbourne, Australia, attacking even women on the street who do not have a mask on. This is raw tyranny and how they are deliberately seeking to breakdown society to make the population controllable as was the case under communism.

Field Marshall Hermann Wilhelm Göring (1893–1946)

 “Why, of course, the people don’t want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don’t want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood.

But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship.

With respect to a Democracy they argued, the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States, only Congress can declare wars.

Göring replied: “Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.”

Welcome to the New Norm. These things are well defined. Once you understand what can be accomplished, then you can see their strategic plan. Since 1992, countries have signed on to Agenda 21 with the United States to inventory everything in the world along with the population. You MUST understand that there is this idea of a one-world government that would prevent wars. Here you have the former French Prime Minister bolding explaining this very idea was behind creating the Eurozone. They are seeking to do this globally and they have made their move here in 2020. This is not a conspiracy theory. I disagree that they will ever be able to pull it off. That does not mean those in power will not try.

Gates has been feeding into this agenda and seeks to push for digital currency so the tech companies will get a piece of every transaction in the world. He then is involved in food production and vaccines under the pretence of helping people when he is afraid of over-population.

The NEW NORM is less freedom if any remains. It will be more likely that you will need a permit to have a child, as was the case with the one-child rule in China that failed.

Britain Calling in Military to Enforce its COVID-19 Restrictions Without Parliament Debate


COMMENT: Has social media replaced civil disobedience, do people vent their spleens over a keyboard and feel that they’ve made their contribution.

When will we see politicians hanging from lampposts?
Cheers A
REPLY: It is clever to call anyone who disagrees with this agenda a “conspiracy theorist” so then they do not have to answer for their actions. I seriously doubt that people are truly aware that this is a major agenda and it is being put forth from so many directions with each expressing one component. I cannot stress enough that our computer has been accurately projecting what is coming. I have stated previously, I question if there will be free elections in the USA after 2024.
Martial Law in Poland
This AGENDA is the acknowledgment that there is a Sovereign Debt Crisis and a Monetary Crisis converging which would normally bring about the fall of governments and sets the stage for war. They actually believe by using this virus as the excuse to justify eliminating human rights and adopt an authoritarian style government under the pretense of protecting you, they will succeed. It is inevitable that such types of governments ALWAYS crash and burn.

This is the Wroclaw Poland Monument to the Anonymous Passerby. This is a striking public sculpture installed on street representing the period of martial law in Communist Poland. The Wroclaw  Monument honoring the anonymous passerby who fell under the ground. People who were living at the time of martial law, know that it is real. Underground was a place where a part of the Polish nation came into being December 13, 1981. Wroclaw took part in the anti-communist activity. This represents our hope, that the dissent which is being forced underground, will one day rise up as history dictates such oppression always fails.

This AGENDA is being carried out from many fronts. Its goal is to cover-up the default on government debt which has become unsustainable with nations surrendering their sovereignty to the United States. Part of that agenda is to suppress free speech and to regulate social media to ONLY present the United Nations glory. We already have that taking place with YouTube and Facebook supporting this one-world agenda removing any post that challenges the US Agenda.

 

Already we see how YouTube and Facebook are supporting this global agenda. Gates’ plan to eliminate cash and force all transactions into digital is designed to give these companies a piece of every transaction in the world. Bill Gates is already working with Mastercard.

AGRA Watch Report_ _The Man Behind the Curtain

Gates has become his own SUPERPOWER which extends far beyond just vaccines. As revealed in the AGRA Watch report, “The Man Behind the Curtain: The Gates Foundation’s Influence on the UN Food Systems Summit,” published August 2020, Bill Gates actually has vast power also over the food supply. His influence over global food and agriculture policy is conducted through his funding of numerous organizations that are involved in agricultural development. Gates is controlling food policy and he is using many companies and organizations that can then do his bidding to hide his global reach.

Gates not only controls the United Nation’s World Health Organization which has been instrumental in using CFOVID-19 to crush the world economy, but he also controls the United Nations Climate Change policy, recommendations to eliminate currencies, and food supply.

But to point any of this out you are labeled a “conspiracy theorist” to discredit whatever you say without having to ever address the facts.

Is the Official Covid-19 Death Toll Accurate?


Re-Posted from Just Facts Daily By James D. Agresti, September 15, 2020

Overview

Roughly two-thirds of U.S. residents don’t believe the CDC’s official tally for the number of Covid-19 deaths. This distrust, however, flows in opposing directions. A nationally representative survey conducted by Axios/Ipsos in late July 2020 found that 37% of adults think the real number of C-19 fatalities in the U.S. is lower than reported, while 31% think the true death toll is greater than reported.

The facts show that neither side has an airtight case, but the evidence is more consistent with the theory that less people have died from C-19 than the official figures indicate. Nevertheless, the extent of the possible overcount is unknown, and even if it were as high as 50,000, it would not make a marked difference in key measures of the pandemic’s severity. Hence, debates over the accuracy of the death toll distract from other issues with much greater implications.

Excess Deaths

The main argument of those who claim that the official C-19 death tally is an undercount is based on a factor called “excess deaths.” This is defined as the total number of deaths from all causes during the pandemic minus the number of deaths that would normally occur at this time of the year.

In the words of the Government Accountability Office, “Examining higher-than-expected deaths from all causes helps to address limitations in the reporting of Covid-19 deaths because the number of total deaths is likely more accurate than the numbers of deaths from specific causes.”

U.S. death certificate data shows that the rise in deaths during the pandemic has indeed been greater than the number of reported C-19 deaths. Some jump to the conclusion that these additional fatalities must be C-19 deaths that were not recorded as such, but a broad array of data indicates that the bulk or all of them are caused by societal reactions to C-19—instead of the disease itself.

For a prime example of how people misconstrue this issue, CNN’s chief media correspondent, Brian Stelter, reported on August 16:

We are likely to see the 170,000 mark crossed today—confirmed deaths from Covid-19. But researchers have looked at the actual number of excess deaths in this country—estimated deaths above the norm—and they say it’s closer to 200,000 so far this year. So the real actual death toll from Covid-19 is around 200,000. We have to constantly remind viewers that it’s even worse than we know. It’s even worse than the data indicate.

First, Stelter is wrong that this figure is for “confirmed” deaths. It is actually for “confirmed” plus “suspected” deaths. Those exact words come from the CDC’s official guidance for certifying C-19 deaths, which was published on April 3. On the same day Stelter made this claim, the CDC’s website stated that its C-19 “case counts and death counts” have included “both confirmed and probable cases and deaths” since April 14. In other words, Stelter misrepresented the essence of the data even though this accounting change was in effect for four full months.

The impact of including probable deaths in the count is evidenced by how the CDC altered its website when it adopted this methodology. Two days after the new method of counting deaths was implemented, the CDC updated its website twice (instead of its usual once-per-day update) to incorporate this revision. The changes it made on that day (April 16) provide a rough sense of scale for how the new policy modified the death toll:

  • Before any updates, the CDC reported that 24,582 people had died from C-19 as of April 14.
  • On the first update, the CDC reported that 27,012 people had died from C-19 as of April 15, including 22,871 “confirmed” and 4,141 “probable.”
  • On the second update, the CDC reported that 31,071 people had died from C-19 as of April 15, including 26,930 “confirmed” and 4,141 “probable.”

Taken at face value, the second update shows that CDC’s insertion of “probable” cases raised the death count from 26,930 to 31,071, or by 15%. From a more skeptical standpoint, the difference between the 22,871 “confirmed” deaths on the first update and the 31,071 “confirmed and probable” deaths on the second update amounts to a 36% rise caused by these bookkeeping modifications.

More significantly, Stelter failed to reveal that scholars who conduct research on excess deaths have found that multitudes of them have been caused by lockdowns, panic, and other responses to the pandemic. In July 2020, the Journal of the American Medical Association published a paper regarding this matter by researchers from Virginia Commonwealth University and Yale University. An article about the study from Virginia Commonwealth University summarizes its findings and quotes the researchers as follows:

  • Some excess deaths “may reflect under-reporting” or “patients with Covid-19 who died from related complications,” “but a third possibility, the one we’re quite concerned about is” the “spillover effects of the pandemic, such as delayed medical care, economic hardship or emotional distress.”
  • In the five states that that had the most Covid-19 deaths in March and April:
    • stroke deaths were 35% above normal.
    • Alzheimer’s deaths were 64% above normal.
    • heart disease deaths were 89% above normal.
    • diabetes deaths were 96% above normal.
  • “New York City’s death rates alone rose a staggering 398% from heart disease and 356% from diabetes.”
  • “Still others may have struggled to deal with the consequences of job loss or social isolation.”
  • “A number of people struggling with depression, addiction and very difficult economic conditions caused by lockdowns may have become increasingly desperate, and some may have died by suicide. People addicted to opioids and other drugs may have overdosed.”
  • “The findings from” the “study confirm an alarming trend across the U.S., where community members experiencing a health emergency are staying home—a decision that can have long-term, and sometimes fatal, consequences.”

Numerous other facts corroborate the ones above, a small sampling of which includes the following:

  • A scientific survey commissioned by the American College of Emergency Physicians in April 2020 found that 29% of adults have “actively delayed or avoided seeking medical care due to concerns about contracting” C-19.
  • A California-based ABC News station reported in May:
    • “Doctors at John Muir Medical Center in Walnut Creek say they have seen more deaths by suicide during this quarantine period than deaths from the Covid-19 virus.”
    • Mike deBoisblanc, head of the trauma unit at the hospital stated that he’s “seen a year’s worth of suicide attempts in the last four weeks,” and “mental health is suffering so much” that he says “it is time to end the shelter-in-place order.”
  • A scientific survey conducted by the CDC in July 2020 found that about 32% of U.S. adults had “symptoms of anxiety disorder” as compared to 8% around the same time last year. The perils of this are underscored by a 2015 meta-analysis in the Journal of the American Medical Association Psychiatry, which found that the overall risk of death among people with anxiety is 43% higher than the general population.
  • A study published by the American Medical Association in September 2020 found that 27.8% of U.S. adults had symptoms of depression during the C-19 pandemic as compared to 8.5% before the pandemic. The same 2015 meta-analysis found that depression is associated with a 71% higher risk of death.
  • An article published by the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco estimated that “more than 20 million jobs” were “swept away” in the early months of the C-19 pandemic. A 2011 meta-analysis in the journal Social Science & Medicine about mortality, “psychosocial stress,” and job losses found that “unemployment is associated with a 63% higher risk of mortality in studies controlling for covariates.”
  • A study published by Just Facts in May 2020 found that anxiety related to C-19 will ultimately destroy at least seven times more years of life than can possibly be saved by lockdowns. With regard to this study, the accomplished psychiatrist Joseph P. Damore, Jr. wrote that it “thoroughly answers the question about the cure being worse than the disease.”

Thus, many or all of the excess deaths that Stelter and others attribute to C-19 are caused by the actions of governments and media outlets. These include but are not limited to stay-at-home orders, business shutdowns, and pervasive misinformation that fuels ill-informed decisions, panic, and depression.

Evidence of Overcounting

Several lines of evidence prove that some deaths included in the official C-19 tally were, in fact, not caused by C-19. However, the combined weight of this evidence is not enough to prove that the reported death toll is significantly greater than the actual one.

Four weeks after the World Health Organization declared C-19 a pandemic, Dr. Deborah Birx, the coordinator of the White House Covid-19 task force, stated that the U.S. is taking a “a very liberal approach” to counting C-19 deaths compared to “some countries.” She then explained that “if someone dies with Covid-19, we are counting that as a Covid-19 death.” Notably, that standard does not distinguish between dying from Covid-19 and dying with Covid-19.

In the wake of Birx’s statement, various government officials revealed exactly how they were implementing this “very liberal approach”:

  • A Michigan news article reported in April:
    • “In Macomb County, Chief Medical Examiner Daniel Spitz had a recent case in which an individual died by suicide. Because they had a family member in the hospital suffering from Covid-19, Spitz had a postmortem test done and found that the individual who died at home was positive for Covid-19. The virus wasn’t their cause of death, but the individual is counted as a Covid-19 death.”
    • In Oakland County, “every individual who has died while infected with Covid-19 has counted as a coronavirus death, according to Dr. Ljubisa J. Dragovic, the county’s chief medical examiner.”
  • Ngozi Ezike, director of Illinois Department of Public Health stated during a April press conference:
    • If “you were in hospice and had already been given a few weeks to live, and then you were also found to have Covid, that would be counted as a Covid death. It means that technically, even if you died of a clear alternate cause, but you still had Covid at the time, it’s still listed as a Covid death.”
    • “So everyone who’s listed as a Covid death doesn’t mean that was the cause of the death, but they had Covid at the time of death.”
  • A month later, Ezike said that the Department of Public Health was partly unwinding its previous policy but some of it would remain in place:
    • We are “trying to remove those obvious cases” from the C-19 death tally “where the Covid diagnosis was not the reason for the death. If there was a gunshot wound, if there was a motor vehicle accident, we know that that was not related to the Covid positive status.”
    • If “someone has another illness, like heart disease, and then had a stroke or other event, it’s not as easy to separate that and say Covid didn’t exacerbate that existing illness. That would not be removed from the count.”
    • “Even if somebody was very elderly and they were maybe in hospice, we still can’t say that their Covid infection didn’t hasten the death, and so it’s relevant that Covid-19 maybe had a chance to accelerate that process.”
  • A Colorado-based CBS news station reported in April:
    • The “Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment has reclassified three deaths at a Centennial nursing home as Covid-19 deaths, despite the fact attending physicians ruled all three were not related to coronavirus.”
    • A spokesman for the state explained that it “follows the CDC’s case definition of Covid-19 cases and deaths,” and “when a person with a lab-confirmed case of Covid-19 dies, their death is automatically counted as a Covid-19 death unless there is another cause that completely rules out Covid-19, such as a fatal physical injury.”
  • The same CBS news station reported in May about a death in Colorado where C-19 was completely ruled out, but the state counted it anyway:
    • A man was found dead with blood alcohol content about twice the level that is potentially fatal, and Montezuma County Coroner George Deavers ruled that he died of alcohol poisoning.
    • Colorado’s Department of Public Health and Environment classified the case as a C-19 fatality because the man tested positive for C-19 after his death.
    • The coroner stated: “Yes, he did have Covid, but that is not what took his life.”
  • In Florida during July:
    • A local Fox news station asked Dr. Raul Pino, the health officer of Orange County, if two people in their twenties who had allegedly died of Covid-19 had any preexisting conditions. Pino replied: “The first one didn’t have any. He died in a motorcycle accident.”
    • Two days after the news station published this story, Pino’s office said the case “was reviewed,” and the person “was taken off the list for Covid fatalities.”
  • Officials of the Maricopa County, Arizona Public Health Department stated in August:
    • “Even if it’s not listed on their death certificate, anyone who has a Covid-19 positive test within a certain period of when they died, is also counted as a Covid-19 positive death.”
    • If a person dies in a car crash and tested positive for C-19 in the prior 60 days, “Yes, the death would be added” to the C-19 death tally because “it is important to understand who died WITH the disease even if the disease was not the CAUSE of death. Obviously, fatal accidents are a small subset of the total.”

Short of scrutinizing every alleged C-19 death or a truly representative sample of them, there is no way to tell how many cases like those above are part of the official tally. However, certain evidence suggests they are not a large portion of the total:

  • Contrary to Birx’s statement in March, the CDC issued guidance in early April that states: “Not all conditions present at the time of death have to be reported—only those conditions that actually contributed to death.”
  • The CDC posted that guidance on April 3 when the official C-19 death count was 5,443 people, or less than one-thirtieth of the current tally. Thus, whatever happened prior to then can’t have a major impact on the total.
  • Some states instruct people who fill out death certificates to exclude C-19 if it didn’t play an active role in the fatality. Mississippi, for instance, says: “If Covid-19 was unrelated to the cause of death and not a contributing factor, it should not be included” on the death certificate.

On the other hand, the CDC’s guidance and other government policies still incentivize or stack the deck in favor of including C-19 on death certificates. For example:

  • The state of Alaska instructs medical professionals to report C-19 deaths according to this standard: “Whether Covid-19 shortened a life by 15 years or 15 minutes; whether Covid-19 is an underlying or contributing condition, the virus was in circulation, infected an Alaskan, and hastened their death. This must be reported.” Given the impossibility of determining if C-19 shortened a life by 15 minutes, these instructions favor placing C-19 on the death certificates of people who died with or after C-19 but not necessarily from C-19.
  • The CDC’s guidance for certifying C-19 deaths provides three examples of how to record them on death certificates, one of which involves an 86-year-old female who was never tested for C-19, had a debilitating stroke three years prior to her death, and passed on with “a high fever and severe cough after being exposed to an ill family member who subsequently was diagnosed with Covid-19.” The guidance states the “underlying cause of death,” or the pivotal factor that led to her death, should be listed as “Probable Covid-19.” However, many other diseases can cause a fever and cough, and a recent CDC study shows it is not uncommon for people to display symptoms of C-19 but test negative for it.
  • The federal CARES Act, which became law in late March, pays hospitals a 20% premium for treating Medicare patients who are diagnosed with C-19. Until recently, a positive lab test for C-19 was not needed to obtain this money, but the federal government added this requirement in September “to address potential Medicare program integrity risks….” Note that C-19 need not appear on a death certificate for hospitals to receive these payments, so it may not influence decisions to include it.
  • The Mississippi Department of Health states: “If the patient was a confirmed Covid-19 case, but Covid-19 contributed to but did not cause the death, such as stroke,” C-19 should be listed in Part II of the death certificate. This again favors placing C-19 on death certificates, for as the director of Illinois Department of Public Health said: If “someone has another illness, like heart disease, and then had a stroke or other event, it’s not as easy to separate that and say Covid didn’t exacerbate that existing illness.” Note that the CDC includes in its C-19 death tally all death certificates that mention C-19, regardless of whether it appears in Part I or Part II.

A breakdown of how many C-19 deaths appear in Part I versus Part II might shed considerable light on the issue of C-19’s lethality. This is because Part I of a death certificate “is for reporting the sequence of conditions that led directly to death,” while Part II is for “other significant conditions that contributed to the death, but are not a part of the sequence of conditions directly leading to the death.” Thus, Just Facts requested such data from the CDC on September 11 and is awaiting a reply.

Summary

Media outlets have persistently reported on the number of C-19 deaths while ignoring vital facts that place them in context. A simple example of this is that 2.8 million people die in the U.S. every year, including about 170,000 from accidents. Also of great import, accidents rob an average of 30.6 years of life from each of its victims, as compared to roughly 10.8 years for C-19. Yet in contrast, media outlets don’t continually publicize the running death tally from accidents.

This focus on the raw number of C-19 fatalities—combined with the fact that the very nature of the disease makes these figures uncertain—has spurred controversy over the accuracy of the CDC’s death count. Adding fuel to the fire, the statements and actions of some public officials show clear evidence of overcounting.

But even if the real death toll is 50,000 less than the 200,000 deaths currently reported by the CDC, this 25% difference would have little effect on key measures of the pandemic’s severity.

Consider, for example, the infection fatality rate, which is the portion of people who die after catching the disease. In early March, the World Health Organization announced that “about 3.4% of reported Covid-19 cases have died” and that “by comparison, seasonal flu generally kills far fewer than 1% of those infected.” This 3.4% figure was widely reported, and many media outlets criticized President Trump for saying, “I think the 3.4% is really a false number,” and “I would say the number is way under 1%.”

As it turned out, Trump was correct, and the Center for Evidence-Based Medicine at the University of Oxford now estimates that the infection fatality rate for C-19 is “somewhere between 0.1% and 0.41%.” This is well below 1%, just as Trump stated, and within range of the flu’s infection fatality rate of 0.15%. So even if C-19 deaths are overcounted by 25%, and this exaggerates the fatality rates by the same amount, they would still be 0.1% to 0.3%—or practically unchanged.

Likewise, the CDC’s current best estimates for the infection fatality rate range from 0.003% for people aged 0–19 to 5.4% for people aged 70 and above. Again, a 25% change in these figures would leave them in the same ballpark.

Thus, debates over the death count are a distraction from more informative measures like the odds of dying from C-19 for those who catch it. In this case, the highly publicized figure of 3.4% proved to be off by about a factor of 10. That is a major factor that truly informs the big picture.

From an even broader perspective, the most comprehensive available measure of the threat posed by Covid-19 is the total years of life that it will rob from all people who were alive at the outset of 2020. This crucial measure accounts for the facts that:

  • there is a material difference between a malady that kills a 20 year-old in the prime of her life and one that kills a 90-year-old who would have otherwise died a month later.
  • Covid-19 is unlikely to have an ongoing high death toll because the virus that causes it mutates much less substantially than that of the flu and other contagious diseases. Thus, it is far less likely to keep taking lives in the face of acquired immunity and vaccines.

In the context of this broad measure, debates over the actual death toll amount to rounding errors in the relative threats posed by Covid-19 and other common scourges that take masses of lives every year:

In conclusion, the facts of this matter accord with a Government Accountability Office technology assessment published in July that found: “The extent of any net undercounting or overcounting of Covid-19 deaths is unknown.” More importantly, debates over the accuracy of this figure divert attention from other issues that have much greater implications for understanding the pandemic and how it should be addressed.

The Global Usurpation of Power Underway


COMMENT FROM THE UK:

Hi Marty

I am sure you, like me, have expected without a doubt a move back into FALL lockdowns. It has been blatantly obvious here in the UK for months. The hype and overreaction is intentional and fear generation is being ramped through the roof. A school has one case of an asymptomatic boy and it closes with 447 kids sent home for 14 days!!?? Casedemic is alive and being driven into a frenzy, as they have nothing else. The only thing you can rely on daily from this government is FEAR.

Cases are 90% asymptomatic, those that get symptoms last a couple days. We ask for context, age breakdowns, severity, hospitalizations and deaths, both of which are non-existent and it is like pulling teeth. They simply cannot let the real information out as there would be revolt.

The pearler for today – we have just been told by PMs office, that serious consideration is taking place today to call a ‘Circuit Breaker’ 14 day lockdown, to nip the new cases in the bud before they turn into serious hospitalizations. Where have we heard ‘just 14 days’ before – flatten the curve, yip and now 6mths down the line, we are to believe that 14 days, will not run through, lets be honest elections and well into 2021, as then unrest will be very violent and everywhere. The obvious question if all cases are asymptomatic, they will not end up in hospital. But that will not stop our idiot of a prime minister claiming victory in March next year, as his actions will naturally be the reason there was no explosion in deaths and hospitalizations.

This has nothing to do with covid and everything to do with US elections. I believe before 5th October, UK and most of Western Europe will be in lockdown 2, to make the US democrat mayors and governors look less idiotic ahead of elections for the new wave of lockdowns coming shortly from them. They will just point to this is what the UK&EU is doing – follow the science.

Sad when you find out what is a supposedly conservative right wing government, is actually a Marxist, socialist utopia and Boris is just one of the global lap dogs.

Kind Regards

PD (UK)

REPLY: The more I talk to reliable sources, the greater this seems to be a reaction in anticipation of what our model has been forecasting — The Monetary Crisis Cycle & Sovereign Debt Crisis. Granted, they may be doing this because of our models, but only because they are also trapped by their negative interest rates and cannot raise them anymore. The central banks are screaming behind the curtain, “Hey, this isn’t working!” I warned that Big Bang would begin 2015.75. Indeed, the ECB moved to negative interest rates in 2014. They never considered what would happen it that experiment failed.

There is a reasonable amount of coordinated circumstantial evidence to support that likelihood. However, that does not mean that they are looking at our solutions to maintain the continuity of a free society. Instead, they have chosen the authoritarian path and there is also a high probability that they are working with the Democrats to overthrow Trump, and hence their attempt to hand $3 trillion to the IMF to support this globalist agenda.

That all said, they may be looking at what is coming and are trying to solve the Sovereign Debt Crisis by moving to perpetual bonds where they only pay interest and will not be obligated to redeem them. They are moving to increase taxes dramatically and embrace the Marxist theory and thereby adopt an authoritarian government. In the EU, nobody in the European Commission stands for election and neither does the head of the EU. Europe has already stripped the right of the people to any democratic process. They vote for a Parliament that has no power. All smoke and mirrors. In the USA, they have been putting in career politicians or fools for presidents so the bureaucracy (Deep State) is really in control also on an unelected basis.

The English Bill of Rights (1689), states: “it is the right of the subjects to petition the king, and prosecutions for such petitioning are illegal.” Yet, by pretending these lockdowns are for your own protection instead of banning protests and thereby adopting the strategy of Julius Caesar, divide and conquer, they are taking all our freedoms and once such power is exercised, it is never relinquished without revolution.

Governments are simply incapable of proper management of society, for every action they take is to retain their own power. They will not act in the self-interest of the people or the nation. It is not that they may even do this in a knowing manner. They simply think they are preserving the nation when that to them is government.

Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense” inspired the American Revolution. He wrote that government confounds the nation with themselves. There was never a more correct political statement ever said.

Governments that makes mistakes never admit them. Instead, they will blame someone else, or in this case the virus, to justify whatever actions they take.

Here is an English political token how they wanted to hang Paine for his words, and they sent a full army to try to capture Thomas Jefferson at his home.

Does Martin Armstrong Advise Boris Johnson?


QUESTION: Marty; Do you ever advise Boris Johnson?

HS

ANSWER: No. I have never spoken with him nor with any member of his staff that I am aware of. Perhaps some in the past. People tend to rotate around a lot in government. But to the best of my knowledge, I have never spoken with his administration. I was asked to fly over to meet with him by supporters BEFORE this COVID scheme to take over the world using fear, but that never took place.

Given his extreme actions with respect to these restrictions, I seriously doubt he would be interested in listening to me anyway. He seems to have bought this agenda because I believe the economic reality of Keynesian economics is smacking them in the face.

The central banks cannot rebuild the economy and the Bank of England hinting at negative rates demonstrates they feel they should do something, but can’t. They lack the courage to do what is really necessary. Hence, the COVID fake pandemic is being used to suppress civil rights and to try to prevent mass uprisings and protests because the Keynesian-Socialist agenda is collapsing.

London Freedom Protest September 19, 2020