|Posted by Miri on January 23, 2021 at 5:20 AM||comments (0)|
Ever since the pantomime plague began, your local friendly crazy quackaloons have been telling you the diagnostic test isn't fit for purpose and creates false positives, due to results being amplified too many times.
Now the WHO states the diagnostic test isn't fit for purpose and creates false positives, due to results being amplified too many times.
For the hard of thinking and BBC watchers (but I repeat myself ), I will explain again what the PCR test does: it detects genetic sequences of viruses, but NOT viruses themselves. The more amplification cycles a test result goes through, the more genetic sequences it detects. As we all have all sorts of genetic debris floating about inside of us, then - to quote the inventor of the PCR test - "anyone can test positive for anything with the PCR. It doesn't tell you you're sick."
(Read this salutary tale from 2007 for what happens when PCR tests are inappropriately used to diagnose infectious illness: https://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/22/health/22whoop.html)
So, if you happen to be in the midst of orchestrating a pretend plague and want to create a lot of "positive cases" to terrify the masses, you just amplify the PCR test results a lot of times. Have you noticed how the propaganda press is always going on about rises in CASES? Not deaths. Not hospitalisations. Not even the sniffles. Just "cases". A "case" is a positive PCR result, and hence, in reality, meaningless. It doesn't tell us anything about whether more people are ill or not.
Nevertheless, most people take headlines at face value and don't and can't think (critical thinking having been intentionally axed from the national curriculum years ago), so they believe an explosion in "cases" a pandemic makes. Oh, but you know someone who was really sick "with Covid"? I'm heartless for denying its severity? Look: I don't deny you knew someone very sick. They may even have died. But elderly and unwell people, and sometimes younger people, do die. It's tragic, but it's life. In normal circumstances, 1,600 people die every day in the UK alone. That number hasn't significantly increased. Just because they "tested positive" on an unfit-for-purpose test shortly before their death does not prove they died "from Covid", and it certainly doesn't prove there's a pandemic.
The PCR test has been used to create the illusion of a pandemic to manufacture your consent for a variety of draconian and authoritarian measures that you never would have accepted unless you had been scaremongered into compliance. The best way to control people is to scare them - all repressive regimes know that.
But - now we have the miraculous saviour vaccine, so the propaganda angle has got to change.
Hence - the WHO is now telling labs across the world to reduce the number of PCR cycles. This means a dramatic decrease in positive test results, which will be used as "evidence" the vaccine is working.
Meanwhile, as bad reactions to the experimental gene therapies being marketed as vaccines mount up, this will be used as evidence for why we need to keep the restrictions, as bad vaccine reactions will be blamed on "the virus mutating" and as evidence we don't have "herd immunity". We will be told new and different vaccines are needed every six months or so to fight the never-ending "new strains".
So, both restrictions and vaccines will go on and on and on. This will last until at least 2025, by which point, you will have been fully and irreversibly re-engineered, to be terrified of other people, to eschew all physical contact, to smother your airways and hide your face, and to view your fellow human beings with deep suspicion and hostility, snitching to the authorities if they break "the rules", and viewing them as nothing but filthy disease vectors and potential mass murderers. That's if you survive the next five years, of course, which, if you keep getting vaccinated, is not necessarily very likely. - especially if you're older and/or have existing health problems.
That's the future in store for you if you keep believing the execrable and mendacious lies being fed to you by your government, and their state propaganda organs "the press".
Yes, I know I'm just a crazy conspiracy theorist, and why should anyone listen to me? But you know what the biggest conspiracy of all is? Believing the Government has your best interests at heart.
|Posted by Miri on December 9, 2020 at 5:20 AM||comments (0)|
I find the mainstream media, linked above, to be an endless source of fascination, because it DOES reveal the truth, if you know how to read it properly (this was explored to brilliant effect by investigative journalist, David McGowan, who exposed some extraordinary "conspiracy theories" simply by citing mainstream sources and knowing how to interpret them - his work is a must-read if you haven't discovered it yet).
I'm not saying the truth is that Piers Morgan is pigeon lady (an insult to pigeon ladies everywhere), but if you read the whole article, it's casually, blink-and-you'll-miss-it thrown in at the end that: "Piers then took the opportunity to remind viewers he’s starred in a total of 10 films, including Flight (2012) and Entourage (2015)."
Not incidentally, Piers also starred in deadly-plague movie, World War Z, as a shrieking talking head predicting mass death and devastation.
The point I'm making, and that the mainstream media is clearly telling you, is that Piers is a (quite accomplished) actor. He's playing a part. Many have marvelled at how he can be so extraordinarily thick, heartless, pompous, etc., so completely and utterly impervious to the real facts about this fake pandemic, and it's quite easily answered - it's because he's acting. He's reading from a script. He's playing a character called Piers Morgan, just like he did in World War Z and all the other films he's starred in.
As it happens, Piers Morgan used to be a Facebook friend of mine (I know, I know, it was a long time ago, I was young and naive etc.) and I had a brief correspondence with him. He isn't stupid. He is, however, a very good actor.
When you go to watch World War Z at the cinema, you know it isn't real, and that Piers is playing a part, because you're overtly told before you buy the ticket.
When you watch GMB on television, you're tricked into thinking it's real, but in reality, it's just another glossy studio production staged by actors, and you're being covertly told that all the time (check just how many talking heads and politicians have profiles on IMDB).
It is very, very pertinent indeed that the "first man to get the vaccine" was William Shakespeare. All the world really is a stage, and they're telling you so all the time.
|Posted by Miri on October 8, 2020 at 2:00 PM||comments (1)|
This is the front cover of today's Daily Mail. There is certainly quite a formidable turn of the tide lately, and I can't help thinking this is all deliberate and part of the "show". You know who was one of the first to share this image online, call Covid "a conspiracy", and insist we must get back to normal? Spencer "son of Piers" Morgan. That being, the Piers Morgan who has been shrieking hysterically since day one for lockdown-on-steroids. That being, the Piers Morgan who, quite by coincidence of course, was also pictured shrieking hysterically in the opening credits of "end of the world" disaster movie, World War Z.
I will clarify what I'm suggesting: that, where it comes to the public sphere, all the world's a stage, and the men and women, merely actors. Piers Morgan stars on television. He's been in the movies. He's an actor, and acting dynasties often spring up within families.
If Piers and his son genuinely had such a profound disagreement on such a central issue, would they really choose to broadcast it publicly via Twitter (they've actually had a little public "spat" about it)? Maybe they would. But alternatively, maybe this is all actually just part of the drama, part of the deftly scripted show. Good cop, bad cop. Oh no he isn't, oh yes he is.
Spencer Morgan is now calling out Covid as a conspiracy, and labelling the restrictions drastically disproportionate; one of the UK's most-circulated newspapers is effectively agreeing, with a big front-page splash questioning all aspects of the "official line", and, meanwhile, multiple people I've spoken to who, in the initial stages, were terrified of the virus and believed every word of the government's propaganda, are now rolling their eyes and shaking their heads and saying it's all nonsense and the government is lying and we need to get back to normal.
Is this situation going to simply be allowed to continue, and the government made to look even bigger incompetent clowns than they already do? Don't forget, this epic global production is being expertly stage-managed, and this stage too has been planned. It wouldn't be front-page news in the Daily Mail otherwise - if the government wanted us still in maximal panic mode, they would just have commissioned another headline about a terrifying rise in "cases" or some souped-up "tragedy" about a 103-year-old great-grandfather with terminal cancer and advanced heart disease who "died after testing positive for coronavirus".
But that isn't happening; major media outlets and relatives of major media figures are coming out and overtly stating the virus is, more or less, a hoax, and the restrictions completely inappropriate and counterproductive.
On the surface this looks encouraging. Too encouraging. So, I'm afraid that I think that this is a trap. I think that we are being encouraged to question and doubt the government, to set the stage for what they have planned next. We know that they are very aggressively pushing the 'flu vaccine this year, with God knows what in it - as the Corvelva Italian scientists found, "official" vaccine ingredients' lists bear little resemblance to what is actually in them; we know they are ambushing children at schools with "surprise" vaccination drives, again injecting them with God knows what (see this story where a 7-year-old boy "suddenly became ill and died" whilst at school - whilst this may of course be unrelated to vaccination, the fact remains healthy 7-year-olds don't just "suddenly die", and the date given, October 1st, is when many schools did their 'flu vaccines - https://www.cheshire-live.co.uk/news/chester-cheshire-news/tributes-paid-happy-healthy-beautiful-19053990).
I think that in the very near future, we are going to see a sudden tsunami of very sick people. I do think the death rate will genuinely spike (it does every "flu (vaccine) season" anyway). I think that - quite unlike the "first wave", which was entirely illusory - the "second wave" will be real. Not that people will be dying from a cold virus, obviously, but that people will start becoming very sick and dying, this will be attributed to COVID-19 (since everything is now, even suicide) and then just imagine the power of the government and the media to deliver the biggest, most devastating "we told you so" of all time.
People are being encouraged to doubt and question the government, so when real illness and death does actually start happening, the government can say, "see, we told you this would happen, we told you how serious this was, and we were only trying to help you with our restrictions. If only you'd listened to us and trusted us and followed the rules, none of this ever would have happened."
Result of this? Huge increase in fear-based compliance to whatever the government says, and concomitant huge increase in hatred and distrust of "conspiracy theorists" and anyone who questions the mainstream view.
As ever, I sincerely hope my predictions are wrong. But as soon as I saw Spencer Morgan being touted as the "new conspiracy kid on the block", alarm bells started shrieking, nearly as loudly as his father does...
|Posted by Miri on September 29, 2020 at 10:25 AM||comments (1)|
I've become fond of starting my posts with memable quotes, so I feel compelled to declare that not only is all the world a stage, but it is also all a rich man's trick...
People within "the truth movement" understand how reality is manipulated to extraordinary effect through false flags, crisis actors, psy-ops, propaganda, and generally an unrelenting campaign of mind-bending treachery and lies from the mass media and world's governments.
But what's harder to accept is that seeing through one level of illusion doesn't render us invincible against all others. There is no reason to believe the same strategies deployed in the mainstream aren't also being used to full and devastating effect within "the truth movement", because, well, why wouldn't they be?
As all successful tyrannical forces in history have known, the best way to control the opposition is to lead it themselves, and to those ends, ALL significant anti-establishment movements are heavily infiltrated by the establishment. All of them. Obviously, that means the truth movement too, and pointing that fact out isn't "divisive" or "negative", it's vitally important, because eternal vigilance is the price of freedom, and that means being extremely vigilant about the truth movement and its "leaders", too. Because some of them, inevitably, are controlled intelligence assets sent in by the establishment to weaken and neutralise the enemy (us). They're not "on our side" and "fighting for the same thing" - they're liars and actors, master illusionists (not all masks are made of cloth), trying to trick and deceive, because as I said, that always happens in all anti-establishment movements. This was detailed to particularly brilliant effect in David McGowan's "Laurel Canyon", an expose of how intelligence agencies so successfully infiltrated and ultimately destroyed the 1960s anti-war movement in America (and, having clearly given away too many "tricks of the trade", McGowan died suddenly soon after writing it).
To these ends, I had a chat with Westminster borough council yesterday. I asked them for a copy of the risk assessment that was submitted and accepted for the protest in Trafalgar Square on Saturday 26th September. They informed me I would have to put my request in writing to the Metropolitan Police, which I have done. I have made a formal Freedom of Information request, and I have been instructed I will hear from them within 20 working days.
Why have I made this request? Because nothing about this adds up.
Most people, including me until recently, didn't really know what a risk assessment was, nor the conditions for receiving one and having it remain valid. So I shall attempt to explain. In the simplest terms, a risk assessment is a document that describes what the potential risks of an activity are and what controls will be put in place to mitigate those risks. So if you were organising, for instance, a party at a Students' Union, a risk might be "people getting drunk and falling over", with the potential consequence of that being "injury", so the controls in place to mitigate that risk could be, "trained first-aiders on site" and/or "a token system to limit number of drinks". The controls are not expected to eliminate risks completely, as that is impossible, but to sufficiently minimise them, and the controls put in place to do that have to be realistic and persuasive for the risk assessment to be accepted. So for the student party, if the control was, "ban alcohol from the event", that would likely not be accepted, as it isn't realistic the students would adhere to it. If the controls are unrealistic and the risk assessment is therefore not accepted, the event cannot go ahead legally.
A crucial piece of information to know about contemporary risk assessments is that, due to a change in the law in early September, risk assessments pertaining to protests are required to be "Covid-secure". That is to say, the risk assessment for a protest must acknowledge Covid infection as a risk (if it doesn't, it won't be passed), and detail what controls are going to be put in place to minimise that risk. If this is not done, the risk assessment will not be accepted, and the event will not be able to go ahead legally.
Therefore, if indeed the risk assessment for Saturday 26th September was passed (and I am told that it was), the organisers of the protest accepted in writing that Covid infection was a risk and agreed they would adhere to "Covid secure" measures to minimise this risk. These would typically involve social distancing and masks where social distancing is not possible. Someone within the council and/or police decided their controls were compelling and realistic enough to pass the risk assessment.
Let me be clear on what I am saying: the organisers of this protest agreed, in a legally binding document, to apply "Covid secure" measures at the protest, and furthermore, someone in the council/police decided that, despite the fact the point of the event was to protest "Covid secure measures", and despite the fact a near-identical event had been broken up by the police a week before having made no efforts to adhere to these measures, it was nevertheless entirely likely and plausible this time the measures would be adhered to.
Let me say it again: if the organisers hadn't agreed to adhere to Covid-secure measures and explained in persuasive detail exactly how they and the attendees would do so, the risk assessment wouldn't have been passed and so the event would not have been able to go ahead; it would have been blocked from even setting up.
"Okay," You might say. "So they lied to get the risk assessment passed. So what? They didn't have a choice."
That may be true, but why weren't potential attendees all openly advised of this? That these were the conditions of the risk assessment being passed, and in order for it to remain valid, these measures had to be adhered to? Nobody was told this, either before or during the event, and they absolutely should have been, because a risk assessment isn't a passive document. It's not just passed, then that's it, you're home free. A risk assessment is an active document which can become voided at any time if the event doesn't comply with the terms of its risk assessment.
So as soon as the event began and there were no attempts to observe "Covid secure" measures or to advise the crowd to, the risk assessment became voided and the event illegal - and THAT is why it was able to be broken up by the police. It certainly was not broken up because "they're afraid of the truth getting out". If that was so, they would have broken it up in the first ten minutes (or simply not passed the risk assessment in the first place).
Can you see some problems with all this? Why did event organisers agree in writing to apply Covid secure measures, but not tell anyone attending this is what they had done? The conditions of the risk assessment should have been transparently communicated to all attendees, otherwise they end up unwittingly breaking the law and risking highly unpleasant confrontations with the police - which, surprise surprise, is exactly what ended up happening, just as it did on the 19th.
Furthermore, why did the council/police pass the risk assessment? What person or persons decided that an event specifically protesting Covid restrictions was nevertheless highly likely to adhere to them, bearing in mind that no previous anti-lockdown protest had ever even attempted to? Apparently, Piers Corbyn submitted the risk assessment. He is a high-profile "Covid denier" who has been arrested repeatedly for breaching Covid restrictions. Who in their right mind would therefore believe he was likely to adhere to said restrictions and advise 20,000 others to do so as well? And frankly, even if the crowd HAD wanted to observe social distancing, that would have been impossible for such a large crowd in a confined space like Trafalgar Square.
So, none of this makes any sense. While I'm not accusing anyone of anything (yet), I am asking crucial questions which would not appear to have any readily-available answers. If anyone can provide evidence-based answers to the following simple questions, I would greatly appreciate it:
1. Who was involved in completing the risk assessment?
2. What risks were identified?
3. What controls were described?
4. Who submitted it?
5. Who did they submit it to?
6. Who passed it?
7. Were the conditions of the risk assessment clearly communicated to attendees?
8. Were they reminded of these conditions throughout the event?
9. If they weren't, why weren't they?
10. Why did the police wait three hours, until 3 (:03!) before going in, when it was obvious in the first ten minutes "Covid secure" measures weren't being applied?
These are all crucial questions that we deserve answers to, and anyone who attacks me for daring to ask questions about an event that culminated in horrific and brutal violence (and yet more arrests, which I was promised on multiple occasions by multiple people "couldn't happen" because the Covid rules "aren't the law") needs to have a little think about who's side they're really on. If the organisers have nothing to hide, they will have no problem answering my questions, and they also won't have any problem with being questioned or scrutinised, because that is what you must welcome and expect if you put yourself out there so provocatively and prominently.
These protests were splashed all over the front pages of all the major newspapers, and scores of people have been left deeply traumatised as a result of what they experienced, with at least 19 more known state dissidents now having their DNA on police file (the police will take this when you are arrested, consensually or otherwise). Such an event deserves scrutiny. We deserve answers. So, I'm not going to sit here meekly and say nothing about all the ENORMOUS unanswered questions hanging over this event because that's "divisive". I might as well not question the government if that's the mentality you'd like to promote, since that's "divisive" as well. Not wearing a mask is "divisive". Being anti-vax is "divisive". In short, standing for anything, ever, is divisive, and that includes having opinions that friends and allies don't agree with. If they're real friends, they'll respect your right to have a different view. If they attack and condemn you for raising legitimate queries and concerns, they're not.
Nobody is above being questioned and held to account, because - one more meme for those at the back - the truth does not fear investigation.
|Posted by Miri on September 23, 2020 at 4:30 PM||comments (0)|
So, the Johnson Junta has tightened the screws yet again and here we are now, effectively, in a de-facto police state. It goes without saying (well, maybe not, as I have said it a few thousand times...) that all manner of invective and outrage deserves to be hurled at this truly hideous situation. It is despotic, dystopian, Orwellian, tyrannical, Satanic, evil. The level of decimation this situation has inflicted on individuals, relationships, families, livelihoods, and the very fabric of human life itself is inestimable and obscene.
However - we are where we are. And, much as I sincerely appreciate the value in raging against it, and in doing everything we can to try and halt it, we also need to recognise it is rolling ahead full speed, and so a major priority right now has to be self-preservation and tactical action. Solutions-based strategy focused on positive results for us, the people who see through this grotesque mirage but nevertheless have to live in a world where many people believe in it and where the law will enforce it.
First of all, please understand what the law is. The Coronavirus Act, an "emergency" piece of legislation rammed through parliament without scrutiny and giving the authorities extraordinary and unprecedented powers, is the law. By which I mean, it will be enforced by law enforcement officers, as they demonstrated at the protest in London on Saturday. To reiterate, 32 arrests were made, there was considerable police brutality, and there are unconfirmed reports that at least one person was killed. So as I said: they will enforce it. As I've stated previously, the protest was illegal because it hadn't passed a "Covid-secure" risk assessment, and the police confirmed that fact on live RT footage, explaining to members of the crowd that is why they were there, and that, if the attendees didn't leave when advised of this illegality, then dispersal and arrests would follow; as they did.
Many people have made spurious claims along the lines of "the Coronavirus Act isn't real law, they can't enforce it if we don't consent", but this is simply not true. Yes, they can. They can and they have and they will continue to do so. If the Coronavirus Act could be sidestepped by us merely saying "we don't consent", why would it even matter that it exists? Why did so many of us so vigorously oppose this Act upon its institution? Why are we so ferociously fighting against its renewal now? If it was an optional, opt-in sort of arrangement, we wouldn't bother - we'd just opt out and get on with our lives. We can't do that - a fact of which I'm sure anyone reading this is all too well aware.
So please be very clear on the nature of the reality we currently find ourselves in: the powers given to the authorities under the Coronavirus Act do NOT require your consent to be enforced. I watched as protestors at the London rally chanted at the police that they "didn't consent" and "stood under common law". Five minutes later, the police charged at them and violent arrests followed. The police don't care about what you think your rights are; they only care about enforcing what they have been told is the law. They care about following orders and not getting into trouble with their superiors. That's it. Please look at all oppressive regimes around the world, and see how their dissidents fare when they get into the faces of the police, and whether stating "we don't consent" has ever served a single one of these people. Speak to a Palestinian and see how well they are faring informing the Israelis they don't consent to ethnic cleansing and genocide. It's almost as if many dissidents in this country are under a sort of spell, like they're playing a game, and believe if they say such-and-such magic words, all the oppression and tyranny around them will evaporate and they'll be allowed to peacefully go on their merry way. Please listen to me - it's not true. There is no magic spell, no special pass. You are living in a despotic police state and the police do not care about you or what you imagine your rights are. They will do as they have been told.
If they arrest you for breaking what they have been told is the law, and you feel this is illegitimate, could you challenge them thereafter? Very possibly, people do; but this is a lengthy and expensive process with no guarantee you will win - is that how you want to invest your time and money? Maybe it is, but you really need to give this some serious thought and not rush into anything with maximal bravado and minimal critical thinking, getting yourself into a situation you're not well equipped to handle and that may not be in your interests. I have yet to hear from any of the 32 people who were arrested on Saturday that they feel this was overall a positive, enriching experience. Indeed, the one first-hand account of arrest I have read confirmed the experience was violent, traumatic, and awful. Being arrested is not fun. It's not something to get into lightly, and it has far-reaching consequences (the police will take your DNA by force for a start; what else might they start doing by force?).
We have to really acknowledge the fact that the government is coming down on us very hard. They're deploying the military to the streets. This isn't a game and they're not going to play nice or fair. So if you want to win, you've got to play smart.
The current knee-jerk response from "the resistance" (and don't think I don't understand and sympathise with it, because I certainly do) is to simply publicly and visibly disobey every new rule as much as possible. The government says I can only have 6 people round my house? Right, arrange a loud house party for 50 people immediately! The government says protesting is illegal if it's not Covid-secure? In that case, I shall arrange the biggest protest imaginable flouting all the Covid rules! And trust me, I get it. These rules are utterly abhorrent and morally illegitimate at every level... But they are nevertheless the law, they will be enforced as the law, and therefore, there may very well be consequences for you if you publicly and visibly break them; consequences which you may not wish to entertain.
Please do not misinterpret what I am saying. I am not saying you should comply with these laws. I am saying if you are not going to comply with them, do it in an intelligent way that serves you, not in a way that plays right into the hands of the enemy. You publicly flout the laws and flaunt your illegal activity all over the place, and what happens to you? You could very well get arrested - meaning you are now being detained by state officials in state facilities. Does that concept not concern you? It should. If you are a dissident who doesn't trust the state, why on earth would you put yourself in a position where you're spending time alone, incarcerated by state law enforcement officials, where they may do God knows what to you? Don't forget the brutal and extraordinary powers granted to them under the Coronavirus Act.
Successful state dissidents do not make a habit of spending time alone with the police or any other state officials. You're keen to avoid hospitals, you definitely don't want to visit quarantine camps... But you're happy to be incarcerated by the police? Please think. There are much smarter, saner ways to resist than that.
Concealing your law-breaking activities from the authorities is not endorsing the law. It's recognising your responsibility to your own self-preservation, and that, however ludicrous a law might be and however much you might oppose it, breaking it publicly and openly may have deeply undesirable consequences for you. Breaking it non-publicly and non-visibly is far more likely to get you what you want, in a way that won't have self-defeating consequences.
Let's use an example of a law we have virtually all broken - buying alcohol under the age of 18. I broke this law frequently and enthusiastically from the age of about fifteen, and yet, faced no consequences for it, because I did not advertise the fact I was breaking it.
"How old are you?"
"Nineteen." (18 is way too obvious, budding teenage drinkers...)
"What's your date of birth?"
"*Gives fake date.*"
[Of course, back in those days, they were quite relaxed and didn't demand state-approved photo ID to prove you were over 30 with a mortgage and a pension plan, or whatever the ridiculous law is now.]
Having successfully broken this law, I would take my illegal purchase and go and drink it in someone's private home, rather than, say, standing outside a police station jumping up and down and shouting that "I do not consent" to not legally being able to purchase alcohol.
Now, did the fact I concealed my law-breaking activity mean I endorsed the law or was somehow promoting compliance with it? Obviously not. I opposed the law then and I still do now (it's ludicrous that someone can get married, have a child, and join the army - all things 16-year-olds can legally do - but can't purchase a bottle of beer from the corner shop). But I still didn't openly flaunt to the authorities the fact I was breaking it, because that would not have served my purposes - which were to purchase the alcohol and not have the authorities get in my way. After all, I didn't feel I needed their "consent" to buy the alcohol, so I bypassed their laws through concealment and therefore got what I wanted.
Another law a large proportion of people have broken is the purchasing and possession of illegal drugs. One assumes if you choose to purchase illegal drugs, then you oppose the law stating they're illegal and that, obviously, you're not complying with it. But you carry out your non-compliance covertly - you don't plaster your activity all over social media, letting the world know exactly where, when, and from whom you will be buying your drugs.
I think you get the point. If your aim is to break a law because you oppose it, then breaking it loudly, visibly, and publicly may not be in your interests. This may have consequences that aren't helpful to you and could in fact be extremely undesirable.
We can examine many examples throughout history where dissidents opposed the law and successfully broke it... But they did so by concealing their illegal activity, not by flaunting it. How did drinkers get through prohibition? How did Robin Hood avoid being butchered by the Sheriff? How did Sylvester Stallone get his rat burger in Demolition Man? If you want to challenge the authorities and their despotism, the best and most effective way to do it is by concealing yourself from them, not flaunting yourself in their faces. Because if you do that, they will respond. They will bite back. We saw it on Saturday, and that was just the beginning. Just a taster. There are now, I repeat, armed militia on the streets. This isn't a game and they will show their teeth if you antagonise them. They WANT you to antagonise them, that's why they've made the rules so absolutely, utterly ridiculous - to incite you into losing your temper and breaking them publicly - because then they've got you. Obviously what they want is to be able to make mass arrests and detainments, they wouldn't be issuing all these draconian threats and putting armed guards on the streets if they didn't. They wouldn't have quarantine camps and Nightingale Hospitals, which for all we know are there to incarcerate the unruly and inject them by force (which they can do under the Coronavirus Act, by the way).
They're not going to kick your door down and drag you out, because that is a lot of effort (and, for now, still illegal) when they could much more easily go for the "low-hanging fruit". That is to say, people who get in their faces and make a scene. People who break the law publicly and in highly central and visible locations with a large police presence. People who advertise their plans to law-break - when, where, and with whom - all over social media.
So please just give all this some serious thought. What are your actual goals? What do you want to achieve? How have successful dissidents now and all throughout history continued to live their lives as they wish without being incarcerated by a tyrannical state?
To win a war, you have to be very clear on not just what you want, but what the enemy wants. What does the enemy want? To be given an excuse to incarcerate and force-inject troublemakers and antagonists, perhaps?
Think very, very carefully about what you do next and whether it is serving you and your self-preservation - or whether it's playing right into the enemy's hands. Be clear on this fact - they want you dead. They're going to play dirty - all's fair in love and war - and so you need to always be ten steps ahead. Not walking straight into their traps - and letting them know you will be in advance on a viral Facebook post.
Be strategic, think tactically, act prudently. That's how you survive what's coming - and that's, ultimately, how we win.
|Posted by Miri on September 14, 2020 at 6:55 AM||comments (2)|
I had quite a few "heated debates"* last week (*got called stupid and evil a lot, because is there any other kind of "debate" on social media? No, so thankfully now we're here where I have a filter on certain words in comments... :D), in regards to my interpretation of the new "rule of six" being a law, not a guideline, and that breaking it could therefore put one at risk of arrest and all the undesirable consequences associated with that.
It has been confirmed today that it is a law, and that breaking it could therefore end up slapping one with a criminal record. I know there's a lot of bravado floating around the internet, both of the "yeah, I don't care if I'm arrested, bring it on!" and the "ah, but I have my magical cloak of invincibility, so it won't apply to me" varieties, and I just want to urge people to be very careful before you take this at face value and make your next move. We are in a war - the fight for our lives - and as all victorious armies know, in order to defeat the enemy, you need planning and strategy - not ill-informed bravado.
So first of all, please do your research about all these magical immunity-from-authority spells floating around Facebook (common law, Magna Carta, etc.) which people are hawking as protection from breaking the law and the consequences thereof. I have looked into all this in great detail, and I find no evidence whatsoever that this is true. It is possible you could use common law or similar to challenge an arrest thereafter, but not to avoid being arrested in the first place. If the police want to arrest you, they will, and I would be thinking very carefully before putting yourself in a situation where arrest is a serious possibility, believing you have total immunity from this situation by saying such-and-such, without having seen any direct evidence of this being put into practice and being successful.
Many people, with no experience of being arrested or handling the police, have said something to the general effect of, "oh, so you're scared of getting arrested are you? Pfft, how pathetic, what's a little arrest given the current circumstances?"
Am I scared of being arrested? That is to say, am I scared of being detained by state operatives in state facilities at a time when the state has given itself unprecedented and frankly despotic powers? Er.... YES. And if you're not, I don't think you're thinking clearly. People have expressed rightfully grave concerns about being detained in quarantine camps - state facilities run by state operatives - but they're not worried about a police station? What meaningful difference is there?
Virtually nobody being so blithe and cavalier about the prospect of arrest has ever been arrested or knows what it entails. First of all, did you know even if you challenge the arrest afterwards as illegitimate and are successful (a complex and costly process with no guarantee you will win), the arrest remains on your record and can come up on an enhanced DBS check?
But far, far more sinister, did you know it is standard police procedure to take a DNA swab of everyone they arrest, and that they can do it by force if you don't consent? (See link at footer.)
So, let's envisage this scenario: On the 19th September, there's a big "anti-lockdown" protest in London; when I checked on Friday, the situation appeared to be all protests with more than six people would be illegal. However, the situation now apparently is:
"Protests and political activities organised in compliance with COVID-19 secure guidance and subject to strict risk assessments can continue." (Source: https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/coronavirus-rule-six-england-lockdown-18926782)
Well, what chances are there that a protest specifically designed to oppose all the "COVID-19 secure guidelines" is nevertheless going to adhere to them in order to make it legal - !? And if it did do that, it would invaidate the entire purpose of the event.
Despite the lllegality, was there an immense turnout, as per the August 29th event, then, yes, the protest would be very difficult to police; but as the protest - initially scheduled for the 26th - has been split in two, there are now going to be dramatically less people attending, thereby making it much easier for the police to make arrests.
Certainly, they can't arrest everyone. But they have made it very clear they will be enforcing this law and criminalising people who break it, and what better opportunity to prove this to the populace and scare them into compliance than to make an example of "selfish Covidiots" protesting the new restrictions, in a "non-COVID secure" way?
The organisers will almost certainly be fined and arrested (please note Piers Corbyn, Kate Shemirani, and Mark Steele have already been arrested for arranging protests), and my strong suspicion is that members of the crowd will be, too. There was a small anti-lockdown protest in Melbourne at the weekend, and 74 members of the crowd were arrested.
Once you have been arrested and are in police custody, they can and will take your DNA and fingerprints; and I repeat, they will do this by force if you don't consent.
So now you, as a known state dissident, are a suspected criminal with your fingerprints and DNA on police record.
Is this helpful strategy in winning the war, or is it actually playing right into the enemy's hands? The reason they take your DNA is to run it against past unsolved crimes. Would you put it past our completely corrupt and criminally insane state to frame you for something? I wouldn't. What a great way of dealing with dissenters who are getting too rowdy or visible - arrest them, take their DNA, and frame them for a crime; and of course, the masses would have NO trouble believing it: "crazy conspiracy theorist arrested at anti-lockdown protest found to be serial thief / rapist / murderer". It might sound far-fetched, but so would everything that's going on right now 12 months ago, and as I said, I put NOTHING past these psychopaths and you shouldn't either.
So yes, I am afraid of getting arrested, and you are at risk of arrest if you very publicly flout the "rule of six" (they can't enforce it in private homes as they can't enter without a warrant - yet). In my view, mass arrests will be made at the protest on the 19th for the reasons I've just outlined above.
Please think very carefully before you put yourself in that situation. Some "professional protestors" like Piers Corbyn are always getting arrested and know how to handle themselves with the police. You probably don't, and if you've never been arrested before, your DNA and fingerprints are currently not on police record. You may want to keep it that way. I certainly intend to.
There are multiple ways of challenging the current circumstances which don't risk criminalising you and getting your DNA on police file. I would be very wary of anyone encouraging you to publicly flout these rules, because what benefit is there to you of getting arrested? Ok, you've "made a statement", but as I said, there are multiple ways of doing that that don't involve detainment by state officials in state facilities having your DNA taken by force.
I already decided not to go to the London event because I oppose the split, which seems at best ego-driven, and also because I don't see much of a purpose to standing around in the cold for four hours listening to speeches I can't hear properly telling me things I already know - a day-trip that also entails a considerable investment of time and money, given I live four hours' drive away.
But things are much more serious than personal preference now. The reality is, if you attend the event on the 19th and it hasn't passed a strict risk assessment deeming it "COVID secure", you are breaking the law, and you could get arrested. Are you genuinely prepared for that? Will it help? How will it help? Or could it make things unfathomably worse for you and for "the cause"?
As all military victors know, you must not be swayed by playing to the crowd or people-pleasing, but instead think very carefully before you make your next move. Don't be influenced by people calling you names (remember what happened to Marty McFly in Back to the Future because he got so wound up every time someone called him "chicken"; this has always been an effective ploy from malevolent forces of getting people to do things that aren't in their interests). Think about what's best for you, your family, your reputation - because you're the one who's going to have to live with the consequences of what you decide, and all the people goading you now for being scared or unprincipled if you don't risk arrest... Will be nowhere to be seen.
|Posted by Miri on September 6, 2020 at 8:15 AM||comments (0)|
So, where are we on planet insanity today?
The government has confirmed what us crackpot nutjobs have been telling you for months, insofar as Christmas is being cancelled and we are on course for another, much more severe "lockdown" - despite the fact, as all MSM articles confirm if you look carefully, there has been no rise in hospitalisations or deaths.
That's because there is no deadly virus. Nothing worse than what's usually around this time of year. However, that doesn't matter. What matters is that you BELIEVE there's a virus (it really is the Emperor's New Virus), because once you believe that, the overlords can manipulate you into doing all sorts of things that you would not do unless you held this belief.
If you've got a group of infinitely wealthy and powerful intergenerational psychopaths who want to drastically depopulate the planet to free up more resources for themselves, they're not going to come outright and tell you that's what they want to do. Psychopaths are many things, but one thing they're not is stupid. They're actually intellectually brilliant with extraordinary abilities in strategy, public relations, and planning. If they weren't so ruthlessly evil, they would be to be admired.
So, they want to kill a lot of people, but they want to do it in a way that nobody realises it was them. So, they invent "a deadly pandemic". They hire the media to churn out maximum fear propaganda all day every day (doesn't have to be real, staged events are fine, as per the amendment in the NDAA which made it legal for the press to propagandise the public). So now the public is petrified of "a deadly pandemic", which means a) they will do whatever they're told to avoid it, and b) as they believe there's a deadly pandemic, they have the expectation that a lot of people are going to die.
So, the overlords then summon them for regular "testing" (the tests are contaminated, which even the MSM admits, and are highly likely to be an intranasal "vaccine" of some description, designed to create poor health and shorten life) and imminently, regular coronavirus vaccinations, too. Do you know what's in the vaccine? Nope. Could be anything. Even the official ingredients' list doesn't declare all components, as the Covelva scientists in Italy recently discovered.
It's very easy for psychopaths with infinite wealth and resources to buy off scientists (and those who can't be bought off, killed off) and have them create potent genocidal bioweapons, call them "vaccines", and inject them into people. We also have the good old reliable 'flu vaccine, shedding and suppressing immunity, to create even more ill health, thus completing the illusion.
A lot of people are going to die in the next few months - I'm very sorry to have to say that, but it's the reality we're all going to have to prepare for - because of the above factors, and there will be no resistance or fighting back against the evil overlords killing them, because the people will simply not realise this is what is happening. They will accredit all the excess deaths to "the pandemic".
Genius, really. Evil, diabolical, psychopathic genius. But if I point it out, of course, I'm the crazy conspiracy theorist. Yes, I get nothing for pointing the above out to the normies except ridicule and abuse, I'm not peddling snake oil or trying to recruit for a cult, I'm just providing information. You don't have to believe me. But ask yourself what I have to gain for sharing it with you?
Whenever you want to get to the truth of any situation, there's always one vital question to ask - cui bono? Who benefits?
Do I benefit from the current situation? I've lost my job, I can't get the eye operation I need, and I was unable to see my dad on his 70th birthday, amongst many and various other significant sacrifices. This really is not a beneficial situation for me.
Do rich psychopaths benefit? Have they become a lot richer since "the pandemic"? Have the openly stated "overpopulation" is a problem?
THINK. Think as if your life depended on it. Because it really, really does.
|Posted by Miri on August 15, 2020 at 11:40 AM||comments (0)|
When town centres are cancelling Christmas celebrations in AUGUST (as per below link), you know this isn't about a virus.
I have predicted on several occasions previously that Christmas this year will be cancelled, and that this winter is going to be very difficult indeed. The first wave was an IQ test; the second will be a resilience test. Please prepare now for food shortages, power cuts, and disruptions to the water and heating supplies (in LA, they're already threatening to cut households off who host "non-permitted gatherings").
Remember also that significant power cuts will stop us being able to charge our phones, laptops, etc., leaving most of us very cut off. Make provisions for that now so it doesn't hit you too hard if/when it happens - for instance, make sure you have addresses of nearby friends written down in pen so you can go round to their houses without needing to consult your phone (if you don't have nearby friends, now is the time to make them! Plenty of local meet-ups being arranged via FB).
Keep buying extra tins and other non-perishables every time you go shopping, as well as bottled water, torches, matches, batteries, and anything else you might need in the event of power cuts and/or supply scarcity. Extra blankets are a good idea, as I foresee a bitterly cold winter, compounded by heating failures. Don't forget non-electronic entertainment items, such as books, games, drawing equipment, etc. And remember to stock up for pets, too.
As I said, what's coming will be a resilience test and "they" really will try to break us. Cancelling Christmas will be an attempt to deliver a huge, traumatic bodyblow to an already psychologically shattered culture, following months of other profound disruptions (the fallout when furlough and eviction protection ends in October is going to be unimaginable), so prepare yourself now, including psychologically and emotionally.
We are also going to see a sudden uptick in illness and death, which will be caused by a number of factors including the shedding children's 'flu vaccine, the immune-suppressing adult 'flu vaccine, contaminated test kits, months of festering muzzle wearing, general lowered immunity from months of sitting inside avoiding fresh air, sunlight, and human contact, and of course, from the coronavirus vaccine. We will all have to prepare ourselves for the fact that people we know will be affected. It won't be the same as now when almost no-one knows anyone who's actually ill.
I'm not saying this to scare you, but to prepare you, because like I said, what's coming is a resilience test. And as with all tests, if you fail to prepare, you prepare to fail. I do actually think there's light at the end of the tunnel once we get through this; but we do have to get through that tunnel first.
The main things that will get you through are practical supplies (food, blankets, books, etc.) and human support - so use the time we have left before the "second wave" (about four weeks, I'd say) to do all you can to bolster your reserves of both.
See you on the other side...
|Posted by Miri on August 5, 2020 at 7:25 PM||comments (0)|
This is what I believe "they" have planned for the next six months:
The schools will go back in September as promised, but for the sole reason of making sure all pupils are vaccinated with the live, shedding 'flu nasal mist. You may have been told your child's school isn't doing the 'flu mist until later in the year, but "to protect the NHS", expect the programme to be moved forward. This is the only reason they want children to return to school.
(If it is at all possible, I would strongly advise not sending your child back.)
Within a couple of weeks, the 'flu mist will have shed all over the country, creating a tidal wave of ill health - as it does every year, but expect this year's vaccine to be turbocharged with nastiness - and hey presto, there's your "second wave".
Schools will then be closed nationwide, permanently. They are, we will be told, too dangerous to ever re-open, and all teaching will be moved online (I've posted about this before: https://miriaf.webs.com/…/48836324-schools-brave-new-normal- ).
The country will then declare a state of emergency and a second, much more draconian lockdown will be imposed at the end of September, of the sort going on in Australia now. No leaving your house for ANY reason, not even to exercise. State operatives going door-to-door to check you're inside. Huge on-the-spot fines for anyone found breaking "the rules".
Then, the coronavirus vaccine will debut - the most dangerous vaccine ever produced in human history, which is a position even held by many pro-vaccine advocates. The wall-to-wall propaganda and marketing for this vaccine will be extraordinary, and the pressure to receive it, enormous. Millions will, and then the country - already in compromised health from the shedding 'flu mist - will see mass illness and death on a scale never before experienced. The extra hospitals will be full (with the death-trap, organ-harvesting ventilators getting plenty of use, now that the state owns your organs*), and at that point, entirely unlike now, we will all personally know people who are affected.
We have already been told the vaccine won't be a "magic bullet" (after all, we have a 'flu vaccine, and the 'flu is still responsible for mass illness and death every year), so they will drag out the same script to explain why vaccinated people are dropping like flies - "the virus mutated" - "it would have been much worse if you weren't vaccinated" - "anti-vaxxers are compromising herd immunity" - rinse and repeat, ad infinitum, ad nauseum.
At that point, the country will be on its knees in a state of trauma and terror and certainly in no mood to celebrate Christmas, which will be cancelled. Visiting family banned. Christmas lights and attractions called off. And of course, no singing carols, because this, as we know, spreads the virus.
You can also factor in food shortages, power cuts, and a breakdown in law and order (the government has already promised us riots that will entirely eclipse those of 2011 in their severity) as the entire infrastructure of the country collapses.
By the time we get into early 2021, the ruthless assault on the psyche of the (surviving) people will be such that they will be stunned and defeated with trauma, prepared to do anything to feel safe and never experience this horror again. They will agree to chipping, tracking, tracing, monitoring, constant surveillance and vaccination - anything! Just don't make us live through this horror again!
"Of course not, my pretties," the criminally insane overlords will cackle. "Just do exactly as we say, always and forever, and we promise you protection and security. Now, here's your latest injection of sterilising carcinogenic neurotoxins to keep you safe, because we love you. Sorry about bulldozing your house, by the way."
This is the future they've got mapped out.
If it's not a future you particularly care for, the time for action is NOW. Every "little" thing we do, from writing to officials to challenging mask mandates to refusing to comply with track and trace, makes a difference, and if we all do "little" things as often as we can, we end up having a big impact.
We are many and they are few. The only reason they are getting away with this is our silence and compliance.
Speak up - even if your voice shakes.
|Posted by Miri on July 21, 2020 at 8:50 AM||comments (0)|
We are seeing more and more of these admissions from "celebrities" (pictured below), in concert with the increasing exposure of major establishment figures, including royalty. It is tempting therefore to think "the jig is up", and these depraved psychopaths are finally going to be exposed and brought to justice (because everything she says about child trafficking and hunting parties is true and everyone involved in elite and high-level celebrity circles knows it).
Sadly, I don't think that is what this is about. Think back to Ricky Gervais at the Golden Globes. Yes, what he said was explosive and gratifying, but why was he allowed to say it? Because he obviously WAS allowed to. Nobody tried to stop him or cut him off or claim "technical issues" with the transmission, which would all be the standard responses if someone genuinely went off-message. He also continues to enjoy not only rude good health (remember all the "Ricky Gervais didn't kill himself" memes) but also a thriving career, and there is simply no possible way this would have been permitted if he had said something genuinely rebellious or made revelations that hadn't been authorised at the highest levels. When people ACTUALLY go off-script and expose the real dark recesses in a way that hasn't been deftly orchestrated and pre-arranged, then their career is instantly destroyed, they are endlessly smeared and vilified in the press, and if they still won't shut up, they are killed. See Isaac Kappy for a textbook example.
What I think is happening here is a strategised, weaponised plot to both further obliterate our culture and shatter mental health. For many people, Hollywood stars, royalty, and other celebrities are central cultural figures and aspirational icons. Think of the "cult status" given to certain films and film stars; of all the press and public attention given to royal figures and celebrity events; and how generally Hollywood, the movies, and royal and celebrity culture are interwoven into every aspect of modern life. In many ways, these things have replaced traditionally defining cultural institutions like religion, architecture and art.
In light of these facts, imagine the public reaction when they are confronted with the worst possible revelations about their favourite stars. Imagine irrefutable evidence showing that beloved public figures and top royal celebrities are direct actors in the worst crimes imaginable. And imagine these devastating revelations emerging whilst we are in the midst of an international crisis which is already taking a terrible toll on mental health. This, for many people, will be too much. Their mental filters will not be able to process or accept it. Their minds will snap.
This serves a twin aim for the demonically ruthless ruling classes; first, they are trying their damnedest to drive everyone mad, so people flip and kill themselves (thus meeting depopulation goals), or at the very least become hooked on lucrative and life-shortening cocktails of psychoactive medications. Secondly, they want to completely destroy every aspect of our culture - that is what the elite-bankrolled BLM riots and tearing down of statues are about, that is why great literature and comedy shows are being erased from existence, and that is why they must now go after Hollywood, celebrities, and royalty, too. They want to tar every aspect of our culture as savage, depraved, brutal, and disgusting, both because of the psychological trauma this inflicts on the people, and because that gives them justification to destroy it.
It is true Hollywood IS savage, depraved, brutal and disgusting, but exposing a few film actors and other sacrificial lambs like Prince Andrew is not about actually bringing to an end their disgusting crimes, which will continue unabated at the highest levels. Rather, it is about waging a war on the minds of the people by violently exposing how truly monstrous "their culture" is, so they are in such shattered psychological shock, they raise no objection when it is razed to the ground.