COVID-1984: Technocrats, Plutocrats, Oligarchs & COVID-19 – By Jonas E. Alexis

Source –

  • “…In short, we simply cannot afford of simply listening to one side of important issues—issues that will affect our lives in vitally important ways. This is one reason why decent people need to hear both sides of those issues, irrespective of political affiliation. This is where Dr. Joseph Mercola comes in. He has essentially been blackmailed, shunned, and even threatened by the powers that be so that he could stop being skeptical about what is happening the during pandemic”

Technocrats, plutocrats, oligarchs and Covid 19

What if you are living in a world where freedom of speech or even expressing an opinion based on a wealth of information is simply forbidden? Wouldn’t that be Orwellian?

By Jonas E. Alexis

Noted physicist and critic Alan Sokal once declared:

“The bottom line is all of us—whether we are conservatives, liberals, believers or atheists—live in the same real world, whether we like it or not. And public policy should be based on the best available evidence about that world.

“In a free society everyone has the right to believe whatever nonsense they choose, but the rest of us should pay attention only to opinions that are based on evidence.”

Even those opinions, I would hasten to say, should be challenged if they are drawn from preconceived worldviews that have nothing to do with the real world, actual evidence, or historical documentation.

But what if you are living in a world where freedom of speech or even expressing an opinion based on a wealth of information is simply forbidden? What if you are threatened by the thought police which constantly states that there are certain topics that you cannot discussed? Wouldn’t that be a classic example of the world that George Orwell describes in 1984?

Serious inquiry should not depend on personal preference or political correctness, but on lines of evidence and rigorous tests. We have seen how “science” was used by the eugenic movement to promote the ideology that the “feeble-minded” of society must be expunged. In fact, whenever ideology is the motive, real scientific inquiry will suffer.

Which brings me to my next point. In education, if there are two or three alternatives regarding an important issue, the educator must expose his students to all three and examine the evidence for them, including the strengths and weaknesses of each alternative. Once all rival alternatives are weighed, then inference to the best explanations should be drawn.

If the educator says, “Alternative number one is just nonsense” without saying why it is nonsense, then there are a number of possible assumptions that could be drawn about the educator. First, he is incompetent or too lazy to examine alternative views; second, he does not know what the other alternative is actually saying; or third, he must be following an ideology that will help him advance his career.

The last thing a serious thinking person wants to do when investigating political issues which seem to blend with medicine is to reject or embrace an alternative view without careful thought and much evidence. We must hasten to say that individuals are not free to pursue historical or academic research if they are bound by political ideology which eventually will stifle their medical research. We have seen that over and over in the last few centuries. Keep also in mind that some oligarchs even used the Supreme Court to propose crazy and demoralizing ideas about human beings! Remember the Dredd Scott decision?

We have also seen similar issues when polite people like Margaret Sanger promoted the Negro Project, which was a way to deter birthrate among blacks. These ideas were proposed by a wide-range of political ideologues, “scientists,” and medical doctors, etc., because these people had 1) political power and 2) they used their monetary influence to literally silence and blackmail other voices.

In short, we simply cannot afford of simply listening to one side of important issues—issues that will affect our lives in vitally important ways. This is one reason why decent people need to hear both sides of those issues, irrespective of political affiliation. This is where Dr. Joseph Mercola comes in. He has essentially been blackmailed, shunned, and even threatened by the powers that be so that he could stop being skeptical about what is happening the during pandemic.

Why I’m Removing All Articles Related to Vitamins D, C, Zinc and COVID-19

….by Dr. Joseph Mercola

Over the past year, I’ve been researching and writing as much as I can to help you take control of your health, as fearmongering media and corrupt politicians have destroyed lives and livelihoods to establish global control of the world’s population, using the COVID-19 pandemic as their justification.

I’ve also kept you informed about billionaire-backed front groups like the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), a partner of Bill Gates’ Alliance for Science, both of whom have led campaigns aimed at destroying my reputation and censoring the information I share.

Other attackers include HealthGuard, which ranks health sites based on a certain set of “credibility criteria.” It has sought to discredit my website by ensuring warnings appear whenever you search for my articles or enter my website in an internet browser.

Well-Organized Attack Partnerships Have Formed

HealthGuard, a niche service of NewsGuard, is funded by the pharma-funded public relations company Publicis Groupe. Publicis, in turn, is a partner of the World Economic Forum, which is leading the call for a “Great Reset” of the global economy and a complete overhaul of our way of life.

HealthGuard is also partnered with Gates’ Microsoft company, and drug advertising websites like WebMD and Medscape, as well as the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) — the progressive cancel-culture leader with extensive ties to government and global think tanks that recently labeled people questioning the COVID-19 vaccine as a national security threat.

The CCDH has published a hit list naming me as one of the top 12 individuals responsible for 65% of vaccine “disinformation” on social media, and who therefore must be deplatformed and silenced for the public good. In a March 24, 2021, letter1 to the CEO’s of Twitter and Facebook, 12 state attorneys general called for the removal of our accounts from these platforms, based on the CCDH’s report.

Two of those state attorneys general also published an April 8, 2021, op-ed2 in The Washington Post, calling on Facebook and Twitter to ban the “anti-vaxxers” identified by the CCDH. The lack of acceptance of novel gene therapy technology, they claim, is all because a small group of individuals with a social media presence — myself included — are successfully misleading the public with lies about nonexistent vaccine risks.

“The solution is not complicated. It’s time for Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey to turn off this toxic tap and completely remove the small handful of individuals spreading this fraudulent misinformation,” they wrote.3

Pharma-funded politicians and pharma-captured health agencies have also relentlessly attacked me and pressured tech monopolies to censor and deplatform me, removing my ability to express my opinions and speak freely over the past year.

The CCDH also somehow has been allowed to publish4 in the journal Nature Medicine, calling for the “dismantling” of the “anti-vaccine” industry. In the article, CCDH founder Imran Ahmed repeats the lie that he “attended and recorded a private, three-day meeting of the world’s most prominent anti-vaxxers,” when, in fact, what he’s referring to was a public online conference open to an international audience, all of whom had access to the recordings as part of their attendance fee.

The CCDH is also partnered with another obscure group called Anti-Vax Watch. The picture below is from an Anti-Vax Watch demonstration outside the halls of Congress. Ironically, while the CCDH claims to be anti-extremism, you’d be hard-pressed to find a clearer example of actual extremism than this bizarre duo.5

Gates-Funded Doctor Demands Terrorist Experts to Attack Me

Most recently, Dr. Peter Hotez, president of the Sabin Vaccine Institute,6 which has received tens of millions of dollars from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation,7,8,9 — with funds from the foundation most recently being used to create a report called “Meeting the Challenge of Vaccine Hesitancy,”10,11 — also cited the CCDH in a Nature article in which he calls for cyberwarfare experts to be enlisted in the war against vaccine safety advocates and people who are “vaccine hesitant.” He writes:12

“Accurate, targeted counter-messaging from the global health community is important but insufficient, as is public pressure on social-media companies. The United Nations and the highest levels of government must take direct, even confrontational, approaches with Russia, and move to dismantle anti-vaccine groups in the United States.

Efforts must expand into the realm of cyber security, law enforcement, public education and international relations. A high-level inter-agency task force reporting to the UN secretary-general could assess the full impact of anti-vaccine aggression, and propose tough, balanced measures.

The task force should include experts who have tackled complex global threats such as terrorism, cyber attacks and nuclear armament, because anti-science is now approaching similar levels of peril. It is becoming increasingly clear that advancing immunization requires a counteroffensive.”

Why is Hotez calling for the use of warfare tactics on American citizens that have done nothing illegal? In my case, could it be because I’ve written about the theory that SARS-CoV-2 is an engineered virus, created through gain-of-function research, and that its release was anticipated by global elites, as evidenced in Event 201?

It may be. At least those are some of my alleged “sins,” detailed on page 10 of the CCDH report, “Disinformation Dozen: The Sequel.”13 Coincidentally enough, the Nature journal has helped cover up gain-of-function research conducted at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, publishing a shoddy zoonotic origins study relied upon my mainstream media and others, which was riddled with problems.14,15

So, it’s not misinformation they are afraid of. They’re afraid of the truth getting out. They’re all trying to cover for the Chinese military and the dangerous mad scientists conducting gain-of-function work.

You may have noticed our website was recently unavailable; this was due to direct cyber-attacks launched against us. We have several layers of protective mechanisms to secure the website as we’ve anticipated such attacks from malevolent organizations.

What This Means for You

Through these progressively increasing stringent measures, I have refused to succumb to these governmental and pharmaceutical thugs and their relentless attacks. I have been confident and willing to defend myself in the court of law, as I’ve had everything reviewed by some of the best attorneys in the country.

Unfortunately, threats have now become very personal and have intensified to the point I can no longer preserve much of the information and research I’ve provided to you thus far. These threats are not legal in nature, and I have limited ability to defend myself against them. If you can imagine what billionaires and their front groups are capable of, I can assure you they have been creative in deploying their assets to have this content removed.

Sadly, I must also remove my peer reviewed published study16 on the “Evidence Regarding Vitamin D and Risk of COVID-19 and Its Severity.” It will, however, remain in the highly-respected journal Nutrients’ website, where you can still access it for free.

The MATH+ hospital treatment protocol for COVID-19 and the iMASK+ prevention and early outpatient COVID-19 protocol — both of which are based on the use of vitamins C, D, quercetin, zinc and melatonin — are available on the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance’s website. I suggest you bookmark these resources for future reference.

It is with a heavy heart that I purge my website of valuable information. As noted by Dr. Peter McCullough during a recent Texas state Senate Health and Human Services Committee hearing, data shows early treatment could have prevented up to 85% (425,000) of COVID-19 deaths.17 Yet early treatments were all heavily censored and suppressed.

McCullough, in addition to being a cardiologist and professor of medicine at the Texas A&M University Health Sciences Center, also has the distinction of having published the most papers of any person in the history of his field, and being an editor of two major medical journals. Despite that, his video, in which he went through a paper he’d published detailing effective early treatments, was summarily banned by YouTube in 2020.

“No wonder we have had 45,000 deaths in Texas. The average person in Texas thinks there’s no treatment!” McCullough told the senate panel.18 Indeed, people are in dire need of more information detailing how they can protect their health, not less. But there’s only so much I can do to protect myself against current attack strategies.

They’ve moved past censorship. Just what do you call people who advocate counteroffensive attacks by terrorism and cyberwarfare experts? You’d think we could have a debate and be protected under free speech but, no, we’re not allowed. These lunatics are dangerously unhinged.

The U.S. federal government is going along with the global Great Reset plan (promoted as “building back better”), but this plan won’t build anything but a technological prison. What we need is a massive campaign to preserve civil rights, and vote out the pawns who are destroying our freedom while concentrating wealth and power.

Jonas E. Alexis has degrees in mathematics and philosophy. He studied education at the graduate level. His main interests include U.S. foreign policy, history of Israel/Palestine conflict, and the history of ideas. He is the author of the new book Zionism vs. the West: How Talmudic Ideology is Undermining Western Culture. He is currently working on a book tentatively titled, Kevin MacDonald’s Abject Failure: A Philosophical and Moral Critique of Evolutionary Psychology, Sociobiology, and White Identity. He teaches mathematics in South Korea.

2 thoughts on “COVID-1984: Technocrats, Plutocrats, Oligarchs & COVID-19 – By Jonas E. Alexis

  1. More suppressed information ??? Does ‘great reset’ already control the US government [thru infiltration of the CIA, DOJ, FBI, State, DHS,NIH, Democrat party used to corrupt voting to promote Socialism, ownership of MSM, BLM, antifi, etc. Where does funding come from ?? Embezzlement ??

    It is perplexing that no person at the Mises institute [including Diest and Murphy] seems interested in identifying the destination of the funds from the auctions of Deficit spending Treasury securities. Those securities are transferred to the Federal Reserve system as collateral for credit added on the government accounts by the Fed which creates the book-entry money government spends.

    TreasuryDirect Institutional tabulations label them as “new cash” and as a percentage on each of the Treasury securities to roll-over maturing securities. TD ignore requests to identify any account to which they go. If the funds went to the government, they would eliminate any increase in the National Debt and also eliminate any increase in value in circulation (inflation). They would, in affect, be the same flow of money as would taxes.

    The relevant accounts of auction funds are exclusively handled by the FRBNY and, despite misleading statements by CRS, have never been audited. [They are client accounts—not operational accounts.] The government funds so handled currently exceed $13 trillion annually. Ref. 31 USC #375.3.

    Where do the funds go ??


  2. The handling of money from the sale of Treasury securities is government money. The GAO has authority to audit the handling of any government money.

    Any official document of any FR bank is subject to FOIA access. Bloomberg L.P. v. Bd. of Governors of Fed. Reserve Sys., 649 F. Supp. 2d 262, 274 (S.D.N.Y. 2009), aff’d, 601 F.3d 143 (2d Cir. 2010). Also, “The FRBs give all revenue in excess of expenses to the U.S. Treasury. 12 U.S.C. § 289.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s