No Mercy — Onward To Nuremberg

At the beginning of this year, I began Article 185, somewhat optimistically, with the words:

‘Let us all hope that 2022 will be the year when humanity continues to revert to its senses and rebels against the anti-scientific ‘COVID’ tyranny.’

Well, there has been encouraging progress. More and more individuals are slowly realizing that ‘COVID’ was not a pandemic but an elaborate psy-op, contrived, as Bill Gates admitted, to inject every person on the planet, regardless of necessity (none), efficacy (none) or, most crucially, personal danger (no end of). If ‘booster’ uptake is a relevant marker, then Gates and his globalist bum-chums have lost this battle, along with any shreds of moral or intellectual credibility that they might previously have possessed.

I have fought my corner, albeit a relatively obscure one. Apart from the faithful followers of El Escritor Inglés, and fellow researchers interacting with me on scientific forums, my audience is small. What was always needed is for those with millions of eager devotees to wake up and rise up. This is, to my delight, beginning to happen.

For example, Oscar-winning American actor Tim Robbins (1958-) (Figure 214.1) is one of Hollywood’s most socially-aware individuals. A University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) graduate, he has a multi-decade reputation for being thoughtful and articulate. He is, politically, of the left and has supported several high-profile causes throughout his career.

However, in a recent interview with the British comedian and social commentator Russell Brand (1975-), Robbins made a welcome admission. While hoodwinked and brainwashed by the fraudulent ‘COVID’ narrative, he became ‘tribal, angry, vindictive’ towards the ‘unvaccinated’.

Figure 214.1: Oscar-winner Tim Robbins sees the light.

Copyright © 2022 Russell Brand

‘I bought into it,’ Robbins admitted. ‘And I was masking everywhere. I was keeping my social distance so as adhering to the requests made of me. And I felt angry at people that didn’t do that.’

Robbins was not alone. Millions throughout the world were duped into blaming the imposition of tyranny not on the perpetrators but on those of us who were wide awake and resisting it in brave defence of everyone, including Mr Robbins himself.

‘It wasn’t until I came to the UK in January of 2021 that I started to have questions,’ said Robbins. ‘I noticed a lot of people were not adhering again to these requests made by their government. And I thought, well, they’re going to have a hard day coming up, you know, that there will be some serious death here. And I kept my mask on and I kept adhering to the policies. But it wasn’t until much later that I started to have questions.

‘When I saw that there wasn’t a huge death rate in Britain after I had witnessed personally what it was happening, I started to wonder more and more about what we were being told and whether it was true or not. And so it took a while for me to speak about it.

‘I began to educate myself, and I began to open my mind to what was going on.’

In my view, Robbins deserves credit for his contrition and humility. He had looked — belatedly — beyond the propaganda, asked himself honest questions and, finally, gone public with the only rational conclusions. Even so, how much applause is he due? Should he be welcomed with open arms into the Wide Awake Club or publicly derided for initially advocating a vile persecution of the thinking minority? It is a difficult question to answer. On the one hand, his initial views might have fortified the fraud in the minds of others; conversely, his Damascene conversion is a substantial boon to the cause of worldwide liberty.

Prominent medical practitioners, too, are finally opening their eyes. In Australia last week, former federal Member of Parliament, and Australian Medical Association president, Dr Kerryn Phelps (1957-) (Figure 214.2), spoke out about ‘devastating vaccine injuries’ suffered by her patients, her partner and herself. Dr Phelps also confirmed that the rate of serious adverse events is systematically underreported, owing to censorship and threats to medical professionals.

Figure 214.2: Dr Kerryn Phelps (left) with her partner, Jackie Stricker

Copyright © 2022 Dylan Robinson

The same question, however, applies: should Dr Phelps be applauded for her honesty and newly-discovered insight, or does she stand eternally culpable for the inevitable deaths and injuries suffered by those who were guided by her original, misinformed, pro-‘vaccine’ advice?

Perhaps the most notable mea culpa has come from Professor Emily Oster (1980-) (Figure 214.3), of Brown University, Rhode Island, USA. An economist, albeit with no scientific credentials, this professor has been slated far and wide for calling for an amnesty for all those who imposed or advocated the draconian ‘COVID’ mandates. Does this naïve academic honestly believe that the millions of innocent people who have been crippled physically, financially, socially, educationally and psychologically, based on a monstrous pack of lies, are going to forgive and forget — or that they should?

Figure 214.3: Professor Emily Oster might have just let the cat out of the bag.

Copyright © 2022 TED Conferences, LLC

Professor Oster ought to be reminded that an amnesty — for anything — is something that is proposed by the victims of injustice, not a ruse suggested by the perpetrators or their agents. It is, therefore, not at all surprising that so much vitriol has been thrown in her direction. If I had a drop to spare, I would join the bombardment.

I wonder, though, why she made this deeply offensive suggestion in the first place. Is she trying to save her own skin, following her initial support of ‘COVID’ tyranny? Is she clumsily testing the water, perhaps as a spokesperson for those higher up?

Whatever she is thinking, only those guilty of wrongdoing beg for mercy. There must be none shown — no amnesty, no forgiving and no forgetting. All those involved in this unparalleled crime against humanity must stand trial in a legitimate court of law — i.e. Nuremberg 2.0.

2022 witnessed the truth being told. There must be justice in 2023.

Copyright © 2022 Paul Spradbery

Another Fukushima Explodes

On 11th March, 2011, an earthquake and subsequent tsunami caused a major nuclear disaster at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in Fukushima, Japan. This was the most powerful earthquake ever recorded in Japan — until last week, when its namesake exploded in front of stunned Japanese public health officials and media.

Professor Masanori Fukushima is an infectious disease expert. Professor Emeritus at Kyoto University, Japan, he has more than 25 years of experience in the field of oncology. As Director and Chairman of Japan’s Translational Research Informatics (TRI) Center, Professor Fukushima is a prominent government adviser. When he speaks, anyone with good sense listens.

The following video (Figure 213.1) features a blistering speech given by Professor Fukushima to Japanese Ministry of Health officials. Although it is presented with English subtitles, I would advise all not to mute the sound but to listen to the tone of his voice and the raw emotion he conveys alongside his vast scientific knowledge. In short, he is as angry as hell. He states explicitly that billions of lives could be in danger from the ‘COVID’ injections.

Perhaps most shockingly, he states:

‘So many vaccines have been administered. At the Ministry of Health that is waving the flag in encouragement, only 10% have been vaccinated. Is this a fucking joke?!’

No, it is not. Politicians in many countries are conveniently exempt. They know the danger.

Figure 213.1: Professor Fukushima lets rip.

Copyright © 2022 Bright Light News

If, say, just one per cent of all medics and scientists were as brave, honest and principled as this eminent Japanese doctor, then the whole ‘COVID’ house of cards would collapse immediately. Some lives would be saved, perpetrators would be arrested and Nuremberg-style trials could be arranged. In Article 212, written five days ago, I referred to the fact that the UK’s Royal Society of Biology has not condemned the use of these lethal drugs. Whether its top officials are oblivious to the truth, or simply keeping their heads buried, I do not know. Either way, its stance is quite pathetic and I shall continue to refer to it.

Meanwhile, last Friday, the former Australian cricket captain, Ricky Ponting, 47 years old, was the latest in an ever-lengthening list of sports professionals to be admitted to hospital with acute cardiac pains. Three of Ponting’s international cricketing colleagues, namely Shane Warne, Andrew Symonds and Rod Marsh, ‘died suddenly and unexpectedly’ earlier this year.

Finally, last Saturday, at a not-so-famous sporting venue — Hayes Lane, home of Bromley Football Club in South London — the match between Bromley and Yeovil Town was abandoned after just 11 minutes, after a spectator ‘died suddenly and unexpectedly’.

Excess overall mortality, absent in ‘pandemic year’ (2020), is now at an unprecedented level (Figure 213.2).

Figure 213.2: Edward Dowd is a former Wall Street analyst and BlackRock portfolio manager. In this book, he examines the epidemic of sudden deaths in America. Early in 2021, he noticed a rise of news anecdotes about sudden deaths among very fit athletes and other seemingly healthy young people across the country. His thesis was simple: what changed in 2021? A mass vaccination campaign for ‘COVID’ was his conclusion. Throughout 2021 and 2022, Edward amassed evidence from the insurance industry, funeral home industry and government databases. Excessive deaths among working-age Americans have increased in 2021 versus 2020 when ‘vaccines’ were not available. Equivalent data from many other countries tell the same chilling story.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Cause-Epidemic-Sudden-Childrens-Defense/dp/1510776397

Copyright © 2022 Edward Dowd

Irish-British statesman Edmund Burke (1729-97) wisely said:

‘All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.’

Wise but illogical, I might add. Those that do nothing cannot be described as good.

Copyright © 2022 Paul Spradbery

A ‘Groucho’ Club

I was elected to the Royal Society of Biology (RSB) on 1st July, 2022 (Figure 212.1). Of all the organizations that I have previously joined, only one membership has not lapsed, that of the Worshipful Company of Haberdashers, which is a family tradition dating back two centuries. I am, therefore, proud to be a Haberdasher and look forward to my sons becoming members in the near future. That said, I have never been a natural follower of anything or anyone.

Figure 212.1: RSB membership certificate

Copyright © 2022 Royal Society of Biology

Fair dealing asserted.

The RSB is a prestigious ‘club’. Electees must prove their contribution and ongoing commitment to the scientific method and an honourable pursuit of objective truth. The society offers advice, where appropriate, to government agencies. At a local level, there are fascinating research activities and opportunities coordinated by senior members. For example, I was looking forward to (my younger son and I) taking part in an electro-fishing session on a small river 30 miles from home. Given my everyday routine of micro-analysis in a research laboratory, I thought that some fresh air and dirty fieldwork would be beneficial. Unfortunately, it was not to be.

Last month, I received an unexpected letter from the RSB’s top brass, which referred to my online comments and articles relating to ‘vaccinations’. (Here we go, I thought.) It was accompanied by a weasel word du jour, namely ‘misinformation’, which has yet to be defined by any of the censorship freaks that throw it around. Apparently, my views and public comments do not coincide with the ‘weight of opinion’; and it was, therefore, decided that I had ‘a case to answer’.

Not wishing to disappoint, I answered within the requested 14-day period, as follows:

Dear Dr -----,

Thank you for the attached correspondence, which I have read carefully and with interest.

First, I hereby agree to refrain from including ‘MRSB’ in anything I write, be it online or otherwise. Any existing references to the RSB will be erased as far as possible. I hope this is acceptable to you. That said, I have never referred to RSB membership as anything other than a simple statement of fact. Any views I express are wholly my own and offered in an intellectually honest manner. If any reader assumes that my views represent either the RSB as a whole or any other member, then that would be a lazy misconception. (Note that I have written ‘MRSB', not ‘RSB’.) There has never been, and never would be, any intent to mislead on my part. (If I had likewise correctly stated, for example, ‘University of Dundee alumnus’, then it would be presumptuous and irrational that my personal views should be taken to coincide with those of the institution itself.) I do, however, respect your original point.

Second, I have never discussed the merits or otherwise of ‘vaccinations’, not that it should be objectionable if I had. With reference to the ‘COVID’ drugs, it is well established that these are not vaccines at all. The fact that the WHO saw the urgency to redefine the word ‘vaccine’ is a testament to this sleight-of-hand.

My openly-stated views of these non-vaccines stem mainly from the following:

1. They have been inadequately tested. Novel drugs involve a decade of careful work. Research into reproductive toxicology, carcinotoxicity and genotoxicity, animal tests, medium and long-term clinical trials etc. were not carried out.  A paltry three months of ‘testing’ prior to universal rollout is ludicrously insufficient, from both safety and efficacy perspectives.

2. They provide neither significant prophylactic nor therapeutic benefit. ARR of, for example, the original Pfizer version, is a mere 0.84% — which explains why RRR values were widely publicized instead. This clearly constitutes ‘intent to mislead’.

3. In 1976, a swine flu vaccine was withdrawn completely following just 25 to 50 subsequent deaths. Official data from, for example, MHRA Yellow Card, VAERS and Eudravigilance all show that the huge number of reported fatalities and serious adverse events caused by the ‘COVID’ drugs far exceeds this figure. Apply the substantial under-reporting factor, and it is evident, via basic mathematics alone, that they are already the most dangerous and lethal drugs in the history of medicine. It is an abomination that they are in use.

4. Excess overall mortality is significantly higher than prior to the rollout of the drugs. Positive correlation between injections and deaths is very strong. This is especially high in young people (15 to 45 years), including, most notably, professional athletes. The incidence of severe cardiovascular pathology has recently become so high that the disingenuous term ‘Sudden Adult Death Syndrome’ has suddenly been invented. Such cases are especially prevalent in highly ‘vaccinated’ nations, such as Israel, Australia, New Zealand and Canada.

5. They do not prevent viral transmission. Only last month, a Pfizer director admitted — under oath — that transmissibility tests were never carried out. This revelation is shocking but not surprising.

6. Given that, presently, the vast majority of acute infectious respiratory disease cases in British hospitals are among the ‘vaccinated’, it is clear that the drugs are having a deleterious effect on immune system function. Antibody-dependent enhancement and vaccine-mediated immune deficiency are strongly indicated by the data.

All the above points can be easily substantiated by the relevant literature, if anyone cares to look. It follows, therefore, that I have neither misled nor encouraged anyone to be misled about ‘scientific or professional issues’. I have simply told the truth. In stark contrast, the RSB’s own description of the drugs’ rollout as having been done ‘successfully’ could be deemed accurate in terms of logistics or Big Pharma profits, but it is an ignorant insult to the unprecedented number of dead and seriously injured.

Moreover:

7. ‘COVID’ case figures have been grossly inflated. As any halfway decent biologist knows, PCR is not a diagnostic tool for infection or illness. Its use as a ‘gold standard’ is, therefore, fraudulent. Further, a 45-amplification-cycle protocol ensures a false-positive rate well in excess of 90%. ‘Intent to mislead’ could hardly be more blatant.

8. ‘COVID’ mortality figures have been grossly inflated, too. The phrase ‘died within 28 days of a positive PCR test’ should make this deceit rather obvious, even to non-scientists.

9. Recently, a comprehensive meta-analysis conducted by Stanford University shows that the IFR for ‘COVID’ is approximately 0.15%. This value is not significantly different from that for seasonal flu (0.05 to 0.3%). Hence, there has been no viral pandemic at all. (Had the WHO not redefined the word ‘pandemic’ in 2009, ‘COVID’ would not have qualified to be described as such, and, consequently, the unlicensed drugs masquerading as vaccines could not have been granted Emergency Use Authorization.)

10. The genetic sequences of the ‘COVID’ drugs were patented prior to 2015. The PCR ‘test’ kits were distributed worldwide in 2018. ‘Event 2O1’, a theoretical ‘pandemic’ exercise, conducted in late 2019, foretold — incredibly — of a coronavirus pandemic just weeks prior to worldwide media reports. Hence, ‘COVID’ and its universal ‘treatment’ were, evidently, planned well in advance.

In the light of these simple facts, I reject any accusations of ‘misinformation’ or ‘disinformation’. These Orwellian terms are being parroted to mean ‘statements contradicting the official narrative’ and to shut down debate. I would argue that, if such words are to be used at all, they would be most applicable to information from the State and corporate media, which has been shown repeatedly to be full of lies, exaggerations, distortions and omissions.

Science does not progress by labelling honestly-held, evidence-based alternative views negatively. It does not prosper by obligatory adherence to the ‘weight of opinion’. Science advances only when dissent, disagreement and debate are unopposed — better still encouraged — and when seemingly awkward individuals within a collective are free to claim, without threat of sanction, that the consensus view is nonsense. Truth begins as heresy, as demonstrated by Charles Darwin.

Nonetheless, as the number of post-injection deaths and serious injuries increases ever further, the truth is breaking through the dam. In Parliament, MPs Sir Christopher Chope, Andrew Bridgen and Esther McVey have called for an immediate investigation. In Europe, MEPs Christine Anderson and Robert Roos have been even more vocal. All scientists and scientific organizations now have an urgent moral responsibility to blow the whistle and protect the public. The RSB’s mute stance on the matter is, therefore, unfortunate. Some might say pitiful. How many more innocents must die before the RSB (does as I have done and) speaks out?

It is disappointing, then, to discover that the ethos of the RSB does not coincide squarely with my own. Thus, I feel that it would be wise if I were to relinquish, with immediate effect, RSB membership. As I have stated, I shall make no further references of affiliation and delete existing ones, wherever I can.

I hope, very sincerely, that you and all RSB members will look beyond the crumbling ‘COVID’ narrative, peddled by mendacious politicians and their puppeteers. You should all realize — and publicly admit — that, first, the so-called ‘pandemic’ was a contrived fraud and, second, that official mortality data and peer-reviewed scientific evidence prove that the pushing of these damnable drugs constitutes a crime against humanity which is becoming more serious, and more obvious, by the day.

This will be my final correspondence.

Kindest regards.

Yours sincerely and respectfully,

Paul Spradbery

As things stand, the RSB is on the wrong side of the argument. If it does not wish to be on the wrong side of history, then it must remove its head from the sand and acknowledge the overwhelming truth. It has, in my view, a case to answer. I await any public announcement, recommending immediate withdrawal of these lethal drugs and a full, independent investigation into them. Until then, silence equals complicity.

Groucho Marx (1890-1977) once said:

‘I refuse to join any club that will have me as a member.’

Perhaps I ought to have known better.

Copyright © 2022 Paul Spradbery