Please don’t read “Today” unless you’re prepared to hear what’s really happening in the world.
Some subjects discussed as we move into the future may be distressing.
Please note as well that Hooktube appears to be down. And WordPress is disallowing the uploading of around one in six videos, making for some gaps in coverage.
Tweeted videos take around a minute to load.
Journalist calls for trials of “the press that lied to the world”
I can’t remember when I heard as rousing a speech as Del Bigtree gave at the Defeat the Mandate march in Washington, DC, Jan. 23.
We lightworkers are frequently afraid of demogogues and, as a result of it, we can fail to create momentum. I thought Del did a great job of stating the plain truth of the matter while warning journalists, doctors, politicians, etc., that we will see that they face justice. (1) Thanks to Len.
The notes say:
Emmy award-winning Producer Del Bigtree gave an impassioned speech at the ‘Defeat The Mandates’ Rally, in front of approx. 20k protesters Sunday. On the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in D.C. he called for an investigation into legacy media and public health officials like Anthony Fauci, for suppressing life-saving information during the Covid Pandemic.
#CovidTrial #DelBigtree #Savethe4thEstate #DefeatTheMandates #NewNuremberg
— Unity22 (@unity2299) February 4, 2022
Footnotes
(1) What Archangel Michael once said to me applies, I think, to Del Bigtree’s speech:
Archangel Michael: There is a place for righteous anger, my friend.
So when you show those around you how to do that in a way that is in balance and not in hysteria, you are teaching very well. (Archangel Michael in a personal reading with Steve Beckow through Linda Dillon, May 16, 2011.)
Johns Hopkins Analysis Explodes COVID Lockdown Narrative: Little or No Impact Reducing Deaths
Abby Liebing, Western Journal, February 1, 2022
(https://www.westernjournal.com/johns-hopkins-analysis-explodes-covid-lockdown-narrative-little-no-impact-reducing-deaths/)
COVID-19 lockdowns were not effective, according to a new study from researchers at Johns Hopkins.The study evaluated three different kinds of COVID intervention studies: lockdown stringency index studies, which look at overall stringency of a government’s response in a daily basis, shelter in place order studies and non-pharmaceutical intervention studies.
The report included an analysis of 24 studies — separated into the three categories.
“An analysis of each of these three groups support the conclusion that lockdowns have had little to no effect on COVID-19 mortality. More specifically, stringency index studies find that lockdowns in Europe and the United States only reduced COVID-19 mortality by 0.2 percent on average,” the report said.
“SIPOs were also ineffective, only reducing COVID-19 mortality by 2.9 percent on average. Specific NPI studies also find no broad-based evidence of noticeable effects on COVID-19 mortality.”
Studies looking into non-pharmaceutical intervention showed that there is no broad-based evidence that it had an effect on COVID mortality.
“We find no evidence that lockdowns, school closures, border closures and limiting gatherings have had a noticeable effect on COVID-19 mortality,” the researchers wrote.
The study pointed out that lockdowns have not been used for any major pandemics in the past century, so there was no real precedent for them being imposed.
While the lockdowns had nearly no effect on the mortality rate, the study did mention that it had damaging effects on the economy.
“However, lockdowns during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic have had devastating effects. They have contributed to reducing economic activity, raising unemployment, reducing schooling, causing political unrest, contributing to domestic violence and undermining liberal democracy,” the study reported.
Based on this evidence, the researchers outright condemned the whole idea of lockdowns.
“These costs to society must be compared to the benefits of lockdowns, which our meta-analysis has shown are marginal at best. Such a standard benefit-cost calculation leads to a strong conclusion: Lockdowns should be rejected out of hand as a pandemic policy instrument.”
The study noted that when the pandemic arrived, there were really only two options for how society could have responded: voluntary behavioral changes or mandated behavioral changes.
Clearly, the U.S. and Europe went the route of mandated changes. But as already concluded, this ended up being almost entirely ineffective for mitigating COVID.
The study looked more specifically at the individual measures taken during COVID — border closures, limited gatherings, school closures — and concluded that individually, these also had little effect.
“Overall, lockdowns and limiting gatherings seem to increase COVID-19 mortality, although the effect is modest (0.6 percent and 1.6 percent, respectively), and border closures has little to no effect on COVID-19 mortality,” the study said.
Researchers did note that school closures had a small effect; however, they said this may be due to “other effects such as seasonal and behavioral effects.”
While the study concluded that face masks and the closing of some non-essential businesses may have had some impact, overall, the mandated behavioral changes of lockdowns were unhelpful.
This study is not the first time the effectiveness of the lockdowns has been disputed. For about a year now, more and more people have been speaking out about the ineffectiveness of lockdowns.
In May 2021, the Editorial Board of the Wall Street Journal said that lockdowns did not stop COVID.
Forbes reported on another study that confirmed this point back in March 2021.
Many have continued to argue that while lockdowns and other mandated measures did not stop COVID outright, they were not entirely unhelpful.
But this new study from the Johns Hopkins researchers uses meta-data to statistically prove that mandated measures were ineffective.
It is unfortunate lockdowns were so ineffective. Many predicted this, and now we are still dealing with the aftermath of the economic destruction of worldwide lockdowns.
Though it is frustrating that only now, two years after the pandemic, people are finally starting to confirm that lockdowns were a bad idea, at least that false narrative is finally starting to be cracked. And it is not just being cracked by opinion, but by hard data.
Hopefully this growing realization and the acknowledgement of the data will stop our society from ever imposing such harmful behavioral mandates again.
Report: All-American Company Fires Unvaxxed Employees, Asks Them to Sign 9-Page Agreement to Stay Silent
(https://www.westernjournal.com/report-american-company-fires-unvaxxed-employees-asks-sign-9-page-agreement-stay-silent/)
The Hershey Co. enacted a COVID-19 vaccine requirement for employees and now the company is firing employees who have not complied.A representative of the iconic Pennsylvania-based chocolate manufacturer said employees who have not been vaccinated are being “separated from the company,” WHTM-TV in Harrisburg reported Wednesday.
Hershey announced its vaccine mandate for salary employees in August, and it went into effect on Oct. 4.
“Hershey is committed to maintaining a safe and healthy environment for our employees and our customers,” the company said in a statement. “We believe that the best way to protect the health and safety of our employees, their families and our various business partners is to ensure that our salaried employees are vaccinated against COVID-19. This is to reduce the spread of the virus and the potential for serious disease or death.”
Not only is Hershey firing employees who did not comply, but it is also asking the employees on the way out the door to sign a nine-page confidentiality and release agreement that would remove their rights to sue the company and to talk about their experience there, The Epoch Times reported on Monday.
Signing the agreement would give the fired employees “special separation payment,” the report said. Many have declined to sign the agreement and so won’t get that money.
The Epoch Times reported that employees said the payment for the agreement was determined by an algorithm, and for some workers, it was as much as two months’ pay.
Most employees said that it was a great experience working for Hershey and that they were treated well.
“But it stopped being fun after months of human resources department meetings that employees say included education about the vaccines, asking if the employee had changed their mind about getting the shots, as well as uncomfortably invasive questions,” the Epoch Times reported.
One employee, Kim Durham, shared her thoughts.
“I really thought I’d be OK. I thought, you cannot question my faith. Nobody can question that,” she told the Epoch Times.
“I thought this was behind me until September, when I met with an HR representative. It was an interrogation on your religious beliefs. They twisted your words and tried to put words in your mouth. It was terrible,” Durham said.
Another employee said that it felt like harassment from the company.
“What does that have to do with me keeping a job? From the time we started this ordeal, we have had seven meetings about my vaccination status. It was like harassment. I felt like I wanted to crawl under a rock when I was done,” the person said.
This reported harassment came in spite of Hershey’s official statement that it would work to accommodate employees.
“To support this, the company sponsored multiple vaccination clinics and allowed employees to seek accommodations for religious or medical reasons. The company has engaged in an interactive process with our employees to evaluate when an accommodation with regard to vaccination status is needed or warranted,” the Hershey representative said, according to WHTM.
But then the company fired those who were unvaccinated and tried to entice them to not sue the company or talk about what happened.
This is corporate bullying, straight and plain.
If employees did not want to be vaccinated, Hershey tried to force their hand in a personal, private medical decision in which a company should have no say.
“I know people who got the vaccine just to keep their job. It wasn’t something they wanted to do, but they needed the job,” Durham said.
“I need a job too,” she said. “But I’m not going to do something I don’t feel comfortable doing, just keeping my job.”
Hershey, however, is not the only company firing unvaccinated employees.
Columbia Sportswear, Citigroup, JP Morgan, Mayo Clinic are among those that have mandated vaccines, fired unvaccinated employees or were considering doing one or both, Newsweek reported last month.
Fortunately, many fired employees from Hershey reportedly did not sign the confidentiality and release agreement.
Perhaps they will file lawsuits against the company for harassment and show the nation how inappropriate it is to threaten and bully employees over the vaccine.
Canadian Premier Vows to End Proof of Vaccine Policy as Truckers Protest in Ottawa: ‘Makes No Sense’
Resist the Mainstream, Jan. 29, 2022
(https://tinyurl.com/2p873y7j)
A Canadian premier said Saturday the proof of vaccine requirement makes no sense and he will end it in the “not-too-distant future” in his province.
Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe said in a statement that being vaccinated doesn’t prevent one from getting the virus and the vaccine mandate “makes no sense.”
“I want to be clear on how I feel about vaccines. I am fully vaccinated with my booster shot. This did not prevent me from recently contracting COVID-19, but I believe it did keep me from becoming sick,” he said in a statement.
“That said, because vaccination is not reducing transmission, the current federal border policy for truckers makes no sense. An unvaccinated trucker does not pose any greater risk of transmission than a vaccinated trucker,” he continued.
He will “continue to encourage everyone to get vaccinated” though, believing it will prevent people from becoming seriously ill.
Moe showed his appreciation to the truckers for keeping the country running during the pandemic and said the federal vaccine mandate for truckers poses a significant risk to Canada’s economy and to the supply chain in Saskatchewan.
Saskatchewan is a Canadian [prairie] province about 1,950 miles from Ottawa. It borders the United States from the south.
Moe’s statement came as over 10,000 Canadian truckers are holding the Freedom Convoy 2022 to protest the vaccine mandate for truckers.
After the Public Health Agency of Canada’s announcement that foreign truck drivers can only enter Canada if fully vaccinated starting Jan. 15, and the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) announcing similar requirements starting Jan. 22 for non-U.S. national truckers crossing into the United States, thousands of truckers decided to protest and will meet in Ottawa in an attempt to stop the mandates.
This is an excerpt from The Epoch Times.
Tyler Durden, Zero Hedge, Feb. 2, 2022
Authored by Lily Zhou via The Epoch Times,
England’s CCP virus vaccine mandates for health care and care home workers are set to be scrapped, subject to consultation and parliamentary approval, the UK’s Health Secretary Sajid Javid said on Monday.
Britain’s Health Secretary Sajid Javid arrives for a cabinet meeting at Number 10 Downing Street in London on Jan. 25, 2022. (Daniel Leal/AFP via Getty Images)
The latest government U-turn came just three days before the deadline by which National Health Service (NHS) and other health care workers would have to get their first doses to avoid redeployment or termination.
The deadline will no longer apply while the government carries out a two-week consultation on the proposed policy reversal before putting a motion to Parliament for approval.
However, the vote in Parliament could be a formality as the main opposition Labour Party – which supported the mandates – said it will also support the government on their reversal.
In the previous consultation on mandating the vaccines for older adult care homes, 57 percent of the respondents opposed the proposal, while 65 percent of those responding to the consultation on extending the mandate to the NHS and wider social care sector were against the mandate (pdf). In both proposals, the responses from the sectors were mixed, while the service users—who the mandates aimed to protect—mostly opposed them.
The policy reversal means patient-facing NHS and other health and social care staff who choose not to take the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus vaccines will not have to be redeployed or sacked from April 1.
However, Javid insisted that health care workers have a “professional duty” to take the vaccines, saying those “who would not do the responsible thing and choose to remain unvaccinated” were “choosing to walk away from their jobs in health and care.”
Javid told MPs that he had asked the NHS to “review its policies on the hiring of new staff and the deployment of existing staff, taking into account their vaccination status,” and ordered a consultation on updating the Code of Practice for England’s health care and social care providers registered with the Care Quality Commission.
He also asked health regulators to “urgently review current guidance” on vaccinations to “emphasise their professional responsibilities in this area.”
According to NHS weekly data, by Jan. 23, around 5 percent (77,591) of England’s NHS staff members and 18 percent (193,354) of social care workers had not received any CCP virus vaccines.
Javid said the government estimates 19,300 workers have already lost their jobs due to the care home vaccine mandate, which came into effect in November 2021. These workers are now free to reapply to their old jobs, but the health secretary declined to offer them continuity of service and pension contributions, saying it was “their choice” to leave their jobs rather than “do the professional thing” and get vaccinated.
A nurse administers a CCP virus vaccine to a health and care staff member at the NHS Louisa Jordan Hospital in Glasgow, Scotland, on Jan. 23, 2021. (Jane Barlow/PA)
Javid said the government “makes no apology” for proposing the mandates when the Delta variant of the CCP virus was dominant, arguing it was the right policy at the time as “the weight of clinical evidence in favour of vaccination as a condition of deployment outweighed the risks to the workforce.”
He said the policy reversal is due to two new factors: England’s population is “now better protected against hospitalisation from COVID-19,” because of both the widespread natural immunity from the highly infectious Omicron variant and the vaccination programme, and that the Omicron variant, which currently dominates in England, “is intrinsically less severe.”
But he refused to rule out mandating vaccination in the future, saying the government “will always listen to the evidence, be guided by the evidence as it has been today.”
Jeremy Hunt, former health secretary and current chair of the Health and Social Care Select Committee, said he’s concerned the U-turn will bring uncertainty to potential future vaccine mandates such as with flu vaccines, while other MPs spoke to support the withdrawal of the mandates.
Several MPs criticised the language Javid used to describe health workers who choose not to be vaccinated, saying it was a “disgrace” and doesn’t show respect to people’s bodily autonomy.
Compared to Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland, England has the fewest legal CCP virus restrictions on the general public, but is the only UK nation that has mandated the CCP virus vaccines in the health sector.