Posted by Gareth Icke - memes and headline comments by David Icke Posted on 27 May 2021

An NHS Nurses Resignation Letter – “I am utterly dismayed and disheartened by my profession” (An absolutely must-read)

Dear Ms Sutcliffe and all Executive Directors, 

I write to you today as a highly experienced nurse with 27 years service, to inform you  that when my registration expires on 31.05.2021 I will not be renewing it and therefore I  am resigning my registration and leaving the profession. 

The reasons for this are many but to summarise I am utterly dismayed and disheartened  by my profession and with you as our governing body at the complete lack of integrity  that has been displayed since the beginning of the ‘Covid19 Crisis’. 

The facts about the reality and truth of this alleged crisis are readily available for anyone  to find and investigate for themselves, not least you, a body that should have been doing  just this, seeking the truth and advocating for both your members and our patients, past,  present and future. We are patient advocates not government puppets. 

Under the guise of ‘Covid19’ (which has never been isolated or purified) a massive  injustice has been served onto the people of this country and globally. It was and remains  our duty as healthcare professionals to learn the truth and to be the voice of these  people, yet there has been a deafening silence and a sickening desire to simply comply  by you and so many of my colleagues that I can not and will not condone. Sadly in these  times, for me to speak out about these injustices and to be a true advocate for my  patients has meant me being bullied and ostracised by my colleagues, removed from  clinical practice by hospital management who state they are unable to consider any  evidence presented to them that questions the official narrative and state that they must  simply comply with government ‘guidance’ regardless of any harm they may cause. 

When did our profession cease to be based on evidence? When did we become order  followers uninterested in the facts on which we base the care we give and devastatingly  now on which we deny patients and their families care? To speak out about the many  1000s of people in this country alone that have had treatment and investigations delayed  or have been left to die, has meant me living in constant fear of being ‘struck off’ the  register for simply doing what I swore to do, speak and act for the benefit of my patients  at all times. 

I refer below to the first part of our code of conduct. 

“Prioritise People “

You put the interests of people using or needing nursing or midwifery services first. You  make their care and safety your main concern and make sure that their dignity is  preserved and their needs recognised, assessed and responded to. You make sure that  those receiving care are treated with respect, that their rights are upheld and that any  discriminatory attitudes and behaviours towards those receiving care are challenged”. 

NMC Code of Conduct

This no longer seems to be at the forefront, of too many of my nursing and medical  colleagues, minds and motives. I have witnessed personally and professionally many  examples of the above ethos being completely disregarded and have been informed by  patients and friends of their own experiences where their holistic needs have been  disrespected and disregarded because ‘Covid19’ is a priority over, it seems, every other  illness, and, a priority over the emotional, psychological and spiritual well being of both  our patients and their families. Any nurse who can deny a child their families being with  them when they are sick or dying totally contradicts the entire foundations of our  profession, care. As does any nurse who denies end of life patients spending precious  time with their loved ones, denying them entry into hospices for fear of ‘Covid’  transmission. Enforcing these restrictions rigidly and brutally, making families say their  last goodbyes via the internet or knowing that families have slept in hospital/hospice  carparks just so that they can feel close to their loved one at the time of death, because  we have removed their right to hold their hands and be with them as they pass. The  trauma that this must have caused people is unforgivable and not something I will ever  condone and nor should you or anyone in our profession. 

The devastating isolation of residents in care homes was, in my opinion, inhumane. It is  equally unforgivable and unthinkable that such treatment could ever have been  perpetrated by staff who allege to care for these people. The emotional trauma they and  their families must have suffered is irreparable and I am ashamed to be associated with a  profession that claimed this was to protect them. Holistic care now seems to be a thing of  the past as does an individuals right go choose. 

Mask exempt patients have been denied treatment in A&E and spoken to in such a  manner that any healthcare professional found to be conducting themselves like this  should be investigated and disciplined. Yet they are not, despite so much evidence in the  public arena. Why are you seemingly supporting the actions of these health care  professionals by omission of action, by your silent acquiescence? 

Do you condone the behaviour of the nurses on your register that are bullying and  coercing patients into wearing masks and to take the test? 

What has happened to informed consent? 

Where is the informed consent for masks? 

Mask do not work and are potentially harmful. You should know this. Yet you remain  silent and allow the people of this country to have this imposed on them despite the  absence of any scientific supporting evidence. You remain silent while masks are imposed  on children. Surely you have considered the devastating effect this will and has already  had on their mental health and consequently their physical health? 

The shaming of people who are mask exempt is actively encouraged. 

Many of those that are mask exempt are too afraid to leave their homes for fear of the  judgement and abuse they may receive. As a nurse I have been told by too many mask  exempt patients of the distress they have suffered at the hands of others, healthcare  professionals included. They have been bullied, shamed and coerced into feeling they  must wear a mask even if this would be detrimental to them. Emotionally blackmailed, ”  Wearing is Caring”. Disgraceful marketing campaigns displayed everywhere insisting that  masks must be worn otherwise entry/service will be denied. Yet these masks are useless. 

Bullies in all types of establishments, once again, healthcare settings included, insisting  on proof/ disclosure of exemption and denial of the existence or validity of the ‘Equality  Act 2010’. There are people that are simply not mentally robust enough to withstand the  

discrimination, judgements and verbal assaults, so they either stay home ( meaning  further social isolation/exclusion) or succumb to the bullying and wear masks despite it  causing them physical or mental distress/ harm. This is totally unacceptable. Yet you  remain silent. 

Where is the informed consent for tests? 

The tests are unforgivably inaccurate. The PCR test was never designed as a diagnostic  tool, clearly stated by its inventor Kary Mullis. Surely you are aware of this too? If not why  not? It is your responsibility to be aware of the facts. And if you are aware why are you  silent? Why are you not challenging the Government policy in order to protect and do no  harm? 

These inaccurate tests have been used to justify injustices on the people on a scale that  is nothing short of criminal. 

They have been used to fabricate a health threat and bring this country to its knees  through fear. 

These tests have been used to label healthy, asymptomatic individuals as a potential  threat to the lives of others and to facilitate world governments in rolling out Draconian  measures/restrictions on their people, the people they were elected to serve. 

So-called asymptomatic cases have never in the history of respiratory disease been the  driver for the spread of infection. Rather it is symptomatic people who spread respiratory  infections – not asymptomatic people. 

Why have you not challenged this? 

The measures imposed on us all are responsible for the destruction of lives, livelihoods,  mental health and the very essence of what makes us human, our connections to one  another, making people, and sickeningly, children, fearful of each other. Dehumanisation. 

It has all been ‘marketed’ as protecting the vulnerable. 

What about all the other vulnerable members of our society? I am sure I don’t need to list  them. 

Are their needs no longer important? 

The fact that Healthcare professionals across the UK are refusing patients treatment and  investigations if they are mask exempt and if they refuse a test and/or being told that they  will be removed from treatment and investigation lists if they refuse the test is unethical  medical tyranny.  

I have personally been party in my professional capacity to my colleagues proudly stating  how they have informed patients that if they refuse a test they will be removed from the  waiting list. I asked a senior colleague to show me where in the admission process we  asked patients for their informed consent for mask wearing. I was told, that patients are 

told they must wear a mask and they know if they do not then they will not be admitted to  the hospital and therefore they will not get treatment, so they wear a mask. I witnessed all  surgical patients being expected to wear surgical masks post surgery and even some  Consultant Anaesthetists insisting patients requiring oxygen therapy must wear surgical  masks beneath their oxygen delivery masks, without any evidence of efficacy or potential  harm this may cause. I saw my own colleagues enforcing this, without any evidence to  back up this new practice. 

Do you condone this? 

Again, if you do not then why are you silent? 

Where is the informed consent for the experimental vaccines? 

Do you have the supporting evidence that the vaccines are safe and do not cause harm? 

In the absence of this evidence why are you not challenging Government roll out of the  vaccine? 

Why are you not speaking out about the Government proposals to make it a requirement  for healthcare professionals to have the vaccine ? Surely consultation is necessary? Why  are you not in consultation with the Government on this matter? 

I called your helpline and was told that you were not in consultation and would simply  follow the guidance of the Government. 

Why are you not advocating for your members and the people of the UK? 

Are you aware of the many devastating adverse reactions that are being experienced by  people who are having this experimental vaccine? Are you aware of the deaths caused by  this experimental vaccine? 

Why have you not challenged this? 

To be a healthcare professional who asks questions now is to be labelled ‘uncaring’ a  ‘firebrand’ or a ‘conspiracy theorist’. 

This is wrong, we have a duty to question. 

We have a duty to be informed, to inform and to provide care that does no harm and is  consented to via informed consent. 

I assume you agree. 

Yet part of our training on radicalisation now includes those people who question the  official government narrative on ‘Covid 19’ as having been potentially radicalised into  extreme views. 

This is wrong. Do you support this? 

Are your members that are in support of the vaccine roll out and are administering these  vaccines fully aware of all the facts of each vaccine?

Are they providing patients with all these facts? If not why not? 

I would suggest that this is in the very least negligence by any party to be not  appropriately informed and to not appropriately inform. 

Are you aware that Dr Reiner Fuellmich has initiated legal proceedings against the CDC,  WHO and the Davos Group for crimes against humanity and violations of the Nuremburg  Code? 

“Fuellmich and his team present the incorrect PCR test and the order for doctors to  describe any comorbidity death as a Covid death – as fraud. 

In addition to the incorrect tests and fraudulent death certificates, the “experimental”  vaccine itself violates Article 32 of the Geneva Convention… 

Under Article 32 of the 1949 Geneva Convention, “mutilation and medical or scientific  experiments not required for the medical treatment of a protected person” are prohibited. 

According to Article 147, conducting biological experiments on protected persons is a  serious breach of the Convention. 

The “experimental” vaccine violates all 10 Nuremberg codes – which carry the death  penalty for those who try to break these international laws”. 

Soren Dreier 


You will of course be aware that a ‘Covid’ death, is a death from any cause within 28 days  of a positive test. 

A test that is inaccurate and deaths whose primary (actual) cause could have been  anything, yet the people of the UK have had their businesses, lives and health destroyed  based on these figures. 

And still you remain silent. 

Below is an article written by 

Dr Mike Yeadon 

May 10, 2021 

Why are we being lied to about Covid? There’s no good reason 

BE in no doubt, among the reasons that voices and opinions like mine are never heard in  the main media is extreme censorship more suited to China than a liberal democracy.  Please allow me to illustrate with an example close to my heart why it is high time for us  to change our response. 

Ivermectin is one of the WHO’s ‘essential drugs’ which all countries should have access  to. It’s very cheap as its patent has long expired; it’s one of the most-used drugs in world  history; it’s extraordinarily safe; it is often life-saving against parasitic infections. It is also  one of the best-established pharmaceutical treatments for Covid-19, showing benefit in  every stage of the disease, in multiple independent clinical trials of varying quality. On 

January 3, 2021, Dr Tess Lawrie attempted to alert the Prime Minister to the potential of  Ivermectin. Her video was pulled from YouTube within hours of posting, though it survives  on Vimeo. The paper by the FLCCC group of US intensivists (whose survival rates for  severe Covid-19 are best in class) that was the inspiration for Dr Lawrie’s work was  accepted after extensive open peer review (including two career employees of the FDA)  and ‘provisionally accepted’ by the ‘open science’ journal Frontiers in Pharmacology. The  screenshot of the abstract tweeted by Clare Craig attracted more than 100,000 views.  Then, mysteriously, it was rejected and pulled by the Frontiers editor in chief. It is still in  cached form though the Ministry of Truth has been at work and placed it in a memory  hole, so no trace survives on Frontiers’ own website. 

Intended for a Special Issue on ‘repurposed drugs’ for Covid-19, various guest editors  were so incensed at this behaviour that they resigned in protest. They concluded that  ‘these unfortunate events constitute gross editorial misconduct by Frontiers.’ Fortunately  this major paper is now published by the American Journal of Therapeutics and can be  read below. 

This nevertheless successfully delayed by nearly six months its circulation to leading  public health bodies starting mid-November. A copy was sent to Sir Jeremy Farrar (boss  of the Wellcome Trust and member of Sage) who passed it on to Professor Peter Horby  (also on Sage), amongst others, on November 18, 2020. So the efficacy of Ivermectin  must be well known to the Government’s advisers, but they have done nothing about it.  Likewise, the formal and rigorous meta-analysis performed by Dr Tess Lawrie’s team at  the Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy Ltd has been communicated to Matt  Hancock, but without reply. 

I am telling you about this, because all that governments, their scientific advisers, big  Pharma and regulatory agencies will tell you is that Ivermectin doesn’t work in Covid-19.  They are lying. I am inviting any of them to sue me, but they won’t, for I would win easily. 

If Ivermectin was more widely used, there’d be no need for vaccines. 

To date, despite the brains, expertise and stature of those scientists questioning the  official Covid-19 narrative, as a group they have quite patently been ineffective. And this  is unlikely to change while, as polite professionals, they won’t say: ‘This is corruption and  they’re lying deliberately to scare the people.’ Furthermore, unwittingly, they have been  playing the parts intended by those, including our own Government and their advisers,  who control the global Covid narrative. 

They judged correctly that we polite Brits wouldn’t accuse them of outright lying, even  though they often do exactly that. Boris Johnson’s recent piece to camera, telling us that  it was lockdown and not vaccination which reduced cases and deaths, is a case in point. 

Yet it’s certain this isn’t true, and also certain he and his advisers know it isn’t true. 

The government’s advisers are not fools. Some may be, but the upper echelons are very  smart. They believe polite people won’t say ‘not only are you lying but you’re doing it in  concert with other, non-democratic actors’, because that’s conspiracy theory stuff, right?  Powerful people never use their influence to benefit their interests, do they? Hmm. The  only thing that’s different is scale and the power their public positions give them. Other  than that, they’re just another a bunch of grubby criminals, ripping off unsuspecting  people.

Truth is our most powerful tool. And that truth is that we’re being lied to. 

The truth also, however hard it is to believe it, is that there is unequivocal and clear  evidence of planning and co-ordination. Not to face this fact is to have your head in the  sand. Where it’s leading is easy to discern, once people are willing to lift their internal  censoring and look objectively at the evidence. 

First, though, the lies. It’s abundantly clear now that pretty much everything that the  public has been told and continues to be told is between untrue and downright lies. 

I offer as a shortlist that: 

-PCR mass testing reasonably reliably distinguishes infected and infectious people from  others; 

-that masks reduce transmission of respiratory viruses; 

-that transmission of infection in the absence of symptoms is an important contribution to  epidemic spreading; 

-that lockdowns as executed reduce hospitalisation and deaths; 

-that no matter how small the remaining susceptible population and no matter that  virtually no people who, if infected, might die remain unvaccinated, the position is  perilous; 

-that no pharmaceutical treatments are available; 

-that variants are different enough to warrant border closures and require new vaccines; -that the gene-based vaccines are safe and effective; 

-that ‘vaccine passports’ will increase safety while having no material impacts on freedom  of choice in a liberal democracy. 

It is impossible to believe that intelligent, well-connected and well-briefed senior advisers  to governments don’t know that almost all, if not all, of the above are simply not true. 

It is not a matter of opinion in almost all cases. These statements, which have been  explicitly stated and used in justification for the extraordinary interferences in the lives of  citizens in democratic countries, are mostly demonstrably wrong, as defined by there  being multiple well-conducted, peer-reviewed studies showing the contrary. 

To continue with the pretence that there’s scientific uncertainty, and it is therefore  understandable that an adviser might offer nuanced advice, is wrong and misleading. This  perhaps is where the mainstream media has been most culpable. 

It is not reasonable to expect typical viewers and readers of speeches, articles and  editorials – whether by scientist sceptics or by critical commentators – to appreciate that,  when we point out that what’s happening doesn’t make sense, we mean ‘the executive is  knowingly and deliberately harming the country and its citizens’. We are mostly not saying  this, leaving it to the audience to sum up for themselves. But in my view the audience are 

reluctant to do this. They want to believe in government and perhaps above all they want  a quiet life. To disbelieve is so much harder than to believe. 

So in recent weeks I’ve made a clear decision no longer merely to point out what it is that  governments and their advisers and spokespersons around the world are doing is wrong,  scientifically unjustified and harmful, but to join the dots in an attempt to provide potential  explanations of why they’re doing these things. 

It is time for all Doubting Thomases to take a lead and state unambiguously that  ‘government and its advisers are telling us things that are manifestly untrue and  maintaining restrictive, damaging measures for which there’s no justification’. By not  doing so they are playing into the hands of those who I firmly believe are engaged in a  determined series of crimes against humanity. 

Why do I say this? Simply because there is no benign interpretation of the acts of  commission and omission consistently imposed upon us and no explanation of the  statements which are flatly wrong other than an intention to deceive the population. 

Looking around us now, we see that the prevalence of the virus in the community is  effectively zero. Note that the authorities have never conceded and determined the  operational false positive rate of PCR mass testing. Subtracting any reasonable estimate  of oFPR and we observe no cases at all. This was true for months as indicated by the  positive rate in lateral flow tests. 

No variant of the virus differs by more than 0.3 per cent from the original sequence, and  numerous academic immunologists have stated strongly that there is no possibility that  booster/top-up/variant vaccines are required. Yet we get daily ‘fear porn’ on this topic.  The European Parliament just voted through the basic outlines of a vaccine passport  system. It’s a racing certainty that the UK will soon follow. 

Mask regulations continue in force and many psychologists believe some people are so  traumatised that they will continue to wear them indefinitely, even though they are  useless. 

The economy and currency may already be damaged beyond repair. Yet there’s another  six weeks minimum until the last restrictions are scheduled to be lifted. 

Almost no one is dying ‘with’ Covid-19 now, and the attribution methodology  overestimates this anyway. Yet hospitals and primary health care remain far less  accessible than they should be, inevitably resulting in causing or storing up avoidable  non-Covid-19 deaths, to say nothing of the suffering and misery of the millions awaiting  treatments for painful and worrying illnesses. 

Most terrifyingly, it appears we will soon be required to possess VaxPass apps if we wish  to continue to access our lives. 

This system can run effectively only if everyone is vaccinated. This is a monstrous  concept, because it is known that all four vaccines in use in Europe contain a fatal design  flaw: they cause the fusogenic, pro coagulation spike protein to be expressed wherever  the vaccine is taken up. In some people, especially those so young that they’re at no  measurable risk of death if infected by the virus, vaccination results in their deaths from  thromboembolic events. Permitting the inexpert population to walk into this trap is 

unconscionable: there will be thousands of further vaccine-induced deaths of young  people. 

I invite thoughtful people to ask that difficult question: ‘Why are they doing this?’ 

It is my deduction and conclusion that the only motivation that fits all the observations is  the intention to ‘herd’ every citizen into a VaxPass system. This is a completely novel  system. Never before have all individuals been represented in a single, interoperable  database as a unique digital ID, accompanied by an editable health-related field. Whoever  controls that database, and the algorithms which govern what it permits and denies, has  literally totalitarian control of the entire population. There is no personal threshold  crossing or transaction which doesn’t fall to those operating that system. 

At the very least, the public deserves to be warned that this is coming. I do not expect  conventional judicial processes to protect us in any way. Every institution has already  failed the people of the UK. 

Given that numerous government decisions (as instructed by Sage) have arguably already  led to many avoidable deaths, I think it’s only reasonable to consider what the prize is that  leads intelligent people to do the things they’ve done and continue to peddle. 

The possible answers to this question are all bad. I cannot conceive of a situation where  we will shortly be permitted to resume our normal lives. There is not the slightest hint of  that in any case. 

I have found it impossible to come up with a benign interpretation of the events. No one  works as carefully and for so long as evidently has been done, across the world, only  suddenly to stop. Why?I’ve asked hundreds of people and not a single one has (a)  pointed out where my logic fails or (b) come up with a benign interpretation. 

My own conviction is that the purpose is, at minimum, to establish a system of totalitarian  control which will mean the extinguishing of liberal democracy. 

It almost doesn’t matter what the next steps might be, but they could, for example, have  been sold to numerous people as the only solution to ‘anthropogenic global warming’: the  amount of resources we’ll be permitted to produce and consume will be set by some  unseen controllers. It is possible they could go a step further than this, and see reducing  population or depopulation as another route to solving the perceived problem of AGW. 

Consider the elimination of the class of the inquiring journalist, the censorship of all mass  media. The relentless smearing and exclusion of those who ask too many awkward  questions. The astonishing waste of public money, which apparently the foreign exchange  markets are unperturbed about. The destruction of SMEs which provide a third of all jobs  and a substantial proportion of tax revenues. The relentless lying. The misinformation. The  use of psychological operations to frighten and subdue. The utter disregard for those  vaccinated with ‘vaccines’ that are way too unsafe for their role. The bending past  illegality of the use of incorrect information to persuade pregnant women to get  vaccinated. The numerous breaches of the Nuremberg Code, since no one is being  explicitly told that these vaccines are experimental and so recipients are being unwittingly  enrolled in an unprecedentedly large and unmonitored Phase 3 clinical trial. The  announcement that, soon, our minor children are to be vaccinated.

Add in the ‘top-up vaccines’. They’re not vaccines. Whoever has been vaccinated has no  need of further vaccination. Immunology is perhaps my strongest suit, so I am certain of  this. Is it impossible that in those one billion vials which has already told us its  manufacturing, there is some gene sequence which will instigate one of a few dozen  pathologies, with onset times ranging from near-immediate to a short number of years? I  assure you, biotechnology has awesome power, and it can be used for good or ill. 

I think I’ve made a decent case that what governments and their advisers have done  easily amounts to conspiracy. The same ‘mistakes’ have been made everywhere. The  same tricks and manipulation. Those who claim this is all coincidence are coincidence  theorists. 

I argue that unless this is pointed out to the public before any possible ‘vaccine  passports’ system is established, we’ve all collectively failed to discharge our duties to be  courageous, to take chances, to risk looking foolish: I am absolutely committed to  continuing to speak out for as long as I have breath in my body”. 10.3389/fphar.2021.643369/abstract Review_of_the_Emerging_Evidence_Demonstrating_the.4.aspx 

“Dr Mike Yeadon has a degree in biochemistry and toxicology and a research-based PhD  in respiratory pharmacology. He has spent over 30 years leading new medicines research  in some of the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies, leaving Pfizer in 2011 as Vice  President & Chief Scientist for Allergy & Respiratory. That was the most senior research  position in this field in Pfizer. Since leaving Pfizer, Dr Yeadon has founded his own biotech  company, Ziarco, which was sold to the worlds biggest drug company, Novartis, in 2017” 

I ask you, are you aware of Ivermectin and the work of Dr Tess Lawrie? If not why not?  

Why are you not pressuring the Government to at the very least consider this? 

Why are you not questioning government policy and demanding their evidence to support  their policies? 

Instead through your silence you have and continue to allow them to aggressively  enforce, social distancing, social isolation, closure of businesses and places of spiritual  practice, ineffective and harmful masks, hand sanitiser and the roll out on an uninformed  public of experimental vaccines? 

They trust us and you are failing them through your silence and unquestioning complicity.

Dr Mike Yeadon and Dr Tess Lawrie are not alone in questioning what is happening yet all  and anyone that does question are aggressively censored. Their work removed and  labelled dangerous misinformation. All debate and reasonable discussion immediately  quashed. 

Do you not stop to wonder why? You should. You have a moral and professional  responsibility to do so. 

In my opinion anyone now that knows that something is very wrong with what we are  being told, even merely suspects something is very wrong and does nothing, remains  silent, condoning these injustices and encourages the vilification or actively vilifies or  

attempts to silence those speaking for truth and justice is morally bankrupt. So, do what you will or won’t with this letter but now you are in possession of it and if you  choose to ignore the issues presented then you can no longer claim nescience but are  being wilfully ignorant. 

It is with immense sadness that I end my nursing career but I will not be a part of these  crimes against humanity and against the patients I/we should be protecting and I do not  consent or wish to be governed by a body that silently complies with Government tyranny  and bases their judgement as to whether I am fit to practice as a nurse on my levels of  compliance or in my case  

non- compliance with tyranny. 

I echo Dr Mike Yeadon in saying I will fight for truth, freedom, medical freedom and the  health, rights and freedoms of others so long as I have breath in my body. 

Yours sincerely 

(Sent by email) 


From our advertisers