THE phrase ‘First do no harm’ is attributed to Hippocrates, and forms part of the Hippocratic Oath. However it isn’t actually contained in the Hippocratic text, and the Latin ‘Primus non nocere’ first appeared in the 17th century. In fact its true provenance is much more ancient, for it is the primary code of witchcraft. The Wiccan Rede provides the key moral system in the religion of Wicca: ‘An ye harm none, do what ye will.’ Hippocrates did say ‘Natural forces within us are the true healers of disease.’ Thus, the job of medicine was to assist the natural healing process. This was done through thousands of years of accumulated knowledge about the curative properties found in Nature, applied to the individual through recipes, potions and incantation. Incantation, a deliberately misunderstood concept, was to do with raising of the human spirit, the most powerful of all healing forces.
The 17th century also witnessed the culminated persecution of witches, whom we mostly hanged in England and burnt alive in Scotland and Europe, thereby wiping out ancient wisdoms that had been passed down the generations. I’m quite sure those wisdoms remain locked away somewhere in a secret Vatican library.
Samuel Hahnemann, who died in 1843, was a brief light amidst the developing dogma, with his principle of homoeopathy, that a substance which causes symptoms of a disease in healthy people can cure similar symptoms in sick people, i.e. ‘like cures like’. Sounds a bit like vaccination, doesn’t it, except that tiny doses followed the code of ‘First do no harm’, as well as the Hippocratic principle of helping the body cure itself. Whatever your views on homoeopathy, it is perhaps interesting that Rockefeller stamped all over it at the beginning of the 20th century, and today it is branded as ‘pseudoscientific’ and consigned, with herbalism, to the leper colony of medicine. More bad press, in other words, clearing the way for patented drugs, vaccines and shed-loads of money. Nature became the enemy, the bad guy, because there was no money in natural cures. Indeed, a healthy population turns out to be ‘counter-productive’. As Groucho Marx said, when a doctor cures his patient, he loses a customer.
So I’ll get to my point. Everything we’ve ever been told appears to be the opposite of the truth. Whether or not you consider this to be of Biblical relevance or magnitude, it has most certainly been a series of revelations. Like the skin of an onion, more is revealed at every peel, with an almost breathless change of mindset required.
Peel 1. ‘They’re lying to you,’ said Mike Yeadon, a bloke I’d not heard of, in early 2020. I’ve never been naïve about politicians’ natural ability to lie, but it nevertheless came as a shock at the time that something so important as a pandemic would be founded on a lie.
Peel 2. ‘Safe and effective’. I was offered the ‘vaccine’ early, just after Christmas 2020, and I nearly fell for it. After all, this was a killer pandemic and the government was doing its best. But it bothered me. Vaccines take years to develop and test, and ‘operation warp speed’ just doesn’t cut it when the fundamental testing coordinate is the passage of time. They could have said something like ‘it takes years to be sure about the efficacy of a vaccine, but this is an emergency, so we’re asking you to take a risk and hopefully benefit from a balance of probabilities’. But that might adversely affect take-up. So ‘safe and effective’ was clearly something they couldn’t possibly assert. Yet they did. ‘They’re lying to you’ began to sound like a stentorian echo down the corridors of unfolding time.
Peel 3. The ‘vaccine’ was proveably harming people, but the campaign intensified. Something else was going on.
Peel 4. Is the concept and history of all vaccination founded on a lie? The seductive marketing concept of vaccination is that prevention is better than cure. But the flipside of that argument is to ask why you would inject foreign substances into a healthy body. The answer, of course, is money. An unlimited, continuous market of regular, unneeded injections.
Peel 5. It’s all to do, then, with money. This is a powerful explanation. Several billion arms ready and willing to bare for the next vaccine promises riches beyond your wildest dreams. Then take the lockdowns. I saw through them from the very start. It was clear that vast numbers of SMEs, for example, wouldn’t survive this sustained attack on their businesses, and that transfer of wealth (i.e. stealing) was the agenda. But I knew instinctively that I hadn’t exhausted the onion.
Peel 6. Is it actually to do with power and control, then? This would automatically embody the transfer of wealth into a bigger agenda. Not simply wallowing in a swamp of money, but using it as a bludgeon to play God with people’s lives. The WHO, WEF, CBDC et al suggest we may have arrived at true cause and motivation. But is that really the core of the onion?
Peel 7. The fostering of war is claimed by many to be a distraction from the economic and societal destruction propagated in the West. Certainly, we’re seeing plenty of it. This will set the record straight with a big clear-out followed by all that money rebuilding after the carnage. But is that really the primary cause of war?
Peel 8. I see the lust to harm and kill us drives everything. True, bankers and the arms industry make loads of money by financing and supplying both sides. But it now appears to me that the sheer pleasure of causing fear, pain and death is behind it all. Matt Hancock perhaps unwittingly epitomised the shadow of evil with a phrase that will be on his tombstone alongside many others: ‘This will scare the pants off everyone’.
I therefore believe that the leitmotif is First, Do Harm. If so, perhaps we had better take them on by using the enemy’s own inversion techniques of replacing truth with the opposite, and apply a bastardised principle of guilty until proven innocent, with our own leitmotif to meet any authoritarian edict: First, Disobey.
