It's what propagandists have been feverishly doing the world over - changing language to fit the narrative. Smoke and mirrors, Inversion and lies.

A fiendish opportunity, that has been seized by the pharma-chemical industry, has arisen from the growing number of cases of auto-immune disease in relatively recent years. They like to claim that it is your immune system that is at fault, and what you need is more of the toxins that probably caused it in the first place.

Update on the class action and interviews with some of the international lawyers

Special session: "International Legal Offensive, Part 1" [engl.]

April 23th, starting 5pm CEST!

The current streaming link is always also available at www.corona-ausschuss.de/en/

➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖
🇺🇸German subtitles to follow soon
🇩🇪Deutsche Untertitel folgen bald
➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖

➥ Click here to go directly to the stream

Lawyers and Activists from all over the world present their main legal corona-related strategies and projects at the moment.

Featuring:
▫️Renate Holzeisen (Lawyer, Italy)
▫️Francis E. Hoar (Lawyer, Great Britian)
▫️Dominic Desjarlais (Lawyer, Canada)
▫️Ana Garner (Lawyer, USA)
▫️Leslie Manookian (President of the Health Freedom Defense Fund, USA)
▫️Andrea Steindl (Lawyer, Austria)
▫️Gerold Beneder (Lawyer, Austria)
▫️Dr. Michael Brunner (Lawyer, Austria)
▫️Miguel Luis Marcelo Iannolfi (Lawyer and medical doctor, Argentina)
▫️Dr. Gustavo Salle Lorier (Law- and social scientist, Uruguay)
▫️Natalia Ravanales (Lawyer, Chile)
▫️Michael Swinwood (Lawyer, Canada)

Lawyer Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, this way to the channel:
@ReinerFuellmich
More information:
fuellmich.com/newsletter

Dear BBC, I think there were an awful lot more people at this event on April 24th than you would have us believe.

I've stated this principle before, but it is key to understanding the misconceptions people have about society and the part they play in it.

We know the Covid religion is fuelled by irrational fear, however underlying all of the cult's success is the publics fundamental miscomprehension of the principles on which a free, democratic society is built:

Society exists to serve the needs and wishes of the individual, NOT the other way round - that way lies tyranny.

Let that sink in for a minute.

I can hear noises from the left about 'social responsibility', but just look at the communities where serving society (aka The State) became a mandatory priority over the individual – Soviet Russia and all the Warsaw Pact countries, Communist China, Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany for starters. All societies ruled by fear, and all unsustainable. These societies all eventually fail because of the disproportionate amount of resources that the state has to employ to control people in order to prevent them reverting to normal behaviour. Even after years of brainwashing, people still know that their government stinks.

Socialism – for that is the term given to the compulsory prioritisation of society over the individual – is a triumph of misappropriation of responsibility, removing it from the individual and replacing it with the contrivance of social responsibility, insisting that we are all incapable of taking responsibility for our own livelihood and well being, yet we are obliged to act on behalf of everybody else's.

This way of thinking spreads the falsehood that looking after ones own interests is in some way selfish – as though that were a bad thing – and that minding everybody else's business is right and benevolent, and that ultimately responsibility for everything should lie with the state. If left unchecked this will result in realisation the socialist desire for the state to control even the minutiae of everyones lives, which they do in exchange for your absolute compliance.

Too often people are confusing choice with obligation. To work for the benefit of society is a noble aspiration, however it is a choice, NOT an obligation. To obfuscate the two leads directly to tyranny.

It is your right to exercise free will to do as you wish; your obligation is to do no harm, and that obligation in most well-balanced people, is instinctive. People have an innate tendency to aid and support each other, especially in adversity, and thus is society created; but to make this behaviour mandatory will result in its atrophy.

It is my right to choose whether I wish to serve social needs, for instance, by becoming a public servant, working in healthcare, doing charitable works, or simply behaving towards others in a courteous way. It is not for anyone to exercise care or leadership on others without their consent.

To restrict the behaviour and activities of individuals out of concern for their wellbeing or betterment is fundamentally and morally wrong. It is this reasoning that forms the basis of all fundamental rights, and as the philosopher Frances Hutcheson stated "Unalienable Rights are essential limitations in all Governments".

With regard to matters of infectious disease, everyone is 'selfish' with regard to their own health. My health is my responsibility, no-one else's – unless I request it. Accordingly your health is your responsibility and yours alone. If you fear others may contaminate you in some way, it is entirely up to you to avoid others and protect yourself. While it is responsible for someone with an obvious contagion to stay away from others, it should still not be an obligation, and such cases rarely arise as those afflicted are rarely well enough to engage in wider society. It is the myth of asymptomatic spread that is used to proselytize the inversion of social norm, and such misinformation has been spread specifically to enable the undermining of free society, by those working in support of governments who have not a shred of interest in anyones well-being.

For all the welfare benefits of Social Democracy - and they can be great, it is the social (socialist) part of that system that is the seed of its destruction, because unless socialist tendency is strictly and regularly controlled, inevitably over time, more rights are surrendered to government in return for 'free stuff' and the illusion of security, government then becomes the state, eroding the democratic balance until all we are left with is Totalitarianism.

Never before has anyone bothered to check colds and flu to find out what variety they are. Now they've started naming them everyone is terrified and prepared to trade their soul for a myth of protection.

The Covid 'vaccines'

• Are not true vaccines but experimental gene therapy that has never been used before.
• They are in trials which will not be complete until 2023.
• Don't provide immunity - a prerequisite of a vaccine.
• Claim to be 95% successful at alleviating some of the symptoms that over 86% of people who get Covid never experience anyway.
• Don't stop anyone from spreading the virus.
• Have to date, according to official figures, caused 1,180 deaths and 822,845 adverse reactions in the UK alone. World wide 6 months of 'vaccinations' has resulted in more deaths than all other vaccines over the last 10 years combined.
• Manufacturers have been indemnified against all repercussions from adverse reactions.
Any other vaccine or drug with a fraction of the adverse reactions would have been pulled immediately, yet all the official rhetoric continues to push them unabated.

So why are governments so keen for you to have it that they threaten, bribe and coerce people to submit? And why do they want people to carry proof they have had a potentially lethal injection that utterly fails to deliver on any of its promises?

Why would you want it?

A different perspective that makes great sense https://odysee.com/@TruthPills:5/how-did-we-get-here:b

Reiner Füllmich interviews Dr David Martin, who blows the entire Corona narrative apart, with proof. https://odysee.com/@Corona-Ausschuss:3/Sitzung-60-Die-Zeit-ist-kein-flacher-Kreis-5-Martin:f?src=embed

When something doesn't make sense it's usually a result of errors or deceit. The level of deceit and outright lies in the world today make even the gravest error pale into insignificance, to the extent that NOTHING makes sense in this ridiculous dialogue. Yet in the face of this, still the gullible remain transfixed.

What a political virus this has turned out to be! The communists among us are now fully exposed! The fatal flaw of socialism is that it promotes the belief that the individual should be subservient to the needs of society. This complete inability to comprehend first principles explains why unmanaged socialism left to its own devices will inevitably degenerate into communist tyranny.

As I have stated before - society exists for the benefit of the individual not the other way round, indeed society is the result of the interaction of individuals. Acting for the benefit of society is an individual choice - not an obligation, and all those throwing childish tantrums about social responsibility are merely exposing the fact that underneath it all they are closet totalitarian communists, and that goes for almost the entire occupants of the Commons, who for the past two years have governed in a manner that would make Stalin proud. Fear results in woolly-thinking and paranoia, and no-one should be making life-changing decisions based on fear. Your fear certainly doesn't outweigh the liberties of others. Your healthcare is your own affair, and it is another socialist nonsense that pretends that someone else should take responsibility for aspects of your life that are clearly nobody else's business.

This is all too symptomatic of the left who abdicate all personal responsibility in the belief that the government exists in order to deal with all their problems and insecurities, no matter how trivial. This belief is eagerly fostered by governments who relish the idea of controlling every aspect of everyones lives.

To coerce, bribe, legislate or force individuals to act for the benefit of society is immoral and a total contravention of all fundamental rights. Society is what results when individuals interact, and as such society exists for the benefit of the individual. The inversion of this relationship is tyranny. It is the right of every individual to choose whether to serve society or not, and in what way. It is not, and should never be an obligation. To contravene this first principle is to embark on the descent to tyranny. Identity cards, passes and permits to engage in any aspects of normal life are an abhorrent throwback to the failed totalitarian regimes of the 20th century and are wanton steps of degenerate government to lead us down a comparable path of oppression.

To those who make vacuous comments like 'you don't object to wearing a seat belt' I would make this observation: Crass comparisons with motoring regulations are completely beside the point. Aside from the fact no-one trying to surgically implant seat-belt mounts, the traffic system is not a society, it is effectively a machine that serves society, with operating procedures to ensure smooth-running and avoid incidents. When you use the machine you agree to learn and follow the rules. Society is not in any way comparable to this, being the result of individual interactions. Social norms are not rules, they are agreements which can be supported, or not. That is your choice, not an obligation.

Insulate Britain and its partner Extinction rebellion are the face of controlled opposition in action. Tacitly funded and supported by the very corporations they pretend to despise, they draw attention away from the real culprits of environmental damage, the big corporate conglomerate industries. They employ the gullible middle classes who could never imagine the complex web of deceit they are helping to promote.

They are greenwashers acting on behalf of the major shareholders of these corporations, the WEF, Davos, World Bank, the UN and ultimately coerced or complicit actors in most of the worlds governments, all of whom are working to impose a new 'Technocom' future on the world, one that is absolutely in line with the stated aims of ER.

Their much-publicised enemy is a gas that is fundamental to all life on the planet, and to this end they would have us bow to a one-world government, the abolition of cash and personal property

Precipitated by the imminent threat of collapse of the worlds financial system - brought about by their own central banking practises, they want to introduce a new digital currency based on the vacuous notion of your carbon footprint. This currency would be programmable, and therefore they would control the amount you could earn, how much you could spend, and even what you could spend it on, all in the name of reducing carbon emissions, a myth to keep you distracted from the real problem, which is pollution and destruction of natural resources by the corporations, who - not that it matters - have a far greater carbon footprint between them than all the individuals in the world. And of course this doesn't begin to address the total enslavement of all the worlds peoples, which is what would result from their 'Great Reset'.

In real terms, however, the problem was never CO2, the levels of which which have proven to be dependant on global temperatures, not the other way round - yet another monstrous inversion by those who would rule the world.

It is this multiplicity of misdirection that is allowing them to introduce the key component in this system - the digital pass. Covid was about several things, but never about a virus, it was about massive pharmaco profits, it was also about experimental genetic manipulation and injectable technology, but primarily it was about the pass. They even call it the Green Pass - could they be more obvious?

Oppression is the subjugation of the self for the dogmatic belief of the group - groupthink

Another incisive takedown of the narrative from David Martin https://truthcomestolight.com/dr-david-martin-phd-w-dr-joseph-mercola-md-patents-prove-covid-fraud-and-illegal-dealings/

Dr David Martin is a force to be reckoned with. Essential viewing.

https://rumble.com/vov60h-dr.-david-martin-follow-the-patents-then-you-will-understand-covid.html

I believe what we are seeing in the NHS is the final phase of the 2012 Health and Social Care act, which was essentially a privatisation bill to green-light the sale of the NHS.
Since that time anyone visiting any NHS site will have noticed an increasing display of new branding as the more profitable sectors of the NHS are surreptitiously sold off to new owners, misleadingly described as PPP's or Public Private Partnerships.
Of all the public health models they could choose, in a bid for short-term profit over viability they opted for the American model. The one that provides the least return for the highest price.
It was always anticipated that the core services would be a hard sell, as they are inherently unprofitable. It looks like the option they have chosen is to reduce overheads by running the system down, firing as many staff as possible via vaccine mandates, and at the same time pumping more public money into the system as a carrot to prospective buyers. This is just my own impression, of course, I could be wrong…