Connect with us


Whistleblower: NHS ordered EUTHANASIA to Inflate COVID-19 Deaths in Hospitals



Officials at the U.K. National Health Service (NHS) reportedly ordered medical staff to euthanize patients in order to artificially inflate the number of Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) deaths, according to a whistleblower who wishes to remain anonymous.

Contrary to what authorities and the mainstream media had reported, the COVID-19 pandemic did not overwhelm NHS hospitals, according to the whistleblower who went by the alias Dr. John. Additionally, he revealed the two ways NHS executives falsified data regarding COVID-19 fatalities.

First, they negligently directed medical staff to treat patients with the barest minimum and then simply allow them to pass away. Second, they gave staff instructions on how to put patients to sleep using the drug midazolam and the End of Life Care program. Both of these orders resulted in deaths that were mistakenly recorded under COVID-19.

According to the Daily Expose, Dr. John’s testimony “highlights the negative impact of changes in care policies, leading to patients not receiving proper follow-up care and negative outcomes for patients and their families.” It also reveals how the British government “authorized the essential ‘mass murder’ of the elderly and vulnerable by midazolam injection and then told the public [that] COVID-19 was to blame.”

A report written by the U.K. Care Quality Commission (CQC) and published in November 2020 backs up the whistleblower’s claims. The aforementioned report claims that 34% of NHS employees were forced to give Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) orders to COVID-19 patients who had disabilities and learning difficulties.

Incidentally, the report stressed that every decision about DNR “must be made on the basis of a careful assessment of each individual’s situation and should never be dictated by ‘blanket’ policies.” But based on Dr. John’s disclosures, the NHS’s blanket policies played a big role in these DNRs that were used to manipulate the actual number of COVID-19 fatalities.

Fear of COVID caused patients to miss much-needed medical care

Dr. John also pointed out how the neglectful policies in hospitals have led to patients not receiving proper follow-up care, resulting in worse outcomes. He added that he has “seen this mess evolve from the very beginning of the pandemic.”

“I used to see an average of 20 patients per day, that dropped to one to two patients during the first lockdown. I have even witnessed an elderly lady with horrific broken bones come into the hospital three weeks after her accident as she was too scared of catching the coronavirus to visit the hospital sooner. In the end, the pain overcame the fear.”

The whistleblower continued by saying that he also conducted evaluations on patients experiencing chest pain in their homes. He claimed that these patients were so terrified of COVID-19 that they would rather have a heart attack than contract SARS-CoV-2.

Furthermore, he emphasized that because the follow-up visits did not take place, parents frequently took matters into their own hands, including taking off casts from their kids’ broken limbs. Dr. John also brought up the instance of an elderly woman who had a hip replacement. She only had one in-person follow-up appointment and one phone follow-up with a physiologist after her surgery.

“I found her laid in her mess on incontinence pads, her dignity taken because she was bed-bound with a fixed rotated leg, unable to transfer to a commode,” he recalled. “Her family was extremely upset.”

As a result of not receiving the necessary care, one of Dr. John’s family members passed away from cancer, which served as the basis for his testimony against the NHS. The aforementioned relative was given seven years to live, but under the new system, she only lived for one year.

“I’ve also witnessed the desperation of families witnessing their own relatives dying sooner than they should have due to the lack of professional care that should have been provided,” Dr. John said “It has been a very sad year in which I have witnessed the demise of the health service.”



  1. Pingback: Report: DHS ordered euthanasia to inflate COVID deaths – The Radio Patriot

  2. Cliff Taylor

    July 2, 2023 at 1:02 pm

    Nobody died from Covid – – they were murdered.

  3. Elaine Ramsbottom

    July 3, 2023 at 11:04 am

    My husband was euthanised by the hospital that was supposed to help him. They pumped him that full of crap he didn’t stand a chance. Midazolam and morphine was what they pumped into him and they coerced him into going on a ventilator by saying he would die if he didn’t go on one. They will get their cummupence because the truth is coming out because at least some of the doctors and nurses have a conscience now. Such a shame they didn’t have one when it was happening. The NHS is a dangerous place to have to go because they don’t care about people like they used to. What used to be a golden cow is now a rotting mess

  4. Gillian Broughton

    July 3, 2023 at 11:07 am

    My Dad was put on EOL pathway without our consent and before a court of protection hearing which was 3 weeks away

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply


Democrats Block SAVE Act in Senate, Allowing Potential for Illegal Immigrant Voting



Senate Democrats have thwarted the passage of the SAVE Act, a pivotal bill aimed at bolstering the integrity of federal elections by mandating proof of citizenship for voting eligibility. This move follows the House’s approval of the bill with a narrow vote of 221-198, where almost all Democrats opposed the measure.

The SAVE Act seeks to amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to enforce stricter voter registration standards. Specifically, it proposes that voters must furnish documentary evidence of U.S. citizenship to participate in federal elections, diverging from current regulations that only require such proof for state and local elections.

Senator Mike Lee, commending Representative Chip Roy for the bill’s passage, emphasized the necessity for Senate action, asserting, “Federal elections are only for U.S. citizens.”

However, despite efforts to expedite the bill in the Senate, Democrats raised objections, preventing its immediate passage. Senator Lee expressed frustration over the blockage, highlighting the potential consequences: “It’ll stop noncitizens from voting.”

In a statement on the Senate floor, Senator Lee voiced deep concerns, citing a recent study revealing significant opportunities for illegal voting by noncitizens. The study indicated that between 10% to 27% of noncitizens are registered to vote, with 5% to 13% actually participating in presidential elections.

Instances of voter fraud, including noncitizens illegally registered to vote, have been documented across the country. Reports have surfaced of unsolicited voter registration forms sent to noncitizens and inadequate checks during driver’s license issuance, contributing to vulnerabilities in the electoral system.

A video shared by Mike Howell, Executive Director of the Heritage Oversight Project, in collaboration with, further underscored concerns. The video exposed instances of illegal aliens admitting to voter registration in North Carolina, emphasizing the need to safeguard American elections from foreign influence.

The SAVE Act’s blockade in the Senate has ignited a contentious debate over electoral integrity and the role of citizenship in voting rights. As the legislative battle continues, the future of federal voting regulations remains uncertain, with implications for the upcoming 2024 elections.

Continue Reading

2024 Race

Wisconsin Supreme Court Reinstates Unstaffed Drop Boxes Ahead of 2024 Election



In a significant ruling on July 5, the Wisconsin Supreme Court decided to reinstate the use of unstaffed drop boxes for absentee ballots, reversing the prohibition that had been in effect since 2022. The court’s 4–3 decision marks a pivotal change in Wisconsin’s election procedures ahead of the 2024 elections.

In 2022, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that state law did not allow for absentee drop boxes to be placed anywhere other than in election clerk offices. This decision effectively banned the use of unmanned drop boxes, which had been widely utilized in previous elections to facilitate absentee voting.

The reversal of the 2022 ruling was influenced by a change in the court’s composition. A new justice was elected in 2023, which led to a re-evaluation of the previous decision. During the arguments in May, Justice Jill Karofsky questioned the validity of the 2022 ruling, suggesting that it may have been a mistake. “What if we just got it wrong? What if we made a mistake? Are we now supposed to just perpetuate that mistake into the future?” Karofsky asked during the proceedings.

The court heard arguments three months before the August 13 primary and six months ahead of the November presidential election. Attorneys representing Republican backers of the 2022 ruling contended that there had been no changes in the facts or the law to justify overturning a decision that was less than two years old. Misha Tseytlin, at torney for the Republican-controlled Legislature, argued that overturning the ruling could lead to future instability, as the court might have to revisit the issue whenever its composition changes.

However, Justice Karofsky countered this by pointing out the potential flaws in the 2022 decision, questioning whether the court should continue to uphold a ruling that was “egregiously wrong from the start” with “exceptionally weak” reasoning and damaging consequences.

Democrats and voting rights advocates argued that the 2022 ruling misinterpreted the law by concluding that absentee ballots could only be returned to a clerk’s office and not to a drop box controlled by the clerk. David Fox, attorney for the groups challenging the prohibition, described the current law as unworkable and unclear about where ballots can be returned.

Several justices expressed concerns about revisiting the previous ruling, with Justice Rebecca Bradley cautioning against the court acting as a “super Legislature” and giving municipal clerks excessive discretion in conducting elections.

The case was brought by voter mobilization group Priorities USA and the Wisconsin Alliance for Retired Voters. Governor Tony Evers and the Wisconsin Elections Commission, which oversees the state’s elections, supported the use of drop boxes. Election officials from four counties, including the state’s two largest, also filed briefs in support of overturning the prohibition, arguing that drop boxes had been used securely for decades.

The plaintiffs’ attorneys highlighted the practical impact of the 2022 ruling, noting that over 1,600 absentee ballots arrived late and were not counted in the 2022 election when drop boxes were not in use. By contrast, in the 2020 election, when drop boxes were available, only 689 ballots arrived after Election Day, despite a significantly higher number of absentee voters.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court’s decision to reinstate unstaffed drop boxes is a crucial development in the state’s election laws, potentially increasing accessibility and convenience for absentee voters. As the 2024 elections approach, this ruling may have significant implications for voter turnout and the administration of elections in Wisconsin.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Continue Reading


Elon Musk Backs Voter Bill Aimed at Providing Proof of U.S. Citizenship to Vote, Labels Opponents as “Traitors”



Elon Musk recently voiced strong support for the SAVE Act, a bill proposed by House Speaker Mike Johnson aimed at ensuring only U.S. citizens can vote in federal elections. The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act seeks to amend the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) by mandating documentary proof of U.S. citizenship for voter registration in federal elections.

The bill outlines several key measures:

  • State election officials must verify citizenship before providing voter registration forms.
  • Individuals must provide proof of citizenship to register to vote in federal elections.
  • States can accept various documents to make it easier for citizens to register.
  • States will have access to federal agency databases to remove non-citizens from voter rolls.
  • The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is directed to determine whether to initiate removal proceedings if a non-citizen is identified as registered to vote.
  • DHS must notify state election officials when individuals are naturalized to ensure they can exercise their voting rights.

Supporters, including Musk, argue that these measures are necessary to protect the integrity of U.S. elections by preventing non-citizens from voting. Critics of the bill claim it could disenfranchise eligible voters by imposing additional hurdles to the registration process.

Continue Reading