LOCKDOWNISBOLLOCKS.COM

Winston Churchill is credited as once having said: "Never let a good crisis go to waste"

The reason the Covid-19 virus has caused so much disruption in the World is because the response to it has got almost nothing to do with health and everything to do with money and control. Klaus Schab openly admits in his book "The Great Reset" that the W.E.F. see Covid-19 as an opportunity to introduce their New World Order or 4th Industrial Revolution in which a Global Government controls us all. Yuval Harari believes that technology has now advanced to the stage where we are now hackable human beings and chips should be implanted into our brains to allow the Government to communicate with us directly over the Internet. Pharmaceutical companies see Covid as an opportunity to make billions of dollars from rushed through "vaccines" for which it is lokking questionable if the benefits exceed the risks for many people. Many Countries are suffering a Sovereign debt crisis and a "pandemic" can be used as an excuse to hade this. Small businesses have been forced to close as a result of lockdown measures with their trade being taken up by large businesses.

Belief that Covid-19 represents a pandemic and that the vaccine has saved millions of lives has become almost a religious faith for many people. However this belief is based on a psychological operation perpetrated by television and the press rather than factual information. An idea that that was not put there by facts cannot be removed by facts, so this site will only make sense to anyone who is questioning what the sacrifices we have been asked to make over the past three years were really about.

The first step in the process is to instill as much fear of Covid-19 in people's minds as possible.

This is where television and the newspapers have been utilised to good effect. The main stream media are largely controlled or sponsored by the Pharmaceutical companies so this has been easily achieved.

News programs such as Sky News were covering Covid-19 almost 24 hours a day, and daily published figures of the number of people who had died with Covid being given the reason given on their death certificate. They showed film of people suffering from Covid and begging people to take the disease seriously or saying how much they regretted declining the Covid shot. They never showed the millions of people who contracted Covid with little or no symptoms, nor did they show people who have died or become partially paralysed from the shot. Nor did they try to put any rational perspective on the seriousness or otherwise of Covid by pointing out that no more people died from this than die in a normal flu season, or that you are more likely to be killed in a car crash than die of Covid or that more lives could have been saved by banning the sales of tobacco than by lockdown with far less impact on society or the economy.

Not everyone was influenced by this psychological operation. To minimize the damage lockdown sceptics could do to the plan these people were referred to as Covid deniers. This isn't strictly accurate as most of these people accepted that Covid existed, they just didn't think that in the absence of an increase in excess death rate it deserved to be classed as a pandemic according to the accepted sense of the word. However by calling them Covid deniers this makes them look dishonest and puts them on the same level as Holocaust deniers who deserve to be ignored. It is also worth remembering that the W.H.O. redefined the word pandemic in the dictionary such that a large increase in the death rate was no longer required.

The second tactic used to exploit Covid-19 was the introduction of lockdowns.

This was introduced to the public as a temporary measure to "flattening the curve" to avoid the Health Service being overwhelmed.

This seemed reasonable enough and most people accepted this.

However after a couple of months the curve had been flattened so lockdown restrictions could have been eased at the point to allow herd immunity to spread through the community in a controlled manner. However the scientists advising the Government decided to continue with lockdown and wait for a vaccine to be developed.

An alternative approach to Covid-19 was described in the Great Barrington Declaration. This did not require either lockdowns, travel restrictions or vaccines and has been largely ignored or discredited as this would have defeated the object of lockdown.

So now we have a situation in which not only are people living in fear for their lives, but lockdowns are putting them under virtual house arrest with no knowledge of any release date. Desperate people are likely to seek desperate solutions.

The time is now right to introduce the magic juice, commonly referred to as the mRNA Covid-19 vaccination with its claimed 95% efficacy. It promises to remove the fear of death, end the pandemic and restore our freedoms.

This is sold as the only way of escape from the fear and misery of Covid-19, and a miracle of modern science that the vaccine manufacturers worked so hard to produce a "safe and effective" vaccine in under a year.

No matter that the only way the vaccine could be developed so quickly was by skipping the five to ten year safety trials normally associated with vaccine development, that the animal trials showed problems with antibody dependence enhancement which made them more likely to die from the virus rather than less, that alternative less profitable treatments for which there was long term safety data were suppressed in order to obtain EUA or that the treatment wasn't a vaccine anyway and the only way they could call it this was by redefining the word vaccine in the dictionary

People saw it as the answer to all their prayers and queued up to get it. They were proud of what a clever thing they had done and recommended it to their friends without any medical experience or research. They poured scorn on the unjabbed who they regarded as ignorant, stupid or selfish.

The unjabbed saw things differently. They felt that far from doing a clever and admirable thing, the pro-jabbers had fallen into a carefully laid emotional trap to convince them that Covid-19 was a disease so deadly that was worth shutting down the World's economy for fear of spreading it, and that the "vaccine" was the only way out.

The unjabbed constituted a threat to the plan, as they have concluded that they would rather to take a small risk of dying from Covid-19 than an unknown and possibly greater risk of dying or being injured from the Covid shot. Younger people without underlying health conditions, those who have recovered from Covid and have natural immunity and those who looked at the disappointing results of the animal trials and those who thought it is impossible to produce safe vaccine without long term trials on humans are most likely to think this way.

The intrinsic problem with developing a vaccine in under a year is the best you can hope to prove in trials is that the benefits exceed the risks over this period of time. There is evidence that the shot causes an increase in myocarditis and cancers. These effects might not show up for several years so we will have to wait 2 - 5 years before we know if the shot has saved more people than it has killed or injured.

Travel restrictions have been one of the biggest drivers of vaccine uptake.

Suppose, for the sake of argument, that someone from the UK visits the USA and someone from the USA visits the UK. The first person will now be potentially spreading Covid in the USA rather than the UK and the second person will be potentially spreading Covid in the UK rather than the USA so the two effects will tend to cancel out. This assumes that the jab reduces transmission which is now thought not to be true. However in this example two more jabs have been sold than would otherwise be the case so the exercise has fulfilled its purpose.

It may well be the case that the Covid shot offers a benefit to older more vulnerable people who have not had Covid. However a question worth asking is why are doctors recommending the shot to people who have already had Covid, young people and children who are at negligible risk of the disease and pregnant women when the jab has not been tested on this group and there is evidence of a considerable increase in miscarriages and still and neo-natal births amongst these people. A doctor could easily jab a hundred patients in a day. If he receives a payment only £20 per person, he could easily make an extra £2,000 a day, maybe more. Do the fact checkers seriously expect us to believe that this extra money has mede no difference to their decisions?

Closing schools now only prolonged the pandemic by delaying achieving herd immunity through natural infection amongst those least at risk, but it also causes maximum disruption for parents, children and industry due to parents having to take time off work to care for their kids. In addition it provided an excuse to jab children in order to keep schools open.

Advisory organisation such as SAGE will naturally attract scientists with connections to the Pharmaceutical industry who wish to push the jab to maximize their profits so the advice these scientists give may not be impartial. If I'd been offered the job I would probably have refused it and just told them to forget about lockdowns and vaccinations and adopt the Great Barrington Declaration which doesn't require either.

As a matter of interest, for the first week after hearing about Covid-19 I was being extra careful not to catch it. After a week I asked myself "Why am I doing this?". I noted that the people being affected were mainly over the age of 80 with underlying health conditions. I figured that I was bound to catch it before an effective vaccine was developed so I could reduce my chances of death by catching it now at the age of 68 when I was still healthy rather than risk catching it in 5 or 10 years time when I might not be. I also estimated that the chance of a healthy person dying from Covid is less than the chance of being killed in a car crash so if I were to worry about Covid I would have to give up driving as well.

So I stopped being careful and within a week had mild symptoms of Covid including a slight temperature and a dry cough which lasted less than a day. I was pleased at this result as I now felt I now had a degree of immunity against Covid and if I caught it again it would probably be milder still.

However I also gained something else I had not expected which was an immunity against the relentless scaremongering which was to follow and to which the majority of the population were to succumb. It hadn't occurred to me that vaccine companies were planning to rush through a "vaccination" in less than a year or that people would be prepared to take this in the hope of protecting them against a disease with no higher mortality than the flu or common cold. However the scaremongering has been so successful that people's estimate of the CFR for Covid is in the region of 30% - 50% which is approximately 100x too high. This makes the Covid shot look like a lower risk than Covid-19 itself.

It is shocking the CDC gave emergency use approval for children when there is no emergency.

Even more shocking is that some Countries have imposed vaccine mandates on perfectly healthy people for no good reason. This is totally violates the Nuremberg code which was devised specifically to prevent medical experiments on people against their will. Those responsible should surely be prosecuted for their crimes.

In defence of those politicians and doctors who have promoted the shot, they have been subjected to the same psychological warfare weapons as the rest of us, and I expect most of these people genuinely believed they were doing the right thing. In addition the public who believed there is a genuine emergency expected the Government to do something about it. If they UK Government had refused to roll out the vaccine many people would have been unhappy and some would have gone to other Countries to get it. There has been an increase in excess mortality following the roll-out of the vaccine. This is not what you would normally expect at the end of a pandemic. There seems to be little enthusiasm to investigate this. A useful test as to whether SADS is due to the vaccination or not would be to look at the incidence of SADS amongst vaccinated and unvaccinated people. If these are comparable it would be reasonable to assume that the jab had nothing to do with it. If on the other hand the incidence of SADS is much higher amongst the vaccinated, then this would suggest that the vaccine was the cause. If this is the case, then politicians might conclude that it would have been better to offer the jab on a request basis rather than recommending it to everyone, as those that had suffered vaccine injuries would blame the Government.

Originally the JCVI were against vaccinating children. Could it be that the funding they receive from the Pharmaceutical companies has put them under pressure to look at the data again and revise their decision?

Having said that, doctors are at the front line in seeing what the effects of the jab are. Whilst I understand that if the usual long term trials on the jab had been completed before it was offered to the public the pandemic would have been over before then, the fact that these trials have not been performed makes it all the more important than any unexpected side effects should be monitored carefully from the start of the roll-out to ensure it was safe. Instead doctors who raised concerns about vaccine safety have been called conspiracy theorists, spreaders of misinformation and disinformation and threatened with having their licences revoked. If it proves that indiscriminate vaccination has done more harm than good, faith in the medical profession will be seriously impaired.

Anyone who has suffered an injury from taking the vaccine has to take some responsibility for their decision. It is worth pointing out at the stage that the State education system encourages students to trust and comply with authority figures such as doctors and dentists rather than do their own research and take responsibility for their own health. To refuse to take a shot recommended by a doctor would feel quite alien to most people.

The plan was devised in an exercise called Event 201 which was a dry run how to deal with a global pandemic

This may well have started off with the best of intentions but the problem is the development of a vaccine which could be sold Worldwide with the promise of saving people's lives offers the potential to provide possibly the best marketing opportunity in human history. Given that vaccine manufacturers do not have liability for side effects of their products in most Countries, they have everything to gain and nothing to lose by rushing through vaccine development at "the speed of science".

From a financial point of view, the "vaccine" has been a success almost beyond belief. If you had told me three years ago that 70% of the World's population would willingly receive an unproven injection with no knowledge of the long term side effects in the hope of protecting them from disease which in most cases so mild that you have to be tested to even know you have it I would not have believed this. This shows the power that the media has over people's thinking.

Lateral flow and PCR tests also helped keep fear of Covid-19 alive and made additional money for the Pharmaceutical companies. Kary Mullis, inventor of the PCR process, said that this was never intended as a test for disease and that by using an excessively high value for the cycle threshold a positive result could be obtained from almost anything. This increased the number of people who could be said to have died "Within 28 days of a positive Covid test" which helps boost the published Covid death rate. In addition doctors have been encouraged to attribute deaths to Covid as much as possible.

However if someone dies within 28 days of the Covid shot they are encouraged to put this down as "unascertained natural causes". Moreover, if someone does within 14 days of the shot this is counted as the death of an unvaccinated person since the shot is deemed to take 14 days to take effect!

In order to minimize the deleterious effects the unjabbed could have on the rest of the population, these people have been labelled "anti-vaxxers". No matter that the majority of these people aren't opposed to vaccinations in general. As long as they can be made to look opposed to advances in medical science they can be ignored. Other terms used are "Refuseniks" or suffering from "vaccine hesitancy" as if not wishing to take part in what they see as a reckless and unnecessary medical experiment means that they are suffering from some strange psychological illness not affecting the rest of the population.

Another important line was that from Klaus Schwab: "No-one is safe if not everyone has been vaccinated"

Where is the logic here? If the shot works, then those who have taken it should be protected, and if it doesn't it makes no difference anyway.

Nevertheless a large number of people believed this, and many refused to allow unjabbed relatives to visit them at Christmas.

A number of new phrases have been coined to confuse the public:

Asymptomatic infection: Firstly there is little evidence that this exists, and even if it did, this would be beneficial in increasing herd immunity through natural infection at no cost to health.

Hybrid Immunity. This implies that the Covid shot adds to the immunity provided by natural infection and is therefore doing some good. There is no data to support this, in fact evidence from the Cleveland Clinic suggests that damage to the immune system caused by the Covid shot actually increases the chance of catching Covid. The "vaccine" should therefore really be called and "anti-vaccine" and "anti-vaxxers" should be called "anti-anti-vaxxers". Natural immunity may be the best if not only way the "pandemic" can be ended. However it is the enemy of profit as far as the vaccine companies are concerned which is why it has been discounted as being more effective and possibly safer than the "vaccination" for as long as possible.

Countries which did not go into lockdown have been called "The Ostrich Alliance". Apart from the fact that this is an insult to ostriches, who make nests in the ground and put their heads down to turn their eggs, it could be said that those Countries which did go into lockdown are the ones blinding themselves to the destruction these have caused for so little benefit.

Breakthrough infections. This implies that the Covid shot works most of the time and that cases where people receive the Covid shot and subsequently catch Covid are the exception rather than the rule. I haven't seen any evidence of this, and if anything jabbed people are catching Covid as least as often as the unjabbed.

The W.H.O. will want to engineer more pandemics because there is so much money it in.

What needs to be done?

Approvals and recommendations for use need to be made by authorities who have no financial interest in their decisions. Pharmaceutical companies need to accept at least some liability for their products. Adjuvants which may cause harm such as mercury or aluminium should not be allowed in vaccines. All vaccines should be safety tested against a placebo. Doctors should not be paid extra to administer vaccines.

The following videos may be helpful in understanding why the response to Covid-19 is based on financial considerations and has almost nothing to do with health:

Why lockdowns are the wrong policy - Swedish expert Prof. Johan Giesecke