While Excess Post-Pandemic Deaths Soar, Corporate News Organizations Pretend Not to Notice

Russell Brand recently quoted distressing statistics from insurance companies.  As you can see from the following video, there are large numbers of excess deaths in the United States, even though the pandemic is over.  These numbers have been announced by bean counters employed by insurance companies, not politicians and not the public health "experts" who got almost everything wrong during the pandemic.

Brand explains the problem:

All of a sudden, we now know, as a result of the release of insurance premium figures, that excess deaths in America are beyond even the peak of the pandemic even though the pandemic is over. We are aware now that in the first nine months of 2023--I can't believe that this is true but it is--there's as many young Americans who have died as died in all the American wars from Vietnam to present day. The only reason that we know this information is because insurance companies have reported on it...

Why would the legacy media not investigate [unexplained sudden deaths of young healthy-seeming people] with the same vigor that they've applied to a variety of other subjects that appear to enhance their ability to control dissenting voices and shut down counter narratives? Why is there a demand for censorship to be enshrined in law from the EU, to Ireland, to the United Kingdom to the United States of America to Canada? ... I'm not suggesting for a moment that all of those athletes died or all of those athletes were suffering as a result of particular medications, but the data is available now. Excess deaths are rising, the life expectancy in the United States of America is falling and it isn't because of COVID. Comparable figures are available in the United Kingdom. And once again, the same is true: sudden deaths, unexpected deaths, excess deaths are rising and it isn't because of COVID.

Curiously, there is a total lack of appetite to investigate this even though it seems like there's ample evidence to warrant an investigation. Health Agencies are not investigating it. Legacy media organizations are not investigating it. Elsewhere, we've reported on the kind of relationships that exist between big pharma and cable news media who received the vast majority of their funding not only from big pharma, but specifically from Pfizer, just one organization.

Have you ever seen Albert Bourla contend with a single difficult question except for when he was chased by Rebel News from the snowy streets of Davos? Of course you haven't. You've just seen him in puff piece after puff piece. Independent media is vital because it allows these questions to be asked. We're not for the valuable voices in this space, you wouldn't have a COVID inquiry in the UK. You wouldn't have any dissent at all. You wouldn't have no uptake for the latest COVID booster shots because none of this information will be available.

The real power is with you, your independent thoughts, your ability to choose. That's what they are trying to shut down and control. They do not want an awakened dissenting population investigating the high levels of corruption in their own state, in their own media and in particular in globalist corporatist agencies and financial entities, because if people become aware to that we would oppose it. They want to control and regulate a population that is mistrustful of its media its judiciary as law enforcement agencies and in particular, the establishment interests that appear to be able to coordinate all of them.

You've just seen with your own eyes sufficient evidence to warrant a serious investigation into the impact of the pandemic era distinct and separate from the impact of COVID itself, whether that's as a result of the rise of heart disease, or people taking their own lives or mental health or the collapse of small businesses or the impact on children's education, and certainly, and perhaps most importantly, the possible impact of certain medical interventions that were highly propagandized, the message of which was amplified. Questions weren't asked the sand was shut down. The gym experts were shamed and smeared and shut down and dissenting voices were attacked. This is time for a global reckoning. Let's make sure that 2024 isn't like 2023 a year where ordinary people's views were oppressed. So the establishment power could be continually magnified.

[More . . . ]

Continue ReadingWhile Excess Post-Pandemic Deaths Soar, Corporate News Organizations Pretend Not to Notice

COVID Confession

It's not often that a powerful public figure, in this case, Francis Collins, Head of the NIH, admits that he was totally incompetent at doing his job. He hurt millions of people because it never occurred to him to do a basic cost-benefit analysis regarding a lockdown. And in the process he pissed all over the reputations of highly reputable doctors like Jay Bhattacharya. He hopped over a very low bar by admitting the obvious here, but this is in no universe an excuse for what he and his comrades did from up on their high perches.

Continue ReadingCOVID Confession

Steve Kirsch: “When you Try to Show People the Data, They Run Away

Steve Kirsch discusses the latest safety data regarding the COVID vaccine with Russell Brand at Rumble: Kirsch, inventor of the optical mouse, voluntarily received two COVID vaccinations at during the pandemic. He had minor reactions, but he started hearing from people who claimed that their relatives were dying shortly after getting vaccinated. After finding more than 700 safety signals in the VAERS data obtained as the result of the FOIA request, he approached the CDC, seeking comment or explanation. He received neither. Instead, he encountered willing and/or intentional ignorance regarding the data. The CDC started with the premise that everyone must get vaccinated. Anything conflicting with that must be suppressed. At min 24 of this interview, Kirsch reports recent findings (by Barry Young, a New Zealand whistle-blower who worked for a NZ public health agency, who is currently being prosecuted by NZ) that 1 out of 1,000 people receiving the COVID vaccine was killed by the vaccine. If true, this would project to 650,000 Americans killed by the vaccine. Excerpts from the Interview

Steve Kirsch: Let me start with the punch line, which is that when you analyze the data and you look at overall shots over all ages, what you see is about a increase of one death per 1000 doses on average, is that people that were killed by the vaccine that shouldn't have died. And so that corresponds to 13 million people killed worldwide, it corresponds to about 675,000 people in the United States being killed, and about 150,000 people in the UK being killed.

And so that's what the Barry's data reveals. Now, what's important about Barry's data is that this is the first time in history that we have ever seen record level data for a vaccine. It's always kept hidden from public view. So these are public health records that are always kept hidden from public view. You there's no country in the world that publishes this data that was leaked out. There is no state in the United States that publishes this data. Everyone keeps it hidden from public view. This is public health data, it belongs to the public. And this is the first time in history, this has never happened before. This is a big moment. This is the first time we get to peek behind the curtain and find out if they're what the man looks like behind the curtain. So what Barry did is completely game changing. And for me, it's it's like it this is the the Holy Grail.

This is what I've been searching for. This is what we've been denied all this time is access to the data that would show the truth. And nobody, nobody, nobody who is supporting the pro-vaccine narrative has ever called for any data transparency in the public health data. Nobody. There is not a single person calling for for data transparency. But but you know, there's not a paper that's published in the peer reviewed literature--I've checked that--saying that, "Hey, if you withhold the data from the public, it leads to better health outcomes." So if you want their health outcomes, you need to publish the data. ... He basically he exposed the data... He proved that you could publish the data and nobody's privacy would be violated that but there's still statistical fidelity in the data. So we can obfuscate the data but still have the statistical fidelity so we can do it the analysis without violating anyone's privacy.

This was thought to be impossible. And Barry has proved that it is possible to do and not even the New Zealand Ministry of Health or health New Zealand was able to figure out whose records were published. They know it's their records, but we obfuscated it. So there's no privacy violation, and this frustrates the hell out of them.

Russell Brand: How did Barry get that information, he worked for a New Zealand Health for like a government agency?

Steve Kirsch: He's an Oracle 11 DBA. He's a database administrator. He's a specialist on Oracle. He was tasked with creating the database for this pay per dose system in New Zealand. And there are two there are two systems. And one of them is pay per dose. And it's just the way that that that they do billing. And so he has 4 million, he has over 4 million records of the 12 million records that exist in New Zealand. So it's a sample of all the vaccination records, and it would be great to get everything, but it's only people who've been vaccinated."

In the meantime, the Texas Attorney General has filed a lawsuit against Pfizer for widespread misrepresentations:

The pharmaceutical company's widespread representation that its vaccine possessed 95% efficacy against infection was highly misleading. That metric represented a calculation of the so-called “relative risk reduction” for vaccinated individuals in Pfizer’s initial, two-month clinical trial results. FDA publications indicate “relative risk reduction” is a misleading statistic that “unduly influence[s]” consumer choice. Pfizer was also put on notice at that time that vaccine protection could not accurately be predicted beyond two months. Nevertheless, Pfizer fostered a misleading impression that vaccine protection was durable and withheld from the public information that undermined its claims about the duration of protection. And, despite the fact that its clinical trial failed to measure whether the vaccine protects against transmission, Pfizer embarked on a campaign to intimidate the public into getting the vaccine as a necessary measure to protect their loved ones.

In fact, Pfizer’s product failed to live up to the company’s representations. COVID-19 cases increased after widespread vaccine administration, and some areas saw a greater percentage of deaths from COVID-19 among the vaccinated population than the unvaccinated. When the failure of its product became apparent, Pfizer then pivoted to silencing truth-tellers. The lawsuit notes: “How did Pfizer respond when it became apparent that its vaccine was failing and the viability of its cash cow was threatened? By intimidating those spreading the truth, and by conspiring to censor its critics. Pfizer labeled as ‘criminals’ those who spread facts about the vaccine. It accused them of spreading ‘misinformation.’ And it coerced social media platforms to silence prominent truth-tellers.”

 

Continue ReadingSteve Kirsch: “When you Try to Show People the Data, They Run Away