‘If we succeed in vaccinating all those groups, we will have removed huge numbers of people’ – UK PM MISSPOKEN OR TRUTH
Boris Johnson: Confirmed Globalist?
The Truth Behind The Vaccine Trials – Documentary Film 2021
So the vaccine is not technically licensed as the clinical trials will not be completed until 2023, yet the vaccine promotion campaign is rampant everywhere.
The government, corporations, and celebrities are on an orchestrated campaign to sell us the vaccine, but on what basis are they promoting it?
In this film we will look at how Covid-19 vaccine managed to make it into peoples veins in such a record time, how trials work, and should we just take the vaccine manufactures word of its safety and efficacy.
Featuring as guests: Robert F Kennedy & Prof Dolores CahillPosted by seemorerocks at 16:43No comments: Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to PinterestLabels: Dolores Cahill, mRNA, Robert F Kennedy Jr, vaccine, vaccine injury
We know all this but the most surprising thing about this article is that it was written at all.
You can’t sue Pfizer or Moderna if you have severe Covid vaccine side effects. The government likely won’t compensate you for damages either
20 December, 2021
Under the PREP Act, companies like Pfizer and Moderna have total immunity from liability if something unintentionally goes wrong with their vaccines.
- A little-known government program provides benefits to people who can prove they suffered serious injury from a vaccine.
- That program rarely pays, covering just 29 claims over the last decade.
If you experience severe side effects after getting a Covid vaccine, lawyers tell CNBC there is basically no one to blame in a U.S. court of law.
“It is very rare for a blanket immunity law to be passed,” said Rogge Dunn, a Dallas labor and employment attorney. “Pharmaceutical companies typically aren’t offered much liability protection under the law.“
You also can’t sue the Food and Drug Administration for authorizing a vaccine for emergency use, nor can you hold your employer accountable if they mandate inoculation as a condition of employment.
Congress created a fund specifically to help cover lost wages and out-of-pocket medical expenses for people who have been irreparably harmed by a “covered countermeasure,” such as a vaccine. But it is difficult to use and rarely pays. Attorneys say it has compensated less than 6% of the claims filed in the last decade.
Immune to lawsuits
In February, Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar invoked the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act. The 2005 law empowers the HHS secretary to provide legal protection to companies making or distributing critical medical supplies, such as vaccines and treatments, unless there’s “willful misconduct” by the company. The protection lasts until 2024.
HHS declined CNBC’s request for an interview.
Dunn thinks a big reason for the unprecedented protection has to do with the expedited timeline.
“When the government said, ‘We want you to develop this four or five times faster than you normally do,’ most likely the manufacturers said to the government, ‘We want you, the government, to protect us from multimillion-dollar lawsuits,’” said Dunn.
The quickest vaccine ever developed was for mumps. It took four years and was licensed in 1967. Pfizer’s Covid-19 vaccine was developed and cleared for emergency use in eight months — a fact that has fueled public mistrust of the coronavirus inoculation in the U.S.
Roughly 4 in 10 Americans say they would “definitely” or “probably” not get vaccinated, according to a recent survey by the Pew Research Center. While this is lower than it was two months ago, it still points to a huge trust gap.
But drugmakers like Pfizer continue to reassure the public no shortcuts were taken. “This is a vaccine that was developed without cutting corners,” CEO Dr. Albert Bourla said in an interview with CNBC’s “Squawk Box” on Monday. “This is a vaccine that is getting approved by all authorities in the world. That should say something.”
The legal immunity granted to pharmaceutical companies doesn’t just guard them against lawsuits. Dunn said it helps lower the cost of the immunizations.
“The government doesn’t want people suing the companies making the Covid vaccine. Because then, the manufacturers would probably charge the government a higher price per person per dose,” Dunn explained.
Pfizer and Moderna did not return CNBC’s request for comment on their legal protections.
Is anyone liable?
Remember, vaccine manufacturers aren’t the ones approving their product for mass distribution. That is the job of the FDA.
Which begs the question, can you sue the U.S. government if you have an extraordinarily bad reaction to a vaccine?
Again, the answer is no.
“You can’t sue the FDA for approving or disapproving a drug,” said Dorit Reiss, a professor at the University of California Hastings College of Law. “That’s part of its sovereign immunity.”
Sovereign immunity came from the king, explains Dunn, referring to British law before the American Revolution. “You couldn’t sue the king. So, America has sovereign immunity, and even each state has sovereign immunity.”
There are limited exceptions, but Dunn said he doesn’t think they provide a viable legal path to hold the federal government responsible for a Covid vaccine injury.
Bringing workers back to the office in a post-Covid world also carries with it a heightened fear of liability for employers. Lawyers across the country say their corporate clients are reaching out to them to ask whether they can require employees to get immunized.
Dunn’s clients who run businesses serving customers in person or on site are most interested in mandating a Covid vaccine for staff.
“They view it as a selling point,” Dunn said. “It’s particularly important for restaurants, bars, gyms and salons. My clients in that segment of the service industry are looking hard at making it mandatory, as a sales point to their customers.”
While this is in part a public relations tactic, it is legally within an employer’s rights to impose such a requirement.
“Requiring a vaccine is a health and safety work rule, and employers can do that,” said Reiss.
There are a few notable exceptions. If a work force is unionized, the collective bargaining agreement may require negotiating with the union before mandating a vaccine.
Anti-discrimination laws provide some protections as well. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, workers who don’t want to be vaccinated for medical reasons are eligible to request an exemption. If taking the vaccine is a violation of a “sincerely held” religious belief, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 would potentially provide a wayto opt out.
Should none of these exemptions apply, employees may have some legal recourse if they suffer debilitating side effects following a work-mandated Covid inoculation.
Attorneys say claims would most likely be routed through worker’s compensation programs and treated as an on-the-job injury.
“But there are significant limits or caps on the damages an employee can recover,” said Dunn. He added that it would likely be difficult to prove.
Mandatory vaccination protocols, however, may not happen until the FDA formally approves the vaccines and grants Pfizer and BioNTech or Moderna a license to sell them, which will take several more months of data to show their safety and effectiveness.
“An emergency use authorization is not a license,” said Reiss. “There’s a legal question as to whether you can mandate an emergency observation. The language in the act is somewhat unclear on that.”
$50,000 a year
The government has created a way for people to recover some damages should something go wrong following immunization.
In addition tothe legal immunity, the PREP Act established the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP), which provides benefits to eligible individuals who suffer serious injury from one of the protected companies.
The little-known government program has been around for a decade, and it is managed by an agency under HHS. This fund typically only deals with vaccines you probably would never get, like the H1N1 and anthrax vaccines.
If a case for compensation through the CICP is successful, the program provides up to $50,000 per year in unreimbursed lost wages and out-of-pocket medical expenses. It won’t cover legal fees or anything to compensate for pain and suffering.
It is also capped at the death benefit of $370,376, which is the most a surviving family member receives in the event that a Covid vaccine proves to be fatal.
But experts specializing in vaccine law say it is difficult to navigate. “This government compensation program is very hard to use,” said Reiss. “The bar for compensation is very high.”
Also worrisome to some vaccine injury lawyers is the fact that the CICP has rejected a majority of the compensation requests made since the program began 10 years ago. Of the 499 claims filed, the CICP has compensated only 29 claims, totaling more than $6 million.
David Carney, vice president of the Vaccine Bar Association, said the CICP might deny a claim for a variety of reasons. “One reason might be that the medical records don’t support a claim,” said Carney, who regularly deals with vaccine injury cases. “We have to litigate a lot of really complex issues … and provide a medical basis for why the injury occurred.”
Proving an injury was a direct result of the Covid vaccine could be difficult, according to Carney. “It’s not as simple as saying. ‘Hey, I got a Covid treatment, and now I have an injury.’ There is a lot of burden of proof there.”
There is also a strict one-year statute, meaning that all claims have to be filed within 12 months of receiving the vaccine.
“People who are harmed by a Covid vaccine deserve to be compensated fast and generously,” said Reiss. “The PREP Act doesn’t do that.”
Lawyers tell CNBC that it would make more sense for Covid vaccine injuries to instead be routed through another program under the HHS called the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, which handles claims for 16 routine vaccines. Known colloquially as “vaccine court,” the program paid on about 70% of petitions adjudicated by the court from 2006 to 2018.
And since it began considering claims in 1988, the VICP has paid approximately $4.4 billion in total compensation. That dwarfs the CICP’s roughly $6 million in paid benefits over the life of the program.
The VICP also gives you more time to file your claim. You have three years from the date of the first symptom to file for compensation.
“The VICP allows for recovery of pain and suffering, attorney’s fees, along with medical expenses and lost wages, if any,” said Michael Maxwell, a lawyer who practices in the areas of business litigation and personal injury. “Under the CICP, it’s only lost wages and out-of-pocket medical expenses. That’s it, unless there’s a death.”
The Covid-19 vaccines, however, aren’t on the list of eligible vaccines.
Reiss said the best fix would be to change VICP’s rulebook to add Covid vaccines to its list of covered inoculations. “That will require legislative change. I hope that legislative change happens.”Posted by seemorerocks at 16:42No comments: Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to PinterestLabels: Moderna, mRNA, Pfizer, vaccine, vaccine injury
FORBIDDEN: MIKE LINDELL’S VACCINE TALK CENSORED BY RIGHT SIDE BROADCASTING
Today on TruNews, we discuss RSBN’s censorship of My Pillow’s CEO at CPAC, as he attempted to share his beliefs that the mandatory COVID vaccines in Israel are leading the world toward the Mark of the Beast warned about in the Revelation of Jesus Christ.
We also address President Trump’s call to supporters to get vaccinated with his miracle shot, and the details of his growing legal battle with the Manhattan DA over bank, insurance, and tax fraud.
Rick Wiles, Doc Burkhart, Edward Szall. Airdate 03/01/2021
MASSACRE! People under age 65 who are being injected with Pfizer mRNA are 26000% more likely to die than if they had contracted covid
This report comes from Israel:
“We conclude that the Pfizer vaccines, for the elderly, killed during the 5-week vaccination period about 40 times more people than the disease itself would have killed, and about 260 times more people than the disease among the younger age class. We stress that this is in order to produce a green passport valid at most 6 months, and promote Pfizer sales.”
The uncovering of the
vaccination data in Israel
reveals a frightening picture
5 March, 2021
5 March, 2021 update:
Please see our debunking in French below, and in English here.
– this article has been published first in Hebrew here
– we gave an interview in French to francesoir.fr who translated it in french here
– it has been as well reported in russian here in english in Arutz 7 here and in the U.S here
– and reported in several other language including greek here
This article can not be debunked since it is based on real data that have been exposed but since its publication the Israeli ministry of health and the Pfizer/Moderna coalition keep trying to deceive the public with biased “scientific” article (like the new england journal of medicine)that intentionally focus on the Covid sickness two weeks after the 2nd shot and hide the most important data that is the death numbers among the vaccinated people from covid and other adverse effects after the first shot.The fact that Dr Ran Balicer the corresponding author of the NEJM publication, works for the Israeli health department as head of the Klalit research institute and received grants from Pfizer may explain it…as well as 7 other co-authors of the publication.. see here
we have debunked the NEJM study please read our article, their data validate our analysis here:
Exposing distortions in the NEJM scientific publication on the efficiency of Pfizer’s vax
Analyses below of an article promoting COVID-19 vaccination enable to uncover all vaccination data and a frightening situation
On February 11 2021 Ynet (the most known Israeli News website) published a confused and confusing article entitled “Vaccination efficiency data in Israel, and its rapid effects on the young”.
Our reanalyses of these data explain why during the massive vaccination project initiated mid-December 2020 during a confinement, daily new confirmed COVID-19 cases failed to decrease as they do during confinements, and, more importantly, why numbers of serious, critical and death cases increased during that period that covered at least one month. From mid-December to mid-February (two months), 2337 among all Israeli 5351 official COVID-deaths occurred.Our analyses indicate orders of magnitude increases in deaths rates during the 5-week long vaccination process, as compared to the unvaccinated and those after completing the vaccination process. Presumably, asymptomatic cases before vaccination, and those infected shortly after the 1st dose, tend to develop graver symptoms than those unvaccinated.
The Ynet article is organised in an exciting way and uses data provided in an erroneous way by the Ministry of Health. It is unclear whether this was intentional to prove the vaccine’s efficiency or if this was done erroneously because the provided data were misunderstood.Note that in Israel, all vaccines are from Pfizer.
We bring a very important example from the article, in relation to the table provided by the Ministry of Health. As per the text “However, 546 among the dead were such that were not at all vaccinated or got the first vaccination dose within two weeks before their death” differs from the table. This is clearly unfounded because all data presented in the table and provided below describe only COVID-19 patients that got at least the first vaccination dose. This is clear from examining the table. The grand total is 43781 COVID patients who got the first or the second vaccine dose. Among the total of 660 deaths, 546 got only the first dose.
The data in the table, rather than indicating the vaccine efficiency, indicate the vaccine’s adverse effects.
For that purpose we need first to understand that the provided table describes the state of COVID-19 patients that got the first or the second vaccine dose at given dates, as started in the article “…emerges from the data that among 856 patients above 60 years in serious state hospitalized at this time…” we assume that the article published February 11 reflects the situation in hospitals the previous day, hence February 10 2021, or February 11 2021.
On February 10, the number of serious active cases was 1056 according to the control panel of the Ministry of Health, see photo below.
This surprisingly shows that most serious hospitalized cases on February 10 or at a near date were in fact vaccinated with the first dose or up to two weeks after the second dose. See the table of the vaccinated patients showing 1031 serious and 220 critical cases at the time the table was done. This matches the article in hebrew from February 1st 2021 “Can one show that the vaccine from Pfizer is today’s major cause for high death rates in Israel and the world?”.
However, this is not the last surprise we get from examining the data from the Ministry of Health.
We can substract the number of people with the first vaccine dose on January 19 2021 from that on February 10 2021. During these 21 days, 1331881 Israeli citizens got the first dose. The table shows that 568 among these died, hence 0.042% and that 39047 among them became a COVID-19 case, hence 2.9 %.
For the 2nd dose we focus on data specific to two weeks after the 2nd vaccination according to the table.
From January 26 to February 10 2021 909102 Israeli citizens got the 2nd vaccine dose. Among these according to the table, 92 died, 0.01%.
Hence, during the 5 weeks since the first dose at least 0.05% of first dose recipients died. This death rate relates mainly to a relatively young population whose vaccination stated on January 19, a period during which most vaccinated were below 65.
In order to estimate the death rate of those above 65 which were mostly vaccinated before that period we use data reported by the USA-based VAERS,
There we found, see article in english, that the ratio of deaths by those above 65 vs those below 65 is about 4.42 (155/35). Hence the death rate of those above 65 between the first and the second vaccination dose should be until January 19 0.042 (the death rate of those below 65) multiplied by 4.42, resulting in 0.186%, which is close to the 0.2% reported by the Ministry of Health on January 21 2021.
This value of 0.2 % death has been mysteriously modified later on by the Ministry of Health and was switched to 0.005 without any explanation, see article in hebrew. Above considerations show that the death rate data provided first were correct, the updated death rate data might have been intended to suggest lower death rates among the elderly.
The exposures do not end here.
The number of COVID-19 deaths among the vaccinated since the start of the vaccination action seems to explain the increased death rates from COVID-19 observed since December 2020.
For that purpose, we calculate the products of the number of vaccinated people above age 65 by 0.2 and the number of vaccinated people below 65 by 0.04. This shows that most COVID-19 deaths in that period are for vaccinated people, as shows the table provided by the Ministry of health at the beginning of February.
During the vaccination action from mid-December until mid-February, 2337 among all 5351 COVID-19 deaths reported for Israel occurred, 43.7%. Among these, since January 19, 1271 COVID-19 deaths were reported for Israel.The table provided by the Ministry of Health on February 10 states 660 COVID-19 deaths among the vaccinated, 51.9% of the deaths for that period. Only 1.3 million Israeli, among 8 million (about 1 in 8, 12.5%), were vaccinated during that period. Accordingly, vaccination promotes deaths because 51.9% of deaths during that period are for the 12.5% vaccinated in that period. In addition the serious and critical cases during that period is more than the reported serious cases, the adverse effect of the vaccination process is most likely worse than what appears from the data at hand.
The horror continues. The deaths among those vaccinated should be added to the numerous AVC and cardiac events reported just after vaccination that are not included among COVID-19 deaths which about double the deaths among those vaccinated, whose numbers remain unknown and which we will try to find in the coming days.
At this point we state that vaccinations caused more deaths than the coronavirus would have during the same period.
Among those vaccinated and above 65, 0.2% of those vaccinated died during the 3-week period between doses, hence about 200 among 100000 vaccinated. This is to be compared to the 4.91 dead among 100000 dying from COVID-19 without vaccination, see below. This should not be confused with the COVID-19 0.279 deaths among 100000 reported for those who completed the vaccination process, meaning 2 weeks after the second dose, see below table from the Ynet article.
This scary picture also extends to those below 65, among which, for the 5 weeks during the complete vaccination process 0.05%, meaning 50 among 100000, died. This is to be compared to the 0.19 per 100000 dying from COVID-19 and that are not vaccinated in that age group, as per the above table. Hence the death rate of this age group increased by 260 during this 5-week period of the vaccination process, as compared to their natural COVID-19 death rate.
A simple way to pass these points across relate to the monthly COVID-19 deaths rates since the start of the pandemic and until mid-December, 3014 deaths, hence 3014/9 = 334.9 deaths per month. Monthly death rates since mid-December are 2337/2 = 1168.5 deaths per month, hence 3.5 times greater.
We conclude that the Pfizer vaccines, for the elderly, killed during the 5-week vaccination period about 40 times more people than the disease itself would have killed, and about 260 times more people than the disease among the younger age class. We stress that this is in order to produce a green passport valid at most 6 months, and promote Pfizer sales.
These estimated numbers of deaths from the vaccine are probably much lower than actual numbers as it accounts only for those defined as COVID-19 deaths for that short time period and does not include AVC and cardiac (and other) events resulting from the inflammatory reactions in tens of reports documented on the NAKIM site, which themselves are only the iceberg’s tip, see here.
This does not account for long-term complications described in a criminal complaint filed in December 2020 in France and which was translated to english, see here.
Looking back, this explains why the serious COVID-19 cases increased as vaccination started, and why cases started to decline when vaccination was opened to the young and continue to decline as the vaccination national campaign is losing its momentum.
We hope that this massacre will not include those below 13, as these have an increased adverse reaction rate, including death, to vaccines as shown by multi-decennial data from the VAERS reports in the USA.
We summarise that the pandemic may be predicted for the coming weeks. The decrease in vaccinations and in vaccination age will cause a decrease in serious cases, mainly not because of the protection by the vaccine, but because fewer people will die from the vaccine and other adverse vaccine reactions.
This will be temporary as in a few months we expect to face mid- and long-term adverse effects of the vaccination as ADE (Antibody-dependent Enhancement) and the vaccination-resistant mutants selected by the vaccines. But this should occur after the soon coming elections and the (survivor) voters won’t have another opportunity to express their disappointment at the voting poll.
Thanks to Dr Hervé Seligmann for his huge support on data analysis.
Something terrible is happening in Israel.Here is a message from an Israeli activist.
Posted by seemorerocks at 16:38No comments: Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to PinterestLabels: Covid-19, Israel, pandemic, vaccination, vaccination passports
Please share this where you can.
“Children are dying”” An impassioned plea from a German doctorhttps://rumble.com/embed/vbqrpb/?pub=34kn5
Posted by seemorerocks at 16:35No comments: Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to PinterestLabels: Covid-19, Germany, lockdown, masks
I have lots to say about this but no time to say it.
Carbon dioxide emissions must fall by the equivalent of a global lockdown roughly every two years for the next decade for the world to keep within safe limits of global heating, research has shown.
Lockdowns around the world led to an unprecedented fall in emissions of about 7% in 2020, or about 2.6bn tonnes of CO2, but reductions of between 1bn and 2bn tonnes are needed every year of the next decade to have a good chance of holding temperature rises to within 1.5C or 2C of pre-industrial levels, as required by the Paris agreement.
Research published on Wednesday shows that countries were beginning to slow their rates of greenhouse gas emissions before the Covid-19 pandemic struck, but not to the levels needed to avert climate breakdown. Since lockdowns were eased in many countries last year, there have been strong signs that emissions will rise again to above 2019 levels, severely damaging the prospects of fulfilling the Paris goals.
Corinne Le Quéré, lead author of the study, said the world stood at a crucial point as governments poured money into the global economy to cope with the impacts of the pandemic. “We need a cut in emissions of about the size of the fall [from the lockdowns] every two years, but by completely different methods,” she said.
Lockdowns or the planet gets
it? Guardian ‘accidentally’
suggests Covid-like shutdowns
every 2 years to meet Paris
4 March, 2021
Helen Buyniski is an American journalist and political commentator at RT. Follow her on Twitter @velocirapture23The Guardian accidentally confirmed the suspicions of a whole lot of conspiracy theorists with an article suggesting a “global lockdown every two years” was needed to meet Paris climate goals. The title was quickly changed.
If carbon dioxide emissions don’t drop by the equivalent of a worldwide lockdown “roughly every two years” for the next decade, the earth will heat to apocalyptic levels, a team of researchers at the University of East Anglia warned in a Nature article published Wednesday.https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?creatorScreenName=RT_com&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1367172914441826310&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fnews%2F517146-climate-lockdowns-every-two-years%2F&siteScreenName=RT_com&theme=light&widgetsVersion=e1ffbdb%3A1614796141937&width=550px
This apparently so excited a certain strain of climate fanatic on the Guardian staff, that they originally posted the piece under the title “Global lockdown every two years needed to meet Paris CO2 goals – study.” After being dragged mercilessly for such fear porn, the headline was changed to “Equivalent of Covid emissions drop needed every two years – study” with an explainer that “experts say” that “equivalent falls in emissions over a decade” would be “required to keep safe limits of global heating.”https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?creatorScreenName=RT_com&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-1&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1367225502583390212&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fnews%2F517146-climate-lockdowns-every-two-years%2F&siteScreenName=RT_com&theme=light&widgetsVersion=e1ffbdb%3A1614796141937&width=550px
Despite calling for “completely different methods” to achieve and lock in the emissions drop from the pandemic, lead researcher Corinne Le Quéré nevertheless insisted that climate change couldn’t be a “side issue. It can’t be about one law or policy, it has to be put at the heart of all policy.”
Every strategy and every plan from every government must be consistent with tackling climate change.
While Le Quéré didn’t come out and suggest people be arbitrarily deprived of their liberties every two years in order to please a climate model, the other “strategic actions” she mentioned to keep some of the gains of the pandemic were already being implemented – and in many cases had been implemented for years. From city planning to incentivize “active transport” (walking and cycling) and growing public transportation, to promoting remote work where possible, her suggestions were not exactly new – and unlikely to convince anyone they were sufficient enough.
“There is a real contradiction between what governments are saying they are doing to do [to generate a green recovery], and what they are doing,” Le Quéré told the Guardian, calling the phenomenon “very worrisome.”
Her co-researcher Glen Peters was more explicit in what latitude countries should have to move away from fossil fuels on their own time, calling for “structural changes” to move economies toward renewable energy.
Some on social media, seeing the “quiet part” said out loud on the first edition of the Guardian article, had an “I told you so” moment. The threat of ‘climate lockdowns’ has been alternately presented and “debunked” by mainstream media for months.https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?creatorScreenName=RT_com&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-2&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=true&id=1367175985876107270&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fnews%2F517146-climate-lockdowns-every-two-years%2F&siteScreenName=RT_com&theme=light&widgetsVersion=e1ffbdb%3A1614796141937&width=550px
…others at first assumed it had to be satire, because no one would post something that on-the-nose –https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?creatorScreenName=RT_com&dnt=false&embedId=twitter-widget-3&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=true&id=1367176475460263938&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.rt.com%2Fnews%2F517146-climate-lockdowns-every-two-years%2F&siteScreenName=RT_com&theme=light&widgetsVersion=e1ffbdb%3A1614796141937&width=550px
…except maybe for the World Economic Forum, which actually posted in praise of what lockdowns had done to cities – presumably turned them into uninhabitable hives of snitches where one can’t even take in a Broadway show anymore – earlier this week, before removing its tweet under public pressure.
The WEF had posted a video praising the “silence” and clearer air – and lack of humans, though they didn’t say that part out loud.