thelibertybeacon--2020-11-19--Time For Americans To Rebel Against Lockdowns, Mask Laws & Forced Vaccination [Video]

Now Is The Time For Americans To Rebel Against Lockdowns , Mask Laws & Forced Vaccination With the presidential election highly contested and the mainstream media hyping the rising infection numbers , the public is now facing important questions regarding the future of the pandemic response .
Some states have decided to unilaterally introduce “ executive orders ” to restrict citizen movements , business openings and public activities .
Anthony Fauci is on the news constantly , calling for families to cancel Thanksgiving and Christmas and telling Americans to just “ do what we are told ” .
The media @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the minds of the populace and paint images of plague and death everywhere .
If Biden does actually end up in the White House , a federalized and national high level lockdown is on the table starting in January .
In April of this year I published an article titled ‘ Waves Of Mutilation : Medical Tyranny And The Cashless Society ’ , which outlined a social engineering model put forward by globalists at MIT and the Imperial College of London which I called “ wave theory ” .
The model essentially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the pandemic as a rationale for “ waves ” of restrictive lockdowns , followed by controlled re-openings of the economy and of normal human activity .
Globalists claim that this will “ slow ” the spread of the coronavirus and save lives .
However , they also openly admit that these cycles of closures and openings have other uses .
Over time , the citizenry becomes acclimated to governmental intrusion in their everyday lives , and they get used to the idea of bureaucracy telling them what they are not allowed to do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The system thus bottlenecks all human interactions to the point that we are constantly asking for permission .
We become slaves to the Covid response .
As globalist Gideon Lichfield from MIT stated in his article ‘ We ’ re Not Going Back To Normal ’ : “ Ultimately , however , I predict that we ’ ll restore the ability to socialize safely by developing more sophisticated ways to identify who is a disease risk and who isn ’ t , and discriminating—legally—against those who are .
…one can imagine a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a flight , perhaps you ’ ll have to be signed up to a service that tracks your movements via your phone .
The airline wouldn ’ t be able to see where you ’ d gone , but it would get an alert if you ’ d been close to known infected people or disease hot spots .
There ’ d be similar requirements at the entrance to large venues , government buildings , or public transport hubs .
There would be temperature scanners everywhere , and your workplace might demand you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or other vital signs .
Where nightclubs ask for proof of age , in future they might ask for proof of immunity—an identity card or some kind of digital verification via your phone , showing you ’ ve already recovered from or been vaccinated against the latest virus strains.
” Note that Lichfield suggested that in order to participate in the normal economy you might need to show verification that you have been “ vaccinated against the latest virus strains ” .
In other words , the elites expect there to be many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 19 has run its course , and the restrictions and controls we see today are meant to continue , possibly FOREVER .
The reality is that the wave model is not a very practical plan for stopping viral spread , but it is a perfect method for conditioning people to submit to a high level of control over their personal lives that they never would have accepted otherwise .
The Covid response has also been heralded by elites at the World Economic Forum as a perfect “ opportunity ” to initiate what they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The reset is a plan to deconstruct what ’ s left of the free market capitalist system , introduce carbon controls in the name of the global warming fraud , institute a global cashless monetary system , and finally , move humanity into what they call a “ shared economy ” in which the average person is no longer allowed to own private property of any kind and is completely dependent on the system for their basic necessities .
Of course , such a complex system of “ solutions ” ( dominance ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ managed in a highly centralized way .
Meaning , global governance by the elitist establishment would be the end result .
Naturally….the globalists would reluctantly take the reins of power for “ the greater good ” .
This is the bigger picture , the underlying threat at the core of the lockdowns and Covid laws .
That said , there are also numerous arguments based on logic and evidence as to why there is no reason for people to submit to such restrictions .
Let ’ s outline them in a simple list @ @ @ @ @ @ @ % Of The People It Infects Medical studies in the US indicate that the coronavirus deaths rate for citizens NOT living in nursing homes has been holding well below 1 % on average .
The largest percentage of deaths by far in the US has been in nursing homes among elderly people with preexisting conditions .
People in long term care facilities make up 8 % of Covid infection cases but they are 45 % of all covid deaths .
Pneumonia alone kills around 50,000 Americans each year according to the CDC , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ yet , we are supposed to panic and hand over all our freedoms in the name of stopping a disease which affects a tiny percentage of the population ?
This is why the media and governments have decided to hyperfocus on infection numbers rather than deaths .
The death numbers do not warrant the amount of panic the establishment is trying to foment .
It ’ s basic math and finance ; the small business sector of the US economy is dying .
Small businesses make up around 50 % of US employment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by international banks like JP Morgan , did not get to the vast majority of small businesses that were supposed to receive it .
Those businesses that did get bailouts are still on the verge of closure or bankruptcy .
Any further lockdowns will be the final nail in the coffin for the US economy , except for major corporations which are enjoying the lion ’ s share of stimulus cash .
How many lives will be damaged or lost due to poverty and economic collapse if the current trend continues ?
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because of Covid .
Why is no one in the mainstream talking about the most practical solution to the pandemic ?
The small percentage of people who are most at risk can STAY HOME and take precautions as necessary , while the rest of us get on with our lives .
Why are we being ordered to do the exact opposite just to make less than 1 % of the population feel safer ?
How is this logical , reasonable or scientific ?
The only answer that makes sense is that the lockdown @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lives .
State Governors Have No Authority To Take Away Your Civil Liberties , And Neither Does The President Restrictions based on executive orders have no legal authority under the Constitution .
They are color of law , not true law .
Laws are debated and passed by state legislatures , not by state governors .
Executive orders only apply to state employees and have no bearing on the citizenry .
Leftists and statists argue that during a national crisis the governor has emergency powers and states can do whatever they want .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the Bill of Rights , state governors do not get to proclaim a national emergency based on their personal opinion and then declare themselves dictators in response .
Any “ laws ” exerted because of such a process are therefor null and void ; they are meaningless .
If the states have the ability to do whatever they want without oversight , then they would be able to bring back Jim Crow laws ( among other things ) .
Do leftists support that idea as well ?
If the federal government and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Bill of Rights during a national emergency , then Donald Trump has the authority to bring in martial law across the country because of leftist riots .
Do leftists agree with that outcome ?
It is interesting to me that the political left in particular is so keen on defending the idea of states and governors having the power to unilaterally enforce pandemic restrictions without oversight or checks and balances .
Yet , they have been aggressively opposed to state powers in the past when they had a Democratic president like Obama @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been staunchly opposed to executive orders applied by Donald Trump , but they applaud the idea of executive orders on lockdowns being instituted by Biden .
So , leftists support unilateral state power only when it works in favor of their agenda , and they support unilateral federal and presidential power only when it works in favor of their agenda .
What a surprise… The bottom line is this : State government powers do not supersede the Bill of Rights .
Federal government powers do not supersede the Bill of Rights .
NO @ @ @ @ @ @ @ away your inherent liberties .
Those that claim otherwise have something to gain from your enslavement .
The majority of masks being used by the public today are cloth masks .
Not even the CDC recommends the use of cloth masks for their own employees or medical workers .
They only recommend N95 masks .
They also admit that cloth masks are much less effective at preventing contact with the virus .
Yet , the CDC supports the enforcement of cloth masks for the public .
On top of that , some states @ @ @ @ @ @ @ laws continue to see huge spikes in coronavirus infections .
For example , New York has been one of the most tyrannical enforcers of mask laws and lockdowns in the US , but in November the state has witnessed extensive infection increases .
California , Michigan and Illinois have also seen dramatic infection spikes this month despite hard enforcement of masks .
So , where is the science ?
It would appear that masks are a placebo ; if they actually worked , then the states with the most aggressive enforcement should be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not exponential increases .
Furthermore , why are many states and countries trying to force citizens to wear masks outside in open air and sunlight when viruses can not survive in such conditions ?
UV light from the sun is nature ’ s sterilizer , but no one in the mainstream or in government acknowledges this scientific fact .
Again , this shows that mask laws are about control , not about science or saving lives .
Why should people get vaccinated for a virus that over 99 % of them will easily @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ herd immunity ” through natural infection spread and antibodies ?
The mainstream will continue to ignore these questions because they are inconvenient to the wider agenda .
Also , why should anyone trust a vaccine that was rushed out in less than a year ’ s time ?
China and the rest of the world spent over a decade trying to develop a vaccine for SARS unsuccessfully , but we are supposed to believe that they created a vaccine for SARS related Covid 19 within months ?
The last time the government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ epidemic was the 1976 swine flu scare , and that ended with numerous permanently damaged or dead individuals due to faulty vaccines .
As I noted in my article ‘ Why The Public Should Rebel Against Forced Vaccinations ’ , published in May , there are numerous examples of vaccine tests and implementation going very wrong , from Bill Gates and the World Health Organization giving people polio in various countries through vaccines , to Novartis and their deadly testing of a Bird Flu vaccine on homeless people in Poland , to GlaxoSmithCline @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their pneumonia vaccine .
Again , it ’ s simply not worth the risk over a virus that over 99 % of people will survive .
The idea of such risk being forced on the public is completely unacceptable , but many government officials have supported the idea over the past six months .
It is important for the public to make it clear now that they will NOT be allowing state or federal governments to make vaccination mandatory .
Rebellion Is Needed To Put A Stop To The Fear Machine In closing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ must end the pandemic lockdown agenda once and for all .
Most importantly , the lockdowns , mask orders and vaccine plans are a stepping stone to something much worse – Medical tyranny and centralization on an unprecedented scale .
I will not personally follow such rules because they are not scientifically or morally sound .
They are nonsense designed to frighten the public into complacency and consent .
A rebellion against such measures would be very easy to win .
All we have to do is refuse to follow their mandates .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lock up millions of people ?
Shoot us ?
That would sort of defeat the supposed purpose of the very measures they demand we follow .
And , if it comes to violence , so be it .
I have no problem fighting to defend my freedoms and the freedoms of future generations .
Perhaps it is time for conservatives and moderates that stand against the lockdowns to organize for this possible future .
( TLB ) published this article from Alt-Market.us with our appreciation to Brandon for this perspective .
If you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda , subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch .
Learn more about it HERE .
You can contact Brandon Smith at : brandon @ alt-market.com

Now Is The Time For Americans To Rebel Against Lockdowns, Mask Laws & Forced Vaccination
What are they going to do? Lock up millions of people? Shoot us?
by Brandon Smith
With the presidential election highly contested and the mainstream media hyping the rising infection numbers, the public is now facing important questions regarding the future of the pandemic response. Some states have decided to unilaterally introduce “executive orders” to restrict citizen movements, business openings and public activities.
Anthony Fauci is on the news constantly, calling for families to cancel Thanksgiving and Christmas and telling Americans to just “do what we are told”. The media is generally trying to drum up fear in the minds of the populace and paint images of plague and death everywhere. If Biden does actually end up in the White House, a federalized and national high level lockdown is on the table starting in January.
In April of this year I published an article titled ‘Waves Of Mutilation: Medical Tyranny And The Cashless Society’, which outlined a social engineering model put forward by globalists at MIT and the Imperial College of London which I called “wave theory”. The model essentially works like this:
Governments must use the pandemic as a rationale for “waves” of restrictive lockdowns, followed by controlled re-openings of the economy and of normal human activity. Globalists claim that this will “slow” the spread of the coronavirus and save lives. However, they also openly admit that these cycles of closures and openings have other uses.
Over time, the citizenry becomes acclimated to governmental intrusion in their everyday lives, and they get used to the idea of bureaucracy telling them what they are not allowed to do when it comes to the simplest activities. The system thus bottlenecks all human interactions to the point that we are constantly asking for permission. We become slaves to the Covid response.
As globalist Gideon Lichfield from MIT stated in his article ‘We’re Not Going Back To Normal’:
“Ultimately, however, I predict that we’ll restore the ability to socialize safely by developing more sophisticated ways to identify who is a disease risk and who isn’t, and discriminating—legally—against those who are.
…one can imagine a world in which, to get on a flight, perhaps you’ll have to be signed up to a service that tracks your movements via your phone. The airline wouldn’t be able to see where you’d gone, but it would get an alert if you’d been close to known infected people or disease hot spots. There’d be similar requirements at the entrance to large venues, government buildings, or public transport hubs. There would be temperature scanners everywhere, and your workplace might demand you wear a monitor that tracks your temperature or other vital signs. Where nightclubs ask for proof of age, in future they might ask for proof of immunity—an identity card or some kind of digital verification via your phone, showing you’ve already recovered from or been vaccinated against the latest virus strains.”
Note that Lichfield suggested that in order to participate in the normal economy you might need to show verification that you have been “vaccinated against the latest virus strains”. In other words, the elites expect there to be many more viral events or mutations AFTER Covid 19 has run its course, and the restrictions and controls we see today are meant to continue, possibly FOREVER.
The reality is that the wave model is not a very practical plan for stopping viral spread, but it is a perfect method for conditioning people to submit to a high level of control over their personal lives that they never would have accepted otherwise. The Covid response has also been heralded by elites at the World Economic Forum as a perfect “opportunity” to initiate what they call the “Great Reset”. The reset is a plan to deconstruct what’s left of the free market capitalist system, introduce carbon controls in the name of the global warming fraud, institute a global cashless monetary system, and finally, move humanity into what they call a “shared economy” in which the average person is no longer allowed to own private property of any kind and is completely dependent on the system for their basic necessities.
Of course, such a complex system of “solutions” (dominance) over every individual would need to be managed in a highly centralized way. Meaning, global governance by the elitist establishment would be the end result. Naturally….the globalists would reluctantly take the reins of power for “the greater good”.
This is the bigger picture, the underlying threat at the core of the lockdowns and Covid laws. That said, there are also numerous arguments based on logic and evidence as to why there is no reason for people to submit to such restrictions. Let’s outline them in a simple list:
The Coronavirus Kills Less Than 1% Of The People It Infects
Medical studies in the US indicate that the coronavirus deaths rate for citizens NOT living in nursing homes has been holding well below 1% on average. The largest percentage of deaths by far in the US has been in nursing homes among elderly people with preexisting conditions. People in long term care facilities make up 8% of Covid infection cases but they are 45% of all covid deaths.
Pneumonia alone kills around 50,000 Americans each year according to the CDC, and that’s with vaccinations, yet, we are supposed to panic and hand over all our freedoms in the name of stopping a disease which affects a tiny percentage of the population? This is why the media and governments have decided to hyperfocus on infection numbers rather than deaths. The death numbers do not warrant the amount of panic the establishment is trying to foment.
Lockdowns Destroy The Economy
It’s basic math and finance; the small business sector of the US economy is dying. Small businesses make up around 50% of US employment. The Covid bailout money, handled by international banks like JP Morgan, did not get to the vast majority of small businesses that were supposed to receive it. Those businesses that did get bailouts are still on the verge of closure or bankruptcy. Any further lockdowns will be the final nail in the coffin for the US economy, except for major corporations which are enjoying the lion’s share of stimulus cash.
How many lives will be damaged or lost due to poverty and economic collapse if the current trend continues? I suspect far more than any lives lost because of Covid.
Why is no one in the mainstream talking about the most practical solution to the pandemic? The small percentage of people who are most at risk can STAY HOME and take precautions as necessary, while the rest of us get on with our lives. Why are we being ordered to do the exact opposite just to make less than 1% of the population feel safer? How is this logical, reasonable or scientific? The only answer that makes sense is that the lockdown response is about control, not saving lives.
State Governors Have No Authority To Take Away Your Civil Liberties, And Neither Does The President
Restrictions based on executive orders have no legal authority under the Constitution. They are color of law, not true law. Laws are debated and passed by state legislatures, not by state governors. Executive orders only apply to state employees and have no bearing on the citizenry.
Leftists and statists argue that during a national crisis the governor has emergency powers and states can do whatever they want. This is false. Under the constitution and the Bill of Rights, state governors do not get to proclaim a national emergency based on their personal opinion and then declare themselves dictators in response. Any “laws” exerted because of such a process are therefor null and void; they are meaningless.
If the states have the ability to do whatever they want without oversight, then they would be able to bring back Jim Crow laws (among other things). Do leftists support that idea as well? If the federal government and the president have the power to violate the Bill of Rights during a national emergency, then Donald Trump has the authority to bring in martial law across the country because of leftist riots. Do leftists agree with that outcome?
It is interesting to me that the political left in particular is so keen on defending the idea of states and governors having the power to unilaterally enforce pandemic restrictions without oversight or checks and balances. Yet, they have been aggressively opposed to state powers in the past when they had a Democratic president like Obama in office. The left has also been staunchly opposed to executive orders applied by Donald Trump, but they applaud the idea of executive orders on lockdowns being instituted by Biden.
So, leftists support unilateral state power only when it works in favor of their agenda, and they support unilateral federal and presidential power only when it works in favor of their agenda. What a surprise…
The bottom line is this: State government powers do not supersede the Bill of Rights. Federal government powers do not supersede the Bill of Rights. NO ONE has the legal power to take away your inherent liberties. Those that claim otherwise have something to gain from your enslavement.
Mask Laws Are Unscientific
The majority of masks being used by the public today are cloth masks. Not even the CDC recommends the use of cloth masks for their own employees or medical workers. They only recommend N95 masks. They also admit that cloth masks are much less effective at preventing contact with the virus. Yet, the CDC supports the enforcement of cloth masks for the public.
On top of that, some states and countries with the most stringent mask laws continue to see huge spikes in coronavirus infections. For example, New York has been one of the most tyrannical enforcers of mask laws and lockdowns in the US, but in November the state has witnessed extensive infection increases. California, Michigan and Illinois have also seen dramatic infection spikes this month despite hard enforcement of masks. So, where is the science?
It would appear that masks are a placebo; if they actually worked, then the states with the most aggressive enforcement should be seeing a dramatic downturn in cases, not exponential increases.
Furthermore, why are many states and countries trying to force citizens to wear masks outside in open air and sunlight when viruses cannot survive in such conditions? UV light from the sun is nature’s sterilizer, but no one in the mainstream or in government acknowledges this scientific fact. Again, this shows that mask laws are about control, not about science or saving lives.
Covid Vaccination Is Unnecessary And Potentially Dangerous
Why should people get vaccinated for a virus that over 99% of them will easily survive anyway? Why not simply attain “herd immunity” through natural infection spread and antibodies? The mainstream will continue to ignore these questions because they are inconvenient to the wider agenda.
Also, why should anyone trust a vaccine that was rushed out in less than a year’s time? China and the rest of the world spent over a decade trying to develop a vaccine for SARS unsuccessfully, but we are supposed to believe that they created a vaccine for SARS related Covid 19 within months?
The last time the government rushed out a vaccine for a viral epidemic was the 1976 swine flu scare, and that ended with numerous permanently damaged or dead individuals due to faulty vaccines.
As I noted in my article ‘Why The Public Should Rebel Against Forced Vaccinations’, published in May, there are numerous examples of vaccine tests and implementation going very wrong, from Bill Gates and the World Health Organization giving people polio in various countries through vaccines, to Novartis and their deadly testing of a Bird Flu vaccine on homeless people in Poland, to GlaxoSmithCline and the deaths of children due to their pneumonia vaccine.
Again, it’s simply not worth the risk over a virus that over 99% of people will survive. The idea of such risk being forced on the public is completely unacceptable, but many government officials have supported the idea over the past six months. It is important for the public to make it clear now that they will NOT be allowing state or federal governments to make vaccination mandatory.
Rebellion Is Needed To Put A Stop To The Fear Machine
In closing, there are endless reasons why we must end the pandemic lockdown agenda once and for all. Most importantly, the lockdowns, mask orders and vaccine plans are a stepping stone to something much worse – Medical tyranny and centralization on an unprecedented scale. I will not personally follow such rules because they are not scientifically or morally sound. They are nonsense designed to frighten the public into complacency and consent.
A rebellion against such measures would be very easy to win. All we have to do is refuse to follow their mandates. What are they going to do? Lock up millions of people? Shoot us? That would sort of defeat the supposed purpose of the very measures they demand we follow. And, if it comes to violence, so be it. I have no problem fighting to defend my freedoms and the freedoms of future generations. Perhaps it is time for conservatives and moderates that stand against the lockdowns to organize for this possible future.
**********
(TLB) published this article from Alt-Market.us with our appreciation to Brandon for this perspective.
If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch. Learn more about it HERE.
You can contact Brandon Smith at: [email protected]
••••
••••
Stay tuned to …
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.


thelibertybeacon--2020-11-19--Sidney Powell: Absent Software Fraud … Trump ‘Had At Least 80 Million Votes’

Sidney Powell , attorney extraordinaire , appeared on Newsmax ’ s Greg Kelly Reports on Tuesday to explain what happened on election day and tell why she believes that Trump almost certainly got more votes than any president in American history .
Because Greg Kelly asks the intelligent , clarifying questions that we wish all journalists would ask , her appearance on his show is one of the best explanations of what happened with the Dominion Voting Software .
According to Powell , “ Dominion has a long history of rigging elections .
That ’ s what it was created @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told about her whistleblower , a former high-ranking Venezuelan military officer who worked with Hugo Chavez when developers in Venezuela first created the software .
The whistleblower has signed an affidavit stating that the whole purpose behind the software ’ s creation was to rig elections .
The software worked as promised , according to Powell .
“ It was created… so Hugo Chavez would never lose another election , and he did not after that software was created .
He won every single election.
” Once the software proved its use , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ They exported it to Argentina and other countries in South America , and then they brought it here.
” Powell hammered home a point we ’ ve tried to make at American Thinker , which is that the software constitutes foreign interference in American elections .
To understand the point Powell makes , you need to know that , in September 2018 , Trump issued an “ Executive Order on Imposing Certain Sanctions in the Event of Foreign Interference in a United States Election.
” In the Order , Trump states @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and internet-based communications has created significant vulnerabilities and magnified the scope and intensity of the threat of foreign interference… ” Therefore , he declared a national emergency to justify his Order .
The Order mandates that the national security apparatus must investigate potential foreign interference within 45 days of an election and imposes harsh monetary sanctions on any foreign entity found to be involved in the interference .
Powell asserts that , because of Dominion ’ s origins , as well as its Canadian headquarters , “ It ’ s a foreign company @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , so they ’ ve already violated the president ’ s order against foreign interference in our elections .
Our votes were actually eventually counted in Barcelona , Spain , or Frankfurt , Germany , on foreign servers.
” Indeed , she says , “ the corruption is actually worldwide .
It is going to upset countless numbers of elections across the country and around the world.
” For Biden , Dominion ’ s comforting presence in the election explains why he didn ’ t bother to campaign .
He knew he had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – and this is me speaking , not Powell – Dominion ’ s role in the election also exonerates Trump from charges that he campaigned wrong because one person or another will say if he ’ d just campaigned the correct way ( more polite , less polite , more Hunter Biden , less Hunter Biden , more Wuhan virus lockdowns , etc . )
, he could have beaten the margin of fraud .
In fact , there was no way that Trump could beat the margin of fraud .
The traditional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cake .
The real election manipulation occurred at someone ’ s desktop ( as this older Bloomberg article explains about Latin American election fraud ) , with the person clicking away to ensure that Biden always ended the day with the greatest number of votes .
Powell explains specifically how Democrats rigged the vote for Biden .
It also explains why statisticians , when looking at votes counts in the swing states , are finding crazy anomalies after 3 a.m. , which is when those states temporarily stopped counting as they tried to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s massive lead .
“ The will of the people in this country , ” Powell told Kelly , “ was that Donald Trump won in a landslide .
If we can get to the bottom of it , and I am determined to do that , I think we ’ ll find he had at least 80 million votes .
The only reason the glitches happened in the system was because he was so far ahead , had so many more votes than they had calculated in advance , their algorithms wouldn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ d originally performed or were said to perform .
They couldn ’ t make up the vote count [ because ] he had gotten so many hundreds of thousands more than they planned .
So that ’ s why they had to stop the counting and come up with a way to backfill the votes or destroy votes for Trump while they fabricated votes for Biden.
” The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate , and for this we are grateful and excited !
But we must also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have not asked for any donations , and have built this project with our own funds as we grew .
We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent .
So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them .
Nothing is too small .
We thank you for all your support and your considerations … ( TLB )

Sidney Powell: Absent software fraud, Trump ‘had at least 80 million votes’
By: Andrea Widburg
Sidney Powell, attorney extraordinaire, appeared on Newsmax’s Greg Kelly Reports on Tuesday to explain what happened on election day and tell why she believes that Trump almost certainly got more votes than any president in American history. Because Greg Kelly asks the intelligent, clarifying questions that we wish all journalists would ask, her appearance on his show is one of the best explanations of what happened with the Dominion Voting Software.
According to Powell, “Dominion has a long history of rigging elections. That’s what it was created to do to begin with.” Powell told about her whistleblower, a former high-ranking Venezuelan military officer who worked with Hugo Chavez when developers in Venezuela first created the software. The whistleblower has signed an affidavit stating that the whole purpose behind the software’s creation was to rig elections.
The software worked as promised, according to Powell. “It was created… so Hugo Chavez would never lose another election, and he did not after that software was created. He won every single election.” Once the software proved its use, says, Powell, Venezuela exported it. “They exported it to Argentina and other countries in South America, and then they brought it here.”
Powell hammered home a point we’ve tried to make at American Thinker, which is that the software constitutes foreign interference in American elections. To understand the point Powell makes, you need to know that, in September 2018, Trump issued an “Executive Order on Imposing Certain Sanctions in the Event of Foreign Interference in a United States Election.”
In the Order, Trump states that “the proliferation of digital devices and internet-based communications has created significant vulnerabilities and magnified the scope and intensity of the threat of foreign interference…” Therefore, he declared a national emergency to justify his Order. The Order mandates that the national security apparatus must investigate potential foreign interference within 45 days of an election and imposes harsh monetary sanctions on any foreign entity found to be involved in the interference.
Powell asserts that, because of Dominion’s origins, as well as its Canadian headquarters, “It’s a foreign company no matter how you look at it, so they’ve already violated the president’s order against foreign interference in our elections. Our votes were actually eventually counted in Barcelona, Spain, or Frankfurt, Germany, on foreign servers.” Indeed, she says, “the corruption is actually worldwide. It is going to upset countless numbers of elections across the country and around the world.”
For Biden, Dominion’s comforting presence in the election explains why he didn’t bother to campaign. He knew he had the election in the bag. Incidentally – and this is me speaking, not Powell – Dominion’s role in the election also exonerates Trump from charges that he campaigned wrong because one person or another will say if he’d just campaigned the correct way (more polite, less polite, more Hunter Biden, less Hunter Biden, more Wuhan virus lockdowns, etc.), he could have beaten the margin of fraud.
In fact, there was no way that Trump could beat the margin of fraud. The traditional pre-election fraud was just icing on the cake. The real election manipulation occurred at someone’s desktop (as this older Bloomberg article explains about Latin American election fraud), with the person clicking away to ensure that Biden always ended the day with the greatest number of votes.
Powell explains specifically how Democrats rigged the vote for Biden. It also explains why statisticians, when looking at votes counts in the swing states, are finding crazy anomalies after 3 a.m., which is when those states temporarily stopped counting as they tried to figure out how to fight Trump’s massive lead.
“The will of the people in this country,” Powell told Kelly, “was that Donald Trump won in a landslide. If we can get to the bottom of it, and I am determined to do that, I think we’ll find he had at least 80 million votes. The only reason the glitches happened in the system was because he was so far ahead, had so many more votes than they had calculated in advance, their algorithms wouldn’t perform the functions they’d originally performed or were said to perform. They couldn’t make up the vote count [because] he had gotten so many hundreds of thousands more than they planned. So that’s why they had to stop the counting and come up with a way to backfill the votes or destroy votes for Trump while they fabricated votes for Biden.”
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.


thelibertybeacon--2020-11-19--Is the First COVID-19 Vaccine 90 Percent Effective?

With more than 180 COVID-19 vaccines currently in development1 — 53 of them undergoing clinical trials in humans2 — manufacturers are racing to be the first to reach the market .
Pfizer , in a joint venture with Germany-based BioNTech , may have just taken the lead , with an announcement that their mRNA-based vaccine candidate , BNT162b2 , was “ more than 90 % effective ” in a Phase 3 trial.3 BNT162b2 was selected to move forward to a Phase 2/3 trial after an earlier version of the vaccine , BNT162b1— another mRNA-based vaccine candidate — resulted in considerable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 50 % of individuals who received the highest dose ( 100 micrograms ) , fatigue , headache and chills .
Side effects were even more common following the booster dose , after which more than 70 % of participants experienced a fever at the mid-range ( 30 microgram ) dose .
In fact , those in the high-dose group didn ’ t even get the booster dose after the side effects were deemed to be potentially too severe .
While the vaccines are similar , with the BNT162b2 vaccine , mRNA encodes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protein is a glycoprotein protruding from the envelope of a coronavirus that allows entry into the cell.5 In an earlier study , while BNT162b2 appeared to cause fewer side effects , antibody titers were lower in a group of older individuals , ranging in age from 65 to 95 years , than in younger individuals.6 Geometric mean titers ( GMTs ) , which are used as a measure of immune response , were about 40 % lower among older individuals given Pfizer ’ s BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine than they were in younger age @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s the older individuals who are most at risk from severe COVID-19 .
In a Phase 3 efficacy trial , a vaccine is given to thousands of people , while researchers wait to see how many end up infected compared to those given a placebo.7 Pfizer ’ s Phase 3 clinical trial began July 27 , 2020 and enrolled 43,538 participants8 to date ranging in age from 12 years to over 55 , with a minimum of 40 % of participants in the over 55 age range.9 Participants received either a two-dose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 30-microgram dose 21 days apart , or a placebo .
Initially an interim analysis was set to be conducted after 32 COVID-19 cases , but “ after discussion with the FDA , ” they increased it to after a minimum of 62 cases .
According to Dr. Albert Bourla , Pfizer Chairman and CEO , in a press release:10 Bourla added the caveat , “ As the study continues , the final vaccine efficacy percentage may vary.
” In fact , there are many questions that remain unanswered regarding the reported 90 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a clinical protocol of its trial,11 data for the interim analysis have not been released .
“ This is science by public pronouncement , ” William Haseltine , an infectious disease expert and former Harvard medical professor , told Business Insider.12 In September 2020 , Haseltine criticized COVID-19 vaccine trials , including Pfizer ’ s , saying their protocols reveal that they ’ re “ designed to prove their vaccines work , even if the measured effects are minimal.
” 13 He points out that prevention of infection is a critical endpoint in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of infection is not a criterion for success for COVID-19 vaccines in development by Pfizer , Moderna , AstraZeneca or Johnson & Johnson .
According to Haseltine:14 He also explains that while most people expect that a vaccine will prevent serious illness in the event they ’ re infected , “ Three of the vaccine protocols — Moderna , Pfizer , and AstraZeneca — do not require that their vaccine prevent serious disease only that they prevent moderate symptoms which may be as mild as cough , or headache.
” 15 While Pfizer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 90 % effective based on 94 cases in their trial , “ There are many , many outstanding questions which are left unanswered , ” Haseltine said.16 One of the main unanswered questions has to do with asymptomatic infections , which aren ’ t regularly being tested for in Pfizer ’ s trial .
It ’ s possible , then , that those who have been vaccinated could still be asymptomatic carriers of COVID-19 , spreading the disease to others .
“ That ’ s a major point that I don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told Business Insider .
“ It doesn ’ t mean an end to the epidemic.
” 17 It ’ s also unknown whether the vaccine reduced the number of cases of serious disease , hospitalizations and deaths , as no distinction was made between serious COVID-19 cases and those causing only minor symptoms .
Also missing from Pfizer ’ s press release is how the vaccine fared in different age groups , a key data point since older people are those most at risk of serious disease outcomes .
It also remains to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by a vaccine may last , as the study just began in July .
As for side effects , Pfizer ’ s Bourla said , “ The DMC has not reported any serious safety concerns and recommends that the study continue to collect additional safety and efficacy data as planned.
” 18 Again , however , it ’ s far too soon to know whether the vaccine is safe .
The timeline of the experimental COVID-19 vaccine is unprecedented as , on average , it can take 10 to 12 years for a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the normal licensing process.19 “ We don ’ t know anything about groups they didn ’ t study , like children , pregnant women , highly immunocompromised people and the eldest of the elderly , ” Dr. Gregory Poland , director of the Mayo Clinic ’ s Vaccine Research Group in Rochester , Minnesota , told NBC News.20 As for potential adverse effects , in their clinical protocol Pfizer listed the following , noting that the first five participants in each group in phase 1 would be monitored for four hours after vaccination @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would be observed for “ at least 30 minutes.
” 21 Even Pfizer acknowledged in their clinical protocol that COVID-19 disease enhancement is a real risk following certain vaccinations.22 In what ’ s known as antibody-dependent enhancement , or ADE , or sometimes called paradoxical immune enhancement ( PIE ) .
In these scenarios rather than enhance your immunity against the infection , the vaccine enhances the virus ’ ability to enter and infect your cells , resulting in more severe disease than had you not been vaccinated.23 Th2 immunopathology , in which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ response , triggering allergic inflammation , poorly functional antibodies and airway damage , is another serious risk .
Both ADE and Th2 immunopathology occurred in the 1960s when a vaccination for respiratory syncytial virus ( RSV ) was being developed , resulting in the death of two toddlers and serious illness in several other children who received the experimental vaccine.24 Similar concerns again surfaced in testing for a potential vaccine against another coronavirus , SARS , about 20 years ago .
At the time , even long-time pro-vaccine advocate Dr. Peter Hotez , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Medicine and professor of pediatrics and molecular virology and microbiology at Baylor College of Medicine , was shaken .
According to a feature published in PNAS:25 Despite years of additional research and alternative development strategies , immune enhancement concerns remain , and , as explained by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in our 2020 interview , coronavirus vaccines remain notorious for creating paradoxical immune enhancement .
Pfizer ’ s COVID-19 vaccine is relying on novel mRNA technology that has never previously been used in vaccines.26 It essentially instructs your cells to make the SARS-CoV-2 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the ACE2 receptor of the cell .
This is the first stage of the two-stage process viruses use to gain entry into cells .
The idea is that by creating the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein , your immune system will be stimulated to produce antibodies , without making you sick in the process .
However , another key question that needs to be answered is which of two types of antibodies are produced through this process .
Coronaviruses produce both neutralizing antibodies,27 also referred to as immoglobulin G ( IgG ) antibodies , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ antibodies28 ( also known as nonneutralizing antibodies ) that can not prevent viral infection .
Instead of preventing viral infection , binding antibodies can trigger an abnormal immune response like ADE or PIE .
In trials of Moderna ’ s experimental COVID mRNA vaccine , 25 participants who received two doses of its low or medium dose vaccine had levels of binding antibodies — the type that are used by the immune system to fight the virus but do not prevent viral infections — at levels approximating or exceeding those found in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Data for the more significant neutralizing antibodies , which stop viruses from entering cells , were reported for only eight people .
Pfizer Has $ 1.95 Billion Deal With US Government While the results of Pfizer ’ s Phase 3 trial remain murky , as part of Operation Warp Speed the drug giant has already struck a $ 1.95 billion deal with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Defense to provide Americans with 100 million doses of its COVID-19 vaccine after it is licensed — at no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for 500 million additional doses.30 The agreement is part of Operation Warp Speed .
Pfizer and BioNTech also have a deal with the U.K. government for 30 million initial doses.31 The FDA ’ s guidance for a vaccine to receive Emergency Use Authorization requires only a median of two months of safety data following the second dose , which Pfizer expects to have by the third week of November .
At that point , they ’ re hoping to bring the experimental vaccine to market , with promises to produce up to 50 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to 1.3 billion doses , globally , in 2021.32 Upon Pfizer ’ s announcement that their vaccine showed 90 % effectiveness , shares rose 16 % .
The next day , CEO Bourla sold 62 % of his stock , an amount worth about $ 5.6 million.33 Does the Pfizer CEO know something we don ’ t ?
If and when the vaccine does become available , be sure to carefully weigh the risks versus the benefits before making a choice of whether or not to receive it .
It may help in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re under the age of 40 , your risk of dying from COVID-19 is just 0.01 % , meaning you have a 99.99 % chance of surviving the infection34 — and you could improve that to 99.999 % if you ’ re metabolically flexible and vitamin D replete .

First COVID-19 Vaccine 90% Effective? Story at-a-glance Pfizer, in a joint venture with BioNTech, announced that their mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine candidate, BNT162b2, was “more than 90% effective” in a Phase 3 trial
While Pfizer did release a clinical protocol of its trial, it only issued a press release; data for the interim analysis has not been peer reviewed or published
Infectious disease expert William Haseltine criticized COVID-19 vaccine trials, including Pfizer’s, saying their protocols reveal that they’re “designed to prove their vaccines work, even if the measured effects are minimal”
Asymptomatic infections aren’t regularly being tested for in Pfizer’s trial, so it’s possible that those who have been vaccinated could still be asymptomatic carriers of COVID-19, spreading the disease to others
Also missing from Pfizer’s press release is how the vaccine fared in different age groups, a key data point since older people are those most at risk of serious disease outcomes
There is concern that COVID-19 vaccines could cause antibody-dependent enhancement, or ADE, in which the vaccine enhances the virus’ ability to enter and infect your cells, resulting in more severe disease than had you not been vaccinated
It’s far too soon to know whether the vaccine is safe, as, on average, it can take 10 to 12 years for a vaccine to be developed and go through the normal licensing process
••••

••••
With more than 180 COVID-19 vaccines currently in development1 — 53 of them undergoing clinical trials in humans2 — manufacturers are racing to be the first to reach the market. Pfizer, in a joint venture with Germany-based BioNTech, may have just taken the lead, with an announcement that their mRNA-based vaccine candidate, BNT162b2, was “more than 90% effective” in a Phase 3 trial.3
BNT162b2 was selected to move forward to a Phase 2/3 trial after an earlier version of the vaccine, BNT162b1— another mRNA-based vaccine candidate — resulted in considerable adverse events,4 including fever, which occurred in 50% of individuals who received the highest dose (100 micrograms), fatigue, headache and chills.
Side effects were even more common following the booster dose, after which more than 70% of participants experienced a fever at the mid-range (30 microgram) dose. In fact, those in the high-dose group didn’t even get the booster dose after the side effects were deemed to be potentially too severe.
While the vaccines are similar, with the BNT162b2 vaccine, mRNA encodes the full-length spike protein. A spike protein is a glycoprotein protruding from the envelope of a coronavirus that allows entry into the cell.5 In an earlier study, while BNT162b2 appeared to cause fewer side effects, antibody titers were lower in a group of older individuals, ranging in age from 65 to 95 years, than in younger individuals.6
Geometric mean titers (GMTs), which are used as a measure of immune response, were about 40% lower among older individuals given Pfizer’s BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine than they were in younger age groups, a concerning finding considering it’s the older individuals who are most at risk from severe COVID-19.
Is Pfizer’s COVID Vaccine Really 90% Effective?
In a Phase 3 efficacy trial, a vaccine is given to thousands of people, while researchers wait to see how many end up infected compared to those given a placebo.7 Pfizer’s Phase 3 clinical trial began July 27, 2020 and enrolled 43,538 participants8 to date ranging in age from 12 years to over 55, with a minimum of 40% of participants in the over 55 age range.9
Participants received either a two-dose series of BNT162b2, given at the 30-microgram dose 21 days apart, or a placebo. Initially an interim analysis was set to be conducted after 32 COVID-19 cases, but “after discussion with the FDA,” they increased it to after a minimum of 62 cases. According to Dr. Albert Bourla, Pfizer Chairman and CEO, in a press release:10
“Upon the conclusion of those discussions, the evaluable case count reached 94 and the DMC (Data Monitoring Committee) performed its first analysis on all cases.
The case split between vaccinated individuals and those who received the placebo indicates a vaccine efficacy rate above 90%, at 7 days after the second dose. This means that protection is achieved 28 days after the initiation of the vaccination, which consists of a 2-dose schedule.”
Bourla added the caveat, “As the study continues, the final vaccine efficacy percentage may vary.” In fact, there are many questions that remain unanswered regarding the reported 90% efficacy rate.
While Pfizer did release a clinical protocol of its trial,11 data for the interim analysis have not been released. “This is science by public pronouncement,” William Haseltine, an infectious disease expert and former Harvard medical professor, told Business Insider.12
COVID-19 Vaccine Trials ‘Designed to Succeed’
In September 2020, Haseltine criticized COVID-19 vaccine trials, including Pfizer’s, saying their protocols reveal that they’re “designed to prove their vaccines work, even if the measured effects are minimal.”13
He points out that prevention of infection is a critical endpoint in a normal vaccine trial, but prevention of infection is not a criterion for success for COVID-19 vaccines in development by Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca or Johnson & Johnson. According to Haseltine:14
“Any vaccine trial should include regular antigen testing every three days to test contagiousness to pick up early signs of infection and PCR testing once a week to confirm infection by SARS-CoV-2 test the ability of the vaccines to stave off infection. Prevention of infection is not a criterion for success for any of these vaccines.
In fact, their endpoints all require confirmed infections and all those they will include in the analysis for success, the only difference being the severity of symptoms between the vaccinated and unvaccinated. Measuring differences amongst only those infected by SARS-CoV-2 underscores the implicit conclusion that the vaccines are not expected to prevent infection, only modify symptoms of those infected.”
He also explains that while most people expect that a vaccine will prevent serious illness in the event they’re infected, “Three of the vaccine protocols — Moderna, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca — do not require that their vaccine prevent serious disease only that they prevent moderate symptoms which may be as mild as cough, or headache.”15
Pfizer Didn’t Release Key Vaccine Data
While Pfizer is touting its vaccine as more than 90% effective based on 94 cases in their trial, “There are many, many outstanding questions which are left unanswered,” Haseltine said.16
One of the main unanswered questions has to do with asymptomatic infections, which aren’t regularly being tested for in Pfizer’s trial. It’s possible, then, that those who have been vaccinated could still be asymptomatic carriers of COVID-19, spreading the disease to others.
“That’s a major point that I don’t think most people appreciate,” Haseltine told Business Insider. “It doesn’t mean an end to the epidemic.”17 It’s also unknown whether the vaccine reduced the number of cases of serious disease, hospitalizations and deaths, as no distinction was made between serious COVID-19 cases and those causing only minor symptoms.
Also missing from Pfizer’s press release is how the vaccine fared in different age groups, a key data point since older people are those most at risk of serious disease outcomes. It also remains to be seen how long any protection offered by a vaccine may last, as the study just began in July.
As for side effects, Pfizer’s Bourla said, “The DMC has not reported any serious safety concerns and recommends that the study continue to collect additional safety and efficacy data as planned.”18 Again, however, it’s far too soon to know whether the vaccine is safe. The timeline of the experimental COVID-19 vaccine is unprecedented as, on average, it can take 10 to 12 years for a vaccine to be developed and go through the normal licensing process.19
“We don’t know anything about groups they didn’t study, like children, pregnant women, highly immunocompromised people and the eldest of the elderly,” Dr. Gregory Poland, director of the Mayo Clinic’s Vaccine Research Group in Rochester, Minnesota, told NBC News.20
As for potential adverse effects, in their clinical protocol Pfizer listed the following, noting that the first five participants in each group in phase 1 would be monitored for four hours after vaccination to assess adverse effects, while others would be observed for “at least 30 minutes.”21
Injection site redness, swelling and pain Fever Fatigue Headache Chills Vomiting Diarrhea Muscle pain Joint pain Unknown adverse effects and laboratory abnormalities associated with a novel vaccine Potential for increased exposure to SARS-CoV-2 because of the requirement to visit health care facilities during the trial COVID-19 enhancement, stating, “Disease enhancement has been seen following vaccination with respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), feline coronavirus, and Dengue virus vaccines.”
Coronavirus Vaccines May Enhance Disease
Even Pfizer acknowledged in their clinical protocol that COVID-19 disease enhancement is a real risk following certain vaccinations.22 In what’s known as antibody-dependent enhancement, or ADE, or sometimes called paradoxical immune enhancement (PIE). In these scenarios rather than enhance your immunity against the infection, the vaccine enhances the virus’ ability to enter and infect your cells, resulting in more severe disease than had you not been vaccinated.23
Th2 immunopathology, in which a vaccine induces a faulty T cell response, triggering allergic inflammation, poorly functional antibodies and airway damage, is another serious risk.
Both ADE and Th2 immunopathology occurred in the 1960s when a vaccination for respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) was being developed, resulting in the death of two toddlers and serious illness in several other children who received the experimental vaccine.24
Similar concerns again surfaced in testing for a potential vaccine against another coronavirus, SARS, about 20 years ago. At the time, even long-time pro-vaccine advocate Dr. Peter Hotez, dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine and professor of pediatrics and molecular virology and microbiology at Baylor College of Medicine, was shaken. According to a feature published in PNAS:25
“When SARS, also a coronavirus, appeared in China and spread globally nearly two decades ago, Hotez was among researchers who began investigating a potential vaccine.
In early tests of his candidate, he witnessed how immune cells of vaccinated animals attacked lung tissue, in much the same way that the RSV vaccine had resulted in immune cells attacking kids’ lungs. ‘I thought, ‘Oh crap,’’ he recalls, noting his initial fear that a safe vaccine may again not be possible.”
Despite years of additional research and alternative development strategies, immune enhancement concerns remain, and, as explained by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in our 2020 interview, coronavirus vaccines remain notorious for creating paradoxical immune enhancement.
mRNA Is a Novel Vaccine Technology
Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine is relying on novel mRNA technology that has never previously been used in vaccines.26 It essentially instructs your cells to make the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, which is what attaches to the ACE2 receptor of the cell. This is the first stage of the two-stage process viruses use to gain entry into cells.
The idea is that by creating the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, your immune system will be stimulated to produce antibodies, without making you sick in the process. However, another key question that needs to be answered is which of two types of antibodies are produced through this process.
Coronaviruses produce both neutralizing antibodies,27 also referred to as immoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies, that fight the infection, and binding antibodies28 (also known as nonneutralizing antibodies) that cannot prevent viral infection. Instead of preventing viral infection, binding antibodies can trigger an abnormal immune response like ADE or PIE.
In trials of Moderna’s experimental COVID mRNA vaccine, 25 participants who received two doses of its low or medium dose vaccine had levels of binding antibodies — the type that are used by the immune system to fight the virus but do not prevent viral infections — at levels approximating or exceeding those found in the blood of patients who recovered from COVID-19.29
Data for the more significant neutralizing antibodies, which stop viruses from entering cells, were reported for only eight people.
Pfizer Has $1.95 Billion Deal With US Government
While the results of Pfizer’s Phase 3 trial remain murky, as part of Operation Warp Speed the drug giant has already struck a $1.95 billion deal with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Defense to provide Americans with 100 million doses of its COVID-19 vaccine after it is licensed — at no cost to recipients — with an option for 500 million additional doses.30 The agreement is part of Operation Warp Speed.
Pfizer and BioNTech also have a deal with the U.K. government for 30 million initial doses.31 The FDA’s guidance for a vaccine to receive Emergency Use Authorization requires only a median of two months of safety data following the second dose, which Pfizer expects to have by the third week of November.
At that point, they’re hoping to bring the experimental vaccine to market, with promises to produce up to 50 million vaccine doses in 2020 and up to 1.3 billion doses, globally, in 2021.32 Upon Pfizer’s announcement that their vaccine showed 90% effectiveness, shares rose 16%. The next day, CEO Bourla sold 62% of his stock, an amount worth about $5.6 million.33
Does the Pfizer CEO know something we don’t? If and when the vaccine does become available, be sure to carefully weigh the risks versus the benefits before making a choice of whether or not to receive it.
It may help in your decision to know that if you’re under the age of 40, your risk of dying from COVID-19 is just 0.01%, meaning you have a 99.99% chance of surviving the infection34 — and you could improve that to 99.999% if you’re metabolically flexible and vitamin D replete.
••••
Sources and References:


thelibertybeacon--2020-11-19--‘Merkel Must Go, Democracy Must Stay!’ Anti-lockdown Protesters Rally in Central Berlin (VIDEO)

ER Editor : We ’ re witnessing the classic government move , of taking temporary emergency measures over whatever ( manufactured ) crisis – health , terrorism , etc .
– and putting them into regular law , where governments suddenly have a much broader range of liberty-destroying powers available to them as and when they decide to use them .
‘ Merkel must go , democracy must stay !
’ Anti-lockdown protesters detained at rally in central Berlin ( VIDEO ) Protesters have taken to the streets in downtown Berlin to denounce a bill that would enshrine lockdown measures @ @ @ @ @ @ @ several people and deployed water cannons when the crowd refused to leave .
One person carried a banner with the words “ Merkel must go , democracy must stay !
” referring to Chancellor Angela Merkel .
Barricades were set up to prevent protesters from getting too close to the Bundestag .
The police were filmed detaining several people .
Officers complained that some demonstrators were violating Covid-19 restrictions by not wearing masks , and warned that “ the use of water cannon can not be ruled out ” if they had to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ later deployed when protesters refused to leave .
Officials had previously rejected a dozen applications to rally outside the parliament building .
In a letter to MPs obtained by the media , the police warned about possible “ attacks ” on the Bundestag .
There were attempts to break into the building during a similar demonstration in August .
Lawmakers are expected to pass a bill on Wednesday that would write a long list of concrete quarantine measures , such as mask-wearing and social distancing rules , into the country ’ s existing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government argues that the change is necessary if there is to be a robust response to the Covid-19 pandemic .
Critics say the bill was put forward in a rushed manner and would give the government too much power in regulating the lives of ordinary people .
Germany has been living under a month-long nationwide lockdown since November 2 .
People are being encouraged to stay home , restaurants and bars remain closed , and public meetings are limited to just two households of up to 10 people in total .
The tougher @ @ @ @ @ @ @ growing coronavirus infection rate .
Published to The Liberty Beacon from EuropeReloaded.com The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate , and for this we are grateful and excited !
But we must also be practical .
For 7 years we have not asked for any donations , and have built this project with our own funds as we grew .
We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent .
So we have just installed donation buttons on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this when you visit them .
Nothing is too small .
We thank you for all your support and your considerations … ( TLB ) Comment Policy : As a privately owned web site , we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam , advertising , vulgarity , threats of violence , racism , or personal/abusive attacks on other users .
This also applies to trolling , the use of more than one alias , or just intentional mischief .
Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or permanently banned without prior warning .
Disclaimer : TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner .
We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “ fair use ” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political , health , economic and social issues .
The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes .
If you wish @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than “ fair use ” you must request permission from the copyright owner .
Disclaimer : The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including , but not limited to , text , graphics , images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction .
Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice , diagnosis or treatment .

ER Editor: We’re witnessing the classic government move, of taking temporary emergency measures over whatever (manufactured) crisis – health, terrorism, etc. – and putting them into regular law, where governments suddenly have a much broader range of liberty-destroying powers available to them as and when they decide to use them.
********
‘Merkel must go, democracy must stay!’ Anti-lockdown protesters detained at rally in central Berlin (VIDEO)
Protesters have taken to the streets in downtown Berlin to denounce a bill that would enshrine lockdown measures into German law. The police detained several people and deployed water cannons when the crowd refused to leave.
.
Thousands have gathered at the iconic Brandenburg Gate, which is located in the heart of Berlin, near the country’s parliament building, the Bundestag. Protesters held signs reading “Wake Up,”“Free Speech,” and “For Enlightenment. Peace and Freedom.”
One person carried a banner with the words “Merkel must go, democracy must stay!” referring to Chancellor Angela Merkel. Barricades were set up to prevent protesters from getting too close to the Bundestag. The police were filmed detaining several people. Officers complained that some demonstrators were violating Covid-19 restrictions by not wearing masks, and warned that “the use of water cannon cannot be ruled out” if they had to disperse the crowd. Water cannons were later deployed when protesters refused to leave. Officials had previously rejected a dozen applications to rally outside the parliament building. In a letter to MPs obtained by the media, the police warned about possible “attacks” on the Bundestag. There were attempts to break into the building during a similar demonstration in August. Lawmakers are expected to pass a bill on Wednesday that would write a long list of concrete quarantine measures, such as mask-wearing and social distancing rules, into the country’s existing law on protection from infections. The government argues that the change is necessary if there is to be a robust response to the Covid-19 pandemic. Critics say the bill was put forward in a rushed manner and would give the government too much power in regulating the lives of ordinary people. Germany has been living under a month-long nationwide lockdown since November 2. People are being encouraged to stay home, restaurants and bars remain closed, and public meetings are limited to just two households of up to 10 people in total. The tougher measures were introduced in response to the growing coronavirus infection rate. ************ Source Published to The Liberty Beacon from EuropeReloaded.com
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.


thelibertybeacon--2020-11-19--Portuguese Court Rules PCR Tests As Unreliable & Unlawful To Quarantine People

The court stated , the test ’ s reliability depends on the number of cycles used and the viral load present .
Citing Jaafar et al .
2020 , the court concludes that The court further notes that the cycle threshold used for the PCR tests currently being made in Portugal is unknown .
The threshold cycles used in PCR tests in India is between 37 and 40 , which makes the reliability of the PCR test less than 3 % and the false positive rate as high as 97 % .
This case concerned the fact that four people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Authority .
Of these , one had tested positive for COVID using a PCR test ; the other three were deemed to have undergone a high risk of exposure .
Consequently , the Regional Health Authority decided that all four were infectious and a health hazard , which required that they go into isolation .
A Portuguese professor and lockdown sceptic has sent me a long and informative email about a recent ruling by the Portuguese Court of Appeal which casts doubt on the reliability of the PCR test .
It is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Portuguese legal system that the Court seems to understand in considerable detail the shortcomings of the PCR test as a diagnostic tool , particularly when not used in combination with a clinical diagnosis .
I think this is the best news I ’ ve had all week .
What follows is not the whole email .
The professor doesn ’ t want to be identified , so I ’ m only publishing an extract .
With Spain and Greece , Portugal is one of the few countries in the so-called West where enough @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a dictatorship looks like .
Our numbers are dwindling , as you have to be at least 60 to have experienced the 1974 revolution in any meaningful manner .
I was a teenager at the time , and I remember very well what daily life was like under censorship , massively lying mass media , police brutality , arbitrary detention in the name of the “ national interest ” , etc .
— all those things that I hoped never again have to experience but that the current Covid climate has brought very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Yet , it may well be exactly because of such things having happened in living memory that our Government has been less heavy-handed about the pandemic than most others in Europe .
And , now to the point , maybe that ’ s also why our high courts have issued rulings of potentially devastating consequences for the current Covid narrative .
Portugal is a small country but is part of the EU and so what happens here still is of some international significance .
That ’ s why I thought you ’ d @ @ @ @ @ @ @ developments .
In a recent decision , dated November 11 , 2020 , a Portuguese appeal court ruled against the Azores Regional Health Authority concerning a lower court decision to declare unlawful the quarantining of four persons .
Of these , one had tested positive for Covid using a PCR test ; the other three were deemed to have undergone a high risk of exposure .
Consequently , the Regional Health Authority decided that all four were infectious and a health hazard , which required that they go into isolation .
The lower @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and the appeal court upheld that ruling with arguments that explicitly endorse the scientific case for the lack of reliability of the PCR tests ( e.g.
, as extensively explained in Lockdown Skeptics by Dr. Mike Yeadon , Dr. Clare Craig and others ) .
The court ’ s ruling is a long text .
I provide below a summary of the key passage .
The court ’ s main points are as follows : • A medical diagnosis is a medical act that only a physician is legally qualified to undertake @ @ @ @ @ @ @ solely and entirely responsible .
No other person or institution , including government agencies or the courts , has such an authority .
It is not up to the Azores Regional Health Authority to declare someone ill , or a health hazard .
Only a physician can do that .
No one can be declared ill or a health hazard by decree or law , nor as the automatic , administrative consequence of the outcome of a laboratory test , no matter which .
• From the above , the court concludes that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ medical observation of the patient , with no participation of a physician certified by the Ordem dos Médicos who would have assessed symptoms and requested the tests/exams deemed necessary , any act of diagnosis , or any act of public health vigilance ( such as determining whether a viral infection or a high risk of exposure exist , which the aforementioned concepts subsume ) will violate [ a number of laws and regulations ] and may configure a crime of usurpação de funções [ unlawful practice of a profession ] in the case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by someone devoid of the capacity to do so , i.e.
, by someone who is not a certified physician [ to practice medicine in Portugal a degree is not enough , you need to be accepted as qualified to practice medicine by undergoing examination with the Ordem dos Médicos , roughly our equivalent of the UK ’ s Royal College of Physicians ] .
” • In addition , the court rules that the Azores Health Authority violated article 6 of the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights , as it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ consent mandated by said Declaration had been given by the PCR-tested persons who had complained against the forced quarantine measures imposed on them .
• From the facts presented to the court , it concluded that no evidentiary proof or even indication existed that the four persons in question had been seen by a doctor , either before or after undertaking the test .
The above would suffice to deem the forced quarantine of the four persons unlawful .
The court thought it necessary , however , to add some very interesting considerations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Based on the currently available scientific evidence this test [ the RT-PCR test ] is in and of itself unable to determine beyond reasonable doubt that positivity in fact corresponds to infection by the SARS-CoV-2 virus , for several reasons , among which two are paramount ( to which one would need to add the issue of the gold standard , which , due to that issue ’ s specificity , will not be considered here ) : the test ’ s reliability depends on the number of cycles used ; the test @ @ @ @ @ @ @ load present.
” • Citing Jaafar et al .
( 2020 ; ) , the court concludes that “ if someone is tested by PCR as positive when a threshold of 35 cycles or higher is used ( as is the rule in most laboratories in Europe and the US ) , the probability that said person is infected is < 3 % , and the probability that said result is a false positive is 97 % .
” The court further notes that the cycle threshold used for the PCR tests currently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ N.B .
– I know from acquaintances that in at least some Portuguese labs the threshold is 35 cycles ] .
• Citing Surkova et al .
( 2020 ) ) , the court further states that any diagnostic test must be interpreted in the context of the actual probability of disease as assessed prior to the undertaking of the test itself , and expresses the opinion that “ in the current epidemiological landscape of the United Kingdom , the likelihood is increasing that Covid 19 tests are returning false positives , with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ system and society .
” The court ’ s summary of the case to rule against the Regional Health Authority ’ s appeal reads as follows : • “ Given how much scientific doubt exists — as voiced by experts , i.e.
, those who matter — about the reliability of the PCR tests , given the lack of information concerning the tests ’ analytical parameters , and in the absence of a physician ’ s diagnosis supporting the existence of infection or risk , there is no way this court would ever @ @ @ @ @ @ @ indeed a carrier of the SARS-CoV-2 virus , or whether A , B and D had been at a high risk of exposure to it.
” I anticipate this ruling to have massive legal implications in my country .
Note that it comes on the back of a previous ruling by the Constitutional Court , our highest court , declaring as an unlawful deprivation of liberty a decision by the Regional Government of the Azores to force into a 14-day quarantine every passenger landing in an airport of the territory .
Stop Press @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to say he ’ s looked at the NHS definitions for the terms used in the monthly data analysed by my doctor friend yesterday and uncovered the following gem :

The court stated, the test’s reliability depends on the number of cycles used and the viral load present. Citing Jaafar et al. 2020, the court concludes that
“if someone is tested by PCR as positive when a threshold of 35 cycles or higher is used (as is the rule in most laboratories in Europe and the US), the probability that said person is infected is less than 3%, and the probability that said result is a false positive is 97%.”
The court further notes that the cycle threshold used for the PCR tests currently being made in Portugal is unknown.
The threshold cycles used in PCR tests in India is between 37 and 40, which makes the reliability of the PCR test less than 3% and the false positive rate as high as 97%.
This case concerned the fact that four people had been quarantined by the Regional Health Authority. Of these, one had tested positive for COVID using a PCR test; the other three were deemed to have undergone a high risk of exposure. Consequently, the Regional Health Authority decided that all four were infectious and a health hazard, which required that they go into isolation.
********
Portuguese Appeals Court Deems PCR tests unreliable
LOCKDOWN SCEPTICS
A Portuguese professor and lockdown sceptic has sent me a long and informative email about a recent ruling by the Portuguese Court of Appeal which casts doubt on the reliability of the PCR test. It is a great tribute to the integrity of the Portuguese legal system that the Court seems to understand in considerable detail the shortcomings of the PCR test as a diagnostic tool, particularly when not used in combination with a clinical diagnosis. I think this is the best news I’ve had all week. What follows is not the whole email. The professor doesn’t want to be identified, so I’m only publishing an extract.
With Spain and Greece, Portugal is one of the few countries in the so-called West where enough people are still alive to know what a dictatorship looks like.
Our numbers are dwindling, as you have to be at least 60 to have experienced the 1974 revolution in any meaningful manner. I was a teenager at the time, and I remember very well what daily life was like under censorship, massively lying mass media, police brutality, arbitrary detention in the name of the “national interest”, etc. — all those things that I hoped never again have to experience but that the current Covid climate has brought very, very vividly to the fore. Yet, it may well be exactly because of such things having happened in living memory that our Government has been less heavy-handed about the pandemic than most others in Europe. And, now to the point, maybe that’s also why our high courts have issued rulings of potentially devastating consequences for the current Covid narrative. Portugal is a small country but is part of the EU and so what happens here still is of some international significance. That’s why I thought you’d be interested in learning about some recent developments.
In a recent decision, dated November 11, 2020, a Portuguese appeal court ruled against the Azores Regional Health Authority concerning a lower court decision to declare unlawful the quarantining of four persons. Of these, one had tested positive for Covid using a PCR test; the other three were deemed to have undergone a high risk of exposure. Consequently, the Regional Health Authority decided that all four were infectious and a health hazard, which required that they go into isolation. The lower court had ruled against the Health Authority, and the appeal court upheld that ruling with arguments that explicitly endorse the scientific case for the lack of reliability of the PCR tests (e.g., as extensively explained in Lockdown Skeptics by Dr. Mike Yeadon, Dr. Clare Craig and others).
The court’s ruling is a long text. I provide below a summary of the key passage.
The court’s main points are as follows:
A medical diagnosis is a medical act that only a physician is legally qualified to undertake and for which such physician will be solely and entirely responsible. No other person or institution, including government agencies or the courts, has such an authority. It is not up to the Azores Regional Health Authority to declare someone ill, or a health hazard. Only a physician can do that. No one can be declared ill or a health hazard by decree or law, nor as the automatic, administrative consequence of the outcome of a laboratory test , no matter which.
It is not up to the Azores Regional Health Authority to declare someone ill, or a health hazard. Only a physician can do that. , no matter which. From the above, the court concludes that “if carried out with no prior medical observation of the patient, with no participation of a physician certified by the Ordem dos Médicos who would have assessed symptoms and requested the tests/exams deemed necessary, any act of diagnosis , or any act of public health vigilance (such as determining whether a viral infection or a high risk of exposure exist, which the aforementioned concepts subsume) will violate [a number of laws and regulations] and may configure a crime of usurpação de funções [unlawful practice of a profession] in the case said acts are carried out or dictated by someone devoid of the capacity to do so, i.e., by someone who is not a certified physician [to practice medicine in Portugal a degree is not enough, you need to be accepted as qualified to practice medicine by undergoing examination with the Ordem dos Médicos, roughly our equivalent of the UK’s Royal College of Physicians].”
, or any act of public health vigilance (such as determining whether a viral infection or a high risk of exposure exist, which the aforementioned concepts subsume) in the case said acts are carried out or dictated by someone devoid of the capacity to do so, i.e., by someone who is not a certified physician [to practice medicine in Portugal a degree is not enough, you need to be accepted as qualified to practice medicine by undergoing examination with the Ordem dos Médicos, roughly our equivalent of the UK’s Royal College of Physicians].” In addition, the court rules that the Azores Health Authority violated article 6 of the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights , as it failed to provide evidence that the informed consent mandated by said Declaration had been given by the PCR-tested persons who had complained against the forced quarantine measures imposed on them.
, as it by the PCR-tested persons who had complained against the forced quarantine measures imposed on them. From the facts presented to the court, it concluded that no evidentiary proof or even indication existed that the four persons in question had been seen by a doctor, either before or after undertaking the test.
The above would suffice to deem the forced quarantine of the four persons unlawful. The court thought it necessary, however, to add some very interesting considerations about the PCR tests:
“Based on the currently available scientific evidence this test [the RT-PCR test] is in and of itself unable to determine beyond reasonable doubt that positivity in fact corresponds to infection by the SARS-CoV-2 virus , for several reasons, among which two are paramount (to which one would need to add the issue of the gold standard, which, due to that issue’s specificity, will not be considered here): the test’s reliability depends on the number of cycles used; the test’s reliability depends on the viral load present.”
, for several reasons, among which two are paramount (to which one would need to add the issue of the gold standard, which, due to that issue’s specificity, will not be considered here): the test’s reliability depends on the number of cycles used; the test’s reliability depends on the viral load present.” Citing Jaafar et al. (2020;), the court concludes that “if someone is tested by PCR as positive when a threshold of 35 cycles or higher is used (as is the rule in most laboratories in Europe and the US), the probability that said person is infected is <3%, and the probability that said result is a false positive is 97%. ” The court further notes that the cycle threshold used for the PCR tests currently being made in Portugal is unknown [N.B. – I know from acquaintances that in at least some Portuguese labs the threshold is 35 cycles].
is used (as is the rule in most laboratories in Europe and the US), ” The court further notes that the cycle threshold used for the PCR tests currently being made in Portugal is unknown [N.B. – I know from acquaintances that in at least some Portuguese labs the threshold is 35 cycles]. Citing Surkova et al. (2020)), the court further states that any diagnostic test must be interpreted in the context of the actual probability of disease as assessed prior to the undertaking of the test itself, and expresses the opinion that “in the current epidemiological landscape of the United Kingdom, the likelihood is increasing that Covid 19 tests are returning false positives, with major implications for individuals, the health system and society. ”
The court’s summary of the case to rule against the Regional Health Authority’s appeal reads as follows:
“Given how much scientific doubt exists — as voiced by experts, i.e., those who matter — about the reliability of the PCR tests, given the lack of information concerning the tests’ analytical parameters, and in the absence of a physician’s diagnosis supporting the existence of infection or risk, there is no way this court would ever be able to determine whether C was indeed a carrier of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, or whether A, B and D had been at a high risk of exposure to it.”
I anticipate this ruling to have massive legal implications in my country. Note that it comes on the back of a previous ruling by the Constitutional Court, our highest court, declaring as an unlawful deprivation of liberty a decision by the Regional Government of the Azores to force into a 14-day quarantine every passenger landing in an airport of the territory.
Stop Press: A reader has got in touch to say he’s looked at the NHS definitions for the terms used in the monthly data analysed by my doctor friend yesterday and uncovered the following gem:
For all relevant data items: a confirmed COVID-19 patient is any patient admitted to the trust who has recently (i.e. in the last 14 days) tested positive for COVID-19 following a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test. Patients who have been diagnosed via X-ray and assessment rather than a positive test should be counted as suspected (and not confirmed) COVID-19 patients. So patients that have a test but no diagnosis are confirmed COVID patients. Anyone with a firm clinical diagnosis but no positive test are “suspected”.
************