Ruthless people

Covid, like Climate Change, is run by people who are required, at high levels, to lie and then lie, and then lie some more. At lower levels, it is only necessary to avoid thinking, and to believe.

But the lies have to stick, that is, people cannot be allowed to disbelieve the propaganda. Punishments have to be in place to discipline anyone who observes, thinks, and speaks out. Such people are, in the eyes of the people behind the hoax, dangerous.


Thus do I offer the story of Nicole Sirotec, a registered nurse in Nevada. Her story was written up in the Epoch Times February 1-7 edition: UN Project Targets, Doxxes Medical Professionals Who Go Against COVID Narrative. Here are some notes I took from the story, by Katie Spence, along with my own interjections.

Sirotec testified before Sen Ron Johnson (R-WI), stating that patients were dying not from the pandemic, but rather from “negligence” and “medical malfeasance”. She was harrassed professionally, by a UN Sanctioned group called Team Halo, formed as part of the UN Verified Initiative and Vaccine Confidence Project. This group did not do standard harassment, but pulled out the stops.

Sirotec received pictures of her children posed in a slaughterhouse and hanging from a noose. She was sent drive-by photos of her house.She received letter with white powder inside that exploded on opening.

Team Halo made heavy use of TikTok, posting videos attacking Sirotec, who filed a police report against Team Halo. She retained an attorney to get a cease and desist order. Team Halo, denying nothing, responded that they were acting within their First Amendment rights.

During this time hospital higher-ups were withholding ibuprofen and ivermectin, and prescribing remdisver, a high-cost and poorly tested drug that took the place of ivermectin, cheap and apparently widely effective against cold and flu, which is all that “Covid-19” really was.

The harassment started the day she got back from testifying in DC. Sirotek had founded American Frontline Nurses (AFLN). As more people sought AFLN’s help, the attacks increased in frequency and harshness.

On June 5, 2022, Team Halo posted a video on TikTok calling for a public uprising because the Nevada State Board of Nursing was spreading “disinformation.” Many other videos followed. “Disinformation” is, as with the Catholic Church and Galileo, anything tht contradicts official “truth.” AFLN had advocated for ivermectin and highlighted issues with remdisver and the COVID-19 vaccines.

In June of 2022, Sirotec received a death threat. They cut pictures of the heads of her children and placed them on the bodies of young male children who had been sexually abused.

Having had enough, Sirotek filed legal name change in October of 2022, and due to the harassment she was enduring, the court forwent the necessity of making a public disclosure. In December of 2022, Team Halo doxxed her.


The activates of Team Halo were gross, exceeding human patience, cruel and unusual, and meant to intimidate anyone who spoke out against the official truth, which was a huge lie. There was no virus. The PCR test was bogus, and produced random results but did not in any way detect the presence of a virus in anyone. People were said to have died of Covid if they died within a certain period after testing “positive, a meaningless outcome. They really died, as Sirotek noted, of improper care, but the important thing was that we did not experience excess deaths. That part was made up, and indeed, before this fake pandemic, WHO and CDC changed the definition of “pandemic” to eliminate excess deaths as a criterion.

What then to make of all of the virologists who “isolated” the virus? It is nothing more than groupthink. By definition they do not isolate anything, as in their experiments they do not run controls, that is, they claim to have isolated a virus in human snot, for instance. The key feature of their work is a cytopathic effect (death of healthy cells), which indeed happens. But, if they were to run the same experiment without human snot, and achieved the same result, all bets would be off. As with so much of human affairs, virology is isolated, insulated, and as far from science as can be.

When running a scam of these proportions, it was not enough for the people behind it to control all news media outlets. They also had to pound down any private citizens who used their own initiative to search for truth. That was the purpose of Team Halo.

March 11, 2020 was not, as some claim, the beginning of fascism in our United States. It’s been lurking for decades. The pandemic was merely a means of clamping down on the citizenry, the obvious objective to scare people, and keep them in fear for such a long period they underwent psychotic breaks. All of it, from fake deaths to real death mislabeled as Covid, to masks and quarantine and lockdown, was cruel and unusual and … unnecessary.

But it had a purpose, and that was to create a stampede for the vaccines. What is their real purpose? It can only be one thing, that is, working hand in hand with Climate Change, another massive hoax, depopulation.

I never vaccinated, in fact, take no drugs legal or otherwise, and endure no vaccines of any kind. The reason? I like being alive.

40 thoughts on “Ruthless people

    1. In terms of Climate Change, I have not yet seen the will to power, the ability of the captains to let people just freeze trying to survive on wind and solar. They are firing up coal plants in Germany, but in addition, the winter has been mild so far, unlike in North America.

      Vaccines would translate into excess deaths among older people, 80+,those who used to die of flu and then were labeled Covid. 2018 was a rough year, 80+ thousand dead that year of flu. But this will also translate into lower birth rates – I have seen some work in this regard but have not paid enough attention. Nothing to add.


  1. Mark, I’m guessing she’s a fake just as Maddie de Garay is a fake jab victim, even though, of course, there are thousands if not millions of genuine jab victims – sure, people speaking out suffer but they also push out people to make us fear that we cannot speak out – obviously Alex Jones’ Sandy Hook charge is fake – must have blackmailed him on something. I have to admit I haven’t looked at this woman beyond what I’ve read in your post but to me it smells of fakery. Ron Johnson is also connected to Maddie de Garay’s fakery.

    So this morning a friend texted asking what I thought of the earthquakes in Turkey and Syria. Until now I haven’t really questioned natural disasters although I’ve heard Fukushima was fake and tend to believe it was even though I haven’t looked properly but I assumed the earthquakes were real and felt really bad for all those people. Yesterday, a guy in my local cafe suggested they might have been engineered and to a degree caused by all the tunnels they make for human trafficking – while the idea of engineering doesn’t seem remote, the idea that the tunnels for human trafficking caused them does.

    Just as I was replying to my friend to tell her I thought they were real my mind went to images of a building coming down and thinking (although not fully registering) that it looked like controlled demolition.

    My friend said:

    “Something doesn’t add up! You’ve made me think and look at things differently with every tragedy now haha.

    No warning for such a big earthquake.
    Controlled demolition.
    The kids look like they’re being passed around like its a game.
    People have their phones out, ready to record at the exact moment.
    A mother giving birth died, but the baby was saved from the rubble…?

    Just seems like these photo opportunities with kids and babies are very present and it’s because it tugs at the heartstrings of the population.”

    Well, they could fleece people for worse things than rebuilding places for poor people in substandard housing – if that’s what they’re fleecing them for but …


      1. Come on, Mark, you’re as up on controlled opposition as I am. We know that to defeat the opposition you need to lead it. She started Frontline Nurses and she’s talking BLM crap? I mean come on. She doesn’t strike me as genuine. If she is so be it but I say fake.


        1. The question then is “why” bother with her? I can think of only two reasons, one to contain her and her group, and keep them from having an effect in the general sea of lies and disinfo, and two to deter others, especially professionals, from treading in those waters. Maybe then she is an active participant, but I doubt it. The woman in that video seems like a true believer in terms of illness caused by a virus, and only sees better ways of treatment, including ivermectin. It is the latter, and the true effects of ivermectin on colds and flu, the true nature of “Covid”, that made her a target. That does not make her an agent. She’s just ignorant.


      1. Lots of posed media photos – the usual stuff, people hugging, 10 men carrying one other in a makeshift carpet against a background of rubble and other perfectly undmaged blocks – but never anythink showing bodie or limbs among the wreckage. (Where was the smell of death on 9/11, sapient people asked. Answer – it was absent) Oh, it would be too upsetting to show such things. Perfect.
        You can just make up any death toll.

        Liked by 1 person

  2. Concrete high-rise buildings with not enough steel “pancake” under the stress of an earthquake. I noticed this construction flaw on various visits to Turkey, so bad I remember taking snapshots of corner columns under construction with only a few rebar pieces — undersized as well — and poorly tied together. Floors and stairways are poured concrete as well, again, hardly any steel, or hugely inadequate. This is common practice, country wide. Poor building codes, corruption, who knows, but I have seen these deathtraps under construction, and would expect the results we are seeing in video and camera shots.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks for that Steve, that helps explain things. I’d hardly looked at the media footage which I should have done before making any pronouncement. I can now see buildings that obviously didn’t come down by controlled demolition. What an absolutely devastating disaster.


  3. Against the backdrop of the outrageous and despicable smear campaign by the ISRAELI LOBBY to denounce me as an ANTI-SEMITE, WHICH I AM NOT, NEVER HAVE BEEN and NEVER WILL BE.

    Against he backdrop of them trying to silence me because I lend my voice to the seventy five year old fight for equal human rights for all my brothers and sisters in Palestine/Israel, irrespective of their ethnicity, religion or nationality

    Isn’t the word origin of “Ukraine” the Russian word for “Borderland”? It was part of Russia and the Soviet Union for a long time. It’s a difficult history. During the Second World War, I believe there was a large part of the population of western Ukraine that decided to collaborate with the Nazis. They killed Jews, Roma, communists

    You irritate a lot of people because it always sounds like you are defending Putin.

    Compared to Biden, I am. The US/NATO provocations before February 2022 were extreme and very damaging to the interests of all the ordinary people of Europe.
    Roger Waters, Pink Floyd


  4. Maybe it’s another “see what happens when you speak out?” campaign? I guess we will know for sure when she is sued for One Billion Dollars.

    She’s not too convincing in her speech; looks around and pauses often, reinforces the narrative about “a virus.”

    Liked by 1 person

  5. It seems like The Epoch Times is playing a kind of “anti” role, so of course, true or not, it’s going to play to your biases if you doubt the mainstream narrative. They have very spooky origins, that Chinese cult of dissidents, etc – not sure if anyone has done a full analysis of them. I think Miles or a guest has briefly alluded to that background. It’s got to be some kind of influence operation. Coronacircus (the site) gave one of the best explanations of how that works – controlling the dialectic. I think it’s pushing conservatives into a more extreme level of distrust of major institutions, for one thing.


      1. It’s all about control of the information and the operation:
        — Nicole reinforces the real virus BS
        — She will be used to persuade genuine whistleblowers that she represents them and not to worry she’s handling it and/or there’s no point trying to whistleblow as you’ll just be silenced. Other methods will also be used to try to suppress genuine people – so much easier when you’re working on the “inside” and people trust you
        — Any legal situation will be bogus just like Sandy Hook

        Controlled opposition inveigles itself completely in the opposition so that it’s easy to mistake it for the real thing … but they always give themselves away in little ways, it’s part of their revelation of the method rule. She says:
        “I got to my regular unit and they took my patient away, my black guy …”

        I know very little about nursing in the first place and obviously nursing in the US will be different from in Australia but it sounds strange to me for a nurse to talk about going to her “regular unit” and only having one patient to look after. Why would she say “black guy”, what does it matter what colour his skin is?

        Perhaps someone can chime in here who knows something on the subject?


      2. Why the dialectic? The end state aimed at is not the current status quo, but it’s also not the scary vision of the frontmen Schwab, Gates, Al Gore, etc. They need the clash of thesis and antithesis to arrive at the planned synthesis… So I have to think that an operation as large as The Epoch Times is part of that. Representing the antithesis. I certainly can’t explain it better than that last article Coronacircus posted. They still have the best big picture take I’ve seen in many many months.

        One can take it back to Ellul and the idea of many “propagandas.” There’s one propaganda for the mainstream audience, and another propaganda for those in the dissenting camp. And they’re enlisting more to the latter side every day. The better to tear down the old and bring in the new, I guess. Out of chaos, order.


        1. “One can take it back to Ellul and the idea of many “propagandas.” There’s one propaganda for the mainstream audience, and another propaganda for those in the dissenting camp.”

          Epitomised by the false dilemma propaganda strategy of 9/11.

          We had two options:
          A. Terrorists committed the evil crime or
          B. The power elite committed the evil crime

          when it was really

          C. The power elite were responsible but they staged the death and injury – not, of course, because they wanted to avoid killing people but just because it suited them on this occasion especially when it gave them the perfect opportunity to create their false dilemma propaganda strategy.

          When I got the false dilemma aka fake binary propaganda strategy of 9/11
          (see my comment on the article – and the article by Catte Black – it was the biggest epiphany I’ve ever had in my life. I remember it so clearly. At the moment William Rodriquez’s very incriminating testimony of hearing an explosion in the basement of the North tower struck me as being at odds with his receiving a bravery award for rescuing “hundreds of people” the row of dominoes cascaded and I had the most visceral sense of being a dumb bull in the dark being yanked viciously by the nose ring this way and that. But then I laughed.

          As soon as covid struck I knew we’d get the same roll out: the controlled opposition with “Yes there’s a pandemic BUT a, b, c” and “Yes, there’s a virus but there’s no pandemic” etc and a fake legal investigative team. All very predictable once you know the MO.


          1. You who assert the moon landings were real lecture us about propaganda? Using your mind state, I would assert you are an agent.

            Anyway, I bought a camera and it was damaged, and had to send it back. I used Epoch Times to pack the box to prevent further damage. One thing I noticed about ET is that they are Musky, as in Elon.

            I am not so far around the bend as you imagine, but I do not imagine little people like this nurse are agents. Just useful idiots, if that. What is the range of influence? Several thousand people? C’mon.


  6. A 5-minute search of : “Nicole Sirotek, crying covid nurse” will show that she was in every “right-wing” publication I can imagine, and some I’ve never heard of. Widespread coverage, in other words.

    Then search “crying covid nurse,” and the hits are seemingly endless. The crying nurse (meme/fake binary dilemma) worked “both sided of the aisle” with the fake binary song and dance. When it’s (popular narrative) this or that, chances are very good to excellent that neither is the correct perspective.

    When it comes to media ratings, the staged crying victim is only outdone for mass emotional reaction by the “catastrophic,” “crown” wildfire with a bomber dropping a load of poisonous retardant, pretending to put it out. Anything for ratings, which drive ad rates/revenue.


    1. A recent TikTok clip by Sirotek on her Facebook feed tells us, interl alia, that semen is low carb but not vegan. [Phallic facts] That tells us all we need to know about her.
      Her story about suddenly upping sticks from Nevada and traveling to NYC is backed [single-sourced] by a fake individual called Quinton Martinez.

      She’s a fraud.


    2. Alll right, all right, all right, some days you eat the bear, some days the bear eats you. But I will not be lectured on propaganda by a person who asserts (without evidence) that the moon landings were real.


      1. I do not agree with Petra about the moon landings, but I continue to be mystified by your snide and angry vehemence in shooting down every single comment she makes on any other subject because you don’t like her comments on that subject. I mean, Jesus. You have come to accept MM’s bull-headed and tedious wrongness on many subjects and adopt a “take what’s good and leave the rest” attitude toward him. But you can’t do the same toward a long-time (and always, as far as I’ve seen, polite and respectful) commenter on your own blog? You have a long, self-admitted history of being spectacularly wrong in your own writings. If I had the same attitude toward you that you have toward Petra, I’d have stopped coming here a long time ago. What’s up with that?


        1. Thank you, Scott, I appreciate your comment. Yes, I’m mystified too and although I’m not enamoured of Mark’s attitude towards me the reasons I don’t go away are:

          — I seem to be very good at attracting antagonistic reactions wherever I go and if I went away from everywhere I post for that reason … I’d be nowhere. Off-Guardian published two of my posts in 2016 and early 2018 but when in mid-2018 I finally got the staged death and injury secret of 9/11 and started trying to publicise it they turned against me and started – completely against their ethos – censoring some of my comments (I think they might censor a couple of other people’s as well though not sure), making derisive comments when they did publish them, sometimes calling me a troll … and Catte even wrote an article, The Myth of the “Infallible Elite”, in which she interpreted my claim that all glaring anomalies are examples of revelation of the method as meaning that I think the power elite are infallible … which is not what I mean when I say that at all. It’s only now after five ludicrously long years that OffG is finally starting to get the truth of 9/11.

          — I enjoy the posts and comments on POM including Mark’s which I often find interesting and thoughtful even if sometimes I completely disagree with him.


          1. “I’ve heard Fukushima was fake and tend to believe it was even though I haven’t looked properly…” those last words, that you “haven’t looked at it properly” are what so disturbed me so much about you and McGowan and the moon landings. You never did your due diligence. You never read his work, never took out a shovel and dug. I have to think that all your opinions, now the ones above about 911, are derivative. You’ve not done your homework, making me think an agent. Or, lazy ass. But who would hire you?


            1. I believe we’ve gone over the McGowan issue before, Mark. The very first thing I did when starting to research the moon landings was read Wagging the Moondoggie which I found compelling, however, I felt that rather than just read a book on the subject I should look at the evidence myself and when I did I found it more compelling than the book. I also consulted a great deal of for and against argument to see which side argued better.

              What about your due diligence, Mark? Have you read this criticism of McGowan’s work? It covers:
              — Comparison of Apollo to transatlantic travel
              — Comparison of Apollo to a 500mph early automobile
              — The Soviets’ space budget was half of the USA’s
              — The Apollo landings were about geopolitics, not science
              — The price of the moon landings
              — The technology of the 1960s
              — Smaller distances travelled by modern astronauts
              — Moon force
              — Single-stage versus multi-stage rockets
              — The missing tapes
              — The amount of fuel needed to reach the moon
              — “Missing” plans

              Then in the comments we see links to debunking of American Moon where the Van Allen belts and other issues are addressed.


              Please let me know the most compelling things put forward in McGowan’s work and I’ll respond.


              1. I am going to take a look at that “debunking” article, as the evidence that there were no moon landings is so solid that it would take a committee of gifted dissemblers to tear it apart. Indeed there are many many gifted dissemblers around.


              2. I printed out the entire “debunking” (why can’t they just say “rebuttal”, as “debunking” implies that the writer owns the truth). This should be fun. Stay tuned. We can have the whole debate all over again! It’s been slow around here, you know.


                1. My identical twin and I have argued bitterly over the moon landings way beyond the point of sanity and are always vowing to never mention the subject again … until inevitably we do. I find it interesting that we were brought up together and have the same genes but think so very differently.

                  My sister has a much better grasp of science than I do but nevertheless even though she has a much better grasp it is still limited – she’s no rocket scientist. Her approach is to base her judgement on her font of knowledge and analogise everything to that so as a computer programmer she believes that as no computer program ever works first time they simply couldn’t have landed on the moon successfully the first time. She hasn’t a clue about the testing process but simply judges on what she knows about computer programs – funnily enough the autopilot system failed during landing and Neil Armstrong had to land manually.

                  My attitude is: if an hypothesis is correct then at every pore the evidence will support if not favour it over any other thus if there are hundreds of pieces of evidence there is no need to bother with arcane material such as orbital mechanics and how rockets burn fuel but simply focus on the most tangible pieces of evidence because of themselves they will speak the truth. What I find most compelling is that all the visual evidence fits the very different lunar conditions namely:
                  — black sky in lunar daytime (the most compelling to me)
                  — no atmosphere
                  — 1/6th gravity

                  When I mention these conditions to my sister and other moon hoaxer friends – without exception – their immediate reaction is:
                  “We don’t know what the conditions on the moon are because we’ve never been there.”

                  My response to that is:
                  “While I now know from what I’ve learnt since covid that science can be incredibly fraudulent I’m not going to doubt everything and I accept that scientists can work things out without having “been there”. If you want to argue against lunar conditions as stated then give an argument about what’s wrong with the claim.”

                  My sister argues that they can fake a black background in the lunar imagery, however, it’s not a case of just the background being black, the foreground is also black but with a very brightly-lit surface. I know with film they fake day for night at twilight but there’s no such thing as faking night for day outdoors … or at least there wasn’t in 1969.

                  The very first thing to make me believe in the reality of the moon landings was when I heard the communication between mission control and the astronauts. I thought, “No one could fake this and why would they fake hours and hours of this totally boring-if-you’re-not-there conversation when they don’t have to – sure they could fake an hour or two but hours and hours?,” but I don’t use the opinion-based argument “couldn’t be faked” because I like to argue from clear facts. My argument is, “There is no detection of fakery in the hours and hours of communication,” so in the absence of evidence to the contrary that communication favours the “we went” hypothesis.


      2. Not to keep piling on with contrarian views but… Isn’t it “b’ar” not “bear”? See The Big Lebowski.. 😉

        Anyway, I hope you’ll continue to report on The Epoch Times findings as you see fit, just had to toss in my two cents about taking their reporting with a grain of salt.

        Here’s an angle.. many conservatives did get at least one covid jab.. now much of conservative media is painting it in a bad light. Does this induce a “nocebo” effect? Is this a back door way to target the vax at conservatives? Create hypochondria, a mind virus..


        1. “Some days you eat the bear, some day the bear eats you” was spoken by James Earl Jones in Gardens of Stone, which I saw, a movie ten years prior to The Big Lebowski, which I have seen only in part.


          1. You bailed on Lebowski? It’s definitely got a unique charm that might not be to everyone’s taste. I find it pretty hilarious, as well as having their usual deeper levels that set one musing about things.


          2. I like Steve Buscemi, Jeff Bridges, John Goodman and all the others, but rarely go to theaters when movies are fresh, and so would only have seen Lebowski by renting it to watch on TV. I think I did that, I think I watched it, but do not remember being awestruck, just sadly moved when one of the characters died. I did not get cult classic out of it, but those opinions coming from me mean nothing. I never thought Chevy Chase was all that funny and so never considered Caddyshack** all that great. Princess Bride … yes, enjoyed that very much as humor was a large part of the movie. Most of this stuff just whooshes right by me. I slept through all three of The Ring trilogy. That’s not a comment on the movies, just my lack of patience for long and involved scripts that take forever to make a point, and do so without enough humor. That’s why I have Blazing Saddles on hand, along with Space Balls and the Naked Gun series. OJ and Lindsey Nelson made a great team, neither of them cold blooded murderers. OJ was classic straight man.

            I struggle now with all of the stuff available to find anything I can sit through. Must be a sign of my age, as most of it is directed at younger more impressionable people.

            ** Or Fletch, or Silverado.


            1. That’s entirely fair. In truth, the first time I saw it, it wasn’t one of my favorites of theirs (Coen Bros.) Somehow on rewatching it clicked and I got into its world. Similar to Once Upon a Time in Hollywood – the first time, it’s like What is this? The second time you start to appreciate its reflective melancholy, amid the beautiful imagery and music, nostalgia, layers of commentary.

              Or maybe I’m deluding myself..!


            1. I don’t know when first use was. In Gardens of Stone, it was funny. Jones’ character, Sgt. ‘Goody’ Nelson, is dressing down the troops on morning inspection and for some unknown reason was discussing and quizzing one of the soldiers on asexual reproduction. I’d have to watch it again, but he asked the soldier if he knew of an example of asexual reproduction, and the soldier said fearfully … “Your wife, sir?”

              Later Goody says to a fellow office … “Some days you eat the bear, some days the bear eats you.”

              I did not know until this moment that Gardens of Stone (1987) was directed by Francis Ford Coppola. It was a very good movie about a troop of soldiers whose job it is to provide honor guard for fallen soldiers and to guard the grave of the Unknown Soldier.


  7. “We know they are lying, they know they are lying, they know we know they are lying, we know they know we know they are lying, but they are still lying.” – Attributed to Aleksandr Isayevich Solzhenitsyn


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s