Press conference analysis: Dr. Malhotra calls for immediate suspension of Covid vaccines

Written by: Miri
September 27, 2022

Earlier today, top UK cardiologist, Dr. Aseem Malhotra, took part in a press conference, where he shared his new research paper demonstrating clear and irrefutable evidence of harm from Covid 19 vaccinations. The press conference was hosted by the World Council for Health's Dr. Tess Lawrie, and also speaking was Dr. Ryan Cole by video link.

News of this press conference caused quite a stir on alternative and social media, with actor and activist John Bowe suggesting this would be a game-changer, sentiments echoed by GB News' Neil Oliver. I only heard about the press conference a couple of days ago, but in analysing the situation, deduced they were probably onto something, and this was not yet another "false prophecy" (cf. arrest of Matt Hancock, various "this is it" big dates, and so on) - but that didn't necessarily mean this was all good news. I expanded on my thoughts in this article, which is probably worth reading (it's short-ish by Miri AF standards) so the following commentary makes sense...

I watched the entire press conference live and in full - which was much longer than I expected, at 2 hours 25 minutes - and if you can find the time, I recommend you do, too. I very rarely recommend videos as I find it difficult to get my information that way - I prefer to read - but this is very well done and will hold your attention throughout.

To use the consummate conspiracist's vernacular of choice, it drops "truth bomb" after "truth bomb", all vigorously backed up with evidence, and reveals not only how dangerous the Covid vaccines are, but sets the stage by explaining how corrupt and unreliable both industry and regulators are, where it comes to pharmaceutical products.

Malhotra is an impeccably credentialed speaker, not only as a top cardiologist with two decades' worth experience and as a successful published author, but also as a media star. He has a long and distinguished history of appearing on television and chatting with prominent broadcasters and journalists, and it shows. This man has been media trained to within an inch of his life, and this coupled with his youthful good-looks, his fit physique, and smart-yet-not-stuffy attire (suit but open-neck shirt with no tie) makes him immensely plausible, relatable, and likable.

And hey - I do like him. I have for years, and agree with everything he says about the importance of reducing carbohydrates in the diet, especially for diabetics or those with other metabolic disorders. He has been a stringent critic of the government and NHS in their "healthy eating guidelines", pointing out repeatedly that these represent literally the exact opposite of a healthy diet. He has also correctly pointed out that exercise plays virtually no role in reversing obesity (this is almost entirely down to diet). So he has made a career of challenging sacred shibboleths of mainstream health culture and the NHS, and in that sense, it's unsurprising he would turn his hand to vaccinations - especially after they were strongly implicated in the death of his father (in the press conference, Dr. Malhotra related an anecdote about his extremely healthy father - also a doctor - who was able to beat super-fit son Aseem at Badminton, at the age of 72. Two years later, he died of a sudden heart attack, shortly after receiving Covid vaccinations).

However, I see some anomalies here, which I touched on a little in my previous article, and will expand further on here.

I have always firmly maintained that revealing the harms of the Covid vaccines to the masses is part of the plan, and, indeed, Dr. Malhotra's press conference has already started to get some mainstream coverage, with The Washington Times picking it up moments after it aired. It seems up until now, The Washington Times had been generally pro-vaccine and was promoting the new booster as little as a few weeks ago. So this seems quite encouraging.

Semi-mainstream GB News is giving it extensive coverage too, and so, as I said yesterday, I predict this heralds the beginning of mainstreamed exposure of the harms the vaccine has done. It may not happen quite as immediately and dramatically as we might prefer, but perhaps a gradual build-up (as we're already seeing previously zealous pro-vaccinator Paul Offit doing mainstream interviews with anyone who will listen warning others not to take the new booster) is judged to look more organic and authentic, than the media going lockstep and reporting it all at once. Aseem did say on several occasions in the press conference how controlled and corrupt the mainstream media is, and how it will be an uphill struggle to get them to pay attention (but that they will be successful eventually), so perhaps it simply wouldn't look plausible to have the world's media suddenly and all-at-once backtrack on decades of editorial policy and so it has to happen a bit more gradually.

I can't be sure what the exact strategy is (alas, not having access to "the plan" and only being able to make my best guess based on available evidence), but I firmly maintain that this new study and lengthy press conference will be instrumental in a change-up of the narrative as "the truth" (or some strategic approximation of it) is formally revealed, and that this is all being stage-managed by hidden hands.

As I said yesterday, Aseem himself may not be explicitly aware of this - expert social engineers can use others to their advantage, without said others necessarily realising they are being so used, and it's easier to slip into that trap than you might think: for instance, on more than one occasion, seemingly well-meaning, "on our side" people have offered me money to promote certain content or theories on my site. I have always declined - and always will - but I can certainly understand why others might naïvely accept. So I do think Aseem is being used by higher-ups for a wider purpose, but he himself might not actually be fully aware of this.

Why do I think there's a wider agenda that he's being used to fulfil? Well, I think this for several reasons. The first is that he is extremely visible (having appeared on mainstream TV multiple times and with a huge social media following), and the second is that he is extremely credible, with strings of top qualifications and mainstream experience, including mainstream media experience. He's not some "quack fake doctor" with dubious qualifications from online institutions, he's the real thing.

This means he is hugely influential and credible in the eyes of many - and that he therefore has huge power to move the narrative. As such, if someone as visible as him started genuinely going off-script and off-narrative, the first thing the social engineers would do is de-platform and de-monetise him, as they have to so many others, and others with far less impact. They kicked me off Twitter despite the fact I had less than 3,000 followers, and banned me from PayPal even though I was making less than one quarter of the minimum wage.

If they would so brutally censor me - someone who in the greater scheme of things is a very small fish (and who didn't even pass Biology GCSE, never mind have a medical degree) - why would someone so vastly more powerful and influential be allowed to continue unimpeded?

I'm not trying to say, "if you're not de-platformed you're obviously not genuine", merely posing the logical question as to why - at a time when social media platforms and crowdfunders are being very heavy-handed with the ban hammer, Dr. Malhotra has so seamlessly managed to avoid it?

It's a valid question, and I'm sick to death of being howled down every time I investigate someone's intentions or motives with "stop calling people controlled opposition, you're dividing the movement!!!".

I think these people - who insist NO-ONE is controlled opposition and we must never dare suggest otherwise - are just as bad as those who call EVERYONE controlled opposition - and, listen, I know they're annoying, as I get this accusation too. I was once accused of being a satanist on the basis that I had stood in the council elections for Freedom Alliance (definitely not satanists - they are entirely secular), and was accused at length of being "controlled" when I voiced my opinion that Don't Pay UK are an establishment scam.

So I know it's tedious and frustrating to be accused of being controlled opposition when you're not - however: I entirely support people's prerogative to make this accusation (and for the accused to then robustly defend themselves), because we do not get to the truth if we do not maintain eternal vigilance and remain sceptical and questioning. Please DO ask yourself if I am controlled opposition, do your due diligence, and come to your own conclusion.

Do that for everyone who has a platform in this (or any) influential movement, because ALL influential, anti-establishment movements are infiltrated by said establishment. All of them. Because... of course they are. "The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves", and so forth. I have a very good idea of who the main "controlled" assets in this movement are, but nevertheless, I listen to what they have to say anyway, because the whole point of controlled opposition - in order to be credible and successful - is that they have to give a lot of good information, and then strategically lace the lies therein. If you are a genuine and diligent critical thinker, then controlled opposition pose little threat to you, as you can take the good information and leave the rest.

The problem is, a great deal of people (all of us, at some stage) struggle to maintain this level of vigilance and can find it very easy to be bamboozled and led down the garden path by people seeming to say everything we want to hear - classic pied piperism.

So when a major, credible new voice bursts onto the scene echoing all our thoughts and concerns and appearing to vindicate us at every level, naturally, our response can be to drop our scepticism and defences, and think, "Aha! A true hero! We're saved!"

Yet as master Mason Albert Pike said, "when the people want a hero, we shall supply him."

Aseem Malhotra, with his TV good looks and likeable, relatable persona, has "hero" stamped all over him. So, that's what I think his role is - the hero who has come along with the strength to carry on, and fight for the truth to come out.

I think he'll be successful, too, insofar as getting the mainstream media vehicles to report that the Covid vaccines are dangerous and need to be stopped. Why do I think this? Because look at what hasn't happened: where is psychotically pro-vaccine Jeremy Vine, Aseem's good friend who he calls a "top man", decrying Aseem across all his platforms as a crazy nutjob? Where is Piers Morgan, another demented pro-injector, and also close colleague of Aseem's, saying the same thing?

Tellingly, Aseem revealed in the press conference that he had recently had lunch with "a very prominent broadcaster" who had initially been extremely in favour of the vaccine, and had succeeded by the end of the lunch in changing the broadcaster's mind. I'm pretty sure he's referring to Jeremy Vine, who he Tweeted about having lunch with a few months ago (to the apoplectic fury of his followers - "don't you know what he's been saying about the vaccine?!").

So let's recap here: Aseem is hugely visible and hugely credible, yet hasn't been de-platformed or de-monetised (as so many less visible voices saying the same things have). He's exceptionally well connected in the media, yet none of his close, and very high-profile, contacts are denouncing him, despite how pro-vaccine they have previously claimed to be. The mainstream press is starting to give coverage to his remarks.

It seems pretty clear to me that none of this is incidental, and here is the kicker: in the conference, where Aseem did indeed drop truth bomb after truth bomb, there was one caveat:

He described vaccines as the safest medical products there are.

He was at great pains to emphasise that not only was he not an "anti-vaxxer", but that he was actually a great vaccine enthusiast, considering them one of medicine's crowning glories - it's just that Covid vaccines, he explained, are so different to traditional vaccines. They use a completely different technology and they've been rushed through in a completely different way. That's why they're dangerous. But other vaccines are incredibly safe, incredibly effective. Nothing to worry about there.

Now, to give him the benefit of the doubt, we could say, "he's just saying that to be credible to the mainstream. If he denounced all vaccines, they would instantly dismiss him as insane. His case is stronger if - for now at least - he just concentrates on Covid vaccines."

And that's a valid point. The question is though, is is true? If, after the MSM finally retracts and publishes the truth about Covid vaccines, will Aseem then further his campaigning by declaring, "... and actually, all other vaccines are dangerous too?"

I would put money on the fact that he will not. I think he's playing a very strategic game (whether knowingly or not) by winning trust as a courageous whistleblower calling out the Covid vaccine, so he can later be used as a mouthpiece to promote other vaccines.

"Now, THESE vaccines are safe," Dr. Aseem might say. "You know that if there were safety issues, I'd tell you, just like I did with the Covid vaccines. But these ones are different. These are completely safe."

The pharmaceutical industry has already made an unfathomable fortune from Covid vaccines, so I doubt very much if they care if these are now withdrawn, as they can simply transfer their profiteering to some other dodgy injection instead (after all, there is no financial fall-out for them if the Covid vaccines are shown to irreparably harm people, as we all too well know). They will trot out some trite PR nonsense about "lessons learned" and "standards tightened", people will believe them, and the whole tedious, terrible cycle will start again (just like with thalidomide, vioxx, et al).

There is a huge amount of scepticism and distrust in current institutions and authorities at the moment, and I believe the social engineers intend to capitalise on that (having engineered it in the first place) by comprehensively collapsing all remaining trust and faith in said authorities over the winter months (which we keep relentlessly being warned are going to be 'dire', 'deathly', and so on and so forth), whilst simultaneously promoting new "heroes" who will come and save us - who we will uncritically trust as "on our side", but who will inevitably turn out to be establishment assets playing a part. I said exactly the same thing in 2016 about Donald Trump.

So that's what I think is ultimately going on with Dr. Malhotra and his glittering high-profile activism - and that others like him will inevitably emerge, too. Glossy, media-trained, high-profile "heroes", who ultimately have a hidden and nefarious agenda (even if in some ways unwittingly).

So please never be afraid to ask questions, to scrutinise someone's motives, to look at everything they're saying and seeing if it really adds up. It's not "divisive" or "low-vibrational" (tsk!) to do this, and if someone's going to be a very prominent and very controversial activist, then they've got to expect people to question and scrutinise them (and if they can't handle that, this probably isn't the career for them).

Because it is so, so true that - not only is eternal vigilance the price of freedom - but that the truth does not fear investigation.

Thanks for reading! This site is 100% reader funded, with no advertisements or paywalls. If you would like to make a contribution, please do so through PatreonBuyMeACoffee or bank transfer to: Nat West, a/c 30835984, s/c 54-10-27, account name FINCH MA. Your support is really appreciated. Thank you.

If you enjoyed reading this, please consider supporting the site via donation:
[wpedon id=278]

18 comments on “Press conference analysis: Dr. Malhotra calls for immediate suspension of Covid vaccines”

  1. The fact he was still pushing the existence of Covid19 and it’s variants was a red flag for me.

  2. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. of The Children’s Health Defense, Del Bigtree of ICAN, and Dr. Robert Malone all oppose the Covid vaccine but are vigorous defenders of “safe vaccines”, and (in my opinion) are controlled opposition. I suspect that Dr. Malhotra is also being used by the powers that should not be. It remains to be seen whether he is complicit in their scheme.

  3. “Here is the cold hard truth that everyone in this country MUST understand RIGHT NOW.

    None of the so=called “leaders” in the anti-vax/pro-health freedom movement are on our side. They are all undercover agents, working for Pro-Pharma, Pro-Vax agendas and getting paid very well for their fake opposition efforts.

    They run charity scams and fake opposition organizations in order to CONTROL THE OPPOSITION AND CREATE FALSE NARRATIVES.”

    From the paper “Paul Put the “Offit” in Profit”:

  4. Bravo 👏 another well written and thought provoking article. I too wanted a hero and thought he could be it. But then thought again this is a long game. Great that some will wake up to the harms as more on ‘our’ side would be good but the establishment will manage the great reveal to their own advantage. Thought the Italian lady pm had fire in her belly until I found out she was a member of the Aspen Institute. The one ABOVE the WEF. It’s a long war against us.

  5. Hi Miri,
    I gave up 2 hours of my life to watch it too (like you I prefer to get my information by reading rather than watching, but made an exception for this). This was my FB comment straight afterwards, which I think chimes with yours:

    "Well that was a disappointment. Aseem Malhotra and Ryan Coles' talks were good as far as they went, but went on far too long (2 hours in total) for what was meant to be a press conference. The general background of pharma corruption is important, but should have been dealt with far more briefly to allow more focus on the evidence against the novel gene therapies, and Ryan Coles' talk would have gone over the head of anyone from the MSM present - which of course was the big problem. None of the MSM (apart from GB News, if they count) was there, so once again it was preaching to the choir. Looks like we're going to have to wait a bit longer for The Great Reveal."

    I think Aseem Malhotra fits into the category of Limited Hangout, rather than Controlled Opposition. Knowingly or not (and in his case, I think genuinely unknowingly), they're there to reveal truths that can no longer be hidden, but also to divert attention away from the rest of it. His defence of the smallpox vaccine for half of the front page of his article is a huge red flag, as anyone who's done any research at all into the subject would know it's the most deadly vaccine in history and had nothing to do with the eradication of smallpox. The fact that he stood up there today and said he believed in all the other vaccines, just not these ones, shows to me that he's just a (probably unwitting, I'll give him that) part of a damage limitation exercise.

  6. Sometimes I am happy that I watched tv in the 80's/90's. The X files -'question everything' I do! Blessings lovely lady x

  7. So sad everyone is under scrutiny and suspicion. I too watched and was disappointed that Dr. Maholtra defended all other vaccines. I would assume his defense would include mandated childhood vaccines for school entry. If so, right there I'd have to think he's not on the level considering how MANY vaccines kids must inject for school entry. He claims he believes his father died from the cvd injection(s). I read the Dr. may be in the process of planning suing for his father's death due to cvd vaccine injury. (heart attack) Is this why he has interest in presenting information at this press conference that would support and bolster his lawsuit perhaps? Agree that Maholtra is very easy on the eyes and he's smooth in his delivery and well polished. Should good genes be held against him? Or is there more to him being able to escape being silenced and cancelled as others have been before him? Is anyone deserving of being 100% truthworthy when it comes to speaking out about how dangerous these warp speeded, no liability, experimental, gene therapy injections are? We just had the Nuremberg 2.0 soap opera s**t show finale. Is there any hope that truth and justice exists. I wonder.

  8. I too gave up two and a half hours to watch the press release and have followed Dr Malhotra's work for several years.

    His premise that many illnesses can be treated with dietary interventions (carbohydrate restriction to halt or reverse metabolic diseases) and the profiteering by big pharma does not sit well with the assertion that vaccines are safe interventions. Even the outcomes from Edward Jenner's breakthrough do not hold up well under scrutiny.

    His initial section was long and personal as are the two parts of his published research. His argument is built well but seems a little too personal for academia. It is populist which may get more people to read and take note at the same time as allowing academics to dismiss message.

    Dr Cole went into a lot of detail about the take up of the vaccine in the cell which may well have flown over the heads of any average media punter with a basic science qualification.

    Personally, I hope that this is another nudge in the direction of truth coming out. I hope too that those of us who did our research at the beginning will be found to be wrong and that these vaccines are not going to be the disaster we fear.

  9. You're a breath of fresh air Miri. I watched too. That phrase "wilfully blind" in the video smacks - at what point do they call it criminal negligence...

  10. Unfortunately, when you have been trained and working in the medical industry for years and you become a dr you are at the end of the day - endoctrinated. I think it’s unfair to literally make every matter complicated and sinister in some way. I know Aseem. He is first a Dr and second someone who is vigilantly trying to uncovered fact from fiction. But still as human as every other person who vehemently believes that vaccines are modern miracles until, well, you learn that they are not. We need to stop judging people’s journeys. Many of us knew from day dot that this was all going to turn in to the shit show it has - that was never clear to those who believe firmly in our modern medical prowess. But once you open a can of worms you can’t close it - so when you start looking at data and realising that all those smoking guns actually point to something, you start changing your own tune. Give the man time. And there is a good reason he is being allowed to speak about these things on say GB news and not SKY or BBC - deplatforming has not happened to many high profile mainstreamers - YET. He has been very strategic and measured and will only believe & speak once he’s seen the data for himself. Some of us simply have had more years to discover the truth and others still rely on their taught way of deciphering scientific data. Not everything is as calculated as we like to make it up. At the end of the day we’re all mere humans trying to do our best in the world with what our own brains know and understand - frustrating as that may be for the rest of us.

  11. This is the first time I am reading your work, Miri. I think you have great critical thinking skills and intuition.
    I was out on disability after 15 years of being an RN in geriatric and medical-surgical hospital settings, when the 2009 H1N1 rolled out as a so-called pandemic. Being at home and with both my children out of the home, I was able to really absorb and see how the MSM was handling the messaging of this outbreak. It was like a light bulb went off in my head. Due to a medical journalist from Europe and others I came in contact with, I started to understand this global agenda using vaccination. I started to question the HIV scourge, Lyme Disease that came in the 1990s and the respiratory outbreaks of the 21st Century. I started to realize where Autism was coming from and it’s ever increasing rate in our children based on more and more vaccines in the childhood vaccination schedule here in the US. I started researching Smallpox and polio and as time went on we saw the emergence of Ebola, Nipah, Zika and other outbreaks. I was suspecting much of these emerging diseases were being created by man and being spread, too, by vaccines.
    Going back to my opening gambit, I find it curious that in the 2009-10 H1N1 “pandemic,” a vaccine was rolled out in a six month period. How come so many doctors during this SARS-CoV-2 “pandemic” stated that it takes seven or more years to create a vaccine? Just because the H1N1 was a purported combination of flu viruses— avian, swine and some strain coming from the 1918-20 “Spanish Flu Pandemic” vs a “novel” corona virus? Here is the timeline to the H1N1 response.

  12. Dr Peter McCullough and Dr Robert Malone also said that all other vaccines were safe for a long time, until they were convinced to do due diligence on them as well. And neither of them were de-platformed for quite some time.

    Dr Maholtra hasn't been public for long at all - not nearly as long as all the other doctors, before they were de-platformed.

    I agree with you that a weak point is that he still considers the other vaccines okay.

    He deserves the opportunity to show whether or not he's a one-trick-pony strategically placed to critique one vaccine, or whether or not he will do due diligence on other vaccines, as have some of the other doctors.

    All through the decades, challenging vaccines has been professional suicide, though it always takes a measure of time for bodies like the BMA and the GMC to gang up on a doctor... so in the not too distant future we will know the real face of Maholtra...

    To that end, I put this on his facebook page today:

    I have been involved in the vaccine critical movement since 1984, and have extensive read in the medical literature and listened to past whistle blowers, and seen my own sets of leaked documents, over the decades.

    As such, there are a few perhaps rhetorical questions to you might want to consider:

    1) Why was it that so many of us, with no medical training, could see that the emperor had no clothes, and you could not until your father suffered?

    2) Have you done the same rigorous analysis of all the previous vaccines, or even just Gardasil 4 and Gardasil 9, as you have done for the covid vaccine?

    3) If not, why do you take the same position as you once did about covid vaccines, and assume that all the other vaccines are equally as safe and effective as you once promoted covid vaccines to be?

    You don't have to answer, but in the interests of science I would suggest that at the very least, you take the same approach to looking at the Gardasil vaccines. Not only will that shock you, but it might make you take a broader approach to supporting real science.

    You might want to start with this paper, and then start answering the huge questions this carefully worded paper raises:

  13. Very good analysis,

    I think it's essential to have a dialogue on what constitutes 'controlled opposition' and what that means, because as you infer, the most effective way of doing this, is to recruit or use well meaning people without their knowledge.

    I would dare to say that they probably had a lot of this worked out well in advance, in terms of knowing who was likely to come forward, whether they were going to pose any real threat, and how they could be nudged and guided along a certain trajectory from a distance. Needless to say there are undoubtedly a handful of genuine sleeper agents out there who were trained specifically to come forward and lead the charge at the right time - I think we could probably agree on who these individuals most likely are.

    The method will depend on the individual and the circumstances, but in terms of unwitting or semi-witting patsies etc, they clearly pick ambitious, career-focused individuals for promotion in the media. I.e. people who will tell the public what they want to hear, but who will ultimately limit the scope of their criticisms or direct the blame somewhere other than where it really needs to go. Simply speaking, people who they can count on to instinctively know what's out of bounds and play the game within certain parameters - because that's what they've always done.

    In any case, there will always be a caveat, as there was with Dr Malhotra. You don't get anywhere near a TV camera until you've demonstrated that you have a price. The only people you can trust to give you the full truth without pushing ulterior motives or leading you down the garden path, are people who have got nothing to lose.

    But as you say, if we are discerning, we don't have to 'follow' anyone, and can watch from a distance with intrigue. The problem is the majority of the general public, who need a leader and instructions.

  14. Adding to my previous comment, here is another factor to consider.

    A lot of these so-called whistleblowers and media influencers have publicly addressed this topic in waves. I.e. they did not say anything until it had become socially acceptable, until someone else was talking about it, until the green light had been given. The degree to which the jab has been criticised increases in waves, even though the scientific basis for that criticism long pre-existed the criticism itself - the detractors tend to get louder together, according to how much they feel secure in saying.

    For example, there were people out there talking about topics such as the Great Reset in April 2020, but the same media pundits who ignored or laughed at them then, now address this topic as if they had 'always known', as if it was self evident. Same with the vaccine - what of all the people who managed to figure out almost all the consequences of the jab by December 2020?

    Nobody knows their names. We only know the names of the ones who've been thrust in front of us by social media algorithms - and that includes the ones who got world famous for being banned on Twitter.. Are we supposed to believe that Twitter didn't anticipate this? Please. It's the oldest trick in the book.

    Timing and promotion are everything.

  15. In reply to Hilary Butler:

    Coincidentally, I'm reading Suzanne Humphries's book at the moment. The current thing is like the smallpox vaccine story speeded up x100:
    - "safe and effective"
    - "lifelong immunity"
    - "stops transmission"
    - vaccine mandates
    - 6-monthly boosters
    - "reduces transmission"
    - "mild illness"
    - "pandemic of the unvaccinated"
    - refusal to publish data
    - mass opposition
    - eventual defeat of the mandates.

    I may have missed a few parallels. My favourite bit was the 100,000-strong 1885 Leicester demonstration, where they repeatedly hung Edward Jenner in effigy on a working gallows. Somehow that bit seems to have got missed out of the history books.

Leave a Reply




[wpedon id=278]
©2024 Miri A Finch. All Rights Reserved.
linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram