STORY AT-A-GLANCE
The film Planet Lockdown explores this unprecedented time in history, speaking with epidemiologists, scientists, doctors and other experts to uncover the real motives behind the increasing totalitarian control taking over the globe
Dr. Scott Jensen, a family doctor and former member of the Minnesota Senate, received an email from the Department of Health that coached him to use COVID-19 as a diagnosis incorrectly
The notion of asymptomatic spread turns virtually anyone you meet or encounter on the street into the enemy or a threat, furthering fear and control
The artificially imposed state of incoherence that’s been enacted during the pandemic is described as a torture tactic, designed to get people to submit to vaccine passports and COVID-19 shots
Many of the experts in the film bring up the Nuremberg Code, which is being violated as people are forced to get experimental shots
Civil disobedience, boycotting businesses that are requiring vaccine passports, participating in rallies and fighting illegal mandates in court are ways that everyone can get involved in protecting freedom
Prior to 2020, if you heard the term “lockdown” you might think of something that happens in a prison — not in a free society.
This mechanism of control has since become commonplace — not among prisoners but among the free — with repercussions that are only beginning to be understood.
The film Planet Lockdown explores this unprecedented time in history, speaking with epidemiologists, scientists, doctors and other experts
to uncover the real motives behind the increasing totalitarian control taking over the globe.
Already banned by Facebook and YouTube, the film starts at the beginning of the pandemic, when we were told lockdowns were necessary to “flatten the curve.”
This was supposed to be a short-term, 15-day event in the U.S., but the narrative soon changed to ongoing restrictions.
As Michael Yeadon, Ph.D., a former vice-president and chief scientific adviser of the drug company Pfizer and founder and CEO of the biotech company Ziarco, now owned by Novartis, explained,
people have historically quarantined the sick, but quarantining healthy people, as has occurred for the past two years, has no scientific backing or historic precedence.
“Given this virus represents, at most, a slightly bigger risk to the old and ill than seasonal influenza, and a less risk, a smaller risk, to almost everyone else who’s younger and fit,” Yeadon says,
“it was never necessary for us to have done anything.
We didn’t need to do anything — lockdowns, masks, testing, vaccines even.”
Questionable Practices Urged for COVID-19 Diagnosis
Dr. Scott Jensen, a family doctor and former member of the Minnesota Senate, received an email from the Department of Health that seemed to be coaching him to use COVID-19 as a diagnosis in situations where he wouldn’t have previously used influenza or any other specific viral diagnosis without first testing for it. He said:4
“What struck me right away was I felt like I was being coached to go ahead and use COVID-19 without using the same standards of precision that I would for other things.
If I’m going to make a diagnosis, I believe as a physician I have an obligation to use the tools available to me to nail it down with as much certainty as possible.
And it seemed to me that the Department of Health, and the link to this CDC document that said you could diagnose COVID-19 as a cause of death on a death certificate
… those two documents, in tandem, went against everything that I had been taught or doing for the last 35 years.”
Even Dr. Ngozi Ezike, director of the Illinois Department of Health, is featured in the film stating that even if you died of a clear alternate cause, if you had COVID-19 at the same time, it would still be listed as a COVID death.
“Everyone who is listed as a COVID death, doesn’t mean that was the cause of the death,” she says.
In January 2020, the PCR test for COVID-19 came out, which allowed health officials to define COVID-19 “cases.”
If the test was positive, it counted as a case — it didn’t matter if you have symptoms or not. Reiner Fuellmich, global fraud attorney, founder of the Corona Investigative Committee, pointed out,
“It’s never, in the history of mankind, in the history of medicine, there’s never been testing of healthy people.”
Yeadon agrees that mass testing of people with no symptoms has no scientific basis.
Rather, he says, “It’s just a way to frighten people.”
The rising “cases,” based on PCR testing, is what built the crisis.
But counting cases was only measuring the activity of testing; the more that testing occurred, the more cases that were found.
‘Fear Everyone’ Became the Message
June 8, 2020, WHO director general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus announced that asymptomatic people could transmit COVID-19.
That same day, Maria Van Kerkhove, WHO technical lead for the COVID-19 pandemic, made it very clear that people who have COVID-19 without any symptoms “rarely” transmit the disease to others.
In a dramatic about-face, WHO then backtracked on the statement just one day later.
In the days that followed, media and health officials ramped up fear by claiming that you could be sickened by virtually anyone, even when they appeared to be healthy.
“This idea that … you can be ill even though you have no symptoms and you can be a … virus threat to someone else even though you have no symptoms, that’s also invented in 2020,” Yeadon says.
Alexandra Henrion-Caude, geneticist, former director of research with the French National Institute of Health, is among those who have noticed something off from the start.
“I was very puzzled since the very beginning … I was alert to the fact that what we were living was not quite right.”
She notes that the notion of asymptomatic spread is terrifying because it turns virtually anyone you meet or encounter on the street into the enemy, because they could be exposing you to SARS-CoV-2.
“This is actually terrible because it denies the capacity of a person to be a healthy person.
Because if asymptomatic [spread] exists, then who is healthy?
No one.”
What’s more, the “proof” of asymptomatic spread is flawed and fraudulent.
The New England Journal of Medicine published an article suggesting the transmission of COVID-19 is possible from an asymptomatic carrier in January 2020.
It was based on a 33-year-old businessman who had met with his business partner from Shanghai, then developed a fever and productive cough.
The next evening, he felt better and went back to work January 27.
The writers reported the partner had been “well with no signs or symptoms of infection, but had become ill on her flight back to China, where she tested positive for 2019-nCoV on January 26.”
From this case study, they theorized the virus could be transmitted from asymptomatic carriers.
An important point was left out, which is that the researchers did not speak with the partner from Shanghai before publication.
However, Germany’s public health agency, the Robert Koch Institute (RKI), did speak with the woman on the phone, and she reported she did have symptoms while in Germany.
So she was not asymptomatic after all.
In a State of Incoherence, People Crave Normalcy
The pandemic has twisted reality, leaving the public in a mental fog.
“You’re regularly pledging obedience to things which are not logical,” Catherine Austin-Fitts, assistant secretary, Bush Sr. administration and investment adviser with Solari, Inc., says.
WHO has changed definitions of herd immunity and pandemic, literally altering reality, and this is just one example. ... "
Monday, March 14, 2022
Planet Lockdown: A Documentary, by Dr. Joseph Mercola
FULL ARTICLE HERE:
