Given HART’s experiences on the receiving end of the Censorship Industrial Complex, we give a great deal of thought on a weekly basis as to what we may and may not say and write. We know that some of what we would like to put into the public domain would see us fall foul of external censorship; powerful vested interests can ensure we are not heard.
News
Conspiracy Theory + Time = Truth
It strikes us that there is this apocryphal idea in the minds of many that proven conspiracies have only happened in the dim and distant past. This is a very bizarre position to hold. What it supposes is that for centuries there has been clear evidence of deep state corruption within governments and secret government agencies, but somehow that just suddenly stopped a mere moment ago. Nowadays, the fairytale goes that mummy and daddy government in the civilised West would never do anything to harm its citizens. Ever.
Open Letter to the WHO re: recognition of vaccine side effects
Please read the Open Letter to the WHO authored by several concerned action groups here in the UK, with regards to an ICD recognition of C0VID-19 vaccine-induced side effects and related disorders.
Never in my wildest dreams…
…or never in my wildest nightmares? This was the opening phrase in a Twitter post from Dr Lisa Iannattone,on 15 June. The whole Tweet read, “Never in my wildest dreams could I have predicted a future where a new virus would become the #1 infectious disease killer of children and that medical leadership would decide […]
The lie sandwich
The truth sandwich is promoted as a way of myth busting. The idea is that you state the truth, refer to a myth that you are trying to debunk — and why it is wrong — and then restate the truth. For example, this article used this method in an attempt to debunk the allegation that the Nuremberg code has been violated.
Covid jabs are making things worse
HART reported in January that there was powerful evidence from more than one source that the more injections people had had the higher their risk of contracting covid. One important study in this area was of over 50,000 healthcare workers in the Cleveland Clinic. The researchers observed that the infection rate per person was higher for every additional dose given. This should have been game changing but was ignored or dismissed as not being peer reviewed work.
More than you bargained for
The production methods of Pfizer and Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccines have been thrown into the spotlight due to the discovery of DNA contaminants in the vaccine vials by genomic scientist Kevin McKernan. The DNA found was not only considerable in quantity but also protected by the lipid nanoparticles used for mRNA delivery, implying potential delivery into human cells.
Dismissed!
There are plenty of examples in history of individuals who have been brilliant on one topic and controversial on another. Take Marie Curie; a ‘nerd’s nerd who broke the law for knowledge’. A veritable boundary rider, she went on to win 2 Nobel prizes for her scientific discoveries, but also enjoyed a good seance and slept with vials of Radium by her bed because it was ‘pretty’ (a habit that no doubt contributed to her eventual death from aplastic pernicious anaemia). We don’t however dismiss her entire body of scientific work because she dabbled in a bit of witchcraft or didn’t fully understand the dangers of radioactivity.
Brave Not-So-New World
We are pleased to note that Orwellian censorship antics promulgated by the UK Government – in cahoots with various civil service agencies, assorted contractors and pharmaceutical companies – has managed a few days in the mainstream limelight, even making the front page of the Daily Telegraph.
WHO Decides? Part 3: The line between good and evil
Over the last few decades we have seen sound liberal principles become distorted and perverted until they are not worthy principles any more. In fact, many such perverted principles have run roughshod over other fundamental principles.
WHO Decides? Part 2: Data
Nation states have only months to decide not to commit to the amended WHO International Health Regulations and the Treaty that accompanies them. In part 1, we discussed the impact on your money, and here we will talk about the effect on your data, your privacy and your freedom.
WHO Decides? Part 1: Money
The world is at a crucial crossroads with imminent changes to the World Health Organisation (WHO). Many are aware of a proposed new treaty and maybe even the changes to the International Health Regulations, but what people might not be aware of are the plans for your money. Beliefs about what happened with covid are not relevant to this discussion. You could think that covid was the biggest public health disaster in history and these plans should still concern you.
Referral to the Counter Disinformation Unit – by whom?
The Telegraph has suddenly reported on the existence of the Counter Disinformation Unit (CDU), the dubious activities of which were first highlighted several months ago by Big Brother Watch in a report aptly titled ‘The Ministry of Truth’ (do re-read George Orwell’s 1984 if you don’t recognise this title). A launch meeting was held in January at Westminster, hosted by David Davis MP, who had himself been reported to the CDU for unspecified crimes. Where were the press reports of that meeting?
The perils of blind faith in men
In 430 BC, a devastating plague ravaged Athens, a city embroiled in the Peloponnesian War under the leadership of the statesman Pericles. Simultaneously, Sophocles’ tragic play Oedipus Rex was unveiled, serving as a metaphorical commentary on the events unfolding in Athens.
The impact of the covid response upon workplace absenteeism
The Office of National Statistics has estimated that, in 2022, 185.6 million working days were lost due to sickness, the highest figure recorded since records began. The British economy loses £43 billion a year from this growing ‘disease burden’, with around a third of this strain being attributed to mental health problems.
Querying the existence of a covid ‘pandemic’
The word pandemic used to have a very specific meaning. It was used to describe a scenario where there was extensive incapacitation of key workers and large numbers of deaths, including young people. A genuine pandemic is not something that would have needed billions of dollars in advertising for people to even notice and fear. Using this long-established definition of the word, we conclude that there was in fact no pandemic in 2020. The word was deliberately misapplied and weaponised against an unsuspecting public.
A line in the sand for euthanasia
It is easy to make an argument for euthanasia. Heart wrenching stories can be told about people who are suffering terribly and genuinely want to see their already imminent death hastened. The argument for not crossing this line is because as soon as it is crossed there is a very slippery slope on the other side. Canada has demonstrated this in a most tragic way.
Reply from the MHRA regarding children’s covid vaccinations
The data on the safety of the vaccine in the 12 to 15 year olds have also been reviewed carefully. No new adverse events were identified and the safety data in adolescents was comparable with that seen in young adults.
