How many of us were excluded from society and set aside as crazy or dangerous for refusing to comply with the COVID-19 jab mandates? How many were punished for being brave enough to say no to injecting themselves with an experimental gene therapy vaccine? Now it seems they were right; there was no clinical proof to support that the m-RNA “vaccines” stopped or decreased the virus’ transmission. Does this not qualify as a crime against humanity that should be brought before an International Tribunal?

By Arthur Blok
“If liberty means anything, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.” A famous quote from the preface of Animal Farm by George Orwell. The late visionary author predicted in many publications that our present-day freedom would be merely an illusion.

Orwell was right.

It must have felt like a slap in the face for all the well-behaved followers of the vaccine mandates when Pfizer executive Janine Small admitted to the European Parliament on Oct. 10 that their vaccine had never been tested to stop the virus’s transmission.

Was that not the leading argument for implementing a mandate in the first place?

Please do not do it for yourself but others. Do not be a danger to society, be safe. Rhetoric launched like a media campaign by the World “Health” Organisation (WHO) massively copied by a sleeping mainstream media and blindly implemented by local health authorities and governments alike.

In many cases, those who refused the jab were labeled antisocial and denied access to various aspects of society. And, to make it worse, they were subjected to continuous vicious attacks by their government and friends.

The unprecedented global vaccination drive targeted an overall healthy population and was launched as an essential tool in stopping the “pandemic.”

In the end, it did the opposite. There is now plenty of scientific evidence to support this claim.

In all honesty, the proof was available a few weeks into this customized global emergency. Still, that information was deemed dangerous and kept away from the public, despite warnings from prominent virologists who dared to oppose big pharma.

Finally, the scientific facts are coming out. Let’s summarize some of the dangers and side effects of the mRNA vaccines that were never adequately tested before being enforced on the world’s population.

This is just an executive summary; the list is too long for one article.

Excess mortality
Let’s start with the most significant development since the vaccination campaign came into effect; excess mortality. In the European Union (EU), excess mortality climbed to +16% in July 2022 from +7% in June and May.

The highest value on record so far in 2022, amounting to around 53 000 additional deaths in July this year compared with the monthly averages for 2016-2019.

In comparison, the excess mortality rate during the first year of the pandemic was only +3% in July 2020 (10 000 excess deaths) and +6% in July 2021 (21 000 excess deaths).

In other words, unusually high value for this month, especially seen in the light of the previous two pandemic years. This is not conspiracy data but a formal release from Eurostat, the EU’s data collection agency. The figures show that excess mortality is the highest in the countries with the highest vaccination rate.

Why is this not further investigated before launching the fall booster campaigns across the EU? And how is it possible that on the state level, the alarm bells not ringing?

Who knows.

Acute Coronary Syndrome & blood cloths
Abnormal blood clotting was one of the first mysterious health effects to emerge in the COVID pandemic, first, as an effect of the natural infection and later, as a side effect of the COVID jabs. By mid-March 2021, 20 countries had suspended the use of AstraZeneca’s COVID shot, either in whole or in part. Israeli researchers have also linked the Pfizer jab with a rare blood clotting disorder.

It soon became evident that people who took two mRNA shots more than doubled their five-year risk of Acute Coronary Syndrome, a term used to describe a range of conditions associated with sudden, reduced blood flow to the heart. One such condition is a heart attack. The report shows that this risk significantly increases after a third jab.

What will happen if you go for number four or five? How will this relate to already exceptionally high excessive death mortality rates?

According to another study, people receiving the Johnson & Johnson vaccine are at elevated risk of getting a severe autoimmune disorder (Guillain-Barré syndrome) that can cause paralysis. Researchers used data from the Vaccine Safety Datalink, run by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Earlier this month, a disturbing report found menstrual abnormalities lasting for months following a COVID-19 shot. The data from Israel’s adverse events reporting system shows that some women experienced menstrual disorders for more than 12 months after receiving a jab.

According to a new study funded by pharma giant Moderna, the effectiveness of their vaccine turns negative over time. Researchers estimated that the point of three doses - a primary series and a booster - against infection remained above 50 percent after 150 days against BA.1, a subvariant of the Omicron virus variant.

The effectiveness turned negative against more recent strains, including the currently dominant BA.5. The energy went hostile against BA.2, BA.4, and BA.5 after 150 days; against BA.1.12.1, the effectiveness turned negative after 91 days.

Negative effectiveness means that a vaccinated person is more likely to contract COVID-19 than an unvaccinated person. The study was published before peer review on medRxiv, a preprint server.

Vaccine acquisition by the EU
As if this is not enough, there are many valid questions about how the EU acquired the vaccines; the same goes for individual member states. Nobody has any insight into the terms and conditions, not even the members of the EU parliament. Nor is barely any information shared about the actual content of the vaccines.

Reason enough for the European Prosecutor to investigate the matter who admitted this last week due to “extremely high public interest.” The office declined to answer questions about the investigation, including whether the probe spans the entire European Union (EU) or only certain countries.

Let’s wait and see.

These are not conspiracies, just alarming facts, figures, and many unanswered questions and health uncertainties. Every self-respecting individual should ask: “What is going on here?”

Maybe it is not such a bad idea, after all, to let these questionable policies and measures be subjected to a judicial review by a genuinely independent international tribunal on the model of the Nuremberg trials.

Crisis or not, a crime is still a crime.