RFK Jr. Identifies “The Real Shooter” Behind His Father’s Death

“When I sat down and read the autopsy report, it became clear to me, as it would to anybody who read that report, that Sirhan could not have killed my father.”

Read More: https://vigilantfox.substack.com/p/rfk-jr-identifies-the-real-shooter

Follow @VigilantFox 🦊
Rumble | Substack | Socials

#14 - “The real shooter was behind my father,” claimed Kennedy.

“That man is Thane Eugene Cesar.” Cesar “was a security guard who worked for Lockheed [Martin]. He was a CIA operative. He was a vocal, vocal racist who hated the Kennedys. And he had been the one who led my father through the kitchen toward the ambush.”

“He was holding my father’s arm. He drew his gun. And my father was shot four times from behind. One of the shots passed harmlessly through the shoulder pad of his coat. The other two were into his back and then one behind his ear, which was the fatal shot. And all of the shots had an uphill trajectory. And all of them, and this is what the autopsy found, were contact shots,” reported Kennedy. “So, the barrel of the gun was touching my father’s body or his clothing. And the discharge left carbon tattoos … on his flesh.”

@VigilantFox

https://t.me/robinmg/29634

Jonathan Hall put very well in words what I also think about the ideas of the "no virus" theorists, so I will from now on just refer to this letter and the references at the bottom of it as to what my position also is with regards to this.

As I said at the time, I have personal experience of a typically viral illness with for me and others around me, countless others I have talked to, unprecedented strength of symptoms all round, twice, in 2020 and 2021, yet different from each other too. This points to different viruses. I never feared for my life, so mortality is entirely the wrong place to look for truth in this. People are the right place to look for truth, their experiences, and their stories. This is where contemporary evidence based science fails at: in learning how to really listen to people. I produced a film precisely about this issue. Maybe a few more people should watch it.

I am not going to be gaslighted by people telling me it was all in my head because someone's data said it didn't happen. That is a failure of data, a failure of science to cater to anecdotes as much as it caters to numbers. This is precisely where I think it all went wrong in the 18th Century. In this way of thinking. My body knows the truth, and no "theorists" can take that away from me.

@RobinMG

Jonathan Hall's letter:

https://t.me/robinmg/29604

Time for Your 8th Dose: Pfizer Says Latest C-19 Booster Won’t Be Tested on Humans, but It Works Great on Mice!

🇺🇸💉@COVID19Up: It’s time for another dose! Pfizer announced Thursday (August 17) that their new shot, which targets the Eris variant of COVID-19, is showing great promise in mice.

And given that Big Pharma heavyweights like Pfizer pretty much control America’s Government Health institutions, we should expect to see FDA authorization for another "emergency use” shot in the coming weeks.

For the True Believers who are on schedule with “the science,” this would make for an eighth dose of mRNA in under three years. In April, the FDA authorized a seventh dose of a new shot labeled the “bivalent booster.” When the new “Eris” formulated shot comes out, it will make for an eighth shot.

But for some pharma captured doctors and institutions, eight is still not enough! According to this new article in NPR, some of the “experts” now recommend a booster every two months for the immunocompromised. If you’re not yet immunocompromised, you can take a shot every four months. Once you are immunocompromised by the shots, you have unlocked the every two months achievement and you will be rewarded with a free Pfizer toaster. Time to get those antibody levels up. Personalize the dose!

Source:
https://www.dossier.today/p/time-for-your-eighth-dose-pfizer

Appointment of Jonathan Van Tam to Moderna - UsforThem
https://usforthem.co.uk/cta/appointment-of-jonathan-van-tam-to-moderna/

What the Media Won't Tell You About the Maui Fires (PART 2)
https://youtube.com/watch?v=VfXfS3mUo3Q&feature=share

https://strategic-culture.org/news/2015/08/28/native-americans-and-us-scorched-earth-continuum/

The scorched earth policy has been used for hundreds of years by imperialist and colonialist invaders as a land grab and dispossession.
Their technique was to burn everything, poison everything then starve the population.
Are these facist elite the new imperialists or have they always been?

Alex Jones claims a TSA whistleblower told him TSA employees were instructed on Tue that masks are coming back by October for travelers; full Covid restrictions/lockdowns by December due to a new “dangerous variant” out of Canada.

What did I say on August 11th? See below.

Alex Jones (video above) confirms my premonition. Two of us now saying it's all coming back in December.

It won't be a new "variant".
It will be a new GOF virus.
Different from the ones before?
Probably not much, but enough to evade immunity especially in those who got multiple boosters.

Keep stocks of vitamin D3, quercetin, zinc, turmeric, raw honey. Consider whether you need to have access to a doctor who can if need be prescribe you and provide you both ivermectin and azythromycin (or as an alternative doxycycline) just in case. I am not a medical doctor so this is not medical advice but a suggestion to consider who may be able to provide you with real medical advice and not government or WHO "medical advice".

Better start preparing for what we will all do, as individuals, and as a collective, if Alex Jones and I are right.

My advice is to connect to like minded people in your local community. Especially to grocery shops and food producers and providers on our side.

@RobinMG

https://t.me/robinmg/29514

Anyone got a full download of this, or a link to one? If so please post in comments. Thanks.

https://youtu.be/H8B-gsqPZ9k

The Science of Covid19

Compiled by Jonathan Hall:

The best overall summary I've found on Covid19 pathophysiology that is fully referenced:

COVID-19 Deep Dive Part I: Pathophysiology | ICENI | Substack
https://iceni.substack.com/p/covid-19-deep-dive-part-i-pathophysiology

COVID-19 Deep Dive Part IX: Addendum | ICENI | Substack
https://iceni.substack.com/p/covid-19-deep-dive-ix-addendum

Please also read the Sars-Cov-2 summary report by Spartacus on page 5.  

Interesting articles on the 'no virus' debate from a medical doctor with experience of Covid:  

Thoughts on the Existence of Viruses and Evaluating Controversial Scientific Discussions | The
Forgotten Side of Medicine | Substack
https://amidwesterndoctor.substack.com/p/thoughts-on-the-existence-of-viruses

Nuanced Ideas and Simplistic Truths in the Context of COVID-19 | The Forgotten Side of Medicine | Substack
https://amidwesterndoctor.substack.com/p/nuanced-ideas-and-simplistic-truths"

WHY MASKS DON'T WORK:
VIRUSES SPREAD VIA OBJECTS:

"Viral cultures for assessing fomite [object, surface] transmission of SARS-CoV-2: a systematic review and meta-analysis":

"The evidence from published studies suggests that replication-competent SARS-CoV-2 is present on fomites. Replication-competent SARS-CoV-2 is significantly more likely when the PCR CT for clinical specimens and fomite samples is <30. Further studies should investigate the duration of infectiousness of SARS-CoV-2 and the frequency of transmission from fomites.

Our findings suggest that hand hygiene and surface decontamination procedures should be encouraged to limit the risk of fomite transmission and should remain a cornerstone of public health prevention policies. Although some authors suggested that fomite transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is exaggerated, and surface decontamination represents excesses that are counterproductive, the relevance of hand hygiene and surface decontamination procedures should not be underestimated.

The likelihood of detecting replication-competent SARS-CoV-2 on fomite samples is greater in high-risk patient settings."

Viral cultures for assessing fomite transmission of SARS-CoV-2: a systematic review and meta-analysis - Journal of Hospital Infection
https://www.journalofhospitalinfection.com/article/S0195-6701(22)00283-3/fulltext

"Requirement to wear masks in hospitals may have had little [zero] impact on COVID-19 transmission during omicron wave"

"Requirements to wear surgical masks in a large London hospital during the first 10 months of omicron activity (December 2021 to September 2022) made no discernible difference to reducing hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infections, according to new research being presented at this year's European Congress of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases (ECCMID) in Copenhagen, Denmark (15–18 April).

To find out more, researchers from St George's Hospital in south-west London analyzed routinely collected infection control data over a 40-week period between December 4, 2021 (the first week when the omicron variant became dominant) and September 10, 2022 (when universal COVID-19 screening on admission by PCR stopped) to examine hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infections in relation to changes in mask-wearing policies over time.

During the first phase of the study (December 4, 2021 to June 1, 2022), all staff and visitors were required to wear masks in both clinical and non-clinical areas of the hospital. Then in phase two, at week 26 (June 2, 2022 to September 10, 2022) the surgical mask-wearing policy was removed for the majority of wards (study group), while a subset of high-risk wards (i.e., renal hematology and oncology wards, the medical admissions unit and intensive care units) retained the mask obligation policy for staff (control group).
The analysis found that during a general community surge in SARS-CoV-2 infection in June 2022, removal of the mask policy was not associated with a statistically significant change in the rate of hospital-acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection in the study group—with SARS-CoV-2 infection no higher than the rate when masks were obligatory.

What's more, the authors did not observe a delayed effect, with no change in the SARS-CoV-2 infection rate during the time when the mask-wearing policy was removed (weeks 26 to 40).

Similarly, the control group who continued wearing masks, found no immediate or delayed change in infection rate.

"Our study found no evidence that mandatory masking of staff impacts the rate of hospital SARS-CoV-2 infection with the omicron variant," says lead author Dr. Ben Patterson from St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London."

Requirement to wear masks in hospitals may have had little impact on COVID-19 transmission during omicron wave
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2023-04-requirement-masks-hospitals-impact-covid-.html

Two scientists whose lectures are often very helpful in understanding the extent to which climate has changed recently and historically as well as the likely significance of recent changes.
In this piece, they’re arguing that EPA is drawing unsupported conclusions from sparse data.
Best wishes
Mike

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_app/article/two-princeton-mit-scientists-say-epa-climate-regulations-based-on-a-hoax-5460699

Is a new "pandemic" being planned?

https://www.informedconsentmatters.co.uk/post/practical-activism-for-the-next-plandemic

Advertised online Jan/Feb this year and taken down after it gained attention

‘..what is expected to be the UK’s largest vaccination programme which will be delivered at pace and will be a key Ministerial priority.’

TABLETOP EXERCISE

"Catastrophic Contagion"

"Participants grappled with how to respond to an epidemic located in one part of the world that then spread rapidly, becoming a pandemic with a higher fatality rate than COVID-19 and disproportionately affecting children and young people."

Catastrophic Contagion
https://catastrophiccontagion.centerforhealthsecurity.org/

https://twitter.com/robinmonotti/status/1692844974461616578

NOTICE TO THE "NO VIRUS" THEORISTS:

A number of people in the freedom movement have adopted the narrative that viruses do not exist.

I personally consider this position wrong on all possible levels, and we would have to go back to 1898, when the word was first used by Beijerinck and analyze every single virus identified since independently and in detail to have this debate, so it's not something that we have the time to do, it would take a lifetime or two, and to me the result is also a foregone conclusion, so I have no interest in this exercise, nor the time for it, but that is beside a much more important point, that I will try and explain in a notice here.

This is a very dangerous position to promote publicly, for the health of others. For the following reasons:

1. You can't possibly exclude as a certainty that various labs have viruses that they will release as bioweapons. We already know that Porton Down in the UK is claiming they are working on making "variants". There are claims of such work in Wuhan, and in Ukraine, as well as Fort Detrick, and there are labs in Georgia too.

2. If a virus is released, and this time it's even more dangerous than the last one, and you are making people believe that no such thing exists, then these people will ignore any treatment that is identified as a possible cure or antidote. Do you really want to dissuade people from seeking out treatments if this does happen?

3. If a virus is released, and people do start dying from it, and it's because you have influenced them to believe that no such thing exists, you become partially responsible for the failure of these people to seek treatment. Is that what you really want?

4. Such irresponsability has the potential to shut down the entire freedom movement as "virus deniers", and during a possible real emergency, there will be no hesitation in holding such views and people responsible by the authorities, which could easily organise scientific proof of the new virus in a court of law, specifically for the objective of a show trial against the "no-virus anti-vaxxers".

5. You are entitled to your own scientific views, but you must also consider your shared liability with other members of the freedom movement, and the counterproductive strategy of publicly proclaiming as a certainty something which you can't be certain of, as you don't know for sure what is happening in gain of function labs around the world.

I therefore consider it highly irresponsible to push this view onto others who may indeed be stocking up on treatments for the next "pandemic" without your influence over them. And it's irresponsible to potentially give such an open goal to the authorities to come for all of us in the next "pandemic" with careful proof of their gain of function virus, which they may be preparing now specifically for a court trial.

If I am wrong, nothing will happen, as the virus does not exist. If I am right, then you possibly become co-responsible with the perpetrators of any potential real death as a result of an untreated infection, because the infected person listened to your theory that "viruses don't exist". Think about it, there is no certainty in science, so why publicly act as if there is when it has the potential to damage our entire movement?

I will add below the wording in the letter of Jonathan Hall to Patrick Henningsen, which I think is useful to explain this in other words than mine.