Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

COVID-19

Doctor breaks down how COVID outbreak was used to force injections, ‘not deal with the disease’

Published

9 minute read

Dr. Wahome Ngare

From LifeSiteNews

By Emily Mangiaracina

A Kenyan doctor pointed to one misstep after another in the handling of the COVID outbreak, such as the fact that postmortem examinations were not permitted to direct how COVID was treated.

A Kenyan doctor has made a strong case for why the COVID outbreak was used to force vaccination and “not to deal with the disease,” citing a remarkable number of missteps in handling the “pandemic.”

Dr. Wahome Ngare, the director of Kenya Christian Professionals Forum (KCPF), began in a Tuesday interview with podcast host Lynn Ngugi by explaining that because vaccination targets the healthy and not the sick, it entails greater risks, and this is why it is normally reserved for addressing conditions that are “dangerous” enough to run this risk of stimulating a person’s immune system through a virus, or a piece of a virus.

“So, if your vaccine has a problem, then you can threaten the whole community — that’s why vaccines become a national security issue, because if they’re not properly taken care of and you’re giving them to your whole population (who are) healthy, then you can cause a lot of damage,” Dr. Ngare said.

He maintained that it is therefore “much better to treat those who are sick” than to target those who are healthy through vaccination.

Regarding the COVID so-called “vaccination,” he suggested that the risk involved was much greater than that of a typical vaccine, in part because the full results of Phase One and Phase Two clinical trials, which are “supposed to tell us whether it is safe and effective,” were not released until December 2023 — three years after the outbreak of the COVID virus!

“And the only reason this information was released is because somebody went to court and sued Pfizer in the U.S., and they were forced by the court to release this documentation,” Dr. Ngare noted. He further explained that these trial results revealed many problems caused by the COVID shots, including injuries such as myocarditis, and even death.

“What that tells me as a doctor is very simple: that as doctors we let the world down. Because we shouldn’t have given any support for that injection without seeing the phase one and phase two clinical trial results,” he told Ngugi.

Asked if the “wrong” vaccines were administered, Dr. Wahome shifted the question in a different direction, responding, “What should we do if there is a disease outbreak?”

When COVID first emerged, people did not understand what it was — all they knew was that people were dying in China, said Dr. Ngare. Thus, the first thing doctors should have done was perform post-mortem reports of people who died with COVID in order to “determine what organs were affected, how were they affected, where is this virus causing most damage, and how is it causing the damage.”

“That is totally unscientific, because it denies us the knowledge we need to take care of the living,” Dr. Ngare observed.

He then highlighted an alarming amount of missed opportunities to strategically deal with COVID, beginning with the failure to advise people to keep their vitamin D levels up in order to protect themselves, since evidence had emerged that low vitamin D levels compromised people’s ability to tackle the virus.

As one major mistake, Dr. Ngare cited the fact that people were advised to go to the hospital only if they developed difficulty breathing, when they could have anticipated this by checking their oxygen levels at home and going to the hospital once their oxygen levels hit the 60s or 70s, before they developed difficulty breathing.

“This is something that should have been made available to all Health Centers so that anybody who has those symptoms would easily go to the Health Center every day,” the doctor said.

He went on to address how in medicine, it is standard to repurpose drugs which have been shown to be both useful and safe, yet time-tested drugs such as hydroxycholorquine, with proven safety, were set aside in favor of experimental “vaccines” for targeting COVID, which were questionable both for their safety and for their effectiveness.

Furthermore, hydroxycholorquine was not properly tested in its treatment of COVID. Dr. Ngare explained that too much was given too late to patients, leading health professionals to mislabel the drug as unsuitable for the treatment of COVID.

He then shared how infection gives stronger immunity than vaccines, highlighting how this fact was ignored among health professionals. The doctor explained how if someone gets an infection, they develop immunity against each of the proteins, so that they will be fully ready the next time they’re exposed to the virus. By contrast, the vaccine only exposes people to a portion of the virus.

“So the person who got infection and recovered has a stronger immunity than the one who got the portion … what sense does it then make to say that if you are already got COVID, you still need the vaccine? You see, from a scientific point of view, it doesn’t make sense.”

The doctor then pointed to another absurdity in the way the “pandemic” was handled, which is that employers, city officials, and others mandated that everyone in a given institution or using a certain venue be vaccinated, when that should not have mattered to those who were vaccinated themselves.

“Let me ask you another question. If I have been vaccinated and this vaccine is effective … I am protected. Why should I care if you’re not vaccinated? How do you threaten me?” Dr. Ngare said.

“Why should you tell the one who has not taken the injection not to go to work, unless what you want is for everybody to be injected?” Dr. Ngare stressed that all these facts about how COVID was handled show that “the whole crisis was used to force people to be vaccinated, not to deal with the disease.”

When only those who are promoting the COVID shot “have the right” to an opinion, and anyone who is promoting other kinds of prevention and treatment does not have that right, then clearly there is “an agenda” afoot, Dr. Ngare said.

“So the question is then, what is the game plan? What’s the end goal?”

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

International

Pentagon agency to simulate lockdowns, mass vaccinations, public compliance messaging

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Tim Hinchliffe

With lockdowns, mass vaccination campaigns, and social distancing still on the table from the last around, it appears that AI and Machine Learning will play a much bigger role in the next.

DARPA is getting into the business of simulating disease outbreaks, including modeling interventions such as mass vaccination campaigns, lockdowns, and communication strategies.

At the end of May, the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) put out a Request for Information (RFI) seeking information regarding “state-of-the-art capabilities in the simulation of disease outbreaks.”

The Pentagon’s research and development funding arm wants to hear from academic, industry, commercial, and startup communities on how to develop “advanced capabilities that drive technical innovation and identify critical gaps in bio-surveillance, diagnostics, and medical countermeasures” in order to “improve preparedness for future public health emergencies.”

As if masks, social distancing, lockdowns, and vaccination mandates under the unscientific guise of slowing the spread and preventing the transmission of COVID weren’t harmful enough, the U.S. military wants to model the effects of these exact same countermeasures for future outbreaks.

The RFI also asks participants “Fatality Rate & Immune Status: How are fatality rates and varying levels of population immunity (natural or vaccine-induced) incorporated into your simulations?“

Does “natural or vaccine-induced” relate to “population immunity” or “fatality rates” or both?

Moving on, the RFI gets into modeling lockdowns, social distancing, and mass vaccination campaigns, along with communication strategies:

Intervention Strategies: Detail the range of intervention strategies that can be modeled, including (but not limited to) vaccination campaigns, social distancing measures, quarantine protocols, treatments, and public health communication strategies. Specifically, describe the ability to model early intervention and its impact on outbreak trajectory.

The fact that DARPA wants to model these so-called intervention strategies just after the entire world experienced them suggests that these exact same measures will most likely be used again in the future:

“We are committed to developing advanced modeling capabilities to optimize response strategies and inform the next generation of (bio)technology innovations to protect the population from biological threats. We are particularly focused on understanding the complex interplay of factors that drive outbreak spread and evaluating the effectiveness of potential interventions.” — DARPA, Advanced Disease Outbreak Simulation Capabilities RFI, May 2025.

“Identification of optimal timelines and capabilities to detect, identify, attribute, and respond to disease outbreaks, including but not limited to biosensor density deployment achieving optimal detection timelines, are of interest.” ­— DARPA, Advanced Disease Outbreak Simulation Capabilities RFI, May 2025.

With lockdowns, mass vaccination campaigns, and social distancing still on the table from the last around, it appears that AI and Machine Learning will play a much bigger role in the next.

For future innovation, the DARPA RFI asks applicants to: “Please describe any novel technical approaches – or applications of diverse technical fields (e.g., machine learning, artificial intelligence, complex systems theory, behavioral science) – that you believe would significantly enhance the state-of-the-art capabilities in this field or simulation of biological systems wholistically.”

Instead of putting a Dr. Fauci, a Dr. Birx, a replaceable CDC director, a TV doctor, a big pharma CEO, or a Cuomo brother out there to lie to your face about how they were all just following The ScienceTM, why not use AI and ML and combine them with behavioral sciences in order to concoct your “public health communications strategies?”

When you look at recently announced DARPA programs like Kallisti and MAGICS, which are aimed at creating an algorithmic Theory of Mind to model, predict, and influence collective human behavior, you start to get a sense of how all these programs can interweave:

“The MAGICS ARC calls for paradigm-shifting approaches for modeling complex, dynamic systems for predicting collective human behaviour.” — DARPA, MAGICS ARC, April 2025

On April 8, DARPA issued an Advanced Research Concepts (ARC) opportunity for a new program called “Methodological Advancements for Generalizable Insights into Complex Systems (MAGICS)” that seeks “new methods and paradigms for modeling collective human behavior.”

Nowhere in the MAGICS description does it mention modeling or predicting the behavior of “adversaries,” as is DARPA’s custom.

Instead, it talks at length about “modeling human systems,” along with anticipating, predicting, understanding, and forecasting “collective human behavior” and “complex social phenomena” derived from “sociotechnical data sets.”

Could DARPA’s MAGICS program be applied to simulating collective human behavior when it comes to the next public health emergency, be it real or perceived?

“The goal of an upcoming program will be to develop an algorithmic theory of mind to model adversaries’ situational awareness and predict future behaviour.” — DARPA, Theory of Mind Special Notice, December 2024.

In December 2024, DARPA launched a similar program called Theory of Mind, which was renamed Kallisti a month later.

The goal of Theory of Mind is to develop “new capabilities to enable national security decisionmakers to optimize strategies for deterring or incentivizing actions by adversaries,” according to a very brief special announcement.

DARPA never mentions who those “adversaries” are. In the case of a public health emergency, an adversary could be anyone who questions authoritative messaging.

The Theory of Mind program will also:

… seek to combine algorithms with human expertise to explore, in a modeling and simulation environment, potential courses of action in national security scenarios with far greater breadth and efficiency than is currently possible.

This would provide decisionmakers with more options for incentive frameworks while preventing unwanted escalation.

We are interested in a comprehensive overview of current and emerging technologies for disease outbreak simulation, how simulation approaches could be extended beyond standard modeling methods, and to understand how diseases spread within and between individuals including population level dynamics.

They say that all the modeling and simulating across programs is for “national security,” but that is a very broad term.

DARPA is in the business of research and development for national security purposes, so why is the Pentagon modeling disease outbreaks and intervention strategies while simultaneously looking to predict and manipulate collective human behavior?

If and when the next outbreak occurs, the same draconian and Orwellian measures that governments and corporations deployed in the name of combating COVID are still on the table.

And AI, Machine Learning, and the military will play an even bigger role than the last time around.

From analyzing wastewater to learning about disease spread; from developing pharmaceuticals to measuring the effects of lockdowns and vaccine passports, from modeling and predicting human behavior to coming up with messaging strategies to keep everyone in compliance – “improving preparedness for future public health emergencies” is becoming more militaristically algorithmic by the day.

“We are exploring innovative solutions to enhance our understanding of outbreak dynamics and to improve preparedness for future public health emergencies.” — DARPA, Advanced Disease Outbreak Simulation Capabilities RFI, May 2025.

Reprinted with permission from The Sociable.

Continue Reading

Business

Audit report reveals Canada’s controversial COVID travel app violated multiple rules

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Canada’s Auditor General found that government procurement rules were not followed in creating the ArriveCAN app.

Canada’s Auditor General revealed that the former Liberal government under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau failed multiple times by violating contract procurement rules to create ArriveCAN, its controversial COVID travel app.

In a report released Tuesday, Auditor General Karen Hogan noted that between April 2015 to March 2024, the Trudeau government gave out 106 professional service contracts to GC Strategies Inc. This is the same company that made the ArriveCAN app.

The contracts were worth $92.7 million, with $64.5 million being paid out.

According to Hogan, Canada’s Border Services Agency gave four contracts to GC Strategies valued at $49.9 million. She noted that only 54 percent of the contracts delivered any goods.

“We concluded that professional services contracts awarded and payments made by federal organizations to GC Strategies and other companies incorporated by its co-founders were not in accordance with applicable policy instruments and that value for money for these contracts was not obtained,” Hogan said.

She continued, “Despite this, federal government officials consistently authorized payments.”

The report concluded that “Federal organizations need to ensure that public funds are spent with due regard for value for money, including in decisions about the procurement of professional services contracts.”

Hogan announced an investigation of ArriveCAN in November 2022 after the House of Commons voted 173-149 for a full audit of the controversial app.

Last year, Hogan published an audit of ArriveCAN and on Tuesday published a larger audit of the 106 contracts awarded to GC Strategies by 31 federal organizations under Trudeau’s watch.

‘Massive scandal,’ says Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre

Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre said Hogan’s report on the audit exposed multiple improprieties.

“This is a massive scandal,” he told reporters Tuesday.

“The facts are extraordinary. There was no evidence of added value. In a case where you see no added value, why are you paying the bill?”

ArriveCAN was introduced in April 2020 by the Trudeau government and made mandatory in November 2020. The app was used by the federal government to track the COVID jab status of those entering the country and enforce quarantines when deemed necessary.

ArriveCAN was supposed to have cost $80,000, but the number quickly ballooned to $54 million, with the latest figures showing it cost $59.5 million.

As for the app itself, it was riddled with technical glitches along with privacy concerns from users.

LifeSiteNews has published a wide variety of reports related to the ArriveCAN travel app.

Continue Reading

Trending

X