Connect with us

Alternative News

UFOs Are Are Real – But Secrecy Is The Real Threat

Avatar

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    The presence UFOs has been acknowledged for years, and as time moves on it continues to gain more credible traction within the mainstream. There are many questions to be asked, and much to still be revealed, but is secrecy the real threat?

  • Reflect On:

    What are the reasons for such secrecy? Why is the human race kept in the dark?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

Ella Louise Fortune, who worked as a nurse at the Mescalero Indian Reservation near Three Rivers, New Mexico, took the picture you see above while driving along Highway 54 on October 16, 1957, near Holloman Air Force base

advertisement - learn more

At this moment our media is caught up in a maelstrom of rapid fire reports concerning insider whistleblowers and looming impeachment proceedings. Just a few weeks ago the world wisely turned its attention to the rapid destruction of the Amazonian rainforest and its devastating consequences regarding life on this planet. Despite the sudden absence of coverage on this issue since, that problem has yet to be resolved. It is indicative of our nature to focus on what is new and not on what is truly important. Another astoundingly transformative topic made its way into mainstream media earlier this year but is receiving little attention now. After seven decades of relentless denial, the US military publicly acknowledged the existence of UFOs in our skies. When examined contextually, this casual admission may prove to be the biggest story in the history of humankind.

-->Free e-book - Eat to Defeat Cancer : Are you eating any of the foods that fuel cancer... or the foods that help PREVENT it? Get the TRUTH, and discover the top 10 Cancer-Fighting Superfoods Click here to get the free ebook.

In May of this year (2019) the New York Times and CBS reported that the US Navy recently admitted that their pilots have been observing objects that defy our understanding of how things are supposed to fly. The actual incidents occurred in 2014 and 2015. Another confirmed encounter referenced in the story involved a squadron from the USS Nimitz, which occurred 10 years earlier. This is the “tic tac” sighting, where several pilots observed a small, elliptical “craft” moving in irregular paths at speeds exceeding what was thought possible. Last week, CNN again reports here that the Navy has “confirmed” that their pilots have encountered UFOs. Is that such an earth-shattering admission? They are objects. They fly. They cannot be identified. So what? The real question is, if the Navy doesn’t know what they are, then what are they? We as the public are left to speculate and fantasize as we await the next morsel of information from our trusted government and news sources.

Many people continue to regard this as a curiosity, a preliminary chapter in a story that will end with the admission of a computer glitch, faulty radar system or errant weather balloon. Those who have followed the history of UFO sightings undoubtedly will conclude that this is the first crack in a wall of military secrecy surrounding thousands of separate extraterrestrial spacecraft encounters that have occurred over more than seven decades. 

Is Proof Subjective?

The broad chasm between “believers” and “deniers” exists because the standards of proof on each side are not the same. On one extreme are those who require extraterrestrial beings to appear at town hall meetings before reconsidering their position. On the other are those who see a shaky video of amorphous lights appearing in the sky and then immediately conclude that E.T. is here. How then are we to assess the footage taken from the viewfinders of fighter pilots? If any more credence is given to this “evidence” it is only because of the credibility that we choose to bestow upon the source that has offered it. If we were to be purely objective, there isn’t anything more here beyond the stamp of validity of trusted institutions like the US Navy and mainstream media. How then are we to proceed?

In this day and age, any form of recorded visual evidence carries the possibility of misdirection. Even though billions of human beings have smart phones with sophisticated cameras at the ready, we must contend with the reality that photographs and video can easily be enhanced, modified or created from scratch to falsely “prove” that an extraterrestrial presence exists on our planet. If we cannot rely on videos and photographs, where then should we look for “proof”?

advertisement - learn more

Unless one has had a first-hand personal encounter with a being from another star system, the most compelling evidence can only come from the testimony of actual eye-witnesses to UFOs. Could someone else’s personal account offer anything more than a compelling but unsubstantiated story? That is a matter of opinion. On the other hand, eye-witness testimony, though flawed at times, is often offered as the foundation of proof in our legal system today. If witnesses can condemn a suspect of a crime or provide an alibi that leads to their exoneration why wouldn’t we consider testimony with regard to the UFO phenomenon just as seriously?

The military has unofficially acknowledged UFOs for years

Dr. Steven Greer is an Emergency Room Physician who has spent over two decades tirelessly compiling and spreading evidence of extraterrestrial contact with humans and the suppression of this information by the media and governmental organizations. His two documentaries, “Unacknowledged” and “Sirius Disclosure,” have been viewed by millions of people around the world. He has briefed members of Congress and former CIA Director James Woolsley, and in 2001 he held a conference at the National Press Club flanked by 20 retired military, FAA and intelligence officers who all publicly attested to the presence of ETs on Earth.

Among the wealth of information he has made publicly available, Dr. Greer offers over six hours of eyewitness testimony on his Disclosure website, all of which is worthy of consideration. If you have ever listened to these interviews, it is difficult to conclude them to be intentionally misleading. The witnesses are mainly ex-military, some of them having held high positions. They have very similar stories with a few key, consistent elements including a typical military deadpan delivery. Many were early in their military careers at the time of their encounter. They witnessed objects moving through the sky soundlessly at unthinkable speed, making maneuvers that would have crushed their pilots and then abruptly vanish. Often physical evidence of the encounter remained. Their stories are often corroborated by other eyewitnesses and radar technicians. They claim that they were threatened by their superiors if they spoke out, so they waited, for decades in many cases. Now that their military careers are long over, they find it meaningless to keep their vows of silence and wish to live out their remaining years with a clean conscience. There is, of course, the possibility that they are lying, but what would be their motive? They are not gaining fame or fortune for their candor. Most of them are unwilling to state that what they saw was from another planet or star system, they simply know that things just don’t move like that, at least not anything from around here anyway.

How we choose to interpret these accounts, and more recently those of the F-18 pilots in the New York Times and on CNN, depends on your perspective and how flexible you are in your belief system. Here I would like to explore the “middle” ground. If you believe they are telling the truth and you also believe that extraterrestrial craft are an absurd fantasy perpetuated by a pocket of our population that is tired of acceding to Einstein’s special theory of relativity (which dictates that “warp” speeds are a physical impossibility), it can only lead you to the following conclusion: the objects they saw are real and they are from here. In other words, secret military aircraft would explain most, if not all of the incredible stories told by people who seem utterly convinced of their experience and continue to remain undeterred in their account despite continuous attacks from “debunkers” and dismissal from every “real” media source.

In recent years the government of the United States has been spending around $700,000,000,000 per year (source). Every once in a while we all get a glimpse of what some of this money is paying for when never-before-seen, radar-invisible, futuristic looking flying machines capable of classified speeds and unconfirmed altitudes that are made from obscure materials are rolled out of hangars with a modicum of fanfare. It is not unreasonable to assume that “we” have others out there being tested and tweaked. Flight testing is a necessary part of the development cycle of new technology and could explain many UFO sightings. It would also explain why the military has been so conspicuously tight-lipped about the whole thing. Why jump to the fantasy of ancient, interstellar civilizations that have found a way to crack the cosmic speed-limit when everything could be neatly explained by super-classified military flying machines running test flights?

The secret airship theory certainly ties up many of the loose-ends while not forcing us to discredit the earnest testimony of many eye-witnesses of unexplained aerial phenomena from our brothers and sisters in uniform. It does, however, introduce a new wrinkle in our understanding of the current state. If there are secret aircraft, from whom are they being kept a secret?

A Brief history of Secrecy

We may be quick to conclude that secrecy is a necessary part of modern warfare, and that having weapons technology up our sleeve endows us with a tactical advantage over our adversaries. Upon closer consideration, this military strategy has implications that are potentially very troubling.

To better explain, let us consider the advantage of secret weapons technology historically. In the closing months of WWII it became increasingly apparent that the empire of Japan had little intention of surrendering to the Allied Forces despite their continued heavy losses of life. Emperor Hirohito and propagandists worked the Japanese public into a frenzy through synergistic narratives of nationalism, honor and fear. The introduction of Kamikaze pilots, young warriors of sound mind that were willing to fly their propeller-driven planes directly into American ships, gave the world a startling glimpse into the depth of Japan’s resolve. The United States had something up their sleeve as well.

The possibility of harnessing the power of atomic fission through a chain reaction had been stirring in the minds of theoretical physicists long before the start of the war. The idea of turning this potential force of nature into a weapon came soon afterwards. The Manhattan Project, the secret effort of the US military to build the atomic bomb, did not take place in an isolated desert location called Los Alamos alone. It was an enormous feat of science and engineering that required participation from not only theoretical physicists but engineers, mathematicians, material scientists, construction contractors and laborers. Thousands played a role and their efforts were distributed around the country, from New Mexico to Tennessee. To put it into perspective, the atomic bomb was not constructed only from stuff sitting around. The element Plutonium (used in the Nagasaki bomb) was synthesized by bombarding Uranium with neutron radiation and isolating the products. Prior to the Manhattan Project plutonium was a substance that had not existed beyond extremely trace quantities on our planet.

None of the public and very few of those involved with its production knew what the purpose of all of this activity really was about. Even the Vice President at the time, Harry Truman, was unaware that this effort was taking place. He took the oath of office on April 12, 1945 and was only then briefed about the extent and implications of the Manhattan project. If coordinated correctly, an awful lot of smart people can be kept in the dark about a lot of things, including their own role in a bigger picture.

The decision to deploy the first atomic weapon upon human beings was made behind closed doors. The successful test of an atomic weapon on July 16, 1945 (The Trinity Test) demonstrated undeniably that our species had entered a nuclear age. By most historical accounts, neither the existence of an atomic bomb nor the results of the Trinity test were ever shared with the Japanese government prior to the bombing of Hiroshima just three weeks later. Although it has been reported that a group of leading physicists involved in the development of the weapon formally requested that Truman reconsider his approach, they were not heeded. President Truman made the decision to drop the bomb with no specific warning to the Japanese about its potential for devastation. Ultimately he and his advisers believed that the impact of the bomb would be maximized if it occurred unannounced. Leaflets dropped on the people of Nagasaki several days later did reference the weapon . Because the empire of Japan refused to unconditionally surrender, that city was destroyed with another atomic bomb as well.

Secrecy is the real threat

President Truman’s reasoning has been the subject of much scrutiny and debate. Regardless of one’s critique of his rationale, it is obvious that the use of a weapon as a deterrent is only possible if the enemy is aware that it exists. One can argue that this has been proven as no nuclear weapon has ever been deployed on humans in the 74 years since the destruction of Nagasaki. Indeed, the hegemony nuclear powers exert over the rest of the world only exists because everybody knows who has them and who doesn’t. 

What then is the intent of new kinds of weapons and technology that are are hidden? Secret weapons cannot be deterrents against aggressive action. Weapons that remain hidden in secrecy are necessarily offensive. Moreover, secret weapons can serve a more diabolical purpose than the damage they inflict. If no one knows their damage signature, range or how they are deployed they can potentially be used to synthesize conflict and implicate innocent parties. How would anyone be certain of the source of the aggression? Secret weapons do not exist to prevent wars, they exist to start them.

The atomic bomb was kept a secret for three weeks. Little else has been offered to the public since. It would be naive to to assume that no newsworthy progress has been made with weapons technology beyond supersonic airplanes, miniaturized thermonuclear devices and self-guided drones in the intervening seventy years. If weapons and contrivances of unknown capability are in existence outside of the public eye we must also acknowledge that acts of terror and aggression around the world must carry with it some uncertainty about their origin and intent.

Depending on which sources we trust there have been dozens of staged events portrayed as attacks deserving of retaliation throughout our history, in the United States and around the world. The sinking of the Lusitania, the Gulf of Tonkin events, and Operation Northwoods are just a few of the many actual or planned “false flag” events that our government has admitted were covert operations designed to provoke public outrage and mobilize our war machine. The first resulted in our entry into the first World War, the second resulted in the massive remilitarization of our presence in Vietnam and the third was one of several schemes conceived by JFK’s military advisors to force a US invasion of Cuba using remotely piloted commercial aircraft flown in to American targets. It is likely that those who questioned our government’s depiction of those events at the time felt the same backlash endured by those who continue to exhort others to reexamine the events of 9/11 today.

Three weeks ago we were told by U.S. Secretary of State (and former CIA director) Mike Pompeo that the recent attacks on Saudi oil fields were yet another “act of war” committed by Iran. Tehran continues to vehemently deny his account and insist that it is the work of the Houthis, a Yemeni rebel group. Pompeo characterizes that assertion as “literally nuts” and that an appropriate response would not necessarily be limited to economic sanctions against Iran. Is it possible that neither Iran nor the Houthis were responsible for these attacks?

Whether or not you consider a discussion around UFOs and extraterrestrials to be flippant, the recent attention media has placed on this phenomenon offers an opportunity to consider the depth and implications of secrecy more soberly. Perhaps the US Navy has offered up this footage (15 years after the actual incident in the case of the “tic-tac” sighting) to be forthcoming. Regardless of their intent, it is important to put this admission into context. Have these been the only sightings since 2004? Is it reasonable to assume that this recent disclosure reflects a spirit of transparency or have there been numerous other unacknowledged encounters with UFOs as the “unofficial” testimonies indicate?

If these objects reported by the Navy are not of extraterrestrial origin we must avail ourselves to the reality that weapons and craft of spectacular capability are hidden not just from our “enemies” but from all of us. In either case, it is clear that despite the tepid public reaction to this Navy report, it has offered us a rare glimpse of the depth and breadth of secrecy that has been imposed upon us, if we are willing to pay attention. This wall of secrecy does not merely hide a few irrelevant facts. It may very well be an all-encompassing “distortion field” that has perpetuated a vastly different interpretation of global events while squelching a potential, transcendent truth about our history and our role in a greater cosmic neighborhood.

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Alternative News

Ontario (Canada) Gives Police Authority To Pull Over Vehicles To Find Out Where They Are Going

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 6 minute read

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    The Ontario government has just announced very strict lockdown and stay at home orders. They've also given police the power to pull people over to find out where they are going and where they live.

  • Reflect On:

    Is this really about the virus? Why are so many experts, and so much science that opposes what government is saying completely unacknowledged?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

As authoritarianism spreads, as emergency laws proliferate, as we sacrifice our rights, we also sacrifice our capability to arrest the slide into a less liberal and less free world. Do you truly believe that when the first wave, this second wave, the 16th wave of the coronavirus is a long-forgotten memory, that these capabilities will not be kept? That these datasets will not be kept? No matter how it is being used, what’ is being built is the architecture of oppression. -Edward Snowden (source)

Ontario, Canada has just announced stronger lockdown measures after current lockdown measures and stay at home orders have not done anything to slow the spread of covid when taking cases into account. Under the new orders, most non-essential businesses, manufacturing and construction will be closed, this includes non-essential curb side pick ups as well for retail businesses. Outdoor recreational facilities like parks, basketball courts, tennis courts and golf courses will now be closed and essential businesses, like grocery stores, will be limited to a certain capacity.

For the first time, the Ontario government has given police officers the power to pull vehicles over without cause, demand their ID and home address as well as ask where they are going and why. This also applies to citizens who are outside. This is effective immediately for a period of 6 weeks.

I just came across this via the live press conference. Part of the changes in the recent announcement were to give police more authority to handle non-compliance, something that’s been a big part of this pandemic as many people, doctors and scientists continue to disagree with the actions being taken by governments, while others agree. The government has also put restrictions on travel between provinces.

We have made the deliberate decision to temporarily enhance police officers’ authority for the duration of the stay at home order. Moving forward, police will have the authority to require any individual who is not in a place of residence to first provide the purpose for not being at home and provide their home address. – Solicitor General Sylvia Jones said in the press conference.

The Ontario government continues to blame the citizenry for non-compliance when, in reality, there is a tremendous amount of science and data that’s been published in various medical and scientific journals from around the world showing that lockdowns have not been helpful in stopping the spread of COVID.

Furthermore, there is research showing lockdowns have killed more people than covid, and will have devastating results for years to come. Not only that, an estimate from the United Nations World Food Program indicates that pandemic lockdowns causing breaks in the food chain are expected to push 135 million people into severe hunger and starvation.

The ease to which people could be terrorised into surrendering basic freedoms which are fundamental to our existence…came as a shock to me…History will look back on measures – as a monument of collective hysteria & government folly.” – Jonathan Sumption, former British supreme court justice. (source)

This is quite confusing, if lockdowns and restrictions aren’t necessarily helping to curb the spread, why is government, especially the Ontario government, acting like they are effective and necessary tools? This is a discussion that has not been had within the mainstream. Renowned experts in the field who are presenting this data have been completely ignored, censored and in many cases ridiculed.

Another point that’s being used to justify restriction measures is the fact that hospitals in Ontario are at capacity, and ICUs are full. This has always been a concern in many countries, especially in Ontario, Canada. For example, in 2017 more than 50 percent of hospitals in Ontario were above 100 percent capacity. There are examples all over the world for the past decade. That being said, is covid adding to this, or is it simply something we’ve always seen in hospitals? Is the only difference big media coverage?

What about the fact that PCR testing may yield an enormous amount of false positives? Testing positive does not mean you have the virus, or that you can spread it, especially if you are asymptomatic, yet this entire lockdown is based on testing asymptomatic people and asymptomatic cases. What about the death count and the fact that Ontario Public Health has admitted to the fact that they are marking deaths as “covid” when it’s not even clear if covid caused or contributed to the death? What about the fact that the survival rate of the virus is 99.95 percent and above for people under the age of 70, or that prior infection can provide more immunity than the vaccine?

Again, the point is,there are many concerns that are being completely ignored and unacknowledged.

In the case of covid, it’s quite clear that people of all backgrounds and professions are split. You even have world renowned experts in the field split on these issues, with many opposing and supporting measures. As a result, this has many people confused, and it begs the question, should government really have the authority to put mandates into place that restrict our movement, rights and freedoms?

Is this really about the virus, or about the benefits that big tech, health and government will reap and have been reaping from this pandemic? When measures go against the will of so many people, should government not be allowed to mandate such measures and instead, present their science and make recommendations to people, leaving them the choice to act in ways they see fit?

Are we living in an age where government and big tech are doing the thinking for us, telling us what is and isn’t and trying to control our lives more and more every single year? How do we stop this if it’s true? Why do we continue to comply? One thing is certain, covid has been a great catalyst for more and more people to really question what type of world we are currently living in.

So what’s the solution to this? Is it mass/collective organized peaceful non-compliance? A Belgian court has ruled that the current COVID-19 measures being deployed don’t have a sound legal basis. The State has 30 days to lift restrictions or face fines. Can something like this happen in this situation? We will wait and see what happens as, no doubt, many people are going to be upset and showing it.

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Florida Education Minister Urges Schools To Drop Mask Mandates

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 9 minute read

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Florida Education Commissioner Richard Corcoran said schools should make mask-wearing voluntary in the 2021-2022 school year, stating that they should simply be optional.

  • Reflect On:

    Why is one narrative being pushed hard, while the other is being heavily ridiculed and labelled as "dangerous" by mainstream media and government?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

What Happened: Earlier this week, Florida’s education commissioner directed all schools to drop mask mandates for the next school year because, according to him, they are not necessary and can simply be an optional measure for students and parents. According to him, mask policies “do not impact the spread of the virus” and they “may impede instruction” for some students. The decision is not up to him, however, as each individual district will ultimately decide whether or not they want to impose mask mandes for next school year.

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis recently convened a round table on public health. At that discussion, Professor of Medicine at Stanford University Dr. Jay Bhattacharya stated that “masks have not only been not effective but have been harmful.”

The video of this discussion was removed from YouTube, and then ridiculed by mainstream media. This has been a big problem throughout this pandemic. We have big tech “fact-checkers” censoring and removing any kind of narrative that does not fit within the framework or narrative that government health authorities are telling us. If things were so obvious, why would they need to censor world renowned experts?  It’s been a common theme, and Bhattacharya is one of many who have been subjected to this type of treatment.

He’s one of the three initiators of The Great Barrington Declaration. The other two are  Dr. Sunetra Gupta, PhD Professor of Theoretical Epidemiology at the University of Oxford and Dr. Martin Kulldorff, PhD, Professor of Medicine at Harvard, Infectious Disease Epidemiologist. You can watch an interesting discussion with all three of them here if interested.

Bhattacharya responded to the criticism in a recent piece he wrote for the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) stating the following:

I attended a public-policy roundtable hosted by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis last month. The point was to discuss the state’s Covid policies in the months ahead. That 600,000 Americans have died with Covid-19 is evidence that the lockdowns over the past year, including significant restrictions on the lives of children, haven’t worked. Florida reopened in May and declined to shut down again. Yet age-adjusted mortality is lower in Florida than in locked-down California, and Florida’s public schools are almost all open, while California’s aren’t.

My fellow panelists—Sunetra Gupta of Oxford, Martin Kulldorff of Harvard and Scott Atlas of Stanford—and I discussed a variety of topics. One was the wisdom of requiring children to wear masks. The press asked questions, and a video of the event was posted on YouTube by local media, including Tampa’s WTSP.

But last week YouTube removed a recording of this routine policy discussion from its website. The company claimed my fellow panel members and I were trafficking in misinformation. The company said it removed the video “because it included content that contradicts the consensus of local and global health authorities regarding the efficacy of masks to prevent the spread of COVID-19.”

Yet the panelists are all experts, and all spoke against requiring children to wear masks. I can’t speak for my counterparts, but my reasoning was a cost-benefit analysis. The benefits of masking children are small to none; the costs are much higher.

The scientific evidence is clear.

He then goes on to cite site some science.

Kari Stefansson, senior author of a study  study from Iceland conducted early in the epidemic when masking was uncommon showing that incidents of covid in children is far less than adults, stated that children are.

“less likely to get infected than adults and if they get infected, they are less likely to get seriously ill. What is interesting is that even if children do get infected, they are less likely to transmit the disease to others than adults.”

According to Bhattacharya, “many studies in the scientific literature reach a similar conclusion: Even unmasked children pose less of a risk for disease spread than adults.”

For example, Jonas F Ludvigsson, a paediatrician at Örebro University Hospital and professor of clinical epidemiology at the Karolinska Institute wrote letter to the editor published in the New England Journal of Medicine titled “Open Schools, Covid-19, and Child and Teacher Morbidity in Sweden” has found that:

“Despite Sweden’s having kept schools and preschools open, we found a low incidence of severe Covid-19 among schoolchildren and children of preschool age during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic…No child with Covid-19 died…Among the 1,951,905 children who were 1 to 16 years of age, 15 children had Covid-19, MIS-C, or both conditions and were admitted to an ICU, which is equal to 1 child in 130,000.”

You can read more about this specific story here, as he has quit his research due to the harassment he received for simply presenting data.

Why This Is Important: There are the points made above, and then there are papers outlining the supposed dangers and ineffectiveness of masks. Many have been published in peer-reviewed scientific/medical journals prior to covid, and during covid.

For example, one paper titled “Facemasks in the COVID-19 era: A health hypothesis” concludes:

The existing scientific evidences challenge the safety and efficacy of wearing facemask as preventive intervention for COVID-19. The data suggest that both medical and non-medical facemasks are ineffective to block human-to-human transmission of viral and infectious disease such SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19, supporting against the usage of facemasks. Wearing facemasks has been demonstrated to have substantial adverse physiological and psychological effects. These include hypoxia, hypercapnia, shortness of breath, increased acidity and toxicity, activation of fear and stress response, rise in stress hormones, immunosuppression, fatigue, headaches, decline in cognitive performance, predisposition for viral and infectious illnesses, chronic stress, anxiety and depression. Long-term consequences of wearing facemask can cause health deterioration, developing and progression of chronic diseases and premature death. Governments, policy makers and health organizations should utilize prosper and scientific evidence-based approach with respect to wearing facemasks, when the latter is considered as preventive intervention for public health.

I’ve written about a study published in the New England Medical Journal by Harvard doctors that outlines how it’s already known that masks provide little to zero benefit when it comes to protection in a public setting. According to them,

We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. Public health authorities define a significant exposure to Covid-19 as face-to-face contact within 6 feet with a patient with symptomatic Covid-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and some say more than 10 minutes or even 30 minutes). The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal. In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic.

The papers cited above are a few of many, there are a plethora of them available within the scientific literature.

Yes, there are also studies that claim and explain why they believe masks are an effective tool to mitigate the virus, and we know that organizations like the Centres For Disease Control (CDC) deem them to be extremely effective and necessary.  The point is, why are those who point out, explain, and provide evidence and reason for the idea that masks are not effective being heavily censored, vilified, and ridiculed? What’s going on here? Why is proper critique and discussion being completely shut down and why are those who are creating awareness about these issues labelled as “dangerous anti-maskers.” This, in my opinion is quite frankly unscientific.

Perhaps I can explore one possible explanation. Perhaps any type of information, data or evidence, no matter how credible, that opposes the measures and narrative of government and big media threatens various business/agendas in these powerful circles. It begs the question, does government and government affiliated health/business really look out for what’s best for its citizens? The COVID pandemic has definitely served as a catalyst for more people to ask that question who wouldn’t have prior to the pandemic.

This is just my opinion, but in presenting it I put our platform, Collective Evolution, at risk being punished in various ways for simply sharing it. We’ve not only been falsely smeared by fact checkers but have also been hurt financially on social media simply for bringing forth facts that the mainstream doesn’t wish to address.

The Takeaway: At the end of the day, it’s very difficult to determine who is right or wrong, which is why we need open dialogue. The fact that simple discussion and pieces of evidence that change the narrative, or threaten it, is being shut down, censored and completely ridiculed is quite concerning. The mainstream media continues to fail to have appropriate conversations surrounding all things COVID while forcing their narrative on the public. This in turn has created a great divide among the citizenry when really, we should all be coming together and respecting everybody’s decision to act as they please.

When things are not so cut and dry, it’s questionable whether or not we should really give governments the ability to control our lives in the manner they have done with this pandemic.

Science is being suppressed for political and financial gain. Covid-19 has unleashed state corruption on a grand scale, and it is harmful to public health. Politicians and industry are responsible for this opportunistic embezzlement. So too are scientists and health experts. The pandemic has revealed how the medical-political complex can be manipulated in an emergency—a time when it is even more important to safeguard science. –

Dr. Kamran Abbasi, executive editor of the prestigious British Medical Journal, editor of the Bulletin of the World Health Organization, and a consultant editor for PLOS Medicine. He is editor of the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine and JRSM Open. Taken from his published a piece in the BMJ, titled “Covid-19: politicisation, “corruption,” and suppression of science.”

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Ontario, Canada To Impose Stricter Measures: Lockdown & Stay At Home Orders Are Not Working

Avatar

Published

on

By

CE Staff Writer 5 minute read

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    The Ontario (Canada) government is set to impose even more restrictions and enforcement on the citizenry despite already being in lockdown and stay at home order mode. The announcement will be made this afternoon.

  • Reflect On:

    Why do governments continue to ignore the vast amount of research and data that's been published showing lockdowns and other restrictions do nothing to stop the spread of covid, and are probably doing more harm than covid?

Before you begin...

Coherent icon

Take a moment and breathe. Place your hand over your chest area, near your heart. Breathe slowly into the area for about a minute, focusing on a sense of ease entering your mind and body. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

What Happened: Ontario, Canada is and has been well into a province wide lockdown and stay at home order. Most businesses, if not already permanently closed from going out of business, have been reduced to curb side pick-ups only, while essential stores, like grocery stores, have remained open. This has been ongoing, on and off, as all of you know for more than one year now.

This afternoon, the government is set to announce even more restrictions.

According to CTV News Toronto,

Sources tell CTV News Toronto and CP24 the latest data, which is expected to be released on Friday, shows that based on Ontario’s current trends there could be between 12,000 to 18,000 new daily infections by the end of May, with up to 1,800 patients in intensive care. The measures under consideration include shutting down construction to just critical infrastructure projects and placing limits on non-essential manufacturing and warehousing. Additional restrictions on religious services are also being considered by cabinet.

Ontario is also considering more enforcement with regards to fines for those who disobey rules, and perhaps shutting down curb side pick-ups of some non-essential retailers.

Cases, however, are still accelerating exponentially. A lot of “fear-mongering” and concern is being raised by government public health officials, doctors and scientists. On the other hand, you have a number of doctors and scientists who are not as concerned, explaining that the number of cases, and rising case numbers are not as big of a threat as it’s being made to be, especially given the fact that infection can provide an immunity that is stronger than the supposed immunity a vaccine can provide. They have also been pointing out that we are dealing with a virus that has a very low mortality rate, 99.95 percent and higher for people under the age of 70, to be exact.

Many in the field have been creating awareness around the catastrophic impacts of lockdowns, providing data showing that lockdown measures around the globe may have already killed more people than covid itself, and will have lasting impacts for years to come while they affect most aspects of humanity. Furthermore, they’ve also presented a wealth of data showing that lockdowns are not effective at all at stopping the spread of the virus, that they are, essentially, useless.

This is quite confusing, if lockdowns and restrictions do nothing to curb the spread, why is government, especially the Ontario government, acting like they are effective and necessary tools? Why do they also completely ignore the idea that lockdowns may be completely ineffective and more harmful? This is a discussion that has not at all been had within the mainstream, and renowned experts in the field who are presenting this data have been completely ignored, censored and in many cases ridiculed.

Another point that’s being used to justify restriction measures is the fact that hospitals in Ontario are at capacity, and ICUs are full. This has always been a concern in many countries, especially in Ontario, Canada. For example, in 2017 more than 50 percent of hospitals in Ontario were above 100 percent capacity. There are examples all over the world for the past decade. That being said, is covid adding to this, or is it simply something we’ve always seen in hospitals? Is the only difference big media coverage?

Why This Is Important: Sure, many people might agree with lockdowns and other mandates. It’s hard to hear, however, the Ontario government constantly blaming portions of the population for the fact that they are not being effective, without ever considering, as again something that’s been shown time and time again in several countries, that lockdowns are simply not effective in stopping the spread. If this is the case, it renders lockdowns useless and paints a bad picture for government, which would be the fact that they’ve done nothing but put people in harm’s way.

In the case of covid, it’s quite clear that people of all backgrounds and professions are split. You even have world renowned experts in the field split on these issues, with many opposing and supporting measures. This as a result has many people confused, and it begs the question, should government really have the authority to put mandates into place that restrict our movement, rights and freedoms? Is this really about the virus, or about the benefits that big tech, health and government will reap and have been reaping from this pandemic? When measures go against the will of so many people, should government not be allowed to mandate such measures and instead, present their science and make recommendations to people, leaving them the choice to act in ways they see fit? Are we living in an age where government and big tech are doing the thinking for us, telling us what is and isn’t and trying to control our lives more and more every single year? How do we stop this? Why do we continue to comply? One thing is certain, covid has been a great catalyst for more and more people to really question what type of world we are currently living in.

Dive Deeper

Click below to watch a sneak peek of our brand new course!

Our new course is called 'Overcoming Bias & Improving Critical Thinking.' This 5 week course is instructed by Dr. Madhava Setty & Joe Martino

If you have been wanting to build your self awareness, improve your.critical thinking, become more heart centered and be more aware of bias, this is the perfect course!

Click here to check out a sneak peek and learn more.

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

Elevate your inbox and get conscious articles sent directly to your inbox!

Choose your topics of interest below:

You have Successfully Subscribed!