Category Archives: Conspiracy

Why are certain 5G cell tower components labeled “COV-19?”

By Ethan Huff (via Natural News)

Reports are coming out to show that some of the electrical components being used in 5G tower installations bear the marking of “COV-19,” which just so happens to be almost identical to COVID-19, the name used for the infection supposedly caused by the Wuhan coronavirus.

The “Patriot Street Fighter” account on Telegram is one of the latest to share video footage of the components, which can clearly be seen with the marking of COV-19 on their chipsets.

5G component installers all around the world have reported similar markings on the equipment going into their towers, which shows that the phenomenon is strangely widespread and clearly not coincidental.

As you may recall from early on in the plandemic, reports emerged about how Wuhan, China, where it all originated, had just turned on its 5G towers at almost the exact same time that area residents started to get sick. Some of them got so sick that they dropped dead in the streets, or so we were told.

Donald Trump fast-tracked the rollout of 5G here in the United States not long after that, and here we are a year later with many who are sick and dying, purportedly from the “virus.”

What is really going on here? We will leave it up to our readers to decide if there is a connection between 5G and the symptoms and sickness associated with the Chinese virus.

Be sure to watch the following video from Brighteon.com, which shows yet another COV-19 chipset component being used in 5G installations (WARNING: LANGUAGE):

https://www.brighteon.com/embed/9db72eaa-834a-4b3f-bbe1-1405afa50ba2

Vaccines and 5G, not some phantom “virus,” are spreading disease and death

Throughout the past year while tens of millions of Americans were on lockdown, telecommunications carriers were busy installing 5G chipsets in towers all across the land, including at schools where developing children spend all day in the classroom.

Could it be that 5G radiation exposure produces the very same symptoms that are now being blamed on the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19)? What about Chinese virus injections? Are they, too, producing symptoms that mirror those caused by exposure to 5G radiation?

Perhaps the jabs and the towers are delivering a one-two punch, creating the same health problems together. All of it combined is a recipe for health disaster, and yet the mainstream media is solely focused on the “virus,” with the occasional mention of a “rare” blood clot or death.

Try as they might to convince us all that only the “virus” is dangerous, while everything they propose as the “solution” is perfectly “safe,” millions are waking up to the fact that it is all a sham.

“Oh dear, technocrats, the cat’s out of the bag,” wrote one Brighteon commenter. “Targeted frequencies causing certain designer illnesses in conjunction with bioweapons.”

“If real, what more proof do you need, 5G deniers, than the wording stamped right on the custom-made RF modulator module (which determines output frequency)? The FCC must be investigated.”

Another responded by recommending that those interested check out the book The Invisible Rainbow: A History of Electricity and Life by Arthur Firstenberg.

“Over the last 220 years, society has evolved a universal belief that electricity is ‘safe’ for humanity and the planet. Scientist and journalist Arthur Firstenberg disrupts this conviction by telling the story of electricity in a way it has never been told before—from an environmental point of view—by detailing the effects that this fundamental societal building block has had on our health and our planet,” part of the book’s synopsis reads.

More news about the damaging effects of 5G can be found at 5GAlert.com.

Pfizer-BioNTech Vaccine Developer Says People Will Need Third COVID Shot & One Every Year

ByArjun Walia (via Collective-Evolution)

IN BRIEF

  • The Facts: Dr. Ozlem Tureci, co-founder and CMO of BioNTech, the company that developed a COVID vaccine with Pfizer told CNBC that people will likely need a third shot of its two-dose Covid-19 vaccine. She also believes people will need one every year.
  • Reflect On: Why is vaccine hesitancy so high? Are there actually legitimate concerns that people have? Why are they always called “anti-vaccine conspiracy theories” and never actually addressed?

What Happened: Dr. Ozlem Tureci, co-founder and CMO of BioNTech, the company that developed a COVID vaccine with Pfizer told CNBC that she expects people will need a third shot of its two-dose COVID-19 vaccine because the immunity given from the previous two shots will wane. She also said that she expects people will need to be vaccinated against the coronavirus every single year, similar to the seasonal flu. She states that “scientists expect vaccine induced immunity to decrease over time.” No specific information was given on the length of the immunity the vaccines already provide, if any, and given the fact that she is suggesting that people will need a third shot, as well as a shot every year, it’s safe to assume that the answer is not as long as people had hoped.

According to her, this waning of immunity is also seen in the natural immune response against COVID-19, meaning that those who have been infected with the virus can also be re-infected and are not protected. This is why she believes that they are expecting to see the same response with the vaccines.

Why This Is Important: Her claim that natural infection does not provide lasting immunity is, however, a debated topic among experts in the field. For example, Dr. Martin Kulldorff, a Harvard medical professor, epidemiologist and vaccine expert alongside Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, (two founding members of The Great Barrington Declaration) a physician and professor at Stanford Medical school claim that those who have already been infected are immune.

There are multiple studies hinting to the point these doctors are  making, that those who have been infected with COVID-19 have immunity, and may have immunity for decades. There are studies that suggest infection to prior coronaviruses, which prior to COVID-19 circled the globe infecting hundreds of millions of people every single year, can also provide protection from COVID-19. Keep in mind, the estimated number of people infected is, like other viruses, highly likely to be much more than the numbers we have seen from testing.

According to a new study for example authored by scientists at leading labs, individuals who recovered from the coronavirus developed “robust” levels of B cells and T cells (necessary for fighting off the virus) and “these cells may persist in the body for a very, very long time.” This is just one of many examples.

Dr. Suneel Dhand, an internal medicine physician based in the United States explains thatvaccines aren’t required if one has acquired antibodies from infection, which, according to him, are much more effective than the vaccine.

I’m not aware of any vaccine out there which will ever give you more immunity than if you’re naturally recovered from the illness itself…If you’ve naturally recovered from it, my understanding as a doctor level scientist is that those antibodies will always be better then a vaccine, and if you know any differently, please let me know.

Viral immunologist, Professor at the University of Guelph, and vaccine expert Dr. Bryan Bridle, explains several concerns regarding the rollout of COVID vaccines. He explains that he’d rather acquire immunity through natural infection, and that natural immunity acquired by an ever-growing number of people means fewer people require vaccination to reach herd immunity. As a bonus, natural immunity also equates to broader immunity; these people should be less susceptible to re-infection if an immuno-evasive SARS-CoV-2 variant emerges, according to Bridle.

In his how words,

Acquisition of natural immunity, which targets multiple components of the virus, may reduce the risk of re-infection not only with covid-19, but also with variants that can bypass spike protein-specific (vaccine) immunity…It’s just a matter of time before we will have variants that can bypass this narrow immunity conferred by all of these vaccines….Natural immunity is very broad…And we know now there’s lots of published reports that this is protective.

So if a new variant infects, chances are that the immunity you have is going to blunt that infection, where as if you have that narrowly focused immunity conferred by the vaccine, and this variant has evaded that spike protein specific immunity, those people are going to be at much greater risk of more severe disease than those who acquire the new variant, but have this broad acting natural immunity.

And there’s even evidence, interestingly, that those with preexisting immunity against other coronaviruses, including the SARS coronavirus one from 17 years ago, and even from some of the cold causing coronaviruses, can cross protect some people.

So this is the sweet evidence that natural immunity can be pretty good. I actually kind of laugh when I see these publications coming out, because this is kind of immunology 101 that I teach all my students. This is what our immune systems are designed to do. (Sources linked within this article)

Why So Much Censorship?

Science is a place for open discussion, debate, and the presentation of information in an equal manner. When it comes to all things COVID, it’s no secret that “science is being suppressed for political and financial gain” and that it has “unleashed state corruption on a grand scale”, according to Dr. Kamran Abbasi, among many others.(source)

The issue here, again, with all things COVID is that one narrative is being presented within the mainstream media. When it comes to any information, evidence, data, science and/or opinion that calls into question the information or actions taken by governments around the world, it’s heavily censored, unacknowledged, and if it does gain some sort of traction it is usually then heavily ridiculed and labelled a conspiracy theory.

The media has been very reluctant to report reliable scientific and public health information about the pandemic. Instead they have broadcast unverified information such as the model predictions from Imperial College, they have spread unwarranted fear that undermine people’s trust in public health and they have promoted naïve and inefficient counter measures. – Kulldorff (source)

This is concerning because a large majority of people rely on mainstream media, television and newspapers for information. These are the only sources where they receive their information from and, are as a result, completely unaware of other important pieces of information. Mainstream media does not address this other information and when they do they, they ridicule it without actually addressing the information and evidence being presented.

Vinay Prasad MD MPH, an associate professor at the University of California San Francisco is another one of many experts in the field during this pandemic who has been criticizing Facebook fact-checkers.

He recently published an article in MEDPAGE TODAY titled titled “Facebook: A Worthy Judge of of Medical Info?” It’s a follow up to one he wrote back in November when he expressed,

Over the last few months, I have seen academic articles and op-eds by professors retracted or labeled “fake news” by social media platforms. Often, no explanation is provided. I am concerned about this heavy-handedness and, at times, outright censorship. – Vinay Prasad, MD, MPH (source)

How are people supposed to talk to each other if their perception of the pandemic is given to them by unreliable sources with massive conflicts of interests? Why is there a digital authoritarian Orwellian fact checker patrolling the internet trying to control  information and tell people what is, and what isn’t?

The Takeaway: We’ve said it time and time again, throughout history, especially recent history, mainstream media has failed to have appropriate conversations about “controversial” topics. Governments, along with big media can make the minority look like the majority, and the majority look like the minority. They have such a large stranglehold on the perception of the population with regards to various major topics, and completely push a narrative that seems to suit the interests of a select few. This in turn makes it difficult for people to have conversations with each other and understand one another’s perspective.

This pandemic has, however, served as a great catalyst for more and more people to question the world we live in, and why we are living the way that we do when our potential is so much greater. It’s quite clear that so many people are divided on all things COVID, and things aren’t as black and white as big media and government make them out to be. When things aren’t clear, and so many people are divided on what should be done, should the government simply be making recommendations instead of mandating measures that restrict the rights and freedoms of people? Lockdowns and stay at home orders are a great example, as they have had catastrophic results and may have already killed more people than COVID. Should we give governments so much power to the point where they can make such decisions?

Related CE Article: The Top Four Reasons Why Many People, Doctors & Scientists Refuse To Take The COVID Vaccine

The Global Deep State: A New World Order Brought To You By COVID-19

By John W. Whitehead & Nisha Whitehead (via The Rutherford Institute)

“A psychotic world we live in. The madmen are in power.”

– Philip K. Dick, The Man in the High Castle

For good or bad, COVID-19 has changed the way we navigate the world.

It is also redrawing the boundaries of our world (and our freedoms) and altering the playing field faster than we can keep up.

Owing in large part to the U.S. government’s deep-seated and, in many cases, top-secret alliances with foreign nations and global corporations, it has become increasingly obvious that we have entered into a new world order—a global world order—made up of international government agencies and corporations.

This powerful international cabal, let’s call it the Global Deep State, is just as real as the corporatized, militarized, industrialized American Deep State, and it poses just as great a threat to our rights as individuals under the U.S. Constitution, if not greater.

We’ve been inching closer to this global world order for the past several decades, but COVID-19, which has seen governmental and corporate interests become even more closely intertwined, has shifted this transformation into high gear.

Fascism has become a global menace.

It remains unclear whether the American Deep State (“a national-security apparatus that holds sway even over the elected leaders notionally in charge of it”) answers to the Global Deep State, or whether the Global Deep State merely empowers the American Deep State. However, there is no denying the extent to which they are intricately and symbiotically enmeshed and interlocked.

Consider the extent to which our lives and liberties are impacted by this international convergence of governmental and profit-driven corporate interests in the surveillance state, the military industrial complex, the private prison industry, the intelligence sector, the security sector, the technology sector, the telecommunications sector, the transportation sector, the pharmaceutical industry and, most recently, by the pharmaceutical-health sector.

All of these sectors are dominated by mega-corporations operating on a global scale and working through government channels to increase their profit margins. The profit-driven policies of these global corporate giants influence everything from legislative policies to economics to environmental issues to medical care

Global Disease

The COVID-19 pandemic has propelled us into a whole new global frontier. Those hoping to navigate this interconnected and highly technological world of contact tracing, vaccine passports and digital passes will find themselves grappling with issues that touch on deep-seated moral, political, religious and personal questions for which there may be no clear-cut answers.

We are about to find our ability to access, engage and move about in the world dependent on which camp we fall into: those who have been vaccinated against COVID-19 and those who have not.

“It is the latest status symbol. Flash it at the people, and you can get access to concerts, sports arenas or long-forbidden restaurant tables. Some day, it may even help you cross a border without having to quarantine,” writes Heather Murphy for the New York Times.

“The new platinum card of the Covid age is the vaccine certificate.”

This is what M.I.T. professor Ramesh Raskar refers to as the new “currency for health,” an apt moniker given the potentially lucrative role that Big Business (Big Pharma and Big Tech, especially) will play in establishing this pay-to-play marketplace. The airline industry has been working on a Travel Pass. IBM is developing a Digital Health Pass. And the U.S. government has been all-too-happy to allow the corporate sector to take the lead.

Global Surveillance

Spearheaded by the National Security Agency (NSA), which has shown itself to care little for constitutional limits or privacy, the surveillance state has come to dominate our government and our lives.

Yet the government does not operate alone. It cannot. It requires an accomplice.

Thus, the increasingly complex security needs of our massive federal government, especially in the areas of defense, surveillance and data management, have been met within the corporate sector, which has shown itself to be a powerful ally that both depends on and feeds the growth of governmental bureaucracy.

Take AT&T, for instance. Through its vast telecommunications network that crisscrosses the globe, AT&T provides the U.S. government with the complex infrastructure it needs for its mass surveillance programs. According to The Intercept:

“The NSA considers AT&T to be one of its most trusted partners and has lauded the company’s ‘extreme willingness to help.’ It is a collaboration that dates back decades. Little known, however, is that its scope is not restricted to AT&T’s customers. According to the NSA’s documents, it values AT&T not only because it ‘has access to information that transits the nation,’ but also because it maintains unique relationships with other phone and internet providers. The NSA exploits these relationships for surveillance purposes, commandeering AT&T’s massive infrastructure and using it as a platform to covertly tap into communications processed by other companies.”

Now magnify what the U.S. government is doing through AT&T on a global scale, and you have the “14 Eyes Program,” also referred to as the “SIGINT Seniors.” This global spy agency is made up of members from around the world (United States, United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Denmark, France, Netherlands, Norway, Germany, Belgium, Italy, Sweden, Spain, Israel, Singapore, South Korea, Japan, India and all British Overseas Territories).

Surveillance is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to these global alliances, however.

War has become a huge money-making venture, and America, with its vast military empire and its incestuous relationship with a host of international defense contractors, is one of its biggest buyers and sellers.

The American military-industrial complex has erected an empire unsurpassed in history in its breadth and scope, one dedicated to conducting perpetual warfare throughout the earth. For example, while erecting a security surveillance state in the U.S., the military-industrial complex has perpetuated a worldwide military empire with American troops stationed in 177 countries (over 70% of the countries worldwide).

Although the federal government obscures so much about its defense spending that accurate figures are difficult to procure, we do know that since 2001, the U.S. government has spent more than $1.8 trillion in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq (that’s $8.3 million per hour). That doesn’t include wars and military exercises waged around the globe, which are expected to push the total bill upwards of $12 trillion by 2053.

The illicit merger of the global armaments industry and the Pentagon that President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned us against more than 50 years ago has come to represent perhaps the greatest threat to the nation’s fragile infrastructure today. America’s expanding military empire is bleeding the country dry at a rate of more than $15 billion a month (or $20 million an hour)—and that’s just what the government spends on foreign wars. That does not include the cost of maintaining and staffing the 1000-plus U.S. military bases spread around the globe.

Incredibly, although the U.S. constitutes only 5% of the world’s population, America boasts almost 50% of the world’s total military expenditure,  spending more on the military than the next 19 biggest spending nations combined. In fact, the Pentagon spends more on war than all 50 states combined spend on health, education, welfare, and safety. There’s a good reason why “bloated,” “corrupt” and “inefficient” are among the words most commonly applied to the government, especially the Department of Defense and its contractors. Price gouging has become an accepted form of corruption within the American military empire.

It’s not just the American economy that is being gouged, unfortunately.

Driven by a greedy defense sector, the American homeland has been transformed into a battlefield with militarized police and weapons better suited to a war zone. President Biden, marching in lockstep with his predecessors, has continued to expand America’s military empire abroad and domestically in a clear bid to pander to the powerful money interests (military, corporate and security) that run the Deep State and hold the government in its clutches.

Global Policing

Glance at pictures of international police forces and you will have a hard time distinguishing between American police and those belonging to other nations. There’s a reason they all look alike, garbed in the militarized, weaponized uniform of a standing army.

There’s a reason why they act alike, too, and speak a common language of force: they belong to a global police force.

For example, Israel—one of America’s closest international allies and one of the primary yearly recipients of more than $3 billion in U.S. foreign military aid—has been at the forefront of a little-publicized exchange program aimed at training American police to act as occupying forces in their communities. As The Intercept sums it up, American police are “essentially taking lessons from agencies that enforce military rule rather than civil law.”

This idea of global policing is reinforced by the Strong Cities Network program, which trains local police agencies across America in how to identify, fight and prevent extremism, as well as address intolerance within their communities, using all of the resources at their disposal. The cities included in the global network include New York City, Atlanta, Denver, Minneapolis, Paris, London, Montreal, Beirut and Oslo.

The objective is to prevent violent extremism by targeting its source: racism, bigotry, hatred, intolerance, etc. In other words, police—acting as extensions of the United Nations—will identify, monitor and deter individuals who exhibit, express or engage in anything that could be construed as extremist.

Of course, the concern with the government’s anti-extremism program is that it will, in many cases, be utilized to render otherwise lawful, nonviolent activities as potentially extremist.

Keep in mind that the government agencies involved in ferreting out American “extremists” will carry out their objectives—to identify and deter potential extremists—in concert with fusion centers (of which there are 78 nationwide, with partners in the private sector and globally), data collection agencies, behavioral scientists, corporations, social media, and community organizers and by relying on cutting-edge technology for surveillance, facial recognition, predictive policing, biometrics, and behavioral epigenetics (in which life experiences alter one’s genetic makeup).

This is pre-crime on an ideological scale and it’s been a long time coming.

Are you starting to get the picture now?

On almost every front, whether it’s the war on drugs, or the sale of weapons, or regulating immigration, or establishing prisons, or advancing technology, or fighting a pandemic, if there is a profit to be made and power to be amassed, you can bet that the government and its global partners have already struck a deal that puts the American people on the losing end of the bargain.

We’ve been losing our freedoms so incrementally for so long—sold to us in the name of national security and global peace, maintained by way of martial law disguised as law and order, and enforced by a standing army of militarized police and a political elite determined to maintain their powers at all costs—that it’s hard to pinpoint exactly when it all started going downhill, but we’re certainly on that downward trajectory now, and things are moving fast.

The “government of the people, by the people, for the people” has perished.

In its place is a shadow government—a corporatized, militarized, entrenched global bureaucracy—that is fully operational and running the country.

Given the trajectory and dramatic expansion, globalization and merger of governmental and corporate powers, we’re not going to recognize this country 20 years from now.

It’s taken less than a generation for our freedoms to be eroded and the Global Deep State’s structure to be erected, expanded and entrenched.

Mark my words: the U.S. government will not save us from the chains of the Global Deep State.

Now there are those who will tell you that any mention of a New World Order government—a power elite conspiring to rule the world—is the stuff of conspiracy theories.

I am not one of those skeptics.

I wholeheartedly believe that one should always mistrust those in power, take alarm at the first encroachment on one’s liberties, and establish powerful constitutional checks against government mischief and abuse.

I can also attest to the fact that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

I have studied enough of this country’s history—and world history—to know that governments (the U.S. government being no exception) are at times indistinguishable from the evil they claim to be fighting, whether that evil takes the form of terrorism, torture, drug traffickingsex trafficking, murder, violence, theft, pornography, scientific experimentations or some other diabolical means of inflicting pain, suffering and servitude on humanity.

And I have lived long enough to see many so-called conspiracy theories turn into cold, hard fact.

Remember, people used to scoff at the notion of a Deep State (a.k.a. Shadow Government). They used to doubt that fascism could ever take hold in America, and sneer at any suggestion that the United States was starting to resemble Nazi Germany in the years leading up to Hitler’s rise to power.

As I detail in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, we’re beginning to know better, aren’t we?

UK Hiring COVID Marshals To Patrol Streets Until 2023 Despite Lockdown Restrictions Supposedly Ending In June

By Paul Joseph Watson (via Summit News)

Government councils in the UK are hiring COVID Marshals to patrol streets from July until the end of 2023, despite the fact that all lockdown restrictions are supposed to end in June.

“A new army of Covid Marshals is being recruited for roles that could last until 2023 despite Government plans to lift all remaining restrictions on June 21,” reports the Telegraph.

“Councils around the country are advertising jobs that do not begin until July – several days after the supposed freedom day.”

One example is Hertfordshire County Council, which is “offering a contract of up to £3 million to firms that can supply 60 marshals from July 1 until January 31 next year.”

“The contract comes with a possible one-year extension, meaning marshals would still be patrolling until 2023,” states the report.

The Marshals will be tasked with ensuring “compliance” and helping the public understand “regulations and guidance,” despite the fact that all regulations are supposed to be terminated in 8 weeks time.

“We know that the virus is still circulating and will be for some time. We know from last year that numbers of infections can change rapidly, and Government are very clear that we should plan in case a third wave arises. It would be a dereliction of duty not to prepare for a third wave,” said Jim McManus, director of public health for Hertfordshire County Council.

Critics have accused the government of wasting taxpayer money by allowing councils to use government grants to fund the program.

“To start hiring people based on the situation we faced last year, before we had rolled out the vaccines, does seem to be a waste of public money,” said Mark Harper MP, Tory chairman of the Covid Recovery Group.

The fact that COVID Marshals will be patrolling the streets beyond June once again illustrates how the timetable to lift restrictions is completely phony.

Just like the UK government promised for months that it wouldn’t introduce vaccine passports while secretly funding their creation, the state has been caught lying yet again.

In all likelihood, fearmongering over a “third wave” of the virus, despite the UK vaccinating virtually all of its vulnerable population, will be used to reintroduce lockdown at the beginning of Autumn.

6000% Increase in Reported Vaccine Deaths 1st Quarter 2021 Compared to 1st Quarter 2020

By Brian Shilhavy (via Health Impact News)

As can be expected when new experimental “vaccines” that are not approved by the FDA are given emergency use authorization to fight a “pandemic” that is now over a year old, reported deaths following the injections of these shots have now skyrocketed in the U.S. population by over 6000% here at the end of the first quarter of 2021, as compared to recorded deaths following FDA-approved vaccines at the end of the first quarter of 2020.

These new products, which many doctors and scientists claim do not even meet the legal definition of a “vaccine,” are described by the manufacturers themselves as “operating systems” called the “software of life,” and prior to COVID they have never been approved to be used on human populations.

There are literally thousands of doctors and scientists around the world who have spoken out against these experimental injections, some even calling them “biological weapons of mass destruction.”

Their voices are censored in the pharma-controlled corporate media and by Big Tech, so the people dying and becoming injured by these injections are the pro-vaccine people who primarily only get their information from these censored sources that are funded by Wall Street corporate billionaires, such as Bill Gates.

The CDC Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a U.S. Government funded databasethat tracks injuries and deaths reported to be caused by vaccines, reported only 36 deaths during the first quarter of 2020 through March 31st, and almost 50% of those deaths were infants below the age of 3.

Source

Since today, the day this report is being written and published, is the last day of March, 2021, we do not have complete stats from VAERS on injuries and deaths following vaccination yet. But here’s what we know based on what the CDC has published through yesterday, March 30, 2021.

The last data dump into VAERS was published last week on March 26, 2021, and it listed 2050 deaths following the experimental COVID injections. See the report here.

However, some of those deaths following the COVID injections occurred in December, 2020, when the Pfizer and Moderna shots were issued EUA’s by the FDA.

So we ran the report for this year, 2021, from which we know the data is only current through March 19, 2021, and it showed 1,754 deaths following ALL vaccines, not just the COVID injections.

Source

Notice that 80% of these recorded deaths are among seniors over the age of 65!

How is this NOT a national tragedy that should be headline news everywhere??

As noted above, there are 2050 deaths recorded following COVID injections as of March 19th, but those include some deaths in December, 2020.

Yesterday, the CDC reported that deaths following COVID injections are now 2,509. (Source.)

That is an increase of 459 deaths from what the CDC reported through VAERS through March 19th. So 1754 plus these 459 deaths gives us the total deaths so far through March 2021, which is 2,213, although after the next data dump in to VAERS this coming Friday, this number will increase even more when we add the non-COVID vaccine deaths also.

That is an increase of over 6000% from last year during the same time period.

The increase in deaths reported is most certainly related to the new experimental COVID injections, and yet the CDC and FDA’s position is that NOT ONE of these deaths are related to the COVID injections.

A review of available clinical information including death certificates, autopsy, and medical records revealed no evidence that vaccination contributed to patient deaths. (Emphasis theirs – Source.)

As we have reported numerous times now, the CDC and FDA are criminal organizations run by Big Pharma insiders controlled by the Wall Street Billionaires and bankers. Their main interest is in protecting Big Pharma and their products, and not the health of the public.

Those in the public who continue to trust them for accurate medical advice will suffer dearly, many with their own lives, as seen happening right now in the first quarter of 2021 with a 6000% + increase in deaths by injection.

So far, these tragic deaths are among the foolish who drank the COVID Kool Aid and did not bother to research these new medical products themselves first, blindly trusting in “health authorities” like Anthony Fauci and Bill Gates who are MASS MURDERERS.

But once all of these pro-vaccine people eager to get the COVID “software of life” have been injected with this new human operating system which will need constant updates (booster shots), the eugencists will turn their attention to the “vaccine hesitant,” and they have all their ducks lined up in a row now.

They control the corporate mass media, including Big Tech, and they also control the American judicial system. At the very top we are dealing with psychopaths, most of them pedophiles involved in the Occult, and their goals are to control the world’s financial system, reduce the world’s population, and destroy the family and take over control of raising children for their own evil purposes.

The time is short now, where not a single person on this planet will be exempt from making very difficult choices that will no longer be optional.

This was written to a different group of people in a different day and age, but its principles are eternal, and as true today as any other point in history, if not more so today:

See, I set before you today life and prosperity, death and destruction.

For I command you today to love the LORD your God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commands, decrees and laws; then you will live and increase, and the LORD your God will bless you in the land you are entering to possess.

But if your heart turns away and you are not obedient, and if you are drawn away to bow down to other gods and worship them, I declare to you this day that you will certainly be destroyed. (Deuteronomy 30:15-18)

Pfizer vaccine may cause heart inflammation in people under 30, leaked study suggests

By Children’s Health Defense

Israeli researchers found 62 cases of myocarditis, including two deaths, after recent vaccination with Pfizer. Fifty-five of the cases occurred in men — most between ages 18 and 30.

Details leaked from an Israeli Health Ministry report have raised concerns among experts about a possible link between the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine and myocarditis, according to The Times of Israel and other news outlets.

The preliminary report by a committee tasked with monitoring vaccine side effects found 62 cases of myocarditis, including two deaths, in people who received the Pfizer vaccine. Fifty-six of the cases occurred after the second dose of the vaccine, and 55 cases occurred in men — most between the ages of 18 and 30.

The two patients who died were reportedly healthy until receiving the vaccine and had no pre-existing conditions. One was a 22-year-old woman, the other was a 35-year-old man. The report noted that 5 million people in Israel have been vaccinated for COVID.

Myocarditis, or inflammation of the heart muscle, can lead to cardiac arrhythmia and death.

Israel’s pandemic response coordinator, Nachman Ash, confirmed “tens of incidents” of myocarditis occurred in vaccinated people, primarily after the second dose, but emphasized the health ministry had yet to draw any conclusions.

Determining a link, Ash said, would be difficult because myocarditis, a condition that often goes away without complications, can be caused by a variety of viruses, and a similar number of cases were reported in previous years, Reuters reported.

However, according to researchers at the National Organization for Rare Disorders, myocarditis can result from infections, but “more commonly the myocarditis is a result of the body’s immune reaction to the initial heart damage.”

Israeli researchers presented their findings to the Israeli Health Ministry Director-General, Pfizer, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Asked by Reuters about the review, Pfizer said it was in regular contact with the Israeli Health Ministry to review data on its vaccine and was aware of the Israeli observations of myocarditis that occurred predominantly in young men.

“Adverse events are regularly and thoroughly reviewed and we have not observed a higher rate of myocarditis than what would be expected in the general population,” the company said. “A causal link to the vaccine has not been established. There is no evidence at this time to conclude that myocarditis is a risk associated with the use of Pfizer/BNT COVID-19 vaccine.”

Pfizer said it had not detected similar findings in the rest of the world but would look deeper into the phenomenon.

However, a search for “myocarditis” in the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System revealed 62 cases of myocarditis, with 70% occurring in people between the ages of 17 and 44. Of the reported cases, 23 were reported after the Pfizer vaccine.

Researchers who conducted the Israeli study stressed further investigation was needed to confirm a link between myocarditis and the vaccine, but added they had significant concerns. They wrote:

“At this stage, according to preliminary findings, which need further corroboration, there is an impression of a higher number than expected, especially for ages up to the age of 30. A more advanced report on the subject will be prepared soon.”

“The impression is that there is an increase in the incidence of the phenomenon especially in young men on the scale of 1:20,000 after vaccination. It is likely that the onset of myocarditis is associated with receiving the vaccine (especially the second dose).”

Experts at the health ministry are reviewing the report and will make results public. However in an interview, Ash said the benefits of the vaccine are so great that “even if we do find a connection between some of the cases and the vaccine, it won’t be justified to take any action regarding the vaccine.”

Past research suggests mRNA vaccines can cause same symptoms as COVID

According to Lyn Redwood, RN, MSN, and president emerita of Children’s Health Defense, “It is not surprising that we are seeing the same immune response resulting in myocarditis from the vaccines’ spike protein as we see in the actual infection.”

Redwood explained that mRNA vaccines work by incorporating the genetic blueprint for the key spike protein on the virus surface into a formula that — when injected into humans — instructs our own cells to make the spike protein.

“The problem with this approach is that the spike protein alone — which the mRNA vaccines instruct the body to make — has been implicated as a key cause of cardiac injury and death in people with COVID-19,” Redwood said.

According to Redwood, based on research conducted to date, it is very likely that some recipients of the spike protein mRNA vaccines will experience the same symptoms and injuries associated with the virus.

As The Defender reported Feb. 10, Dr. J. Patrick Whelan, M.D., Ph.D sought to alert the FDA about the potential for COVID vaccines to cause injuries. Specifically, Whelan was concerned that the mRNA vaccine technology utilized by Pfizer and Moderna had “the potential to cause microvascular injury (inflammation and small blood clots called microthrombi) to the brain, heart, liver and kidneys in ways that were not assessed in the safety trials.”

While Whelan did not dispute the vaccines’ potential to quickly arrest the spread of the virus (assuming the vaccines prove to actually prevent transmission — also not assessed in the clinical trials), he cautioned that “it would be vastly worse if hundreds of millions of people were to suffer long-lasting or even permanent damage to their brain or heart microvasculature as a result of failing to appreciate in the short-term an unintended effect of full-length spike protein-based vaccines on other organs.”

In October 2020, physicians warned that research demonstrated the SARS-CoV-2 virus could impact multiple organs of the body, including the heart, and that nearly a quarter of people hospitalized with COVID experience myocardial injury, such as arrhythmias or thromboembolic disease.

Dr. Hyung Chun, a Yale cardiologist, suggested that the endothelial cells lining the blood vessels potentially release inflammatory cytokines that further exacerbate the body’s inflammatory response and lead to the formation of blood clots. Chun stated: “The ‘inflamed’ endothelium likely contributes not only to worsening outcome in COVID-19, but also is considered to be an important factor contributing to risk of heart attacks and strokes.”

In a prospective study that followed 100 patients who recovered from COVID, researchers found involvement of the heart on MRI scans in 78% of patients, and ongoing myocardial inflammation in 60%. These findings were independent of the severity of the infection, overall course of the illness and time from the original diagnosis.

In October 2020, researchers took a more detailed look at the heart after death from COVID-19 and found “cardiac damage was common, but more from clotting than inflammation” and that “microthrombi (small blot clots) were frequent.”

“We did not expect this,” said study co-author Dr. Renu Virmani, of CVPath Institute in Gaithersburg, Maryland. “It seems to be unlikely that the direct viral invasion of the heart is playing a major role in making myocardial necrosis and microthrombi.”

A subsequent study published in January confirmed the findings of microthrombi resulting in myocyte necrosis, indicative of a recent myocardial infarction (heart attack), in 40 individuals who died from COVID infection — the studies also identified microthrombi as a major cause of cardiac injury.

Clinicians around the world have seen evidence suggesting the virus may cause heart inflammation, acute kidney disease, neurological malfunction, blood clots, intestinal damage and liver problems.

The Illusion of Evidence-Based Medicine

Exposing the Crisis of Credibility in Clinical Research

By Jon Jureidini and Leemon B. McHenry (via New Books Network)

An exposé of the corruption of medicine by the pharmaceutical industry at every level, from exploiting the vulnerable destitute for drug testing, through manipulation of research data, to disease mongering and promoting drugs that do more harm than good.

Authors, Professor Jon Jureidini and Dr Leemon McHenry, made critical contributions to exposing the scientific misconduct in two infamous trials of antidepressants. Ghostwritten publications of these trials were highly influential in prescriptions of paroxetine (Paxil) and citalopram (Celexa) in paediatric and adolescent depression, yet both trials (Glaxo Smith Kline’s paroxetine study 329 and Forest Laboratories’ citalopram study CIT-MD-18) seriously misrepresented the efficacy and safety data.

The Illusion of Evidence-Based Medicine: Exposing the Crisis of Credibility in Clinical Research (Wakefield Press, 2020) provides a detailed account of these studies and argues that medicine desperately needs to re-evaluate its relationship with the pharmaceutical industry. Without a basis for independent evaluation of the results of randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trials, there can be no confidence in evidence-based medicine.

Science demands rigorous, critical examination and especially severe testing of hypotheses to function properly, but this is exactly what is lacking in academic medicine.

French Drug Assessment Center Demands Removal of All Four Widely Used COVID Vaccines

According to the CTIAP, all of the vaccines were put on the market and actively used on human beings before ‘proof of quality for the active substance and the finished product’ was produced.

By Jeanne Smits (via LifeSiteNews)

A regional independent drug assessment center, the CTIAP (Centre territorial d’Information indépendante et d’Avis pharmaceutiques), which is linked to the Cholet public hospital in the west of France, recently published a report showing that the vaccines used against COVID were not only submitted to insufficient clinical testing, but that the quality of the active substances, their “excipients, some of which are new,” and the manufacturing processes are problematic. “These new excipients should be considered as new active substances,” the Cholet hospital team stated, in a study that according to them raises issues that have not been commented to date.

The team led by Dr. Catherine Frade, a pharmacist, worked on public data released by the EMA with relation to the Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca and Janssen (Johnson & Johnson) shots, and its first caveat was that all these products only have temporary marketing authorizations. They are all subject to further studies that reach as far as 2024 and even beyond, and these will be almost impossible to be completed because of the way the vaccines are now being distributed, said the CTIAP report.

These studies even include the stability and comparability of the vaccine batches put on the market and the quality and safety of excipients — substances formulated alongside the active ingredient of a medication to facilitate or enhance their absorption.

According to the CTIAP, all of the vaccines were put on the market and actively used on human beings before “proof of quality for the active substance and the finished product” was produced: all the manufacturing labs obtained future deadlines to submit their studies in this regard.

The authors of the report consider that the “variabilities, which impact the very core of the product, could even invalidate any clinical trials conducted” in the coming months and years.

They go so far as to state:

“Prudence would even dictate that, in all countries where these vaccines against COVID-19 have been marketed, all the batches thus ‘released’ should be withdrawn immediately; and that these MAs that have been granted should be suspended, or even canceled, as a matter of urgency until further notice.”

Here below is LifeSite’s full working translation of the CTIAP’s April 2 report:

Can we imagine launching a car manufacturing line and putting vehicles on the road, despite the uncertainties noted in the official documents published? These uncertainties are related to the quality of the parts making up the engine and the various other parts, including those related to safety, the manufacturing process, the reproducibility of the batches that are being marketed, etc.

In the field of medicines (including vaccines), the pharmaceutical act of “release” of the finished product (an authorized product intended for sale) constitutes the final stage of control that precedes the release of these products to the population. This key step of “release” is under the pharmaceutical responsibility of the manufacturers.

Following its previous analyses, the CTIAP of the Cholet Hospital Center has once again revealed to the public, and probably in an unprecedented and exclusive way, new vital information concerning the following four vaccines against COVID-19: the one from the BioNTech/Pfizer laboratory; the one from the Moderna laboratory; the one from the Astra Zeneca laboratory; the one from the Janssen laboratory.

This work was made possible thanks to the valuable contribution of Dr. Catherine Frade, pharmacist and former director of international regulatory affairs in the pharmaceutical industry. She graciously provided us with a documented, written alert.

In this document, she sheds light on data extracted, on March 22, 2021, from the MA (marketing authorization) itself; an MA qualified as “conditional.” She has extracted “source data that is difficult to identify by someone who does not work in the field.” This data is therefore public and verifiable. First of all, it should be noted that the author of this document no longer works in the pharmaceutical industry; she states: “First of all, I would like to make it clear that I have no conflict of interest with the pharmaceutical industry.” It is therefore with her agreement that CTIAP intends to make available to the public, health professionals, decision-makers … an analysis of some of these data that all should read carefully.

This reflection first presents what a “conditional” MA is (I). Then, it recalls that the studies for these vaccines are not complete, as they run from “2021 to at least 2024” (II). Then, it reveals, in an unprecedented and exclusive way, that the official documents, published by the European Medicines Agency (EMA), underline the insufficiency of the evidence concerning also the “quality” of the “active substance” and of the “excipients,” of the “manufacturing process,” of the “reproducibility of the batches” that are being commercialized, etc. (III). Finally, this analysis proposes a conclusion.

I — First of all, it is important to understand what a “conditional” MA is

An MA is to a drug what a car registration document is to a car. MA is granted when a drug has proven its quality, efficacy, and safety; with a positive benefit/risk ratio: that is, it presents more benefits than risks. Obtaining this MA is the essential condition for a pharmaceutical laboratory to sell any drug, including vaccines.

Here, in the case of these vaccines against COVID-19, the four MAs issued are so-called “conditional” MAs. They are temporary. They are valid for no more than one year, because they were obtained on the basis of “incomplete data.” To obtain a standard 5-year MA, the laboratories concerned must provide dossiers completed with “studies in progress and studies planned for the coming years.” Throughout “this development,” close and coordinated monitoring between the manufacturing laboratories and the health authorities is organized through regular discussions. The “conditional” MA is “re-evaluated each year” according to the contribution and critical analysis of additional data provided and collected during a full year.

This “conditional” MA is a European MA. It was obtained through the centralized accelerated procedure. It allows simultaneous marketing in the following 30 countries (European Union and European Free Trade Association): Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden.

The studies concerning these four vaccines are therefore still in progress.

II — Secondly, the planned studies are still in progress and are spread over a period ranging from “2021 to at least 2024”

All of the studies submitted during the MA application are summarized in the EPAR (European Public Assessment Report). This report is published on the European Medicines Agency (EMA) website. The planned studies, not yet completed, are also included.Ireland: Weekly Vaccine Target Reduced by 30,000 Doses Due to Precautionary Pause in AstraZeneca Use

This schedule, which “extends from 2021 to at least 2024,” depending on which COVID-19 vaccine is involved, is defined in the “annexes” of the conditional marketing authorization and in the published EPARs.

As an example, the BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine received this European conditional MA on December 21, 2020. And the deadline for filing “confirmation” of efficacy, safety, and tolerability of this vaccine is “December 2023.”

The Moderna vaccine was granted marketing authorization on January 6, 2021. The deadline for filing “confirmation” of efficacy, safety, and tolerability of the vaccine is “December 2022” at the earliest.

AstraZeneca’s vaccine was granted marketing authorization on January 29, 2021. The deadline for filing “confirmation” of efficacy, safety, and tolerability of the vaccine is “March 2024.”

The Janssen vaccine was granted conditional European marketing authorization on March 11, 2021. The deadline for submitting “confirmation” of the vaccine’s efficacy, safety and tolerance is “December 2023.”

However, to date — and this is undoubtedly where the unprecedented and exclusive revelation of this study lies — another deadline has been set for these four vaccines. This deadline no longer concerns only the ongoing clinical trials, but also the “proof of quality for the active substance and the finished product” itself: that is, the intrinsic quality (the heart) of the product sold and administered to millions of people.

III — Thirdly, and this seems to be unprecedented, the published official documents also underline the incompleteness of the evidence concerning the “quality” of the “active substance” and “excipients,” the “manufacturing process,” the ”reproducibility of the batches” marketed, etc.

The deadline for submitting additional evidence on the “quality” of the “active substance” and the “finished product” (i.e., the vaccine that is authorized and sold) is set for:

  • “July 2021” for BioNTech/Pfizer;
  • “June 2021” for Moderna;
  • “June 2022” for Astra Zeneca;
  • “August 2021” for Janssen.

Indeed, for these 4 vaccines, paragraph E, “Specific obligation regarding post-authorization measures for the conditional marketing authorization,” taken from Annex II of the MA, clearly states the following:

For the BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine (pages 18-19)

By “March 2021,” the laboratory must provide “additional validation data” to “confirm the reproducibility of the finished product manufacturing process.”

By “July 2021,” the laboratory must provide missing information to:

  • “complete the characterization of the active substance and the finished product;”
  • “strengthen the control strategy, including the specifications of the active substance and the finished product” in order to “ensure the constant quality of the product;”
  • “provide additional information regarding its synthesis process and control strategy” in order to “confirm the purity profile of the excipient ALC-0315” and “to ensure quality control and batch-to-batch reproducibility throughout the life cycle of the finished product;”
  • and by “December 2023,” and “in order to confirm the efficacy and safety” of this vaccine, the company “shall submit the final clinical study report for the randomized, placebo-controlled, blind observer study (Study C4591001).

For the Moderna vaccine (page 15)

The laboratory should provide the missing information to:

  • “complete the characterization of the manufacturing processes of the active substance and the finished product” (deadline “January 2021”);
  • confirm the reproducibility of the manufacturing process of the active substance and the finished product (initial and final batch sizes) (deadline “April 2021”);
  • “provide additional information on the stability of the active substance and the finished product and review the specifications of the active substance and the finished product after longer industrial practice” with the aim of “ensuring consistent product quality” (deadline “June 2021”);
  • “submit the final study report for the randomized, placebo-controlled, blinded clinical trial for the mRNA-1273-P301 observer” to “confirm the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccine Moderna” (by December 2022).

For the Astra Zeneca vaccine (pages 14-15)

The laboratory must submit the missing information in order to:

  • “provide additional validation and comparability data, and initiate further testing” with the aim of “confirming the reproducibility of the manufacturing processes of the active substance and the finished product” (by “December 2021”);
  • “Provide the main analysis (based on the December 7 data cut-off (post database lock) and the final analysis of the combined pivotal studies” to “confirm the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca” (deadline “March 5, 2021” (for the main analysis) and “May 31, 2022” (for the combined analysis);
  • “submit final reports of the randomized controlled clinical studies COV001, COV002, COV003 and COV005” to “confirm the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca” (due “May 31, 2022”);
  • “provide additional data regarding the stability of the active substance and the finished product and revise the specifications of the finished product after extensive industrial practice” in order to “ensure consistent product quality” (deadline “June 2022”);
  • “submit the synthesis and summaries of the primary analysis and the final clinical study report for study D8110C00001” to “confirm the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccine AstraZeneca in the elderly and in subjects with underlying disease” — due “April 30, 2021” (for the primary analysis) and “March 31, 2024” (for the final study report).

For the Janssen vaccine (page 18)

The laboratory should submit the missing information to:

  • “provide additional comparability and validation data” to “confirm the reproducibility of the manufacturing process of the finished product” (deadline “August 15, 2021”);
  • submit the final report of the VAC31518COV3001 randomized, placebo-controlled, single-blind clinical study to “confirm the efficacy and safety of the COVID-19 Ad26.COV2.S vaccine” by December 31, 2023.

These facts allow us to offer a conclusion.

Conclusion

For these reasons, which are not exhaustive, it has proved useful to look for and read the content of the paragraph E: “Specific obligation relating to post-authorization measures concerning the conditional marketing authorization,” extracted from Annex II of the MA, corresponding to each of these 4 vaccines against COVID-19.

The inadequacy of the evaluation does not only concern the clinical trials (studies conducted in humans (women and men)), but also the quality of the active substance, the excipients, some of which are new, the manufacturing process, and the batches released and administered to humans in several countries around the world.

Moreover, these new excipients must be considered as new active ingredients, and thus be the subject of a complete evaluation file similar to that required for a new active ingredient.

Changing the commercial name of one of these vaccines, as was recently announced for the AstraZeneca vaccine in particular, can only be considered as a cosmetic arrangement of the product’s image for marketing purposes (winning new public confidence, boosting sales). It would not answer the questions raised concerning the quality, efficacy and safety of the product. This is one of the usual techniques used to put make-up on (dissimulate) certain undesirable characteristics of the product concerned. It is a technique that has been used to present other drugs in the best possible light.

As already mentioned, in the field of medicines (including vaccines), the “release” of the finished product (intended for sale) is the final stage of control (of quality and therefore of safety) before making these products available to the population.

This key stage of “release” of batches is the pharmaceutical responsibility of the manufacturers. However, the responsibility of the users (institutions and health professionals in particular) may also be involved.

In our opinion, these clinical studies should never have begun before the intrinsic quality of the finished product and its manufacturing process had been fully mastered; before the formulas of these vaccines had been stabilized.

How can the results of these clinical trials, conducted on a global scale, be compared if the vaccine administered can vary from one manufacture to another, from one batch to another, from one region to another?

These variabilities, which impact the very core of the product, could even invalidate any clinical trials conducted.

Even in the case of a health emergency, it is therefore difficult for us to understand the basis for the MA (marketing authorization) that has been granted to these COVID-19 vaccines.

In addition to the uncertainties related to COVID-19, there are also the approximations related to the use, and the intrinsic quality, of these vaccines. Now two problems will have to be managed instead of one.

The maneuver seems subtle. The useful information is available in the official documents published in the framework of the MA; but this data is not made visible by the official discourse. It seems the latter has only tried to present these products as being effective and safe, without reservations; even though the formulas and manufacturing processes of these vaccines do not even seem to have been fully stabilized yet.

These new revelations, which are undoubtedly unprecedented and exclusive, further cast doubt on the validity of consent (a fundamental freedom) that is supposed to be free and informed, and which is said to have been given by the people who are now already vaccinated.

Every person has the right to clear, fair and appropriate information. This information is also perennial: if new data is revealed, those already vaccinated must be informed a posteriori (after the administration of this or that vaccine).

The “obligation” to vaccinate cannot therefore be sustained, even in a disguised form, notably through a “vaccine passport.”

This new analysis further confirms our previous reflections such as the one entitled “Could the Covid-19 vaccine (Tozinameran; COMIRNATY°) be qualified as ‘defective’ by a judge?” or those expressed in the two open letters that have already been sent to the Minister of Solidarity and Health and to the seven Orders of health professionals.

Vulnerability does not only arise from the age and state of health of individuals. Not being able to access independent information on medicines (including vaccines) is the first form of poverty and inequality.

Moreover, concerning the uncertainties on the effectiveness of these vaccines, the Council of State noted, on March 3, 2021, in particular the admission of the Ministry of Solidarity and Health itself, and the contradictions of the French “administration.” In this decision, and against the opinion of this Ministry, the Council of State had produced a decision that seemed to tend towards the recognition of this effectiveness. But, a few days later, in a new decision (n° 450413) issued on March 11, 2021, the Council of State changed its position and admitted “the uncertainty that remains regarding the real effectiveness of the vaccine in terms of the spread of the virus.” It should also be recalled that, on February 18, 2021, the Minister of Solidarity and Health also recognized, and that publicly, that no European country has been able to provide proof that these vaccines can prevent “severe” forms of COVID-19 (see press conference, starting at 34min 44s).

In its latest “Update on the surveillance of COVID-19 vaccines — Period from 12/03/2021 to 18/03/2021” published on March 26, 2021, and updated on March 29, 2021, the French National Agency for the Safety of Medicines (ANSM) reports, in particular, the number of deaths that have occurred in France after the administration of these vaccines. Deaths that are notified (reported) in pharmacovigilance (regardless of the certainty of the “causal link” between these vaccines and these deaths): “311 deaths” after administration of the BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine; “4 deaths” after administration of the Moderna vaccine; “20 deaths” after administration of the Astra Zeneca vaccine; (no data is available at this time regarding the latest vaccine (Janssen) to be licensed). In general, for all drugs, there is a high level of under-reporting in pharmacovigilance despite the mandatory nature of these reports.

Consequently, prudence would even dictate that, in all countries where these vaccines against COVID-19 have been marketed, all the batches thus “released” should be withdrawn immediately; and that these MAs that have been granted should be suspended, or even cancelled, as a matter of urgency until further notice. In any case, this is the sense of the recommendations that we could suggest to the ad hoc authorities, and in particular to the French authorities. And, at the very least, this information must be made known to everyone in a clear, fair, and appropriate manner.

All the more so since, in the case of serious adverse effects, including deaths, and in order to establish the said “causal link” with certainty, the victims and their families are often powerless when faced with the requirement of “probatio diabolica” [a legal requirement to achieve an impossible proof].

Mass Murder: 3,486 Deaths in the U.S. Following COVID Injections in 4 Months: More Vaccine Deaths Recorded Than in the Past 15 Years Combined

By Brian Shilhavy (via Health Impact News)

The CDC announced this week that deaths reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a U.S. Government funded database that tracks injuries and deaths caused by vaccines, following experimental COVID injections, have now reached 3,486 deaths since December of 2020, when the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID shots were given emergency use authorization (EUA) by the FDA.

To get a perspective on the magnitude of deaths following COVID shots that are being reported to the CDC, there were only 3,445 deaths reported to the CDC following all vaccines from 1/1/2005 through 11/30/2020, the 15-year period prior to the FDA issuing emergency use authorizations for experimental COVID injections in December of 2020.

Source.

3,186 of the reported 3,486 deaths following COVID injections were included in today’s data dump into VAERS, which also included 86,080 injuries with 1,217 permanent disabilities, 12,374 emergency room/doctor visits, 6,282 hospitalized, and 1,906 life threatening injuries.

Source.

Side by side comparison of 15 years of recorded vaccine injuries and deaths vs. 4 months of recorded COVID vaccine injuries and deaths(Note: the CDC is reporting 3,486 deaths after COVID vaccines while only 3,186 are entered into VAERS so far.)

The breakdown of deaths per EUA injection is as follows.

  • Pfizer/Biontech – 1,476 deaths (Source.)
  • Moderna – 1,540 deaths (Source.)
  • Janssen – 155 deaths (Source.)

According to the CDC’s COVID Vaccine Tracker, the latest statistics on how many doses of each COVID shot have been injected into the population is as follows.

  • Pfizer/Biontech – 116,754,631 doses
  • Moderna – 97,353,734 doses
  • Janssen – 8,040,727 doses

The J&J Janssen shot has the highest percentage of recorded deaths, with Moderna second.

The Janssen shot is currently paused by the FDA due to reports of “rare” blood clots. According to the CDC, these reports only exist with 8 people, all women.

However, the specific cases of blood clots is very narrowly defined by the FDA and CDC, looking only for “cerebral venous sinus thrombosis combined with thrombocytopenia.” (Blood clots in the brain combined with low blood platelets.)

But many other kinds of blood clots following injections have also been reported, many of them fatal, besides just “cerebral venous sinus thrombosis.”

If we search for deaths due to any kind of “thrombosis,” the numbers go up. Here are the search results for “death” and all cases of “thrombosis” (blood clots.)

Source.

Source.

Source.

Clearly deaths associated with blood clots are being reported with all three EUA shots, but the percentage of shots administered along with deaths and blood clots is considerably higher with the J&J shot.

One other thing to note is the age range these deaths and blood clots are happening with each shot.

With the 27 deaths with blood clots among the Pfizer patients, only 1 occurred below the age of 65.

With the 19 deaths with blood clots among the Moderna patients, 5 occurred below the age of 65.

With the 13 deaths with blood clots among the J&J patients, 8 (62%) of them were among those aged below 65, including one between the ages of 17 and 44.

So the J&J shot is affecting young people, who have little to no risk of dying from COVID-19, far more than the other two shots.

And yet news reports today are stating that the CDC and FDA are getting ready to resume the J&J shots. (Source.)

COVID Shots: Mass Murder and Biological Weapons

The decision of whether or not to continue allowing emergency use authorization for the J&J shot, or either of the other two shots, is largely made by just a select few doctors and scientists, all employed by the U.S. Government and with strong ties to the pharmaceutical industry.

Other doctors and scientists who are not employed by a government or a pharmaceutical company that produces and sells vaccines, strongly disagree with the government health bureaucrats, and we have featured many of them here at Health Impact News.

One of the doctors who actually did get an interview in the corporate media is Dr. Hooman Noorchashm, a Harvard trained physician and scientist who was interviewed by Tucker Carlson on Fox News recently.

He stated that he does not know why the FDA and CDC focused on just this specific cluster of blood clots in the J&J experimental COVID shot, because the issue of dangerous blood clots concerns all three EUA COVID shots right now. He was glad the FDA took at least the one shot off the market (although it looks like it is coming back soon.)

The interview is still on YouTube for now. (Let us know if it disappears.)

Not only is there disagreement over whether or not these experimental injections are safe or effective, many are now claiming that these shots are purposely designed to infect and kill people as part of a global plan to reduce the world’s population.

The fact that very well-known scientists and doctors are saying this, such as Dr. Michael Yeadon, the former Vice President and Chief Scientist for Allergy and Respiratory at Pfizer, should be headline news, even if their views are not widely accepted by others.

But instead, they are attacked and censored from the corporate media which is mainly funded by Big Pharma and does not do investigative journalism at all when it comes to vaccines, but simply act as marketing agencies for Big Pharma.

J. Bart Classen, MD, an immunologist, just had a paper published in the journal Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, titled:

COVID-19 RNA Based Vaccines and the Risk of Prion Disease

Excerpt:

There is an old saying in medicine that “the cure may be worse than the disease.” The phrase can be applied to vaccines. In  the current paper the concern is raised that the RNA based COVID vaccines have the potential to cause more disease than the epidemic of COVID-19.

This paper focuses on a novel potential adverse event mechanism causing prion disease which could be even more common and debilitating than the viral infection the vaccine is designed to prevent. While this paper focuses on one potential adverse event there are multiple other potential fatal adverse events as discussed below.

Over the last two decades there has been a concern among certain scientists that prions could be used as bioweapons. More  recently there has been a concern that ubiquitous intracellular molecules could be activated to cause prion disease including Alzheimer’s disease, ALS and other neurodegenerative diseases.

This concern originates due to potential for misuse of research data on the mechanisms by which certain RNA binding proteins like TDP-43, FUS and others can be activated to form disease causing prions.

The fact that this research, which could be used for bioweapons development, is funded by private organizations including the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and Ellison Medical Foundation [2] without national/international oversight is also a concern. (Full study.)

Reducing the world’s population can no longer be considered a conspiracy “theory,” as the Globalists themselves, such as Bill Gates, have publicly stated that we need to reduce the world’s population, usually in the name of climate change and “saving the earth.”

As mentioned at the beginning of this article, there are now more recorded deaths following the experimental COVID shots during the first four months in the market, then deaths recorded following all vaccines for the past 15 years!

And yet, the CDC’s official position is still:

A review of available clinical information including death certificates, autopsy, and medical records revealed no evidence that vaccination contributed to patient deaths. (Emphasis theirs. Source.)

For someone who objectively observes the data, which now includes statements submitted to the corporate media by the CDC explaining that thousands of people who are fully vaccinated are still coming down with COVID infections and dying, it obviously takes a LOT more faith to believe that these injections are for our benefit, than it does to believe these shots only benefit Big Pharma and can cause serious harm and injury, and should be avoided completely.

When more people among the public begin to realize that there are evil motives behind these experimental injections, will the politicians and drug company directors be held accountable for mass murder, as the German doctors were at the Nuremburg trials?

Most of those doctors were executed after being convicted at the trials, and if the same moral and legal principles still apply today, then shouldn’t the same thing happen?

For that to happen, however, Americans need to regain control of the judicial system, a topic of a future article that I hope to publish soon.

CDC Investigating 3 Deaths after J&J Vaccine, New VAERS Data Include 584 More Reports of Deaths after COVID Vaccines

VAERS data released today showed 86,080 reports of adverse events following COVID vaccines, including 3,186 deaths and 10,152 serious injuries between Dec. 14, 2020 and April 16, 2021.

By Megan Redshaw (via Children’s Health Defense)

Data released today by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on the number of injuries and deaths reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) following COVID vaccines showed a notable increase in reports of injuries and deaths compared with last week’s numbers.

VAERS is the primary government-funded system for reporting adverse vaccine reactions in the U.S. Reports submitted to VAERS require further investigation before a causal relationship can be confirmed.

Every Friday, VAERS makes public all vaccine injury reports received as of a specified date, usually about a week prior to the release date. Today’s data show that between Dec. 14, 2020 and April 16, a total of 86,080 total adverse events were reported to VAERS, including 3,186 deaths — an increase of 584 over the previous week — and 10,152 serious injuries, up 1,867 since last week.

Fromthe4/16/21 release of VAERS data.

Of the 3,186 deaths reported as of April 16, 26% occurred within 48 hours of vaccination, 17% occurred within 24 hours and 41% occurred in people who became ill within 48 hours of being vaccinated.

In the U.S., 202.3 million COVID vaccine doses had been administered as of April 16. This includes89 million doses of Moderna’s vaccine, 105 million doses of Pfizer and 8 million doses of the Johnson &Johnson (J&J) COVID vaccine.

This week’s VAERS data show:

  • 20% of deaths were related to cardiac disorders.
  • 54% of those who died were male, 44% were female and the remaining death reports did not include gender of the deceased.
  • The average age of death was 75.9 and the youngest death reported was an 18-year-old. There are a few reported deaths in children under 18, including a 5-month old who died of a rare blood clot two days after the mother received her second dose of Pfizer vaccine and a 2-year-old, but these reports have not been confirmed.
  • As of April 16, 462 pregnant women reported adverse events related to COVID vaccines, including 132 reports of miscarriage or premature birth.
  • Of the 820 cases of Bell’s Palsy reported, 55% of cases were reported after Pfizer-BioNTechvaccinations, 41% following vaccination with the Moderna vaccine and 24 cases (6%) of Bell’s Palsy were reported in conjunction with J&J.
  • There were 92 reports of Guillain-Barré Syndrome with 50% of cases attributed to Pfizer, 40% to Moderna and 13% to J&J.
  • There were 24,841 reports of anaphylaxis with 43% of cases attributed to Pfizer’s vaccine, 47% to Moderna and 10% to J&J.

New reports of blood clots as CDC panel votes to resume J&J vaccine

Blood clotting disorders have been reported following vaccination with PfizerModernaAstraZenecaand J&J COVID vaccines. In the U.S., the J&J vaccine, marketed under the company’s Janssen subsidiary, was paused April 13 while U.S. health officials investigated reports of rare blood clots.

The CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) Friday voted 10 – 4 to lift the pause and recommended continued use for persons 18 years of age and older. The panel did not recommend adding any extra warning about the risk of rare blood clotting disorders.

The ACIP said the link between blood clots and J&J’s COVID vaccine was “plausible,” but concluded the vaccine’s benefits still outweigh the risks. The recommendation by the ACIP has to be approved by the CDC and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) before becoming official government policy, USA TODAY reported.

The Daily News reported today the CDC is investigating the deaths of two more women from a rare blood clotting disorder possibly linked to the J&J vaccine. The CDC’s advisory panel found 15 women who were diagnosed with rare blood clots, including three deaths, seven who remain hospitalized and five recovering at home, according to a slide presentation shared at today’s committee meeting.

Only two of the women were older than 50, with the risk highest in women ages 30-39, according to the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. The findings appear to confirm the suspicion that younger women are more vulnerable to developing blood clots.

The Hill reported today the CDC is reviewing the death of an Oregon woman who died after receiving J&J’s vaccine. The woman, in her late 50s, was vaccinated before the state issued a pause. Two weeks after receiving the vaccine, she developed a rare but serious blood clot associated with very low platelets. The Oregon Health Authority said it was notified about the death on April 20, two days after the CDC was notified on April 18.

U.S. health authorities also are investigating the report of a Texas woman who was hospitalized after receiving J&J’s vaccine. The Department of State Health Services told The Hill in a statementthat the CDC notified state officials on Wednesday afternoon of a “possible case in Texas reported through VAERS. Symptoms reported “appear to be consistent with the six cases reported elsewhere last week,” the department said.

On April 21, The Defender reported that a Nevada teen underwent three brain surgeries to repair blood clots she developed about a week after receiving J&J’s COVID vaccine. Emma Burkey, 18, suffered seizures, was placed in an induced coma and on a respirator before undergoing surgeries for a massive brain injury.

Burkey was one of the initial six cases under review by the CDC. A CDC panel said Burkey and other women experienced headaches and back pain prior to the discovery of blood clots, and also disclosed she was given heparin, a blood thinner which typically is standard treatment for blood clots, but in cases like Burkey’s, can make the condition worse.

Children’s Health Defense queried the VAERS data for a series of adverse events associated with the formation of clotting disorders and other related conditions. VAERS yielded a total of 1,123 reports for all three vaccines from Dec. 14, 2020, through April 16.

Of the 1,123 cases reported, there were 512 reports attributed to Pfizer, 448 reports to Moderna and 160 reports to J&J — far more than the six J&J cases U.S. health officials were originally investigating.

As The Defender reported April 20, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) said Tuesday it found a “possible link” between the J&J COVID vaccine and blood clots, but concluded the vaccine’s benefits outweigh the risks.

EMA’s safety committee (PRAC) said a warning should be added to the product label, but the blood clot-related disorders should be listed as “very rare” side effects of the vaccine. J&J had delayed the vaccine’s rollout in the EU after U.S. health officials paused the vaccine.

Woman paralyzed after Pfizer vaccine

The Defender reported this week that a healthy 33-year-old woman in Pennsylvania experienced paralysis 12 hours after getting her first dose of the Pfizer COVID vaccine. Doctors at the Cleveland Clinic performed a series of tests, but said they didn’t know what caused the woman to develop paralysis.

Although the woman, who asked to remain anonymous, regained feeling and strength in her arms, as of April 21, she had no function from her lower chest down besides very slight movement in a few toes. The woman’s family confirmed with Channel 11 that her case was reported to Pfizer.

CDC ignores The Defender, no response after 46 days

According to the CDC website, “the CDC follows up on any report of death to request additional information and learn more about what occurred and to determine whether the death was a result of the vaccine or unrelated.”

The Defender reached out to the CDC on March 8 with a written list of questions about reported deaths and injuries related to COVID vaccines, the status of ongoing investigations reported in the media, if autopsies are being done, the standard for determining whether an injury is causally connected to a vaccine and education initiatives to encourage and facilitate proper and accurate reporting.

After repeated attempts to obtain a response, a representative from the CDC’s Vaccine Task Force contacted us March 29 and said she had never received our list of questions — even though employees we talked to several times said their press officers were working through the questions and confirmed the representative had received them. We provided multiple deadlines, none of which were met. The Defender also provided the list again and attempted to follow-up multiple times with no response.

After repeated calls to the CDC’s media department this week, we were told the COVID response unit would be informed we had still not received answers. The person we spoke with did not know why our inquiries were being ignored. We also asked why the CDC appeared to have the ability to respond to other news media outlets in a timely manner and questioned why the agency, funded by taxpayer dollars, appeared to be selectively responding to inquiries. No answer was provided.

We were told someone would get back to us. It has been 46 days since our original email was sent inquiring into VAERS data and reports.

New study shows Pfizer’s COVID vaccine may trigger herpes virus that causes shingles

The Defender also reported this week that Pfizer’s COVID vaccine may trigger a herpes virus that causes shingles. A recent study published in the journal Rheumatology found six women out of 491 patients developed a skin rash known as herpes zoster (HZ) infection — or shingles — within three to 14 days of receiving either the first or second dose of the Pfizer’s COVID vaccine. Five of them developed shingles infection after the first dose and one after the second.

Lead researcher Dr. Victoria Furer said five of the six patients were young, had mild cases of autoimmune disease and were taking little if any medications for it — which means they should not have been at increased risk for developing the infection, as HZ tends to develop more in people over the age of 50.

“We cannot say the vaccine is the cause at this point,” Furer said. “We can say it might be a trigger in some patients.” She said further research, including a larger epidemiological study, would be needed to prove cause and effect.

Third dose of COVID vaccines and annual boosters are on the way

The Defender reported this week, vaccine makers told investors and the media that COVID booster shots are in the works. But some independent scientists warn trying to outsmart the virus with booster shots designed to address the next variant could backfire, creating an endless wave of new variants, each more virulent and transmissible than the one before.

Dr. Ozlem Tureci, co-founder and CMO of BioNTech, which developed the vaccine with Pfizer, said she also expects people will need to get vaccinated against COVID annually, like the seasonal flu. That’s because, she said, scientists expect vaccine-induced immunity against the virus will decrease over time, CNBC reported.

Tureci’s comments came after Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said in an interview that aired April 15 that people would likely need a booster shot, or third dose, of the COVID vaccine within 12 months of getting fully vaccinated with possible additional shots each year.

J&J vaccine manufacturer Emergent BioSolutions shuts down

The Defender reported this week a J&J COVID vaccine manufacturing plant, where an ingredient mix-up last month resulted in 15 million doses of J&J vaccine being discarded, may have contaminated additional doses. A report released Wednesday by the FDA also identified a series of other problems at the Baltimore facility owned by Emergent BioSolutions.

Emergent, which in June received $628 million in taxpayer funding through the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to establish the primary U.S. manufacturing facility for J&J’s and AstraZeneca’s COVID vaccines, agreed this week to temporarily shut down operations.

A congressional investigation was launched Tuesday into the company’s federal vaccine contract and shareholders filed a class action lawsuit Monday for false and misleading statements that drove up stock prices and misleading statements regarding the company’s readiness to mass-produce COVID vaccines.

According to CNBC, an FDA inspection of the Baltimore plant in April 2020 revealed Emergent lacked necessary personnel to produce a COVID vaccine. Another inspection, in June 2020, determined Emergent’s plan for producing vaccines was inadequate due to poorly trained staff and quality control problems, raising questions as to why the company did not fix problems earlier and why federal officials who oversaw its contracts did not demand better performance.

Children’s Health Defense asks anyone who has experienced an adverse reaction, to any vaccine, to file a report following these three steps.

Pfizer Is Obsessed with One Thing in this Pandemic. And It’s Not Saving Lives

By Nick Dearden (via Global Justice)

Pfizer is the corporation that has profited most from Covid-19 vaccines to date. Pfizer uses its power to aggressively defend and extend its patents.

The total sales for the Pfizer vaccine will likely exceed $30 billion in 2021 alone. Pfizer shares its profits with its partner company – which means they are expecting at least $15 billion this year, bumping their total revenue next year to around $60 billion – one quarter of which will be accounted for by the vaccine.

According to one financial journalist That would make it the second-highest revenue-generating drug anytime, anywhere”

Profiting from the pandemic

These sales will bring in a substantial profit for the company – particularly because the vaccine received nearly $6 billion from the American government’s contract for production and roll out costs. The German government supported the research, while official reports suggest Pfizer and its partner spent only around $1 billion in additional research costs last year.

Unlike other corporations Pfizer has explicitly said it will profit throughout the pandemic. It has sold very small quantities to the global distribution body Covax and African Union “at cost”, which it claims to be about $6.75 per dose. In fact, experts have suggested these types of vaccines could cost as little as 60 cents to $2 per dose to make. However, Pfizer is selling to most countries at $19.50 per dose, supposedly a special pandemic price, but clearly one which allows the corporation to make a large profit.

But a large profit isn’t enough for Pfizer, and it seems clear prices will rise steeply once they decide the pandemic is ‘over’. A senior executive has suggested $150-175 per dose would be more ‘normal’ pricing for a vaccine of this sort.

Pfizer claims these astronomical prices are needed to recoup R&D costs. But a glance at their accounts last year shows that the corporation returned a whopping $8.4 billion to shareholdersin dividends and reported a profit of $8.7bn.

Pfizer has sold its vaccines largely to rich countries. They’ve sold more than three times the amount to high income countries (1.6 billion) as they have to the rest of the world (560 million), while tiny quantities have been sold to low income countries. The international distribution network Covax has managed to secure a mere 40 million.

A vast lobbying effort

Pfizer’s former CEO was instrumental in developing the global patent agreement – known as TRIPS – and intellectual property is a bedrock of Pfizer’s profits. Pfizer’s CEO led the charge to bypass the WHO’s technology sharing programme CTAP, labelling it “nonsense”. This has helped render this important tool ineffective to date.

In its most recent annual report the corporation seems proud of its role in pushing for even stronger patent law stating “Our industry advocacy [lobbying] efforts focus on seeking a fair and transparent business environment for foreign manufacturers, underscoring the importance of strong intellectual property systems.” They say that “While the global intellectual property environment has generally improved following WTO-TRIPS and bilateral/multilateral trade agreements, our growth and ability to bring new product innovation to patients depends on further progress in intellectual property protection[emphasis added]”

This lobbing clout is important. Pfizer and its lobbying body PhRMA were the top spending lobbyists in the US healthcare sector in the last 2 decades. They use the power lobbying gives them to promote and extend their rights of secrecy (‘data exclusivity’) over medical development and their monopoly protection which allows them to charge astronomical prices. They support the US government including higher levels of monopoly protection in new trade deals.

It’s not just Covid-19

Last year, we looked at Pfizer’s troubling history of profiteering. In one example, Pfizer and its British distributor hugely hiked the prices of anti-epilepsy drug phenytoin which 48,000 NHS patients relied upon. NHS expenditure on the drug rose from £2 million a year to £50 million in a single year, with the cost of 100mg packs rising from £2.83 to £67.50. Overall, UK wholesalers and pharmacies faced price hikes of between 2,300% and 2,600%.

In 2009, Pfizer was forced to pay $2.3 billion in a set of complex suits which included the company’s illegal marketing of arthritis drug Bextra, as well as giving kickbacks to doctors. A whistleblower claimed that sales staff were incentivised to sell Bextra to doctors for medical conditions for which the drug wasn’t approved and at doses up to eight times those recommended. “At Pfizer I was expected to increase profits at all costs, even when sales meant endangering lives. I couldn’t do that,” he stated.

MSF ran a campaign against the price of Pfizer’s pneumonia vaccines, which it claimed were 68 times more expensive in 2015 than in 2001. While Pfizer did reduce prices for the lowest income countries, MSF said the cost to vaccinate remained “roughly US$9 for each child to be vaccinated in the poorest countries, and as much as $80 per child for middle-income countries”. It claimed Pfizer and GSK have earned over $50 billion for the drug, but “Today, 55 million children around the world still do not have access to the pneumonia vaccine, largely due to high prices.”

What we can do

Pfizer’s obsession with maximising its profits during the pandemic is in keeping with its troubling record. But there is no reason big pharma companies should remain in the driving seat.

Governments have the power to put global public health first.

We are campaigning for the suspension of patents on all Covid-19 vaccines to help scale up the global vaccine effort and give the world the best chance of getting this disease under control.

Rocky business bans COVID vaccine recipients from entering premises

By Adam Ophus (via rdnewsnow)

A local Rocky Mountain House business is making waves on social media over a new policy they’ve implemented.

Tea Rocks, a metaphysical supply store, posted a new policy Tuesday stating they will not allow any individual vaccinated for COVID-19 within the last month to enter their store. 

The reason they’ve given is that they have a pregnant staff member and have implemented it for her and their staff’s safety.

“Hate us if you want, this is our stance and new policy,” the store said in its Facebook post announcing the policy.

The move comes from a theory circulating on social media that claims people who are vaccinated can “shed” the spiked pathogens from the vaccine onto women, affecting their menstrual cycle or fertility.

Tea Rocks says there is “no proof the vax works and no proof it does not shed.”

Owner Christine Foesier noted that this ruling is not for all vaccines, only for the COVID-19 and all the “Unknown’s around the vaccine.”

The store’s Facebook page has exploded with comments and shares from across the country and the world both for and against the policy.

One user wrote, “Now THIS is a business practice I can get behind.” 

Another shared their worry about the possibility of the page spreading misinformation, which Tea Rocks responded to by saying they are just trying to protect themselves and their staff.

This isn’t the only time the business has caught the public’s eye. Last December, the store had anonymous complaints sent in to AHS over a lax stance they had taken regarding mask wearing. Shortly afterwards, the store stated that they had been the target of a review bomb, which is when people on mass target a business giving it poor reviews on the internet.

It was mentioned that calls have been constantly coming in from people all the way from B.C. to Nova Scotia since the post went viral. She did also say that she was appreciative of the support they’ve been receiving on Facebook. Christine mentioned that since the posting they have been seeing a lot of local support.

She is also asking that people “Stop the harassment just because we want to look after ourselves and employees.”

Laboratories in US can’t find Covid-19 in one of 1,500 positive tests

BY GREATREJECT

CDC sued for massive fraud: Tests at 7 universities of ALL people examined showed that they did not have Covid, but just Influenza A or B – EU statistics: ‘Corona’ virtually disappeared, even under mortality.

A clinical scientist and immunologist-virologist at a southern California laboratory says he and colleagues from 7 universities are suing the CDC for massive fraud. The reason: not one of 1500 samples of people tested “positive” could find Covid-19. ALL people were simply found to have Influenza A, and to a lesser extent Influenza B. This is consistent with the previous findings of other scientists, which we have reported on several times.

Dr. Derek Knauss: “When my lab team and I subjected the 1500 supposedly positive Covid-19 samples to Koch’s postulates and put them under an SEM (electron microscope), we found NO Covid in all 1500 samples. We found that all 1500 samples were primarily Influenza A, and some Influenza B, but no cases of Covid. We did not use the bulls*** PCR test.’

At 7 universities not once COVID detected

‘When we sent the rest of the samples to Stanford, Cornell, and a couple of the labs at the University of California, they came up with the same result: NO COVID. They found Influenza A and B. Then we all asked the CDC for viable samples of Covid. The CDC said they can’t give them, because they don’t have those samples.’

‘So we came to the hard conclusion through all our research and lab work that Covid-19 was imaginary and fictitious. The flu was only called ‘Covid,’ and most of the 225,000 deaths were from co-morbidities such as heart disease, cancer, diabetes, pulmonary emphysema, etc.. They got the flu which further weakened their immune systems, and they died.’

‘This virus is fictitious’

‘I still need to find one viable sample with Covid-19 to work with. We who conducted the lab test with these 1500 samples at the 7 universities are now suing the CDC for Covid-19 fraud. The CDC still has not sent us a viable, isolated and purified sample of Covid-19. If they can’t or won’t, then I say there is no Covid-19. It’s fictional.’

‘The four research papers describing the genome extracts of the Covid-19 virus never managed to isolate and purify the samples. All four papers describe only small pieces of RNA that are only 37 to 40 base pairs long. That is NOT a VIRUS. A viral genome normally has 30,000 to 40,000 base pairs.’

‘Now that Covid-19 is supposedly so bad everywhere, how come not one lab in the world has completely isolated and purified this virus? That’s because they never really found the virus. All they ever discovered were small pieces of RNA that were not identified as the virus anyway. So what we’re dealing with is just another flu strain, just like every year. Covid-19 does not exist and is fictitious.’

‘I believe that China and the globalists have set up this Covid hoax (the flu disguised as a new virus) to establish a global tyranny and totalitarian control police state. This intrigue included (also) massive election fraud to overthrow Trump.’

CDC itself admits to having no identifiable virus

Deeply hidden in an official document on Covid-19, the CDC ruefully admitted as early as summer 2020 that it does not have a measurable virus: ‘As no quantified (= measured) isolated virus objects of 2019-nCoV are available at this time…’ (page 39 of the ‘CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel’ (July 13) In other words, the CDC, as one of THE leading medical authorities in the world, could not, and still cannot, demonstrate a virus.

About the for this purpose scientifically totally debunked, but still shamelessly abused PCR test, the CDC wrote under the heading ‘limitations’: ‘The detection of viral RNA cannot demonstrate the presence of an infectious virus, or that 2019-nCoV is the causative agent of clinical symptoms.’ And in addition: ‘This test cannot exclude other diseases caused by other bacterial or viral pathogens.’

In other words, we cannot prove that the people who get sick and are hospitalized, and very occasionally die, were sickened by a new coronavirus called SARS-CoV-2, nor can we prove that it caused them to develop a new disease called ‘Covid-19.’ It could just as easily be a different virus and a different disease. (And since all the symptoms, including severe pneumonia, correspond seamlessly to what flu can cause historically in vulnerable people… ‘if it looks like a duck and walks like a duck, it is a duck’.

Reward of $265,000 for demonstrating coronavirus

Earlier this year, Samuel Eckert’s German Team and the Isolate Truth Fund pledged a reward of at least $265,000 for any scientist who can provide incontrovertible proof that the SARS-CoV-2 virus has been isolated and therefore exists. They too pointed out that not one lab in the world has yet been able to isolate this corona virus.

Yes, systems scientists claim they have, but this ‘isolation’ consists only of a sample from the human body, which is a ‘soup’ full of different kinds of cells, remains of viruses, bacteria, et cetera. With the help of (toxic) chemicals one then searches for some (residual) particles that may indicate a virus that once existed or may still exist, after which this is designated as ‘evidence’.

Canadian team also received no evidence despite 40 Public Access Law requests

In late December 2020 there was a similar initiative to the one in Germany. A team around Canadian investigative journalist Christine Massey submitted no less than 40 Public Access Law requests to medical authorities worldwide with the simple request for proof that the SARS-CoV-2 virus has been isolated and its existence can therefore be objectively proven. Not one of the agencies and authorities written to was able to provide that evidence.

‘Impossible to demonstrate that SARS-CoV-2 causes a disease called Covid-19’

Dr. Tom Cowan, Dr. Andrew Kaufman and Sally Fallon Morell recently published a statement on “the continuing controversy over whether the SARS-CoV-2 virus is isolated or purified. But based on the official Oxford definition of “isolation” (“the fact or condition of being isolated or secluded, a separation from other things or persons, standing alone”), common sense, the laws of logic and the rules of science dictate that any unbiased person must come to the conclusion that the SARS-CoV-2 virus has never been isolated or purified. As a result, no confirmation of the existence of the virus can be given.’

‘The logical and scientific implications of this fact are that the structure and composition of something whose existence cannot be proven cannot be known, including the presence, structure and function of hypothetical spike or other proteins. The genetic sequence of something that has never been found cannot be known, nor can the “variants” (mutations) of something whose existence has not been demonstrated. It is therefore impossible to show that SARS-CoV-2 causes a disease called Covid-19.’

Combined PCR test for corona and influenza ‘because there’s hardly any difference’

Not surprisingly, the world’s largest biotech company, China’s BGI, recently launched a new PCR test that can simultaneously test for influenza A, B and corona. Apart from the proven fact, acknowledged trough various lawsuits, that a PCR test cannot prove infection with any virus whatsoever, BGI’s explanation that both diseases are so difficult to distinguish from each other and that they have therefore made only one test, says more than enough. Maybe there IS no difference at all, ‘Covid’ is just another name for ‘old familiar’ flu viruses, and this is just another clever marketing trick?

Most people have been fooled by fear propaganda

With worldwide, government-controlled 24/7 fear propaganda by the mass media, most people have come to believe that there is indeed a life-threatening virus that makes people sick much faster and more severely than seasonal flu. However, even the latter is demonstrably not the case. Influenza A has been the leading cause of death from pneumonia in the developed world for years.

But send people designated as severe Covid patients to a few ICU’s, put cameras on them constantly, instruct a few physicians that they should only discuss the worst cases, and you have your “televised pandemic. The argument ‘we are doing it because otherwise care will be overburdened’ was undermined by governments itself some time ago, by rejecting offers of additional ICU beds or staff, because ‘it is not necessary’. (Was this perhaps the first and only time the truth was told?)

Official figures: nothing to worry about (yet it never gets back to normal)

Now that also the official figures show that after the normal traditional flu season nothing is wrong, and according to the EU statistics (EuroMOMO) there is even a significant lower mortality, the society – if it really was about a virus and public health – should immediately go back to normal to start repairing the huge damage caused by government policies.

However, as you know, that will never be done, and that is because this carefully planned pandemic hoax is carrying out an ideological agenda, the ‘Great Reset’, which aims to largely demolish the society and economy of the West, and then subject it to a global technocratic communist climate-vaccine dictatorship, in which all our freedoms, civil and self-determination rights will be done away with once and for all.

At least that was their plan.

Source

Family Of Italian Woman Whose Death Linked To AstraZeneca Jab Launches Legal Action

BY TYLER DURDEN (via Global Research)

While American lawmakers have taken steps to shield US pharma companies from any legal blowback caused by COVID vaccines, drugmakers in Europe haven’t been so lucky. And after widespread skepticism of the AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine, what was supposed to be the workhorse of the global immunization rollout before reports of rare and deadly blood clots inspired regulators around the comment to either halt the jab, or impose limits on its use.

And now, all these issues will be dredged up again as AstraZeneca is hit by lawsuits filed by the families of those who died from rare blood clots potentially linkted to the vaccine. In what appears to be a first, Sky News reported Monday that the family of an Italian woman who died from a case of vaccine-linked clots are suing to officially establish whether the jab was at fault in her death.

Augusta Turiaco

The case involves 55-year-old Augusta Turiaco from Messina, Sicily, who received her COVID jab on March 11, but started experiencing severe symptoms a few days later.

Despite feeling unwell afterwards, Turiaco returned to work, posting two days later to reassure worried friends saying: “Andra tutto bene” – or “everything will be alright” in Italian.

She fell into a coma on March 28 March and died on March 30 March, 19 days after having the AstraZeneca injection. Her conditions also found in others who died after having the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine.

Here’s more from Sky News:

Her brother Nunzio Turiaco told Sky News: “For us it was a bolt from the blue that such a clinical picture occurred.

“My sister was in excellent health, she did not take drugs because she did not have diseases such as hypertension or diabetes.”

Medical records seen by Sky News showed blood clots had formed in Ms Turiaco’s body, including in her brain.

Her platelet levels had fallen.

According to Sky, the family’s suit is one of several legal actions in Europe directed at AstraZeneca over the clotting issue.

The legal proceedings launched by the family are just one of a number of cases across Europe being mounted against AstraZeneca.

The family’s lawyer, Daniela Agnello, told Sky News: “The excellent state of health of Ms Turiaco, the absence of previous pathologies, the very short period of time between the administration of the vaccine, the appearance of the first illnesses and the very serious clinical picture and then death.

Messy clinical trial data, manufacturing issues and – of course – the rare blood clots that have resulted in more than a dozen deaths have all damaged the AstraZeneca jab’s reputation, experts say.

Despite this, both the European Medicines Agency and the World Health Organization consistently stressed that the vaccine’s benefits far outweigh the risk of any side effects and advised against any restrictions to its use. Still, national health authorities have moved ahead with their own risk and benefit assessments, which, remarkably, have drawn dissimilar conclusions – ranging from limiting the vaccine’s use in different age groups to suspending its usage and even ditching it entirely.

Whether the vaccine will ever be approved for use in the US remains unclear; although AstraZeneca has said it has applied for review by regulators in the US, reports cited uneasiness with the vaccine’s safety record, which include a halt to a Phase 3 trial in the US for a month last fall.

“It’s On” – Germany, France Back EU Push To Sue AstraZeneca Over Botched Vaccine Rollout

BY TYLER DURDEN (via Zero Hedge)

Following reports that Germany and other major EU members were reluctant to sue AstraZeneca over the botched rollout of its COVID-19 vaccine, it looks like Berlin and Paris have actually signed on. According to the latest round of reports, almost every EU country has now signed on, opening the door for the EU Commission to launch the lawsuit as soon as Friday.

As Politico reminds us, 5 or 6 major EU nations had expressed some reservations about a lawsuit when EU ambassadors met earlier this week, arguing that legal action could further worsen AstraZeneca’s already-tarnished image. But as many member states continue to impose age limits on the AstraZeneca jab, it seems they’ve given up on these concerns. One by one, each country reportedly fell in line, with France backing the lawsuit on Thursday night, followed by Germany Friday morning, according to a pair of diplomats who weren’t named in the report. Hungary backed the lawsuit as well on Friday morning, a sign that the lawsuit has broad support among EU members.

AstraZeneca infuriated the EU by failing to deliver on its delivery commitments. The company delivered only 30 million out of the 100 million doses promised for the first quarter in a contract that will likely be the focus of the suit.

The lawsuit, however, will likely focus on the company’s continued inability to deliver doses in the second quarter. The EU wants AstraZeneca to commit to supplying 90 million doses by the end of June, approximately half of what the company originally committed to send in the second quarter. Instead, AstraZeneca told the EU it plans to supply just 70MM doses in that time period. During the first three months of 2021, AZ delivered only 30M doses, a fraction of the 100M it promised.

EU members aren’t the only ones who will be suing AstraZeneca. Already, family members of victims who died from rare blood clots believed to be linked to the vaccine are suing for more information as they consider pushing for monetary rewards.

A spokesperson for AstraZeneca said the company is “not aware of any legal proceedings” and that the company “continues to hold regular discussions on supply with the Commission and Member States.”

18 Reasons I Won’t Be Getting a Covid Vaccine

By Christian Elliot (via Deconstructing Conventional)

A few friends have asked my thoughts on the covid jab(s) so I thought it was time to write an article on the topic.

All my friends had not heard most of the details I shared, so I figured you might appreciate hearing some of what I told them.

Knowing how contentious this issue is, part of me would rather just write about something else, but I feel like the discussion/news is so one-sided that I should speak up.

As I always strive to do, I promise to do my best to be level-headed and non-hysterical.

I’m not here to pick a fight with anyone, just to walk you through some of what I’ve read, my lingering questions, and explain why I can’t make sense of these covid vaccines.

THREE GROUND RULES FOR DISCUSSION

If you care to engage on this topic with me, excellent.

Here are the rules…

I am more than happy to correspond with you if…

  1. You are respectful and treat me the way you would want to be treated.
  2. You ask genuinely thoughtful questions about what makes sense to you.
  3. You make your points using sound logic and don’t hide behind links or the word “science.” In other words, make a kind, level-headed argument (links welcome), but don’t just post a link and say “read the science.” That’s intellectually lazy.

If you do respond, and you break any of those rules, your comments will be ignored/deleted.

With that out of the way, let me say this…

I don’t know everything, but so far no one has been able to answer the objections below.

So here are the reasons I’m opting out of the covid vaccine.

#1: VACCINE MAKERS ARE IMMUNE FROM LIABILITY

The only industry in the world that bears no liability for injuries or deaths resulting from their products, are vaccine makers.

First established in 1986 with the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, and reinforced by the PREP Act, vaccine makers cannot be sued, even if they are shown to be negligent.

The covid-vaccine makers are allowed to create a one-size-fits-all product, with no testing on sub-populations (i.e. people with specific health conditions), and yet they are unwilling to accept any responsibility for any adverse events or deaths their products cause.

If a company is not willing to stand behind their product as safe, especially one they rushed to market and skipped animal trials on, I am not willing to take a chance on their product.

No liability. No trust.

Here’s why…

#2: THE CHECKERED PAST OF THE VACCINE COMPANIES

The four major companies who are making these covid vaccines are/have either:

  1. Never brought a vaccine to market before covid (Moderna and Johnson & Johnson).
  2. Are serial felons (Pfizer, and Astra Zeneca).
  3. Are both (Johnson & Johnson).

Moderna had been trying to “Modernize our RNA” (thus the company name)–for years, but had never successfully brought ANY product to market–how nice for them to get a major cash infusion from the government to keep trying.

In fact, all major vaccine makers (save Moderna) have paid out tens of billions of dollars in damages for other products they brought to market when they knew those products would cause injuries and death–see Vioxx, Bextra, Celebrex, Thalidomide, and opioids as a few examples.

If drug companies willfully choose to put harmful products in the market, when they can be sued, why would we trust any product where they have NO liability?

In case it hasn’t sunk in, let me reiterate…3 of the 4 covid vaccine makers have been sued for products they brought to market even though they knew injuries and deaths would result.

Let me reiterate this point:

Given the free pass from liability, and the checkered past of these companies, why would we assume that all their vaccines are safe and made completely above board?

Where else in life would we trust someone with that kind of reputation?

To me that makes as much sense as expecting a remorseless, abusive, unfaithful lover to become a different person because a judge said deep down they are a good person.

No. I don’t trust them.

No liability. No trust.

Here’s another reason why I don’t trust them.

#3: THE UGLY HISTORY OF ATTEMPTS TO MAKE CORONAVIRUS VACCINES

There have been many attempts to make viral vaccines in the past that ended in utter failure, which is why we did not have a coronavirus vaccine in 2020.

In the 1960’s, scientists attempted to make an RSV (Respiratory Syncytial Virus) vaccine for infants.

In that study, they skipped animal trials because they weren’t necessary back then.

In the end, the vaccinated infants got much sicker than the unvaccinated infants when exposed to the virus in nature, with 80% of the vaccinated infants requiring hospitalization, and two of them died.

After 2000, scientists made many attempts to create coronavirus vaccines.

For the past 20 years, all ended in failure because the animals in the clinical trials got very sick and many died, just like the children in the 1960’s.

You can read a summary of this history/science here.

Or if you want to read the individual studies you can check out these links:

  • In 2004 attempted vaccine produced hepatitis in ferrets
  • In 2005 mice and civets became sick and more susceptible to coronaviruses after being vaccinated
  • In 2012 the ferrets became sick and died. And in this study mice and ferrets developed lung disease.
  • In 2016 this study also produce lung disease in mice.

The typical pattern in the studies mentioned above is that the children and the animals produced beautiful antibody responses after being vaccinated.

The manufacturers thought they hit the jackpot.

The problem came when the children and animals were exposed to the wild version of the virus.

When that happened, an unexplained phenomenon called Antibody Dependent Enhancement (ADE) also known as Vaccine Enhanced Disease (VED) occurred where the immune system produced a “cytokine storm” (i.e. overwhelmingly attacked the body), and the children/animals died.

Here’s the lingering issue…

The vaccine makers have no data to suggest their rushed vaccines have overcome that problem.

In other words, never before has any attempt to make a coronavirus vaccine been successful, nor has the gene-therapy technology that is mRNA “vaccines” been safely brought to market, but hey, since they had billions of dollars in government funding, I’m sure they figured that out.

Except they don’t know if they have…

#4: THE “DATA GAPS” SUBMITTED TO THE FDA BY THE VACCINE MAKERS

When vaccine makers submitted their papers to the FDA for the Emergency Use Authorization (Note: An EUA is not the same as a full FDA approval), among the many “Data Gaps” they reported was that they have nothing in their trials to suggest they overcame that pesky problem of Vaccine Enhanced Disease.

They simply don’t know–i.e. they have no idea if the vaccines they’ve made will also produce the same cytokine storm (and deaths) as previous attempts at such products.

As Joseph Mercola points out

Previous attempts to develop an mRNA-based drug using lipid nanoparticles failed and had to be abandoned because when the dose was too low, the drug had no effect, and when dosed too high, the drug became too toxic. An obvious question is: What has changed that now makes this technology safe enough for mass use?”

If that’s not alarming enough, here are other gaps in the data–i.e. there is no data to suggest safety or efficacy regarding:

  • Anyone younger than age 18 or older than age 55
  • Pregnant or lactating mothers
  • Auto-immune conditions
  • Immunocompromised individuals
  • No data on transmission of covid
  • No data on preventing mortality from covid
  • No data on duration of protection from covid

Hard to believe right?

In case you think I’m making this up, or want to see the actual documents sent to the FDA by Pfizer and Moderna for their Emergency Use Authorization, you can check out this, or this respectively. The data gaps can be found starting with page 46 and 48 respectively.

For now let’s turn our eyes to the raw data the vaccine makers used to submit for emergency use authorization.

#5: NO ACCESS TO THE RAW DATA FROM THE TRIALS

Would you like to see the raw data that produced the “90% and 95% effective” claims touted in the news?

Me too…

But they won’t let us see that data.

As pointed out in the BMJ, something about the Pfizer and Moderna efficacy claims smells really funny.

There were “3,410 total cases of suspected, but unconfirmed covid-19 in the overall study population, 1,594 occurred in the vaccine group vs. 1,816 in the placebo group.”

Wait…what?

Did they fail to do science in their scientific study by not verifying a major variable?

Could they not test those “suspected but unconfirmed” cases to find out if they had covid?

Apparently not.

Why not test all 3,410 participants for the sake of accuracy?

Can we only guess they didn’t test because it would mess up their “90-95% effective” claims?

Where’s the FDA?

Would it not be prudent for the FDA, to expect (demand) that the vaccine makers test people who have “covid-like symptoms,” and release their raw data so outside, third-parties could examine how the manufacturers justified the numbers?

I mean it’s only every citizen of the world we’re trying to get to take these experimental products…

Why did the FDA not require that? Isn’t that the entire purpose of the FDA anyway?

Good question.

Foxes guarding the hen house?

Seems like it.

No liability. No trust.

#6: NO LONG-TERM SAFETY TESTING

Obviously, with products that have only been on the market a few months, we have no long-term safety data.

In other words, we have no idea what this product will do in the body months or years from now–for ANY population.

Given all the risks above (risks that ALL pharmaceutical products have), would it not be prudent to wait to see if the worst-case scenarios have indeed been avoided?

Would it not make sense to want to fill those pesky “data gaps” before we try to give this to every man, woman, and child on the planet?

Well…that would make sense, but to have that data, they need to test it on people, which leads me to my next point…

#7: NO INFORMED CONSENT

What most who are taking the vaccine don’t know is that because these products are still in clinical trials, anyone who gets the shot is now part of the clinical trial.

They are part of the experiment.

Those (like me) who do not take it, are part of the control group.

Time will tell how this experiment works out.

But, you may be asking, if the vaccines are causing harm, wouldn’t we be seeing that all over the news?

Surely the FDA would step in and pause the distribution?

Well, if the adverse events reporting system was working, maybe things would be different.

#8: UNDER-REPORTING OF ADVERSE REACTIONS AND DEATH

According to a study done by Harvard (at the commission of our own government), less than 1% of all adverse reactions to vaccines are actually submitted to the National Vaccine Adverse Events Reports System (VAERS) – read page 6 at the link above.

While the problems with VAERS have not been fixed (as you can read about in this letter to the CDC), at the time of this writing VAERS reports over 2,200 deaths from the current covid vaccines, as well as close to 60,000 adverse reactions.

“VAERS data released today showed 50,861 reports of adverse events following COVID vaccines, including 2,249 deaths and 7,726 serious injuries between Dec. 14, 2020 and March 26, 2021.”

And those numbers don’t include (what is currently) 578 cases of Bell’s Palsy.

If those numbers are still only 1% of the total adverse reactions (or .8 to 2% of what this study published recently in the JAMA found), you can do the math, but that equates to somewhere around 110,000 to 220,000 deaths from the vaccines to date, and a ridiculous number of adverse reactions.

Bet you didn’t see that on the news.

That death number would currently still be lower than the 424,000 deaths from medical errors that happen every year (which you probably also don’t hear about), but we are not even six months into the rollout of these vaccines yet.

If you want a deeper dive into the problems with the VAERS reporting system, you can check this out, or check this out.

But then there’s my next point, which could be argued makes these covid vaccines seem pointless…

#9: THE VACCINES DO NOT STOP TRANSMISSION OR INFECTION

Wait, what?

Aren’t these vaccines supposed to be what we’ve been waiting for to “go back to normal”?

Nope.

Why do you think we’re getting all these conflicting messages about needing to practice social distancing and wear masks AFTER we get a vaccine?

The reason is because these vaccines were never designed to stop transmission OR infection.

If you don’t believe me, I refer you again to the papers submitted to the FDA I linked to above.

The primary endpoint (what the vaccines are meant to accomplish) is to lower your symptoms.

Sounds like just about every other drug on the market right?

That’s it…lowering your symptoms is the big payoff we’ve been waiting for.

Does that seem completely pointless to anyone but me?

  1. It can’t stop us from spreading the virus.
  2. It can’t stop the virus from infecting us once we have it.
  3. To get the vaccine is to accept all the risk of these experimental products and the best it might do is lower symptoms?

Heck, there are plenty of other things I can do to lower my symptoms that don’t involve taking what appears to be a really risky product.

Now for the next logical question:

If we’re worried about asymptomatic spreaders, would the vaccine not make it more likely that we are creating asymptomatic spread?

If it indeed reduces symptoms, anyone who gets it might not even know they are sick and thus they are more likely to spread the virus, right?

For what it’s worth, I’ve heard many people say the side effects of the vaccine (especially the second dose) are worse than catching covid.

I can’t make sense of that either.

Take the risk.

Get no protection.

Suffer through the vaccine side-effects.

Keep wearing your mask and social distancing…

And continue to be able to spread the virus.

What?

It gets worse.

#10: PEOPLE ARE CATCHING COVID AFTER BEING FULLY VACCINATED

Talk about a bummer.

You get vaccinated and you still catch covid.

In reality, this phenomenon is probably happening everywhere, but those are the ones making the news now.

Given the reasons above (and what’s below), maybe this doesn’t surprise you, but bummer if you thought the vaccine was a shield to keep you safe.

It’s not.

That was never the point.

If 66% of healthcare workers in L.A. are going to delay or skip the vaccine…maybe they aren’t wowed by the rushed science either.

Maybe they are watching the shady way deaths and cases are being reported…

#11: THE OVERALL DEATH RATE FROM COVID

According to the CDC’s own numbers, covid has a 99.74% survival rate.

Why would I take a risk on a product, that doesn’t stop infection or transmission, to help me overcome a cold that has a .26% chance of killing me–actually in my age range is has about a .1% chance of killing me (and .01% chance of killing my kids), but let’s not split hairs here.

With a bar (death rate) that low, we will be in lockdown every year…i.e. forever.

But wait, what about the 500,000 plus deaths, that’s alarming right?

I’m glad you asked.

#12: THE BLOATED COVID DEATH NUMBERS

Something smells really funny about this one.

Never before in the history of death certificates has our own government changed how deaths are reported.

Why now, are we reporting everyone who dies with covid in their body, as having died of covid, rather than the co-morbidities that actually took their life?

Until covid, all coronaviruses (common colds) were never listed as the primary cause of death when someone died of heart disease, cancer, diabetes, auto-immune conditions, or any other major co-morbidity.

The disease was listed as the cause of death, and a confounding factor like flu or pneumonia was listed on a separate line.

To bloat the number even more, both the W.H.O. and the C.D.C. changed their guidelines such that those who are suspected or probable (but were never confirmed) of having died of covid, are also included in the death numbers.

Seriously?

If we are going to do that then should we not go back and change the numbers of all past cold and flu seasons so we can compare apples to apples when it comes to death rates?

According to the CDCs own numbers, (scroll down to the section “Comorbidities and other conditions”) only 6% of the deaths being attributed to covid are instances where covid seems to be the only issue at hand.

In other words, reduce the death numbers you see on the news by 94% and you have what is likely the real numbers of deaths from just covid.

Even if the former CDC director is correct and covid-19 was a lab-enhanced virus (see Reason #14 below), a .26% death rate is still in line with the viral death rate that circles the planet ever year.

Then there’s this Fauci guy.

I’d really love to trust him, but besides the fact that he hasn’t treated one covid patient…you should probably know…

#13: FAUCI AND SIX OTHERS AT NIAID OWN PATENTS IN THE MODERNA VACCINE

Thanks to the Bayh-Dole Act, government workers are allowed to file patents on any research they do using tax payer funding.

Tony Fauci owns over 1,000 patents (see this video for more details), including patents being used on the Moderna vaccine…which he approved government funding for.

In fact, the NIH (which NIAID is part of) claims joint ownership of Moderna’s vaccine.

Does anyone else see this as a MAJOR conflict of interest, or criminal even?

I say criminal because there’s also this pesky problem that makes me even more distrustful of Fauci, NIAD, and the NIH in general.

#14: FAUCI IS ON THE HOT SEAT FOR ILLEGAL GAIN-OF-FUNCTION RESEARCH

What is “Gain-of-Function” research?

It’s where scientists attempt to make viruses gain functions–i.e. make them more transmissible and deadlier.

Sounds at least a touch unethical, right?

How could that possibly be helpful?

Our government agreed, and banned the practice.

So what did the Fauci-led NIAID do?

They pivoted and outsourced the gain-of-function research (in coronaviruses no less) to China–to the tune of a $600K grant.

You can see more details, including the important timeline of these events in this fantastically well-researched documentary.

Mr. Fauci, you have some explaining to do…and I hope the cameras are recording when you have to defend your actions.

For now, let’s turn our attention back to the virus…

#15: THE VIRUS CONTINUES TO MUTATE

Not only does the virus (like all viruses) continue to mutate, but according to world-renowned vaccine developer Geert Vanden Bossche (who you’ll meet below if you don’t know him) it’s mutating about every 10 hours.

How in the world are we going to keep creating vaccines to keep up with that level of mutation?

We’re not.

Might that also explain why fully vaccinated people are continuing to catch covid?

Why, given that natural immunity has never ultimately failed humanity, do we suddenly not trust it?

Why, if I ask questions like the above, or post links like what you find above, will my thoughts be deleted from all major social media platforms?

That brings me to the next troubling problem I have with these vaccines.

#16: CENSORSHIP…AND THE COMPLETE ABSENCE OF SCIENTIFIC DEBATE

I can’t help but get snarky here, so humor me.

How did you enjoy all those nationally and globally-televised, robust debates put on by public health officials, and broadcast simultaneously on every major news station?

Wasn’t it great hearing from the best minds in medicine, virology, epidemiology, economics, and vaccinology from all over the world as they vigorously and respectfully debated thingslike:

  • Lockdowns
  • Mask wearing
  • Social-distancing
  • Vaccine efficacy and safety trials
  • How to screen for susceptibility to vaccine injury
  • Therapeutics, (i.e. non-vaccine treatment options)

Wasn’t it great seeing public health officials (who never treated anyone with covid) have their “science” questioned?

Wasn’t it great seeing the FDA panel publicly grill the vaccine makers in prime time as they stood in the hot-seat of tough questions about products of which they have no liability?

Oh, wait…you didn’t see those debates?

No, you didn’t…because they never happened.

What happened instead was heavy-handed censorship of all but one narrative.

Ironically, Mark Zuckerberg can question vaccine safety, but I can’t?

Hypocrite?

When did the first amendment become a suggestion?

It’s the FIRST amendment Mark–the one our founders thought was most important.

With so much at stake, why are we fed only one narrative…shouldn’t many perspectives be heard and professionally debated?

WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO SCIENCE?

What has happened to the scientific method of always challenging our assumptions?

What happened to lively debate in this country, or at least in Western society?

Why did anyone who disagrees with the WHO, or the CDC get censored so heavily?

Is the science of public health a religion now, or is science supposed to be about debate?

If someone says “the science is settled” that’s how I know I’m dealing with someone who is closed minded.

By definition science (especially biological science) is never settled.

If it was, it would be dogma, not science.

OK, before I get too worked up, let me say this…

I WANT TO BE A GOOD CITIZEN

I really do.

If lockdowns work, I want to do my part and stay home.

If masks work, I want to wear them.

If social distancing is effective, I want to comply.

But, if there is evidence they don’t (masks for example), I want to hear that evidence too.

If highly-credentialed scientists have different opinions, I want to know what they think.

I want a chance to hear their arguments and make up my own mind.

I don’t think I’m the smartest person in the world, but I think I can think.

Maybe I’m weird, but if someone is censored, then I REALLY want to hear what they think.

Don’t you?

To all my friends who don’t have a problem with censorship, will you have the same opinion when what you think is censored?

Is censorship not the technique of dictators, tyrants, and greedy, power-hungry people?

Is it not a sign that those who are doing the censoring know it’s the only way they can win?

What if a man who spent his entire life developing vaccines was willing to put his entire reputation on the line and call on all global leaders to immediately stop the covid vaccines because of problems with the science?

What if he pleaded for an open-scientific debate on a global stage?

Would you want to hear what he has to say?

Would you want to see the debate he’s asking for?

#17: THE WORLD’S LEADING VACCINOLOGIST IS SOUNDING THE ALARM…

Here is what may be the biggest reason this covid vaccine doesn’t make sense to me.

When someone who is very pro-vaccine, who has spent his entire professional career overseeing the development of vaccines, is shouting from the mountaintops that we have a major problem, I think the man should be heard.

In case you missed it, and in case you care to watch it, here is Geert Vanden Bossche, explaining:

  1. Why the covid vaccine may be putting so much pressure on the virus that we are accelerating it’s ability to mutate and become more deadly.
  2. Why the covid vaccines may be creating vaccine-resistant viruses (similar to anti-biotic resistant bacteria).
  3. Why, because of previous problems with Antibody Dependent Enhancement, we may be looking at a mass casualty event in the next few months/years.

If you want to see/read about a second, and longer, interview with Vanden Bossche, where he was asked some tough questions, you can check this out.

If half of what he says comes true, these vaccines could be the worst invention of all time.

If you don’t like his science, take it up with him.

I’m just the messenger.

But I can also speak to covid personally.

#18: I ALREADY HAD COVID

I didn’t enjoy it.

It was a nasty cold for two days:

  • Unrelenting butt/low-back aches
  • Very low energy.
  • Low-grade fever.

It was weird not being able to smell anything for a couple days.

A week later, coffee still tasted a little “off.”

But I survived.

Now it appears (as it always has) that I have beautiful, natural, life-long immunity

…not something likely to wear off in a few months if I get the vaccine.

In my body, and my household, covid is over.

In fact, now that I’ve had it, there is evidence the covid vaccine might actually be more dangerous for me.

That is not a risk I’m willing to take.

IN SUMMARY

The above are just my reasons for not wanting the vaccine.

Maybe my reasons make sense to you, maybe they don’t.

Whatever does makes sense to you, hopefully we can still be friends.

I for one think there’s a lot more that we have in common than what separates us.

  • We all want to live in a world of freedom.
  • We all want to do our part to help others and to live well.
  • We all want the right to express our opinions without fearing we’ll be censored or viciously attacked.
  • We all deserve to have the access to the facts so we can make informed decisions.

Agree or disagree with me; I’ll treat you no differently.

You’re a human just as worthy of love and respect as anyone else.

For that I salute you, and I truly wish you all the best.

I hope you found this helpful.

If so, feel free to share.

If not, feel free to (kindly) let me know what didn’t make sense to you and I’d be happy to hear your thoughts too.

Stay curious and stay humble.

Until next time,

Christian

Pregnant Women Should Not Get a COVID Vaccine

By Dr. Joseph Mercola (via Global Research)

By injecting pregnant women with novel COVID-19 mRNA gene technologies, the medical establishment has thrown away one of the most fundamental safety edicts of medicine, which is that you do not experiment on pregnant women.

None of the COVID-19 vaccines on the market are licensed. They’ve only received emergency use authorization, as basic efficacy and safety studies are still ongoing. Yet pregnant women are urged to get vaccinated, and are lining up to get the shot — probably while at the same time being careful about avoiding second-hand smoke, alcohol and drugs with known or suspected toxicity.

In my view, giving these vaccines to pregnant women is beyond reprehensible. This experimentation is doubly unforgivable seeing how women of childbearing age have virtually no risk of dying from COVID-19, their fatality risk being a mere 0.01%.1

Contrast this dramatic downside to the potential benefits of the vaccine. You can still contract the virus if immunized and you can still spread it to others.2 All it is designed to do is lessen your symptoms if or when you get infected. Pregnant women simply do not need this vaccine, and therefore any risk is likely excessive.

It seems like the choice is obvious, unless you are an unethical pharmaceutical company that has been previously convicted of criminal felonies that resulted in billions of dollars in judgments and is seeking to create tens of billions of dollars of revenue.

Abnormal Periods and Miscarriage Reported

As reported by The Defender,3 as of April 1, 2021, VAERS had received 56,869 adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination, including 7,971 serious injuries and 2,342 deaths. Of those deaths, 28% occurred within 48 hours of vaccination. The youngest person to die was just 18 years old.

There were also 110 reports of miscarriage or premature birth among pregnant women. In all, 379 pregnant women reported some sort of adverse event. In the U.K., the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) Yellow Card reporting site that collects COVID-19 vaccine side effects had, as of March 28, 2021, 40 miscarriages listed for Pfizer’s vaccine4 and 15 for AstraZeneca’s.5

Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D., sent me a 2006 study6 that could explain this, as it showed sperm can take up foreign mRNA, convert it into DNA, and release it as little pellets (plasmids) in the medium around the fertilized egg. The embryo then takes up these plasmids and carries them (sustains and clones them into many of the daughter cells) throughout its life, even passing them on to future generations.

It is possible that the pseudo-exosomes that are the mRNA contents would be perfect for supplying the sperm with mRNA for the spike protein. So, potentially, a vaccinated woman who gets pregnant with an embryo that can (via the sperms’ plasmids) synthesize the spike protein according to the instructions in the vaccine, would have an immune capacity to attack that embryo because of the “foreign” protein it displays on its cells. This then would cause a miscarriage.

If there were, truly, a public health authority in the U.S., the criminals that are recommending this would be put in prison for reprehensible criminal negligence for the unnecessary damages they are causing to pregnant women and the deaths of their unborn children.

Even among non-pregnant women, side effects hinting at reproductive side effects are being reported, such as heavier than normal menstrual flow, uterine bleeding or restarting their period for the first time in years.7,8

While no one knows what might be causing the heavier flow, it may be worth looking into the parallels between the blood clotting disorders reported, both in some COVID-19 cases and post-COVID-19 vaccination, and Von Willebrand disease, a chronic condition that prevents normal blood clotting, thus resulting in excessively heavy periods.

Rare and Lethal Blood Disorder Reported

Several individuals have rapidly developed immune thrombocytopenia9,10 (ITP), a rare autoimmune disease, following COVID-19 vaccination.11 The condition, which is often lethal, causes your immune system to destroy your platelets (cells that help blood clot), resulting in hemorrhaging. Despite the loss of platelets, serious blood clots are also occurring at the same time.

One example is the 58-year-old Florida doctor who got the Pfizer vaccine and died from sudden onset of ITP two weeks later. Dr. Jerry L. Spivak, an expert on blood disorders at Johns Hopkins University, told The New York Times “it is a medical certainty” that Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine caused the man’s death.12,13 Pfizer, of course, denies any connection.

At least two papers have been published on the condition, as scientists search for clues as to how the vaccines might be causing this unusual reaction. As reported by The Defender:14

“Two teams of researchers have published detailed observations of patients who developed thrombotic thrombocytopenia after receiving the AstraZeneca vaccine and have speculated about a possible mechanism.

Both groups suggest that the development of serious blood clots alongside falling levels of platelets is an immune response that resembles a rare reaction to the drug heparin, called heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. The researchers have labelled the syndrome vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia.”15,16

It’s unclear, however, where the platelet-antagonistic antibodies come from. They might form against the spike antigen, or perhaps it’s a response triggered by some other immune response factor. Either way, doctors at Oslo University Hospital recently announced the blood clotting disorders experienced by some recipients of the AstraZeneca vaccine are caused by the vaccine:17

“Our theory that this is a powerful immune response most likely triggered by the vaccine, has been confirmed … In collaboration with experts in the field from the University Hospital of North Norway HF, we have found specific antibodies against blood platelets that can cause these reactions …

We have the reason. Nothing but the vaccine can explain why these individuals had this immune response. There is nothing in the patient history of these individuals that can give such a powerful immune response. I am confident that the antibodies that we have found are the cause, and I see no other explanation than it being the vaccine which triggers it.”

Several European countries have halted use of the AstraZeneca vaccine due to blood clots in the past several weeks, and in the U.S., the FDA and CDC have agreed to temporarily halt use of Johnson & Johnson’s vaccine while they review six reports of blood clots in combination with low platelet counts. So far, one has died. Another is in serious condition. The announcement was made April 13, 2021.18

Another Novel Hypothesis

Other potential mechanisms of action also exist. For example, as noted by freelance medical writer and neurobiology postgrad Shin Jie Yong in a March 19, 2021, Medium article,19 Dr. Goh Kiang Hua, a consultant general surgeon and Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons, has suggested a novel hypothesis to explain the loss of platelets seen in some COVID-19 vaccine recipients.

He believes the lipid-coated nanoparticles, which transport the mRNA, may be carrying that mRNA into the megakaryocytes in your bone marrow. Megakaryocytes are cells that produce platelets. According to this hypothesis, once the mRNA enters your bone marrow, the megakaryocytes would then begin to express the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, which would tag them for destruction by cytotoxic T-cells.

“Platelets then become deficient, causing thrombocytopenia,” Yong writes, adding, “Of course, he emphasized that these are just speculations.” In my view, Hua may well be onto something. If correct, it would be an elegant explanation.

Breast Cancer Symptoms

Many also report developing swollen lymph nodes after their COVID-19 vaccination and, as reported by Fox 8 News Cleveland,20 doctors at Cleveland University Hospital system are seeing swollen lymph nodes in the mammograms of women who have had a COVID vaccine, and typically on the side where the vaccine was given.

Swollen lymph nodes on a mammogram are one sign of breast cancer. University Hospital’s breast imaging department also reported that they are fielding calls from patients who are concerned about finding swollen nodes under their arms.

According to the news report, data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows over 11% of vaccine recipients have swollen lymph nodes after the first dose of COVID-19 vaccine and 16% after the second dose. The swelling typically begins two to four days post-vaccination, and can persist for up to four weeks.

Lymph nodes that remain engorged beyond the four-week mark need to be evaluated by your doctor, Dr. Holly Marshall with University Hospitals told Fox 8 News.

Scarcity of Controlled Trials in Pregnant Women

Getting back to vaccination during pregnancy, it’s important to realize that this is a time during which experimentation can be the most hazardous of all, as you’re not only dealing with potential repercussions for the mother but also for the child. Any number of things can go wrong when you introduce drugs, chemicals or foreign substances during fetal development.

According to the Mayo Clinic,21 30,000 pregnant women have been “successfully” vaccinated against COVID-19 in the U.S. with either Pfizer’s or Moderna’s mRNA vaccines. They don’t mention anything about reported side effects, but as mentioned earlier, 379 VAERS reports had been filed by pregnant women as of April 1, 2021.

A recent BBC article22 sought to make light of post-vaccination miscarriages, saying, “Data showing a miscarriage occurred after a vaccine does not mean that the two events are linked.” Meanwhile, people dying from heart attacks, cancer and other longstanding diseases who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 were counted as COVID-19 deaths, no questions asked. There was no difficulty in linking those data points to drive up COVID-19 fatality statistics.

The BBC also notes that miscarriage is “very common,” with 1 in 8 pregnancies (12.5%) ending in miscarriage. The U.K. MHRA, in an effort to put a lid on concerns about miscarriages, claim they occur in “about 1 in 4 pregnancies,”23 or 25%, which strikes me as an exaggeration.

Other sources24 reviewing statistical data stress that the risk of miscarriage drops from an overall, average risk rate of 21.3% for the duration of the pregnancy as a whole, to 5% between Weeks 6 and 7, all the way down to 1% between Weeks 14 and 20. One way to assess whether miscarriages are in fact increasing after vaccination could be to compare miscarriage rates during the second and third trimester, when spontaneous losses are at their lowest under normal circumstances.Injecting pregnant women with novel gene therapy technology that can trigger systemic inflammation, cardiac effects and bleeding disorders isn’t a good idea, and violates both the Hippocratic Oath that admonishes doctors to “First, do no harm,” and the precautionary principle that, historically, has governed health care for pregnant women.

A vaccination safety monitoring program led by the CDC called V-Safe currently has 2,000 pregnant patients enrolled, but fewer than 300 had completed their pregnancies by the end of March 2021.25Their babies will be evaluated for side effects until they’re 3 months old.26

These are not significant numbers. It’s also a very short follow-up for the babies. So, while COVID-19 vaccines are hailed as safe for pregnant women and their babies alike, they seem to be basing such claims on extremely limited data.

On the whole, injecting pregnant women with novel gene therapy technology that can trigger systemic inflammation, cardiac effects and bleeding disorders (among other things), isn’t a good idea in my view, and violates both the Hippocratic Oath that admonishes doctors to “First, do no harm,” and the precautionary principle that, historically, has governed health care for pregnant women.

Report All COVID-19 Vaccine Side Effects

If you or someone you love has received a COVID-19 vaccine and are experiencing side effects, be sure to report it, preferably to all three of these locations:27

  1. If you live in the U.S., file a report on VAERS
  2. Report the injury on VaxxTracker.com, which is a nongovernmental adverse event tracker (you can file anonymously if you like)
  3. Report the injury on the Children’s Health Defense website

Notes

1 Annals of Internal Medicine September 2, 2020 DOI: 10.7326/M20-5352

2 The Defender April 6, 2021

3 The Defender April 9, 2021

4 UK Gov Yellow Card Report for Pfizer, March 28, 2021 (PDF)

5 UK Gov Yellow Card Report for AstraZeneca, March 28, 2021 (PDF)

6 Molecular Reproduction and Development 73(10):1239-46

7 MSN April 10, 2021

8 UK Gov Yellow Card Report Unspecified Brand March 28, 2021 (PDF)

9 Hopkins Medicine ITP

10, 14 The Defender April 13, 2021

11 The Defender February 9, 2021

12 New York Times January 12, 2021

13 The Defender January 13, 2021

15 NEJM April 9, 2021 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2104882

16 NEJM April 9, 2021 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2104840

17 Science Norway March 18, 2021

18 NBC News April 13, 2021

19 Medium March 19, 2021

20 Fox 8 Cleveland February 2021

21, 25, 26 Mayo Clinic March 29, 2021

22 BBC April 11, 2021

23 Reuters March 31, 2021

24 Medical News Today January 12, 2020

27 The Defender January 25, 2021

Vaccine Refusal

Should Unvaccinated and Obese be Penalized by Government?

By Dr. Joseph Mercola (via Global Research)

Vaccine refusal will come at a cost — for all of us,” Edward-Isaac Dovere, a staff writer for The Atlantic, proclaims in an April 10, 2021, political commentary.1 Unvaccinated individuals “will have higher health care costs,” he says, and the vaccinated will have to foot the bill, either through taxes or insurance premiums.

This argument could have been made for decades, and can still be made today, for any number of groups. Obese individuals have far higher health care costs than those of normal weight. Insulin resistant people and those with Type 2 diabetes end up costing the health care system enormous sums. Who pays for them?

Overall, healthy individuals — people who generally do what they can to take good care of themselves to prevent chronic conditions — have always paid for those who are less particular about their diets and lifestyle.

The Economic Costs of Vaccination Vs. Vaccine Refusal

Dovere predicts the economic costs of vaccine refusal will begin to feature heavily as we move forward. He quotes Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, who told him,2 “You have a liberty right, and that unfortunately is imposing on everyone else and their liberty right not to have to pay for your stubbornness.” Not surprisingly, Dovere and Inslee both focus on just one side of what needs to be a two- if not four-sided equation.

When making public health policy, you have an obligation to analyze both the benefit and the cost of any given policy. In this case, what might be the cost of vaccine side effects, both in terms of health care costs and lives lost? As of April 1, 2021, VAERS had received 56,869 adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination, including 7,971 serious injuries and 2,342 deaths.3 By April 13, the had updated that death toll to 3,005.4

What might be the cost if the vaccines don’t work and you get sick anyway? As of April 15, 2021, some 5,800 Americans who had been fully vaccinated against COVID-19 had been diagnosed with COVID-19 post-vaccination; 396 (7%) required hospitalization and 74 died.5 These cases are popping up all over the world.

The vaccines are not foolproof. In fact, so-called “breakthrough cases,” meaning cases in which a fully vaccinated individual is diagnosed with COVID-19 are to be expected. I’m not sure why anyone is surprised, seeing how the vaccine makers have acknowledged that the mRNA injections are not designed to actually make you immune to SARS-CoV-2.

You can still contract the virus and spread it to others. What the shots may do is lessen your symptoms if and when you get infected with SARS-CoV-2. So, of course people can still get sick, as they did before. Some will require hospitalization. Some will die — just like they did previously, before the vaccine.

Then there’s the question of whether vaccinated individuals end up being more susceptible to variants of the virus than unvaccinated individuals. Preliminary research6,7,8,9 found that people who had received both doses of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine were eight times more susceptible to contracting the South African variant of SARS-CoV-2, called B.1.351, (5.4% compared to 0.7%).

Unfortunately, the study was too small to glean any information about outcomes, so we don’t know whether they developed milder or more serious illness than unvaccinated people sickened by the same variant.

Either way, if vaccinated people are more susceptible to more dangerous variants (which they claim B.1351 is), why assume that unvaccinated people would incur higher health care costs? Variants are now cropping up all over the place, so maybe vaccinated people will end up being responsible for a greater share of medical expenses. Maybe, if they have milder illness and unvaccinated have more serious illness, the costs might end up about the same for each group.

May There Be Economic Benefits to Vaccine Refusal?

In my view, the notion that COVID-19 vaccines will end this pandemic is an illogical fallacy since these shots do not provide actual immunity. The fizz in Dovere’s argument starts going flat on that basis alone. But there’s much more.

To really determine what’s best for public health, you’d also want to do the benefit and cost analysis of not vaccinating and relying on naturally-acquired immunity in combination with immune-boosting strategies instead, such as improving vitamin D levels across the entire population, for example.

Only when you have made all of those calculations — the benefit and cost of vaccinating, and the benefit and cost of not vaccinating — can you compare the two and begin to make statements about how certain groups of people may incur higher health care costs, and which strategy is likely to save the most lives. As of right now, it’s pure guesswork as to who’s going to cost more in the long run.

For example, I don’t know of any actual data showing that the health of people who are planning to forgo the vaccine place them at increased risk of serious COVID-19. If I were to guess, and this is pure speculation, people who have decided not to get vaccinated may be doing so because a) they know they’re in a low-risk category and/or b) they are health-conscious people who feel confident that they can prevent and/or treat COVID-19 in other cost-effective ways, should they get sick.

There are a lot of data that need to be compiled and analyzed before we can start declaring the COVID-19 vaccination campaign a public health care success, let alone a cost-saving imperative.

Appeal to Illogical Reasoning

Dovere goes on to discuss some of the messaging campaigns employed to lure people out of their vaccine hesitancy:10

“Two appeals seem to work best: First, the vaccines are safe, and they’re more effective than the flu vaccine. Second, you deserve this, and getting vaccinated will help preserve your liberty and encourage the government to lift restrictions.

(That last idea is what Jerry Falwell Jr. focused on in the vaccination selfie he posted11 this week, captioned, ‘Please get vaccinated so our nutcase of a governor will have less reasons for mindless restrictions!’) Inslee hopes that emphasizing those points will persuade more Republican men to get their shots.”

Sometimes it can help to spell out a logical fallacy using different words. (Personally, I believe Falwell was simply trying to be funny, but Dovere and Inslee have apparently seized the “lift restrictions” angle as a social conditioning opportunity, so that’s really what I’m addressing here.)

One rewrite of Falwell’s plea could be: “Please ignore your current health status and potential vaccine risks and just obey so that our governor will have less reason to impose unconstitutional and unscientific limitations on our basic rights and freedoms.”

In my view, a more appropriate way to prevent “mindless restrictions” would be to peacefully disobey and/or take the governor to court, as has been done to California Gov. Gavin Newsom. The Supreme Court has ruled against him no less than six times, finding he abused his power, overstepped his authority and violated the Constitution with his pandemic restrictions on churches.12

Urging someone to take a vaccine to prevent an elected official — who can be unseated — from implementing unscientific and/or unconstitutional restrictions is hardly rational. Let’s not forget that cost-benefit analyses13 have actually been done for lockdowns — perhaps one of the most mindless of restrictions — and the cost is far greater than the benefit.

The cost of the lockdowns in the U.K., in terms of Wellbeing Years (WELLBY), is five times greater than might optimistically be saved, and may in reality be anywhere from 50 times to 87 times greater. The cost for lockdowns in Canada is at least 10 times greater than the benefit.

In Australia, the minimum cost is 6.6 times higher, and in the U.S., the cost is estimated to be at least 5.2 times higher than the benefit of lockdowns. A cost-benefit analysis performed for New Zealand, which looked at the cost of adding just five extra days of “COVID-19 alert level 4” found the cost in Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALY) was 94.9 times higher than the benefit.

Should We Penalize Obesity and Vitamin D Deficiency?

If it’s determined that unvaccinated individuals need to be penalized socially, financially or otherwise, then how can we not also penalize other choices that significantly add to the COVID-19 burden? We know, for example, that vitamin D deficiency significantly raises your risk of COVID-19. In one analysis,14 82.2% of COVID-19 patients were vitamin D deficient.

I published a scientific review15 on the impact of vitamin D in COVID-19 in October 2020, co-written with William Grant, Ph.D., and Dr. Carol Wagner, both of whom are part of the GrassrootsHealth expert vitamin D panel. You can read the paper for free on the journal’s website.

Another major COVID-19 factor is obesity. As reported by CNN16 March 5, 2021, the COVID-19 death rates were more than 10 times higher in countries where more than half the adult population was overweight, compared to countries in which the obesity rate was below 50%. The COVID-19 death rates also rose in tandem with the prevalence of obesity, thereby strengthening the link, according to the report, released by the World Obesity Federation.

At the lowest end is Vietnam, which has an obesity rate of 18.3% and a COVID-19 death rate of 0.04 per 100,000. Toward the high end is the U.S., which has an obesity rate of 67.9% and a COVID-19 death rate of 152.49 per 100,000. (Of course, this report used COVID-19 mortality statistics that have been proven to be wildly exaggerated, as detailed in my interview with Dr. Henele.)

Making an already dire situation worse, recent data17 show 42% of U.S. adults have packed on unwanted pounds, with an average weight gain of 29 pounds, since the start of the pandemic. Only 18% report undesired weight loss, with an average weight loss of 26 pounds.

Government Has Ignored the Value of Healthy Population

According to the World Obesity Federation report, obesity was the second most important risk factor for hospitalization and death from COVID-19 — old age being the primary risk factor — and as noted by Johanna Ralston, CEO of the World Obesity Federation:18

“Old age is unavoidable, but the conditions that contribute to overweight and obesity can be highly avoidable if governments step up and we all join forces to reduce the impact of this disease. The failure to address the root causes of obesity over many decades is clearly responsible for hundreds of thousands of preventable deaths.”

Lead author of the report, Dr. Tim Lobstein, added:19

“Governments have been negligent, and ignored the economic value of a healthy population at their peril. For the last decade they have failed to tackle obesity, despite setting themselves targets at United Nations meetings. COVID-19 is only the latest infection exacerbated by weight issues, but the warning signs were there. We have seen it in the past with MERS, H1N1 and other respiratory diseases.”

Let’s Not Accept Hypocrisy and Double Standards

Even WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus commented on the report saying it “must act as a wake-up call to governments globally,” as “The correlation between obesity and mortality rates from COVID-19 is clear and compelling.”

That said, let’s get back to Dovere’s argument that unvaccinated people are bound to incur higher health care costs due to COVID-19, and therefore there must be some way to penalize those people or force them into compliance.If you cannot fathom penalizing obesity, insulin resistance, diabetes or vitamin D deficiency — conditions known to significantly raise your risk of severe COVID-19 — then how could you possibly consider penalizing an unvaccinated person based on that single parameter alone?

Using that logic, what, then, do we need to do about obese individuals, whose risk of hospitalization due to COVID-19 is anywhere from 40% to 113% greater, and their chances of requiring intensive care 74% higher,20 than that of their non-obese peers? What do we need to do about people who just refuse to get their vitamin D levels up, and end up taking up the lion’s share of hospital beds?

To be clear, I am NOT proposing we penalize people based on their weight, metabolic flexibility or vitamin D status. I do not support that any more than I support penalizing unvaccinated people — and that is the whole point. Most would agree that this would be completely ridiculous.

My point is, if you cannot fathom penalizing obesity, insulin resistance, diabetes or vitamin D deficiency — conditions known to significantly raise your risk of severe COVID-19 — then how could you possibly consider penalizing an unvaccinated person based on that single parameter alone?

The question is especially valid because, again, vaccinated persons can contract and spread SARS-CoV-2 like anyone else. It’s really unclear how vaccinated people are “safer” than unvaccinated ones, when the only person standing to gain from these shots is the person getting it (in the form of milder symptoms when sickened).Are You ‘Pure’ Enough for Your Government?COVID-19 Vaccine Tested on Babies Even as Death Toll Mounts. Greatest Public Health Calamity in Modern History

I think it’s important to realize that the COVID-19 vaccine campaign is less about protecting public health and more about creating the infrastructure and psychological climate required for the implementation of global tyranny, which will likely begin with the introduction of vaccine passports that are very similar to the China social credit system.

As discussed in “Vaccines Are the New ‘Purity Test,’” it can almost be likened to a loyalty test. Or perhaps it could best be described as a totalitarian submission test?

Getting private companies to require these vaccine passports only makes sense if there is a strong vaccine push, and this is one of many clues as to what’s really behind the stated “need” for the whole world to get vaccinated.

We’re not all at risk for COVID-19. For a vast majority of individuals, the vaccines make little or no sense, as for young, healthy individuals, their risks outweigh the benefit. Now they are pushing to vaccinate children, whose risk of getting COVID-19 is well-established as being profoundly minuscule.

They are at exponentially higher risk from many other factors. There are currently fewer than 500 children who are reported to have died from COVID-19, even with the massively manipulated causes of death. Remember, if you had a positive COVID test and died from terminal cancer or a motorcycle accident, you were classified as a COVID-19 death.

As you can see from the graph below, there are 10 higher risks of death than COVID-19 for children. To be logically consistent, the government would need to be equally rigid about addressing all of these causes as aggressively as they are pursuing COVID-19 vaccination for children.

10 leading causes of child and adolescent death in the U.S.

But it’s not about simply getting a vaccine into your arm. Ultimately, it’s about getting you tied into the digital system being launched in the form of vaccine passports. As explained by former Clinton adviser and author Naomi Wolf (whom I will be interviewing shortly) in a March 28, 2021, interview with Fox News’ Steve Hilton:21,22

“‘Vaccine passport’ sounds like a fine thing if you don’t understand what those platforms can do. I’m [the] CEO of a tech company, I understand what these platforms can do. It is not about the vaccine, it’s not about the virus, it’s about your data.

Once this rolls out, you don’t have a choice about being part of the system. What people have to understand is that any other functionality can be loaded onto that platform with no problem at all. It can be merged with your Paypal account, with your digital currency. Microsoft is already talking about merging it with payment plans.

Your network can be sucked up. It geolocates you everywhere you go. You credit history can be included. All of your medical and health history can be included … It is absolutely so much more than a vaccine pass … I cannot stress enough that it has the power to turn off your life, or to turn on your life, to let you engage in society or be marginalized.”

Dangerous Curves Ahead

Wolf also points out the horrific history of IBM, which developed a sophisticated system of punch cards that allowed Nazi Germany to create a two-tier society and ultimately facilitated the rounding up of Jews for extermination. Fast-forward to today, and IBM is now a leader in the vaccine passport business. I wrote about this in “IBM Colluded With Hitler, Now Makes Vaccine Passports.”

In Nazi Germany, the obsession with purity — both in terms of hygiene and race theory — drove the genocide of Jews, the old, the handicapped and the mentally challenged.

In present day, the public narrative has eerily followed Nazi Germany’s playbook for genocide, starting with the scapegoating of healthy people, as the rapid spread of COVID-19 was blamed on asymptomatic individuals not properly masking, social distancing and self-isolating.

That then grew into the nurturing of prejudice against people who refuse to wear masks, and now we’re seeing the narrative building toward persecution of those who do not want to get the vaccine. It will start with discrimination, and already, we’re hearing talk of how only vaccinated people ought to have the right to partake in certain social activities. If that is tolerated, then outright persecution will be the inevitable next step.

This is why I reject and counter commentaries such as that by Dovere. These half-baked, one-sided, persecutory arguments must be challenged at every turn, because they only lead us one way. And unless you’re part of the technocratic elite, you — regardless of how you feel about vaccination right now — do not want to end up there.

The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) recently posted more than 50 video presentations from the pay-for-view Fifth International Public Conference on Vaccination held online October 16 to 18, 2020, and made them available to everyone for free.

The conference’s theme was “Protecting Health and Autonomy in the 21st Century” and it featured physicians, scientists and other health professionals, human rights activists, faith community leaders, constitutional and civil rights attorneys, authors and parents of vaccine injured children talking about vaccine science, policy, law and ethics and infectious diseases, including coronavirus and COVID-19 vaccines.

In December 2020, a U.K. company published false and misleading information about NVIC and its conference, which prompted NVIC to open up the whole conference for free viewing. The conference has everything you need to educate yourself and protect your personal freedoms and liberties with respect to your health.

Don’t miss out on this incredible opportunity. I was a speaker at this empowering conference and urge you to watch these video presentations before they’re censored and taken away by the technocratic elite.

Notes

1, 2, 10 The Atlantic April 10, 2021

3 The Defender April 9, 2021

4 CDC, Selected Adverse Events Reported after COVID-19 Vaccination April 13, 2021

5 The Defender April 15, 2021

6 Epoch Times April 11, 2021

7 Reuters April 10, 2021

8 Washington Examiner April 11, 2021

9 Medical Xpress April 11, 2021

11 Twitter Ruth Graham April 8, 2021

12 Townhall April 13, 2021

13 Preprints.org 2020: 2020100330 DOI: 10.20944/preprints202010.0330.v2

14 The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism October 27, 2020; dgaa733 [Epub ahead of print], Results

15 Nutrients October 31, 2020;12, 3361; doi:10.3390/nu12113361

16, 18, 19, 20 CNN March 5, 2021

17 APA.org Undesired Weight Change Since Start of Pandemic

21 Real Clear Politics March 29, 2021

22 The Epoch Times March 29, 2021

To Jab or Not to Jab

By Nowick Gray (via Global Research)

The topic of COVID-19 vaccination is perhaps the most controversial issue at large today. The pro-vax message rules the media airwaves, guidance from government and health authorities, social media gatekeeping, and many company policies. Conversely, to question that agenda, or even to “hesitate” for the sake of caution, risks personal abuse and outright censorship, citing a threat to public safety.

Therein lies the test for everyone: to assess the facts, the balance of risks and benefits, for the healthiest choice.

Disclaimer: I’m an editor, not a doctor. Therefore what I offer here is not medical advice, but an effort to critique a range of information for the sake of clarity.

Information

First, a note about sources of information. Official pronouncements and mainstream media imply a consensus favoring the vaccine. For example, ImmunizeBC:

“While it’s difficult to definitively say whether or not there are long-term side-effects, the medical and scientific community is confident in the long-term safety of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.”

In fact many medical and scientific experts do not share such confidence, but their dissenting view is not allowed on centralized and censored media and social media platforms. Fortunately we still have free access to a broader range of information and evidence, from peer-reviewed journals and official sources, that is less publicized. Three sites offering comprehensive research are Vaccine Choice Canada.ca, Childrens Health Defense.org, and Americas Frontline Doctors.org.

GlobalResearch.ca and Off-Guardian.org also cover this and other issues with daily updates, analysis and commentary.

From my own research I will summarize what appear to be the main risks and benefits of both choices before us: to jab or not to jab. The word “vaccine” itself is misleading, since the COVID-19 mRNA injection is not a vaccine in the traditional sense, but an experimental synthetic gene therapy.

The main purported benefit of the injection is protection from COVID-19.

ImmunizeBC states: “In the clinical trials, 95% of people had full protection after getting the vaccine.”

But what does that mean? For context, survival rates even after a COVID-19 infection, without vaccination, range from 99.997% (under age 20) to 94.6% (over 70) (CDC).

To opt for the jab means at least trying to beat those odds. Can it deliver?

The CDC states in its guidance for fully vaccinated people that there is a “residual risk of fully vaccinated people becoming ill with COVID-19 or transmitting SARS-CoV-2 to others.” Human rights lawyer P. Jerome reports,

“The Centers for Disease Control (CDC), the World Health Organization (WHO), and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) have each publicly stated that the vaccines have NOT been shown to prevent infection or transmission… nor do they prevent symptoms of Covid-19 from appearing.”

The only demonstrated benefit is a possible reduction in one or more symptoms.

report by America’s Frontline Doctors finds,

“The only group that really may benefit is the advanced elderly, and there is very limited data on efficacy and almost none on safety in this group.” The British Medical Journal reports: “None of the trials currently under way are designed to detect a reduction in any serious outcome such as hospital admissions, use of intensive care, or deaths. Nor are the vaccines being studied to determine whether they can interrupt transmission of the virus.”

BC Health and Island Health still tout the unproven benefit of reduced transmission:

“This not only protects you, but also provides greater protection to everyone around you.”

With greater transparency, Salt Spring Island’s Lady Minto Hospital expresses the cautionary disclaimer that the shot offers “no guarantee of full protection against transmission.”

Without or without vaccines, everyone is still required to continue to mask, distance, and isolate, for fear of transmission. Public officials continue to ignore contrary scientific findings, and previous official statements of their own, that asymptomatic, healthy people are not carriers or transmitters of COVID-19.

Source: WHO, @DrEli David, TwitterCOVID Vaccine Nonsense

Even though the WHO has reversed their definition of “herd immunity” to depend on the role of vaccines, the Covid-19 therapy fails to achieve that benefit. On the one hand, the WHO states:

“‘To safely achieve herd immunity against COVID-19, a substantial proportion of a population would need to be vaccinated, lowering the overall amount of virus able to spread in the whole population.’

This statement contradicts the WHO’s prior admission that ‘We do not know whether the vaccines will prevent infection and protect against onward transmission’” (Jerome).

Risks

Health Canada gave “emergency” approval to the experimental vaccine with less than six months of trial data. New vaccines typically take 15–20 years of research and trials before going to market. This human experiment, lacking the normal animal studies, retains its “trial” status into 2022-23. The agency admits,

“As with all vaccines, there’s a chance that there will be a serious side effect, but these are rare… less than one time in a million.”

ImmunizeBC, however, lists a one in 100,000 chance of a severe allergic reaction (“anaphylaxis”) from all vaccines; the rate with mRNA Covid vaccines is 25 times higher. 

With the Moderna vaccine  there have been over 300 reported anaphylactic shock events and 450 permanent disabilities after vaccination (GlobalResearch).

The FDA/CDC reporting system, VAERS, reports 3000 vaccine-associated deaths, among 60,000 adverse events including 8000 serious injuries. According to CDC, these figures are vastly underreported.

Remember the numerous media stories of hospitals “overwhelmed” by Covid cases? With massive vaccinations underway, former New York Times reporter Alex Berenson says,

“I have now heard from multiple people that VAERS (the vaccine side effect reporting system) is – to be polite – overwhelmed, behind on reports, and hardly functioning.”

Are the benefits worth those risks? In one isolated Kentucky monastery, two nuns died of Covid-19 after receiving the vaccines, despite zero Covid cases in the monastery during the previous ten months. The CDC has admitted that nearly 6000 people “have still come down with COVID-19 after being fully vaccinated, and 74 people fully vaccinated against COVID-19 have allegedly died from COVID-19.” That doesn’t sound like the “full protection” advertised.

Dr. Charles Hoffe reports, in an open letter to BC Health Officer Dr. Bonnie Henry,

“In our small community of Lytton, BC, we have one person dead, and three people who look as though they will be permanently disabled, following their first dose of the Moderna vaccine… These people were not sick people, being treated for some devastating disease. These were previously healthy people, who were offered an experimental therapy, with unknown long-term side-effects, to protect them against an illness that has the same mortality rate as the flu. Sadly, their lives have now been ruined.”

Reports of post-vax deaths and injuries continue to pour in from around the world, leading to a pause or halt of the vaccine rollout in dozens of countries. Adverse effects include transverse myelitis, Bell’s Palsy, possibly permanent infertility, and blood clots.

In February VAERS showed a third of the Covid vaccine deaths occurred within forty-eight hours of the shot. One possible cause—amplified autoimmunity, also known as pathogenic priming or antibody dependent or immune enhancement—could have devastating long-term as well as short-term consequences.

The risk is potentially much higher upon later exposure. The AFD report cautions,

“Initially all seems well. The person seems to have a great immune response but then [it] becomes deadly when the person is exposed to the virus in the wild.”

While animal trials were skipped for the current “emergency” rollout, previous coronavirus vaccine studies that included trials on cats and ferrets produced widespread deaths. Dr. Mike Yeadon, Pfizer’s former VP, says that two to three years down the road, we may see massive genocide-like deaths from mRNA-type injections.

Source: vaccineinjury.info

It must be emphasized, this so-called Covid vaccine is more accurately described as an experimental gene therapy. Moderna CEO Tal Zaks in 2017laid out the concept of the mRNA vaccine: “introduce a line of code or change a line of code… We are actually hacking the software of life.

”The Moderna website openly boasts of their “technology platform that functions very much like an operating system on a computer…. It is designed so that it can plug and play interchangeably with different programs. In our case, the “program” or “app” is our mRNA drug – the unique mRNA sequence that codes for a protein.”

As these “trials” are ongoing, there is insufficient data on the mid-term or long-term adverse effects, and on combination effects with other medications and health conditions. When you sign up to receive your vaccine, are you giving your fully informed consent to be part of an experimental gene therapy trial… and, quite literally, to become reprogrammed as a genetically modified organism (GMO)—and as such, a pre-patented commodity?

Bottom Line: Effective & Safe, or Unnecessary & Risky?

What’s the bottom line on your own benefit–risk analysis?

In areas with little to no actual impact of COVID-19, it is prudent to ask what you are gaining by an experimental injection that promises no immunity nor prevents transmission. Lytton’s Dr. Hoffe concludes, “In stark contrast to the deleterious effects of this vaccine in our community, we have not had to give any medical care whatsoever, to anyone with Covid-19. So in our limited experience, this vaccine is quite clearly more dangerous than Covid-19.”

Children’s Health Defense breaks down the risks and benefits, based on the reported injury rate of 1 in every 40 jabs. In short, the 150 shots necessary to avert one mild case of COVID will cause serious injury to at least three people. Trials indicate the rate is likely to increase dramatically after the second shot.

The American Frontline Doctors’ white paper concludes with recommendations by age group, discouraging vaccination as higher risk for all but those aged 70+ with comorbidities, compared to prophylactic treatment with established, safe and proven medications such as HCQ, Ivermectin, zinc and Vitamin D.

Source: Salaf Gilani, Off-Guardian.org

To carefully assess risks and benefits, one must consider information beyond what is filtered to us from a single perspective or authority steering us to a predetermined solution.

Leo: Those who don’t want vaccine “may change their mind” if denied travel & events

by Ben Scallan (via GRIPT)

Tánaiste Leo Varadkar has said that though he expects some people will refuse the covid-19 vaccine, he believes that those individuals may change their mind if the government restricts their ability to travel or attend events.

Speaking on the Dermot & Dave show on Today FM, the Tánaiste said he was worried that some members of the population may have an “apathy” or hesitancy about taking the jab.

“We expect there may be 10 to 15% of people who will refuse the vaccine and just don’t want it, although, they may change their minds if the ability to travel and attend mass events is linked to it,” Varadkar said.

“One thing I’m a little more worried about than hesitancy is vaccine apathy.

“They found in some countries, like Israel was one, that there’s a lot of people who aren’t afraid of getting the vaccine – they just don’t really get around to it.And when the numbers go down low and people start going back to their normal lives and there aren’t many deaths, it kind of falls down the priority and people say, “oh I’ll get a vaccine, but I’ll get it later.”

“What we really need for this to work fully is to get about 80% of people vaccinated,” he added.

“That’s where you start to hit herd immunity, where the virus just doesn’t have anywhere to go.”

Some have recently expressed concern that public confidence in the AstraZeneca and Johnson and Johnson vaccines may be slipping as several world governments stall or postpone their use over concerns of rare blood clots.

Pentagon Scientists Reveal a Microchip that Senses COVID-19 in Your Body before You Show Symptoms and a Filter that Extracts the Virus from Blood

  • Scientists at the Pentagon’s secretive unit are researching viruses and developing pandemic cures
  • They work at Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and other Pentagon laboratories
  • DARPA’s teams saw COVID-19 infected 1,271 onboard USS Theodore Roosevelt as the virus spread unchecked
  • In response they have developed a sensor which can detect minute changes in the body caused by asymptomatic infection in a bid to prevent a COVID outbreak
  • The gel is inserted below skin and would trigger a sensor if COVID infects the body
  • DARPA have also created a filter which can remove COVID virus from the blood when attached to dialysis
  • They are working on a vaccine that would work against all coronaviruses, even ones not yet identified
  • The team also successfully manufactured antibodies against Spanish Flu

By Harriet Alexander (via Daily Mail)

Pentagon scientists working inside a secretive unit set up at the height of the Cold War have created a hydrogel sensor to be inserted under the skin, which has the ability to detect infections such as COVID-19, and a revolutionary filter that can remove the virus from the blood when attached to a dialysis machine. 

The team at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) have been working for years on preventing and ending pandemics.

They assess the issues and come up with ingenious solutions, which at times appear more from a science fiction novel than a working laboratory.

One of their recent inventions, they told 60 Minutes on Sunday night, was a sensor which detects any infection in an individual before it can become an outbreak.  

Retired Colonel Matt Hepburn, an army infectious disease physician leading DARPA’s response to the pandemic, showed the 60 Minutes team a tissue-like gel, engineered to continuously test your blood.

‘You put it underneath your skin and what that tells you is that there are chemical reactions going on inside the body, and that signal means you are going to have symptoms tomorrow,’ he explained. 

He said they were inspired by the struggle to stem the virus’ spread onboard the USS Theodore Roosevelt, where 1,271 crew members tested positive for the coronavirus.

‘It’s like a “check engine” light,’ said Hepburn.

‘Sailors would get the signal, then self-administer a blood draw and test themselves on site. 

‘We can have that information in three to five minutes.

‘As you truncate that time, as you diagnose and treat, what you do is you stop the infection in its tracks.’

Troops are likely to be highly skeptical of the new invention.

In February, The New York Times reported that a third of troops have refused to take the vaccine, sighting concerns that the vaccine contains a microchip devised to monitor recipients, that it will permanently disable the body’s immune system or that it is some form of government control.

Another invention of Hepburn’s team is a filter, which is placed on a dialysis machine and removes the virus from the blood. 

The experimental four-day treatment was given to “Patient 16”, a military spouse, who was in the ICU with organ failure and septic shock.

‘You pass it through, and it takes the virus out, and puts the blood back in,’ said Hepburn.

Within days, Patient 16 made a full recovery. 

The FDA has authorized the filter for emergency use, and it has been used to treat nearly 300 critically ill patients.

Another Pentagon agency, the Joint Pathology Institute, studies tissue samples from soldiers and sailors infected with pathogens all over the world.

They have in their laboratories tissue from patients infected with the Spanish Flu 100 years ago, and in 2005 a team from Mount Sinai hospital and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) managed to recreate the virus.

They also found survivors, and have manufactured antibodies to the lethal virus. 

A member of the team, Dr James Crowe, has found a way to find antibodies in a vial of blood in record time – reducing the time frame from the usual six to 24 months down to 78 days.

The technology he developed was used to help make antibodies against COVID-19. 

They are currently working on ways to speed up the actual growing of antibodies – a process that at present takes three weeks for 7,500 doses.

‘We would start from a blood sample from a survivor, and be done with all of this and be giving you an injection of the cure within the 60 days,’ he said. 

Another scientist, Dr Kayvon Modjarrad, is currently trying to create a vaccine against all coronaviruses.

‘This is not science fiction, this is science fact,’ he told the show. 

‘We have the tools, we have the technology, to do this all right now.’

He said the aim was to be able to inoculate people against deadly viruses that have not even been identified.  

‘Killer viruses that we haven’t seen or even imagined, we’ll be protected against,’ he said.

  • Since publication this article has been amended to remove references to the hydrogel sensor as a ‘microchip’, and to clarify that while the technology is able to detect infection prior to symptoms appearing, it is not able to identify the cause of the infection.

Big Pharma Conglomerate with a Criminal Record: Pfizer “Takes Over” the EU Vaccine Market. 1.8 Billion Doses

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky (via Global Research)

“Hundreds of millions of people have taken an injection that allows a bio-reactive “gene-therapy” molecule to be injected into their bodies because of fear, ignorance, and a refusal to consider that the people who are promoting this … have ulterior motives.” (Edward Curtin, April 2021)

Introduction

On April 14, 2021, the President of the European Commission confirmed that Brussels is negotiating  a contract with Pfizer for the production of 1.8 billion mRNA vaccine doses. 

This astronomical figure represents 23 percent of the World’s population. It is exactly four times the population of the 27 member states of the European Union (448 Million, 2020 data). 

This is the largest vaccine project in World history which is accompanied by the imposition of a diabolical “Timeline” on the people of the European Union consisting of recurrent mRNA inoculations over “the next two years and beyond”.

The entire process will be coupled with a relentless fear campaign and the embedded ID vaccine passport, approved by the European Parliament barely a few weeks prior to the EU’s announcement.

The EU Digital Vaccine Passport to be implemented by Pfizer BioNTech is part of  theinfamous ID2020 project sponsored by Bill Gates’ Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI) “which uses generalized vaccination as a platform for digital identity“.

If this EU contract with Pfizer extending into 2023 were to be  carried out as planned, every single person in the European Union would be vaccinated four times over a two year period (2021-2023).

And bear in mind, at the time of writing, Pfizer’s mRNA (as well as those of its competitors including Astrazeneka, Moderna and J & J) are legally categorized (in the US) as “unapproved” and “experimental products”. They are illegal drugs.

In the US, the FDA in its ambiguous statement  provided a so-called Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, namely “to permit the emergency use of the unapproved product, … for active immunization…” (see below)

I have checked this statement with a prominent lawyer. It is blatantly illegal to market an “unapproved product” (irrespective of government permissions pertaining thereto).

A Multi-billion Dollar Bonanza for Pfizer BioNTech

Coinciding with the EU April 14, 2021 historic decision, Pfizer has announced that the price of its vaccine has been hiked up to $23 a dose.

Big Money for Big Pharma. The 1.8 billion doses vaccine project will cost 41 billion dollars, largely to be financed by the creditors of EU member states. The vaccine project will thereby contribute to the spiralling public debt crisis affecting most European countries, which was triggered by the closure of economic activity and the lockdowns in the course of last 13 months.

Meanwhile, Pfizer has extended its global market largely to the detriment of its competitors.

  • A contract to supply the US with up to 600 million doses,
  • Brazil, approximately 100 million,
  • South Africa 20 million doses,
  • Philippines, 40 million,
  • etc.

The Medium Term: 2021-2023 and “Beyond”. No Return to the “New Normal” once Vaccinated

What is envisaged in the EU is a so-called “medium term” plan extending into 2022/23. Does this “medium term” timeline imply a fourth and a fifth wave?

The “medium term” project will be carried out in liaison with the “Great Reset” proposed by the World Economic Forum. It will most probably be accompanied by lockdown and other restrictive measures. No foreseeable return to the “New Normal” is contemplated:

But let me [President of EU Commission Ursula von der Leyen] also focus on the medium term. ... It is clear that to defeat the virus decisively, we will need to be prepared for the following: … we might need booster jabs to reinforce and prolong immunity; … we will need to develop vaccines that are adapted to new variants; and we will need them early and in sufficient quantities. Having this in mind we need to focus on technologies that have proven their worth. mRNA vaccines are a clear case in point.

Based on all this, we are now entering into a negotiation with BioNTech-Pfizer for a third contract. This contract will foresee the delivery of 1.8 billion doses of vaccine over the period of 2021 to 2023. And it will entail that not only the production of the vaccines, but also all essential components, will be based in the EU.

The negotiations we are launching today [April 14, 2021]– and hope to conclude very rapidly – are a further important step in Europe’s response to the pandemic.

I want to thank BioNTech-Pfizer. It has proven to be a reliable partner. It has delivered on its commitments, and it is responsive to our needs. This is to the immediate benefit of EU citizens. ( President of EU Commission)

Reliable Partner? Pfizer’s Criminal Record

There is another dimension, a “can of worms” which the EU does not want to open. The largest vaccine project of an “unapproved drug” is to be implemented by a Big Pharma company which has a longstanding record of bribing medical doctors and public health officials.

Pfizer has been a “habitual offender,” persistently engaging in illegal and corrupt marketing practices, bribing physicians and suppressing adverse trial results. Since 2002 the company and its subsidiaries have been assessed $3 billion in criminal convictions, civil penalties and jury awards. (Dr Robert G. Evans, National Institutes of Medicine)

Moreover, Pfizer has a criminal record in the US, indicted by the US Department of Justice in 2009 for “fraudulent marketing”. 

“Pfizer, the world’s largest drugs company, has been hit with the biggest criminal fine in US history as part of a $2.3bn settlement with federal prosecutors for mispromoting medicines and for paying kickbacks to compliant doctors.”(Guardian)

In a historic US Department of Justice decision in September 2009, Pfizer Inc. pleaded guilty to criminal charges. It was “The Largest Health Care Fraud Settlement” in the History of the U.S. Department of Justice.

To view the C-Span Video Click Screen below 

How on Earth can you trust a Big Pharma vaccine conglomerate which pleaded guilty to criminal charges by the US Department of Justice (DoJ) including “fraudulent marketing” and “felony violation of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act”? 

In this 2009 DOJ Judgment, Pfizer was so to speak “Put on Probation” for a four year period. Pfizer was ordered to enter into “a corporate integrity agreement” with the Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), acting as a de facto “Parole Officer”. “That agreement provided for “procedures and reviews to … avoid and promptly detect” (future) misconduct on the part of Pfizer, Inc.

The Killer “Vaccine”

Corporate Integrity? Pfizer BioNTech’s “Fraudulent Marketing” behaviour prevails with regard to the projected 1.8 billion doses of its  “unapproved” “experimental” mRNA COVID‑19  Tozinameran “vaccine”, sold under the brand name Comirnaty.

What we are dealing with is the “fraudulent marketing” of what is best described as a killer “vaccine”.

But in fact, the mRNA “vaccine” which modifies the human genome “is NOT” a vaccine. It is based on gene therapy combined with an embedded ID vaccine passport.

Deaths and Injuries Resulting From the MRNA “Experimental Vaccine”

Is the European Commission intent on edging out Astrazeneka and J & J (on behalf of Pfizer??). Official statements suggest that Pfizer BioNTech will eventually be taking over the entire EU vaccine market.

In early March 2o21, 18 European countries including France, Italy, Germany and Spain decided to suspend the AstraZeneka mRNA vaccine. Astrazeneka was the target of national EU governments, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) as well as the EU Commission.

The EU has now confirmed that it will not renew its contracts with J and J and AstraZeneka despite the fact (according to EU and UK data) that the deaths and injuries resulting from the Pfizer BioNTech “vaccine” are much higher than those of AstraZeneka.

Official EU data pertaining to vaccine deaths and injuries  for Pfizer, Moderna and AstraZeneca point to: 3,964 Dead and 162,610 Injuries  (December 27, 2020 – March 13, 2021) 

The Breakdown (Astrazeneka, Pfizer, Moderna)

Total reactions for the experimental vaccine AZD1222(CHADOX1 NCOV-19) from Oxford/AstraZeneca451 deaths and 54,571 injuries to 13/03/2021

Total reactions for the experimental mRNA vaccine Tozinameran (code BNT162b2Comirnaty) from BioNTechPfizer: 2,540deaths and 102,100 injuries to 13/03/2021

Total reactions for the experimental mRNA vaccine mRNA-1273 (CX-024414) from Moderna: 973 deaths and 5,939 injuries to 13/03/2021

UK data also confirms that the so-called side effects of the mRNA are significantly higher for the Pfizer BioNTech “vaccine” (in comparison with AstraZeneka).

So why are Pfizer’s competitors, namely Astrazeneka and J & J being shoved out of the EU market?

There is War within Big Pharma. 

Concluding Remarks

Amply documented, the vaccine is not required.  There is no pandemic. 

And why would the EU Commission representing 450 million people in 27 countries commit itself to purchasing 1.8 billion doses of Pfizer’s mRNA Tozinameran”vaccine” which at the very outset is known to have resulted in countless deaths and injuries including autoimmune reactions. blood clotting abnormalities, stroke and internal bleeding?

Who is behind this despicable project??

See the Rebuttal of Doctors for Covid Ethics addressed to the European Medicines Agency (EMA).

Say NO to the Killer Virus. The EU sponsored Pfizer “vaccine” must be the object of  a coordinated grassroots movement in all 27 member states of the European Union, as well as  Worldwide.

The scientific evidence amply confirms that a Covid-19 vaccine is NOT required. Quite the opposite.

The estimates of so-called covid-19 positive cases are based on the RT-PCR test which according to the WHO’s latest statement(January 20, 2021) is totally unreliable and which has served to hike up the numbers, while also justifying the need for a mRNA vaccine, which in effect is not a vaccine.

See:The WHO Confirms that the Covid-19 PCR Test is Flawed: Estimates of “Positive Cases” are Meaningless. The Lockdown Has No Scientific Basis

While the media will highlight the “Killer virus”, with scanty and contradictory “evidence”, what is at stake is best described as “a killer vaccine”.

Misleading Covid Death Estimates

Moreover, the estimates of Covid deaths used to justify the need for a vaccine are fake. In the US, certifiers have been instructed to indicate the “underlying cause of death” as Covid-19 “more often than not”.

See Covid-19 and the Falsification of Death Certificates: The CDC’s “More Often Than Not” Clause

REPORT: Pfizer Vaccine Confirmed To Cause Neurodegenerative Diseases

A new report has determined the Pfizer vaccine can cause Alzheimer’s and other conditions

by NATHANIEL LINDERMAN (via National File)

In a shocking new report on the COVID-19 vaccines, it has been discovered that the Pfizer coronavirus vaccine has long term health effects not previously disclosed, including “ALS, Alzheimer’s, and other neurological degenerative diseases.”

“The current RNA based SARSCoV-2 vaccines were approved in the US using an emergency order without extensive long term safety testing,” the report declares. “In this paper the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine was evaluated for the potential to induce prion-based disease in vaccine recipients.” Prion-based diseases are, according to the CDC, a form of neurodegenerative diseases, meaning that the Pfizer vaccine is likely to cause long term damage and negative health effects with regards to the brain.

This is especially concerning since the Pfizer vaccine is an mRNA vaccine, an untested type of vaccine which creates new proteins and can actually integrate into the human genome, according to a report from the National Library of Medicine. In other words, degenerative brain conditions may appear at any time in your life after receiving the vaccine.

“The RNA sequence of the vaccine as well as the spike protein target interaction were analyzed for the potential to convert intracellular RNA binding proteins TAR DNA binding protein (TDP-43) and Fused in Sarcoma (FUS) into their pathologic prion conformations,” explains the report. TDP-43 is a protein known to cause dementia, ALS and even Alzheimer’s, according to Alzpedia. Similarly, the FUS protein is known to cause ALS and Hereditary Essential Tremors, according to the Human Genome Database.

The experiment done for the report was to determine whether or not these two harmful proteins embed themselves into our DNA, as an mRNA vaccine is expected to do. The report determined that “the vaccine RNA has specific sequences that may induce TDP-43 and FUS to fold into their pathologic prion confirmations,” meaning that both proteins have the potential to embed themselves into our DNA and cause harmful neurological diseases.

The report’s abstract summary concludes that “The enclosed finding as well as additional potential risks leads the author to believe that regulatory approval of the RNA based vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 was premature and that the vaccine may cause much more harm than benefit.” The report itself ends with this warning: “The vaccine could be a bioweapon and even more dangerous than the original infection.”

National File actually reached out to the CDC to inquire as to why the Pfizer vaccine is still being distributed despite these credible allegations. No response was received prior to publication.

Antibiotics Before Age 1 Tied to Celiac Disease Risk

Results from Scandinavian study differ from TEDDY trial

by Diana Swift (via MEDPAGE TODAY)

Exposure to systemic antibiotics in the first year of life was modestly associated with later diagnosis of celiac disease, a national study of Danish and Norwegian children found.

In the observational study of two independent cohorts numbering more than 1.7 million children, a dispensed systemic antibiotic in the first year of life consistently correlated with diagnosed celiac disease, with a pooled odds ratio (OR) of 1.26 (95% CI 1.16-1.36), according to Stine Dydensborg Sander, MD, PhD, of Hans Christian Andersen Children’s Hospital in Odense, Denmark, and colleagues.

And a dose-dependent relationship emerged as the number of antibiotic prescriptions increased (OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.05-1.11), they reported in Gastroenterology.

“These findings indicate that childhood exposure to systemic antibiotics may be a risk factor for celiac disease,” the authors stated.

Other studies have found no such association, including the 2017 TEDDY study, a multinational cohort of children at high genetic risk of type 1 diabetes and celiac disease. TEDDY “found no association between parentally reported antibiotic exposure and persistently positive celiac disease,” at age 4 years, Sander and colleagues noted.

“In contrast to population-based cohort studies that do not include cases of undiagnosed children, screening for celiac disease autoimmunity as the outcome captured all the children with celiac disease and some who never will develop celiac disease. Our findings may be affected if factors related to being diagnosed as opposed to remaining undiagnosed are related to the use of antibiotic,” they stated.

Neither a specific type of antibiotic nor age at exposure were prominent factors in celiac disease, suggesting there is no particularly vulnerable age and no differing effect among antibiotic classes. The association was at least as strong for exposure from 0 to 24 months as for 0 to 12 months, Sander’s group reported.

The study cohorts consisted of children born in Denmark from 1995 to 2012 (the Danish National Birth Cohort) and followed until May 2015, and children born in Norway from 2004 to 2012 (the Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort Study) and followed until December 2013. The mothers answered questionnaires, sometimes aided by computer-assisted telephone interviews, on infectious diseases and feeding.

The final analysis in the Danish cohort included 1,168,656 children with a median age at end of follow-up of 11.6 years. A diagnosis of celiac disease was registered for 1,427 of these children (0.12%). Systemic antibiotics in the first year of life were dispensed to 451,196 participants without celiac disease (38.7%) and to 622 with celiac disease (43.6%).

The final Norwegian cohort consisted of 537,457 children, with a median age at end of follow-up of 5.4 years. Celiac disease was diagnosed in 1,919 (0.36%) of participants. Systemic antibiotics in the first year of life were dispensed to 98,538 without celiac disease (18.4%) and to 390 with celiac disease (20.3%).

Data from two large subgroups within the final cohort looked at the potentially confounding impact of adjustment for the number of children’s maternally reported infections as well as the duration of breastfeeding, examined 6 and 18 months postpartum for 55,082 Danish children (100 with celiac disease) and 53,257 Norwegian children (464 with celiac disease). Neither variable had a measurable impact, nor did prescriptions for topical antifungal drugs, although these were more common in those registered for systemic antibiotics.

The authors pointed out that the intestinal microbiota is considered a player in pathogenesis of celiac disease and one strongly influenced by systemic antibiotics, especially in early life. Early-life infections have been proposed as promoters of celiac disease development and important potential confounders. Some studies have reported associations with types of infection, as well as the number of hospital admissions for infectious diseases, medically attended infectious diseases, and parentally reported infectious diseases.

Jocelyn A. Silvester, MD, of Boston Children’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, commented that understanding the potential ties between antibiotics and celiac disease poses a challenge.

“This is a very difficult question to answer, even though this is one of the largest datasets we have to look at,” said Silvester, who was not involved in the study.

She added that it is difficult to tease out the true relationship because of potential confounding factors, noting that not all antibiotic types have the same effect on the microbiota, and not all the infections treated with antibiotics were bacterial but may have included viral and fungal.

Underlying infection rather than antibiotics may have been driving the celiac risk. “But having large well-done studies that try to answer difficult questions is always a step in the right direction,” Silvester said.

Study limitations included the difficulty of disentangling the effect of infections and antibiotics in an observational study lacking details of the infections and indications for antibiotic use.

The authors concluded that the findings could have resulted from reverse causality, in which the symptoms of celiac disease can mimic infection, exaggerate infectious symptoms, or raise the risk of infectious diseases, thereby increasing the propensity for prescriptions for antibiotics.

Nation Puts a Stop to Bill Gates-Backed Plan to Dim the Sun By Spraying Particles into Sky

By Matt Agorist (via The Free Thought Project)

As TFTP reported last year, it was reported that the top climate change scientist for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration received $4 million in funding from Congress along with permission to study two highly controversial geoengineering methods in an attempt to cool the Earth. According to Science Magazine, David Fahey, director of the Chemical Sciences Division of NOAA’s Earth System Research Laboratory, told his staff last week that the federal government is ready to examine the science behind “geoengineering”—or what he dubbed a “Plan B” for climate change.

This plan is in congruence with the plan backed by billionaire Bill Gates in which plans have been made to spray dust into the atmosphere to dim the sun that would potentially reflect sunlight out of Earth’s atmosphere, triggering a global cooling effect.

The Stratospheric Controlled Perturbation Experiment (SCoPEx), launched by Harvard University scientists, aims to examine this solution by spraying non-toxic calcium carbonate (CaCO3) dust into the atmosphere — a sun-reflecting aerosol that may offset the effects of global warming.

What could possibly go wrong?

Before we go any further, it is important to point out to new readers that we are not a satire site. We are not a conspiracy theory site. The information you are about to read is factually accurate and 100% real despite the ostensible ‘skeptics’ who claim otherwise.

After years of planning, it was announced earlier this year that SCoPEx is about to go live. However, some countries — namely the ones it was going to start in — are having second thoughts.

According to a report out of Forbes Magazine in January, SCoPEx was going to take a small step in its early research this June near the town of Kiruna, Sweden, where the Swedish Space Corporation (SSC) has agreed to help launch a balloon carrying scientific equipment 12 miles (20 km) high.

However, that may not take place now as the SSC has decided it may be a bad idea. According to a statement from the SSC, they have decided not to move forward with dimming the sun.

Climate change and its consequences is one of the greatest challenges we face on our planet. Research within this field is therefore important, and many of the experiments that are being conducted onboard balloons and rockets from Esrange Space Center contribute to such research.

To that end, the purpose of the SCoPEx project as such fits well into SSC services and mission to help earth benefit from Space.

However, the scientific community is divided regarding geoengineering, including any related technology tests such as the planned technical balloon test flight from Esrange this summer.

SSC has had dialogues this spring with both leading experts on geo-engineering and with other stakeholders, as well as with the SCoPEx Advisory Board. As a result of these dialogues and in agreement with Harvard, SSC has decided not to conduct the technical test flight planned for this summer.

Whether or not research on geoengineering should be conducted is an important discussion that should continue within the scientific community, as well as with other stakeholders and the general public. SSC welcomes such a broad societal discussion on this important matter.

As TFT has reported, Harvard announced in July of 2019 that it has created an external advisory panel to examine the potential ethical, environmental and geopolitical impacts of this geoengineering project, which has been developed by the university’s researchers.

The experiment will spray calcium carbonate particles high above the earth to mimic the effects of volcanic ash blocking out the sun to produce a cooling effect. This appears to be the same as NOAA’s “Plan B.”

Naturally, there are many critics of geoengineering and it is concerning to many people, including environmental groups, who say such efforts are a dangerous distraction from addressing the only permanent solution to climate change: reducing greenhouse-gas emissions.

Scientist cite several volcanic eruptions in the past which led to global cooling, but that had devastating effects on other parts of the world.

David Keith, a professor of applied physics and public policy at Harvard University, recognizes the “very many real concerns” of geoengineering, according to Forbes. To offset these risks he has proposed the creation of a “risk pool” to collect funds for the risks associated with playing mother nature — up to and including cooling an area so much that inhabitants are unable to grow food.

As Forbes reports:

Again, these temperature decreases bring with them serious risks. Freezing temperatures in 1815 led to failed crops in near-famine conditions. British scientists have cited stratospheric aerosols from volcanic eruptions in Alaska and Mexico as the potential cause of drought in Africa’s Sahel region. Major disruption of the global climate could bring unintended consequences, negatively impacting highly populated regions and engineering another refugee crisis.

David Keith has proposed the creation of a “risk pool” to compensate smaller nations for collateral damage caused by such tests, but such a payout might be little comfort to those displaced by unlivable conditions.

Indeed. No amount of money would compensate for a family losing all of their land to freezing temperatures and being forced to relocate to another country. But these are some of the risks involved in weather modification.

This is likely one of the reasons Sweden decided to pull out of the tests.

To be clear, no one here is claiming to be an expert on climate change or the effects of geoengineering. But one thing is clear and it’s the fact that there is still much to be debated and learned before humans deliberately begin altering Earth’s climate. Aside from doing nothing to curb carbon emissions, if we are so quick to jump on this method, it could set off a chain reaction that could prove to be catastrophic.

Digital Trails: How the FBI Identifies, Tracks and Rounds Up Dissidents

By The Free Thought Project (via The Free Thought Project)

(The Rutherford Institute)

“Americans deserve the freedom to choose a life without surveillance and the government regulation that would make that possible. While we continue to believe the sentiment, we fear it may soon be obsolete or irrelevant. We deserve that freedom, but the window to achieve it narrows a little more each day. If we don’t act now, with great urgency, it may very well close for good.”—Charlie Warzel and Stuart A. Thompson, New York Times

Databit by databit, we are building our own electronic concentration camps.

With every new smart piece of smart technology we acquire, every new app we download, every new photo or post we share online, we are making it that much easier for the government and its corporate partners to identify, track and eventually round us up.

Saint or sinner, it doesn’t matter because we’re all being swept up into a massive digital data dragnet that does not distinguish between those who are innocent of wrongdoing, suspects, or criminals.

This is what it means to live in a suspect society.

The government’s efforts to round up those who took part in the Capitol riots shows exactly how vulnerable we all are to the menace of a surveillance state that aspires to a God-like awareness of our lives.

Relying on selfies, social media posts, location data, geotagged photos, facial recognition, surveillance cameras and crowdsourcing, government agents are compiling a massive data trove on anyone and everyone who may have been anywhere in the vicinity of the Capitol on January 6, 2021.

The amount of digital information is staggering: 15,000 hours of surveillance and body-worn camera footage; 1,600 electronic devices; 270,000 digital media tips; at least 140,000 photos and videos; and about 100,000 location pings for thousands of smartphones.

And that’s just what we know.

More than 300 individuals from 40 states have already been charged and another 280 arrested in connection with the events of January 6. As many as 500 others are still being hunted by government agents.

Also included in this data roundup are individuals who may have had nothing to do with the riots but whose cell phone location data identified them as being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Forget about being innocent until proven guilty.

In a suspect society such as ours, the burden of proof has been flipped: now, you start off guilty and have to prove your innocence.

For instance, you didn’t even have to be involved in the Capitol riots to qualify for a visit from the FBI: investigators have reportedly been tracking—and questioning—anyone whose cell phones connected to wi-fi or pinged cell phone towers near the Capitol. One man, who had gone out for a walk with his daughters only to end up stranded near the Capitol crowds, actually had FBI agents show up at his door days later. Using Google Maps, agents were able to pinpoint exactly where they were standing and for how long.

All of the many creepy, calculating, invasive investigative and surveillance tools the government has acquired over the years are on full display right now in the FBI’s ongoing efforts to bring the rioters to “justice.”

FBI agents are matching photos with drivers’ license pictures; tracking movements by way of license plate toll readers; and zooming in on physical identifying marks such as moles, scars and tattoos, as well as brands, logos and symbols on clothing and backpacks. They’re poring over hours of security and body camera footage; scouring social media posts; triangulating data from cellphone towers and WiFi signals; layering facial recognition software on top of that; and then cross-referencing footage with public social media posts.

It’s not just the FBI on the hunt, however.

They’ve enlisted the help of volunteer posses of private citizens, such as Deep State Dogs, to collaborate on the grunt work. As Dinah Voyles Pulver reports, once Deep State Dogs locates a person and confirms their identity, they put a package together with the person’s name, address, phone number and several images and send it to the FBI.

According to USA Todaythe FBI is relying on the American public and volunteer cybersleuths to help bolster its cases.

This takes See Something, Say Something snitching programs to a whole new level.

The lesson to be learned: Big Brother, Big Sister and all of their friends are watching you.

They see your every move: what you read, how much you spend, where you go, with whom you interact, when you wake up in the morning, what you’re watching on television and reading on the internet.

Every move you make is being monitored, mined for data, crunched, and tabulated in order to form a picture of who you are, what makes you tick, and how best to control you when and if it becomes necessary to bring you in line.

Simply liking or sharing this article on Facebook, retweeting it on Twitter, or merely reading it or any other articles related to government wrongdoing, surveillance, police misconduct or civil liberties might be enough to get you categorized as a particular kind of person with particular kinds of interests that reflect a particular kind of mindset that might just lead you to engage in a particular kinds of activities and, therefore, puts you in the crosshairs of a government investigation as a potential troublemaker a.k.a. domestic extremist.

Chances are, as the Washington Post reports, you have already been assigned a color-coded threat score—green, yellow or red—so police are forewarned about your potential inclination to be a troublemaker depending on whether you’ve had a career in the military, posted a comment perceived as threatening on Facebook, suffer from a particular medical condition, or know someone who knows someone who might have committed a crime.

In other words, you might already be flagged as potentially anti-government in a government database somewhere—Main Core, for example—that identifies and tracks individuals who aren’t inclined to march in lockstep to the police state’s dictates.

The government has the know-how.

It took days, if not hours or minutes, for the FBI to begin the process of identifying, tracking and rounding up those suspected of being part of the Capitol riots.

Imagine how quickly government agents could target and round up any segment of society they wanted to based on the digital trails and digital footprints we leave behind.

Of course, the government has been hard at work for years acquiring these totalitarian powers.

Long before the January 6 riots, the FBI was busily amassing the surveillance tools necessary to monitor social media posts, track and identify individuals using cell phone signals and facial recognition technology, and round up “suspects” who may be of interest to the government for one reason or another.

As The Intercept reported, the FBI, CIA, NSA and other government agencies have increasingly invested in corporate surveillance technologies that can mine constitutionally protected speech on social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram in order to identify potential extremists and predict who might engage in future acts of anti-government behavior.

All it needs is the data, which more than 90% of young adults and 65% of American adults are happy to provide.

When the government sees all and knows all and has an abundance of laws to render even the most seemingly upstanding citizen a criminal and lawbreaker, then the old adage that you’ve got nothing to worry about if you’ve got nothing to hide no longer applies.

As for the Fourth Amendment and its prohibitions on warrantless searches and invasions of privacy without probable cause, those safeguards have been rendered all but useless by legislative end-runs, judicial justifications, and corporate collusions.

We now find ourselves in the unenviable position of being monitored, managed and controlled by our technology, which answers not to us but to our government and corporate rulers.

Consider that on any given day, the average American going about his daily business will be monitored, surveilled, spied on and tracked in more than 20 different ways, by both government and corporate eyes and ears. A byproduct of this new age in which we live, whether you’re walking through a store, driving your car, checking email, or talking to friends and family on the phone, you can be sure that some government agency, whether the NSA or some other entity, is listening in and tracking your behavior.

This doesn’t even begin to touch on the corporate trackers that monitor your purchases, web browsing, social media posts and other activities taking place in the cyber sphere.

For example, police have been using Stingray devices mounted on their cruisers to intercept cell phone calls and text messages without court-issued search warrants. Doppler radar devices, which can detect human breathing and movement within a home, are already being employed by the police to deliver arrest warrants.

License plate readers, yet another law enforcement spying device made possible through funding by the Department of Homeland Security, can record up to 1800 license plates per minute. Moreover, these surveillance cameras can also photograph those inside a moving car. Reports indicate that the Drug Enforcement Administration has been using the cameras in conjunction with facial recognition software to build a “vehicle surveillance database” of the nation’s cars, drivers and passengers.

Sidewalk and “public space” cameras, sold to gullible communities as a sure-fire means of fighting crime, is yet another DHS program that is blanketing small and large towns alike with government-funded and monitored surveillance cameras. It’s all part of a public-private partnership that gives government officials access to all manner of surveillance cameras, on sidewalks, on buildings, on buses, even those installed on private property.

Couple these surveillance cameras with facial recognition and behavior-sensing technology and you have the makings of “pre-crime” cameras, which scan your mannerisms, compare you to pre-set parameters for “normal” behavior, and alert the police if you trigger any computerized alarms as being “suspicious.”

State and federal law enforcement agencies are pushing to expand their biometric and DNA databases by requiring that anyone accused of a misdemeanor have their DNA collected and catalogued. However, technology is already available that allows the government to collect biometrics such as fingerprints from a distance, without a person’s cooperation or knowledge. One system can actually scan and identify a fingerprint from nearly 20 feet away.

Developers are hard at work on a radar gun that can actually show if you or someone in your car is texting. Another technology being developed, dubbed a “textalyzer” device, would allow police to determine whether someone was driving while distracted. Refusing to submit one’s phone to testing could result in a suspended or revoked driver’s license.

It’s a sure bet that anything the government welcomes (and funds) too enthusiastically is bound to be a Trojan horse full of nasty, invasive surprises.

Case in point: police body cameras. Hailed as the easy fix solution to police abuses, these body cameras—made possible by funding from the Department of Justice—turn police officers into roving surveillance cameras. Of course, if you try to request access to that footage, you’ll find yourself being led a merry and costly chase through miles of red tape, bureaucratic footmen and unhelpful courts.

The “internet of things” refers to the growing number of “smart” appliances and electronic devices now connected to the internet and capable of interacting with each other and being controlled remotely. These range from thermostats and coffee makers to cars and TVs. Of course, there’s a price to pay for such easy control and access. That price amounts to relinquishing ultimate control of and access to your home to the government and its corporate partners. For example, while Samsung’s Smart TVs are capable of “listening” to what you say, thereby allowing users to control the TV using voice commands, it also records everything you say and relays it to a third party, e.g., the government.

Then again, the government doesn’t really need to spy on you using your smart TV when the FBI can remotely activate the microphone on your cellphone and record your conversations. The FBI can also do the same thing to laptop computers without the owner knowing any better.

Drones, which are taking to the skies en masse, are the converging point for all of the weapons and technology already available to law enforcement agencies. In fact, drones can listen in on your phone calls, see through the walls of your home, scan your biometrics, photograph you and track your movements, and even corral you with sophisticated weaponry.

All of these technologies add up to a society in which there’s little room for indiscretions, imperfections, or acts of independence, especially not when the government can listen in on your phone calls, monitor your driving habits, track your movements, scrutinize your purchases and peer through the walls of your home.

These digital trails are everywhere.

As investigative journalists Charlie Warzel and Stuart A. Thompson explain, “This data—collected by smartphone apps and then fed into a dizzyingly complex digital advertising ecosystem … provided an intimate record of people whether they were visiting drug treatment centers, strip clubs, casinos, abortion clinics or places of worship.

In such a surveillance ecosystem, we’re all suspects and databits to be tracked, catalogued and targeted.

As Warzel and Thompson warn:

“To think that the information will be used against individuals only if they’ve broken the law is naïve; such data is collected and remains vulnerable to use and abuse whether people gather in support of an insurrection or they justly protest police violence… This collection will only grow more sophisticated… It gets easier by the day… it does not discriminate. It harvests from the phones of MAGA rioters, police officers, lawmakers and passers-by. There is no evidence, from the past or current day, that the power this data collection offers will be used only to good ends. There is no evidence that if we allow it to continue to happen, the country will be safer or fairer.”

As I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, this is the creepy, calculating yet diabolical genius of the American police state: the very technology we hailed as revolutionary and liberating has become our prison, jailer, probation officer, Big Brother and Father Knows Best all rolled into one.

There is no gray area any longer.

Politics and Corruption at the World Health Organization (WHO)

By Dr. Pascal Sacré (via Global Research)

This article, translated from French, was written prior to the Wuhan Coronavirus epidemic outbreak.

The WHO [OMS in French] is the World Health Organisation. ‘WHO’ in English – and that’s much more appropriate. WHO: who is it really?

Would the world be getting along any better without this outfit, which is in theory such a good idea? Would we be in better health?

The question is as serious as it is relevant.

Though even one death is one too many, compared with the alarmist forecasts from this professional organisation that were foisted on all the ministries of health the world over, one could say that the H1N1 viral pandemic, version 2009, has so far produced not much more than a mouse.

But what a fabulous show for the media!

What a brilliantly organized panic!

How many millions of euros spent, and best of all, what worrying rumours, about the health risks linked this time to the vaccination, which might not even work!

Thus arose a psychosis that might have stolen the headlines even from a much more palpable threat, much more deadly and with effects that have already been felt to the bone by a large part of the world’s population: the climatic effects of pollution and of the way of life engendered by the currently prevailing ideology, that of extreme and unfair capitalism, “deregulated” as it is called in the sober phraseology of its well-heeled master thieves.

Meanwhile the media, ignoring for a moment its celebrities and football matches, chose to focus the limelight – and thus the gaze of the spectator sheep – on the representatives, experts and spokespersons of this organization, the WHO. Until this year its existence may have been news to some people, but now its importance is plain to see.

We have been shown people with serious faces and a professional air, the sort to whom ordinary mortals tend to ascribe genuine competence and evident integrity.

Their herald, elevated by some to hero, is called Margaret Chan. If her manner does not excite much sympathy, her curriculum vitae speaks for itself.

WHO: the Facts

Like other world organisations born from the ashes of the war of 1940-45 (the WTO, successor to GATT, the IMF, the UN, successor to the League of Nations), the WHO is a sort of transnational superministry, in this case for health.

Its power overrides that of its national equivalents. It is not subjected to genuinely democratic electoral procedures, in the sense of representing the choice expressed by the populations of its member countries. This is true of all these organisations that in fact control our daily lives in their respective fields. Its constitution came into force on 7 April 1948.

All these organisations are in a way like the arms, the tentacles of an enormous octopus whose purpose is to coordinate, improve and reinforce significant action on a planetary scale.

To clarify a crucial point: it would be misleading to think that these organisations undertake anything at all independently of each other. One could as well imagine that the liver can go on doing its own thing without being at all involved with the heart or the kidneys.

All of them work towards the same goals, each in their own specialist sphere, and all of them answer to the UN and to those who provide their funding.

The WHO has nothing to blame itself for

If you go to the official WHO site, you will of course get the impression that this organisation has a spotless record, and deserves to be praised for its humanitarian deeds.

It’s a bit like Monsanto, this multinational that dominates the market in agribusiness and wants to impose on the whole world its GM seeds complete with the Terminator gene (1), yet which tries to make you believe that the well-being and development of poor countries is its main concern.

Anyway, as in any court of law, it’s democratic, enlightened, modern, to give the “accused” party the chance to put its case.

As for the accusations of corruption and collusion with the pharmaceutical companies in the context of the worldwide vaccination campaign of 2009, it is Margaret Chan in person who has stepped up to the plate to defend the reputation of the WHO.

It’s important to realise that the accusations are weighty, well argued, and made by institutions that are well established, and pronounced by scientists and investigative journalists who are credible and trustworthy. It is difficult to dismiss all of them as a handful of conspiracy theorists, as regularly happens nowadays as soon as an interesting and well-argued debate is launched on a sensitive issue (the official version of the 9/11 attacks, the GIEC’s theory of global warming, Iran’s nuclear intentions, and so on).

It’s true that there is a certain logic in having a measure of collaboration between the WHO and the pharmaceutical companies that produce the medications.

However it is legitimate to ask questions about the exact part played by these firms in the decisions finally taken by the WHO, and on their real influence.

According to the WHO, there are many guarantees in place for managing potential conflicts of interest, as well as how they are perceived by public opinion.

The external experts who advise the WHO are […] obliged to provide a declaration of absence of conflict of interest as well as full professional and financial details that might compromise the impartiality of their opinions. Procedures are in place to identify, research and evaluate any potential conflicts of interest, to divulge them and take appropriate measures, such as excluding an expert from a consultative body, an expert study group or a meeting.

Still according to the WHO, the members of the Emergency Committee have to swear to the absence of any conflict of interest. The members of the Committee are chosen from a list of about 160 experts covering a range of areas of public health. The international health regulations (IHR) that came into force in 2007 envisage also a ruling that aims to coordinate the response to public health emergencies on an international scale, such as the H1N1virus pandemic. But the IHR also includes provisions for setting up, if a pandemic arises, an Emergency Committee that advises the Director General on such questions as the need to raise the level of alert, to recommend temporary measures, and so on. All the members of the Emergency Committee will have signed a confidentiality agreement, provided a declaration of no conflict of interest, and agreed to devote time as a consultant to fulfil their duty, without compensation.

Admirable principles, but without any basis in fact!

More details regarding France:

Who are the French experts? On behalf of France, we find among the consultants for the WHO and the Group SAGE, several members of the Agence de Médecine Préventive (AMP), an agency that lists its industrial partner as Sanofi Pasteur, Sanofi Aventis. We also find Prof. Daniel Floret, President of the Comité Technique de Vaccination, who lists numerous collaborations with the pharmaceutical industry; several members of the Sanofi Pasteurlaboratory, declared as such; a member of the Sanofi Pasteur MSD laboratory; and some other members from the pharmaceutical industry who are based in France.

Thanks to the site Santé log for providing the extracts (in italic, above) of a document from the WHO.

The WHO must give an account of itself

If, unlike most people who only stop to admire the window display, we actually go into the shop, we’ll discover two things:

While the fine words are there to soothe our feelings of distrust, it is still true that the close ties between the WHO experts and the pharmaceutical industry are very dangerous, very obscure and difficult to unravel.

Without being a conspiracy theorist for the fun of it, as if it was a sport or a pastime – as the crusaders backing the official versions and the window-dressing of the official sites seem to think – one thing is clear to my mind, that being obscure does not sit well with being truthful.

If the complexity that characterizes all modern institutions bewilders the outsider and puts major hurdles in the way of ordinary people like me pursuing their interests, it is an unintended consequence of modernity and of the ever-multiplying range of tasks and objectives.

Being deliberately obscure is something else. It is intended to hide something, to conceal intentionally.

The financing of the WHO

Have you ever heard anything about public-private partnerships?

In the beginning, the WHO was supposed to receive funds only from the governments of United Nations members, but a few years ago, in order to swell its coffers WHO set up what it calls a “private partnership” that allows it to receive financial support from private industries. But which industries?

Since that time its credibility, seriously tarnished, has not improved very much, and its independence is seriously questioned because of its total lack of transparency with regard to the scientific proof that supports its recommendations, and its collusion with the multinationals. It is obvious that on the world stage, business and politics have a powerful influence on health. (2)

The spotless reputation of the WHO was already besmirched by a book that came out in 1997, Le OMS : Bateau ivre de la santé publique [The WHO, the drunken sailor of public health], ed. L’Harmattan, by Bertrand Deveaud, a journalist, and Bertrand Lemennicier, professor of economics, who had spent two years making enquiries throughout the world and consulting numerous official and confidential reports. Two medical journals well-respected by the profession had already sown doubts as to the integrity and the infallibility of the WHO, The British Medical Journal (BMJ) in regard to the management of the bird flu in 2005, and The Lancet (3), which described the WHO as an institution that was corrupt and on its last legs.

I leave you to ponder awhile these phrases, reported by the journalist Sylvie Simon in one of her articles (4), particularly the passages in bold (my emphasis):

Doctors Andrew Oxman and Atle Fretheim, from the Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services and Dr John Lavis, from McMaster University in Canada, interviewed the management of the WHO and analysed its various recommendations. Andrew Oxman concluded that “it is difficult to evaluate the confidence thatone can have in the recommendations of the WHO without knowing how they were prepared.”* (*Obscurity).

“We know that our credibility is at stake,” admitted Dr Tikki Pang, director of research for the WHO. “The lack of time and the shortage of information and of money can sometimes compromise the work of the WHO.” Some senior officials of the organisation have also admitted that in many cases the proof that was supposed to be the basis of a recommendation did not exist.

Many testimonies have revealed that when the results don’t match those that the industries and companies are hoping for in order to validate their products, standards are altered and the results manipulated.

Contrary to any procedure that is genuinely scientific and independent, which should base its conclusions on the verified results of its experiments, it seems that the tendency is to do just the opposite, and that results are adapted to produce the desired conclusions; desired that is by the firms producing the medicines, vaccines, and other products concerned.

To cite one example:

Dr Oxman criticized the WHO for having its own quality control methods. In 1999 when its views on the treatment of hypertension were criticised, mainly because of the high price of the medicines recommended without any proof that they were more effective than cheaper ones, the Organisation published some “recommendations for preparing recommendations” which led to a revision of the advice on treating hypertension. (5)

Other murky issues have been brought to the surface by courageous researchers: cholesterol and statins (6), mobile telephony, with manipulation of the data on the harmfulness of electromagnetic radiation (7)…and of course, serious doubts are being expressed on the real danger of the 2009 viral H1N1 pandemic, which has enabled the pharmaceutical companies to rake in millions of dollars of profit.

The bank JP Morgan on Wall Street estimated that, thanks mainly to the pandemic alert issued by the WHO, the pharmaceutical giants, who also finance the work of the ESWI run by Albert Osterhaus, were set to make $7.5-$10 billion profit. (8)

The ESWI, European Scientific Working group on Influenza, describes itself as “a multidisciplinary group of leaders of opinion on the flu, whose purpose is to fight against the repercussions of a flu epidemic or pandemic”. As its members themselves explain, the ESWI, directed by Osterhaus, is the central pivot “between the WHO in Geneva, the Institut Robert Koch in Berlin and the University of Connecticut in the United States”.

The most significant thing about the ESWI is that its work is entirely financed by the same pharmaceutical laboratories that are making millions thanks to the pandemic emergency, while it is the pronouncements made by the WHO that compel the governments of the whole world to buy and to stock the vaccines. The ESWI receives funding from the manufacturers and distributors of the H1N1 vaccines, such as Baxter Vaccines, MedImmune, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi Pasteur and others, including

Novartis, who produces the vaccine, and the distributor of Tamiflu, Hofmann-La Roche.(9)

Who is Albert Osterhaus?

Nicknamed “Dr Flu”, Albert Osterhaus, the best known virologist in the world, official consultant on the H1N1 virus to the British and Dutch governments and head of the Department of Virology in the Medical Centre of Erasmus University, has a seat among the élite of the WHO gathered together in the SAGE Group, and is president of the ESWI, which is supported by the pharmaceutical industry.

In its turn the ESWI recommended extraordinary measures to vaccinate the whole world, considering that there was a high risk of a new pandemic which, they insisted, could be comparable to the terrifying pandemic of “Spanish” flu in 1918. (10)

Albert Osterhaus is not the only senior consultant to the WHO whose name is implicated in the dossiers on corruption and possible collusion between the WHO and the pharmaceutical firms, and an industry that wants to sell its products whatever it costs: others are David Salisbury (3)(9), Frederick Hayden (9), Arnold Monto (9), Henry L. Niman, Klaus Stöhr (11).

Professor David Salisbury, who is attached to the British Ministry of Health, is the head of SAGE at the WHO. At the same time he directs the Consultative Group on H1N1 at the WHO. Salisbury is a fervent defender of the pharmaceutical industry. In Britain the health action group One Click (10) accused him of concealing the proven correlation between vaccine use and the steep increase in autism in children, as well as the correlation between the vaccine Gardasil and cases of paralysis and even death.

Dr Frederick Hayden is at the same time member of SAGE at the WHO and of the Wellcome Trust in London; in fact he is one of the close friends of Osterhaus. In exchange for “consultative” services, Hayden receives money from Roche and from GlaxoSmithKline as well as from other pharmaceutical giants engaged in producing goods connected with the H1N1 crisis. (12)

There is yet another member of the WHO enjoying close relations with the vaccine manufacturers who profit from SAGE’s recommendations, in the person of Dr Arnold Monto, a consultant paid by the vaccine manufacturers MedImmune, Glaxo and ViroPharma. (13)

[interview with Wolfgang Wodarg]…Without going so far as outright corruption, which I’m sure exists, there are a hundred and one ways in which the labs can bring their influence to bear on decisions. I noticed specifically, for example, how Klaus Stöhr, who was the head of the epidemiology department at the WHO during the time of the bird flu, and who had therefore prepared the plans for dealing with a pandemic that I referred to earlier, had meanwhile become part of the senior management at Novartis. And similar links exist between Glaxo, Baxter, etc. and influential WHO members. These big firms have “their people” in the system and somehow manage things so that good political decisions are taken – that’s to say, decisions that enable them to pump the maximum amount of money out of the taxpayers. (14)

As for “Dr Flu” Osterhaus, it’s so bad that the Dutch Parliament (15) has serious doubts about him and has opened an enquiry into conflict of interest and bribery.

Outside the Netherlands and the Dutch media, only a few lines in the well-respected British journal Science(16) have made mention of the sensational investigation into the affairs of Osterhaus, who still has the confidence of his Minister of Health.

What all these experts have in common is the concealment of their connections with the pharmaceutical companies while they hold a senior and influential position in the decision-making hierarchy at the WHO, and the fact that they are never challenged. The conflict of interest is obvious, yet systematically minimized.

It is not their expertise or their intrinsic competence that is being questioned, but their independence and their integrity.

The whole matter is sufficiently serious, given the topic in question – our health, to sow doubt and to justify pursuing every investigation, every question, with means that match the urgency of the issue, and by organizations of irreproachable reputation that are truly independent.

It is not the WHO that should investigate the WHO

It’s as if the accused was allowed to lead the enquiry into the crimes imputed to them. If I were an impartial prosecutor, not aiming for scandal or publicity but only for the truth, whatever it may be, even if it is worse than the worst of the lies, I would call to the bar:

Dr Wolfgang Wodarg, president of the Health Commission of the Council of Europe. This member of the German parliament, an epidemiologist, has just requested the Council for a commission of enquiry. In his interview with the paper Der Spiegel, Dr. Wodarg did not hesitate to talk about “one of the greatest medical scandals of the century”. (17)

Next, Alison Katz,

A researcher who spent 17 years at the WHO, and who on 22 January 2007 sent an open letter to the new director of the agency, the Chinese Margaret Chan, accusing the organisation of “corruption, nepotism, violation of its statutes and ineffectiveness in its internal control system”, and concluding that “the WHO has become a victim of neo-liberal globalisation”. She denounced “the commercialisation of science and the close ties between the industry and academic institutions” and “corporatist” private science, and considered that “the WHO ought to be the leader of a movement to transform the way in which scientific research is done, including its sources of funding, as well as the acquisition and use of knowledge” and that the officials of an international organization do not have the right “not to know”. (18)

Lastly, Tom Jefferson, a renowned epidemiologist, member of the Cochrane Collaboration, an organisation of independent scientists including a commission that evaluates all the studies carried out on influenza. In an interview given to the German magazine Der Spiegel, he revealed the consequences of the privatisation of the WHO and the way in which health has been turned into a money-making machine. (19)

Tom Jefferson: “[…] one of the most bizarre characteristics of this flu, and of all the saga that has played out, is that year after year people make more and more pessimistic forecasts. So far none of them has come true, but these people are still there repeating their predictions. For instance, what happened to the bird flu that was supposed to kill us all off? Nothing. But that doesn’t stop these people from making their predictions. Sometimes you get the feeling that the whole industry is starting to hope for a pandemic.”

Der Spiegel: “Who are you referring to? The WHO?”

  1. J: “The WHO and those in charge of public health, the virologists and the pharmaceutical laboratories. They’ve created a whole system around the imminence of a pandemic. There is a lot of money at stake, as well as networks of influence, careers and whole institutions! And the minute one of the flu viruses mutates we’d see the whole machine roll into action.” (20)

When he was asked if the WHO had deliberately declared a pandemic emergency in order to create a huge market for the H1N1 vaccines and medications, Jefferson replied:

“Don’t you find it remarkable that the WHO had changed its definition of a pandemic? The old one specified a new virus, one that spread rapidly, for which there was no immunity and that caused a high rate of illness and of death. Now these last two points on the levels of infection have been deleted, and that’s how the A flu became classed in the pandemic category.” (21)

Very conveniently, the WHO published the new definition of a pandemic in April 2009, just in time to enable them, on the advice coming from, among others, SAGE, “Dr Flu” (alias Albert Osterhaus), and David Salisbury, to declare that mild cases of the flu, renamed A H1N1, signalled a pandemic emergency. (22)

Yes, Tom Jefferson, Alison Katz, Wolfgang Wodarg, among others, and investigative journalists who are neither conspiracy fanatics nor yes-men, would be on my list of witnesses to call.

Conclusions

Strangely enough, while the media were so agitated at the peak of the virus panic during 2009, as soon as a few rumours started spreading about strange goings-on at the WHO involving some scarcely known names, they switched off the spotlights, preferring to redirect the docile spectators to more amusing topics such as the antics of Johnny Hallyday, the comeback in Belgian women’s tennis, the escapades of Michel Daerden or of Nicolas Sarkozy (politicians Belgian and French respectively), and the hopeful proclamations of Barack PeaceObama – at the same time hinting that, while that was all well and good, we should still, as our obedient ministers were saying, be sure to go and get vaccinated while the wicked flu was offering a brief respite.

The dirty conspiracy rumours of corruption, the names so well-known in the business but so unknown to the general public – let’s forget them! Above all, let’s not rock the boat!

The vaccines have been bought, the recommendations given and millions of doses of poison already injected.

Does the truth frighten us so much that we prefer lies, and more and more of them, in our controlled lives, even when it is our health that is at stake?

It may all look very complicated but actually it is very easy.

For each new item of information, a “lite” sweetened version is made up, relayed by the bought-and-paid-for media and sold to us, the viewers, who swallow it without question.

The main drivers of this globalisation are fear and ignorance, the result of this insipid simplification of everything, which takes away any depth, any questioning that is necessary, in fact indispensable, if one wants to understand what is really happening.

It’s the same again with terrorism, where any unexplained event is always blamed on the same scary monster: Al Qaeda – without raising the slightest query about this attribution.(23) An explosion? Al Qaeda. A hijacking? Al Qaeda. An attack on civilians? Al Qaeda. An earthquake? Al Qaeda.

It’s the same again with the dogmatic statements about manmade global warming. This no longer brooks any discussion, any further research, any questioning: it’s a heresy to even think of it. Human CO2 is the Al Qaeda equivalent of the uncertainty factor in global warming.

It’s the same again with pandemics and other health cataclysms of the future. As the GIEC tells us about CO2, the WHO simplifies the problem for us and we thank them: “Get vaccinated. Don’t ask any questions. We have the most trustworthy and competent experts. The pharmaceutical firms, overflowing with philanthropy, are working day and night to save us.” And we believe it.

Humanity of the 21st century is in grave danger, a deadly danger that lurks within each of us.

It’s not Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab (24), this Nigerian student of 23, the Christmas present from Al Qaeda to the war strategy of Peace Obama.

It’s not a virus, the St Valentine’s present to Baxter, GSK, Novartis and the rest.

It’s not our CO2, Nature’s present to our bankrupt politicians. It’s not even Al Gore, that serial sweet talker, condemned by the courts in Great Britain for no less than 11 flagrant lies and misrepresentations noted in his film, which inconveniences only the truth. (25) It’s not Al Qaeda, or any other extremist Islamic organisation.

All those are nothing but scary monsters that press the fear button, that’s to say, they are enemies but relatively minor ones.

It’s our abdication. That’s our enemy number one.

We are living in a time when globalisation has not, as it was expected to in the beginning, brought about a world that is better governed, more just, more transparent, but on the contrary, has created a system that is harder to decipher and understand, and is all-powerful.

This brew of omnipotence and dense secrecy, of being all-powerful and totally resistant to democratic investigation, is deadly. That’s the greatest threat to mankind today.

We have surrendered, preferring to go on deluding ourselves, when so many signs that something is going wrong should have impelled us to regain control.

Instead of which we put ourselves in the hands of these great authorities who are suspected of bribery and corruption, endowed with bad faith and a cynicism that balks at nothing.

Guided by the media and looking only at the things they turn their spotlight on, held by the hand, we choose to believe them instead of asking questions.

Given the present situation, I’ll answer my own question without hesitating:

The world would be getting along much better without these international organisations whose original mission has been hijacked for the sake of financial profits for the few.

As far as the WHO is concerned, we would be in much better health.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Sources

WTO: World Trade Organisation, succeeded GATT in 1994.

GATT: General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs, created in 1947. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Agreement_on_Tariffs_and_Trade

IMF: international Monetary Fund, created in 1944. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMF

LON: League of Nations, created in 1919, in the aftermath of the First World War. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Nations

UN: United Nations Organisation, continuation of the LON, created in 1945. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations

SAGE: Strategic Advisory Group of Experts. http://www.who.int/immunization/sage/SAGE_TORs_Full_21_11_08.pdf

Notes

1. Monsanto Terminator: http://www.greenpeace.org/france/news/ogm-monsanto

2. Article by Sylvie Simon, well-known journalist on health topics: http://www.lepost.fr/article/2009/12/23/1854889_l-oms-ocean-de-corruption-et-d-inefficacite.html

3. The Lancet, http://www.republicain-lorrain.fr/fr/permalien/article/1006828/La-credibilite-de-l-OMS-remise-en-question.html

4. Sylvie Simon, op. cit.

5. Ibid.

6. Cholesterol, lies and propaganda, http://www.lanutrition.fr/Le-lobby-du-cholest%C3%A9rol-au-bord-de-la-crise-cardiaque-a-1708-90.html

7. The worrying connections between Margaret Chan, Michael Repacholi, Bernard Veyret and the mobile phone manufacturers: http://www.next-up.org/pdf/Mobile_phones_and_real_pandemics_05_01_2010.pdfhttp://www.next-up.org/pdf/Serge_Sargentini_Mobilfunk_und_wahre_Pandemien_06_01_2010.pdf

http://videos.next-up.org/FoxNews/Protect_your_self_from_electromagnetic_waves/13_12_2009.html

Mobile phones: falsified data http://www.next-up.org/pdf/Adlkofer_Rudiger_Vienna_Scandal.pdf

8. Quoted in the Dutch article by Louise Voller & Kristian Villesen, “Stærk lobbyisme bag WHO-beslutningom massevaccination“, Information, Copenhagen, 15 November 2009.

9. http://www.voltairenet.org/article163315.html, article by F. William Engdahl, an American journalistwho has published many works devoted to questions of energy and geopolitics. engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/Swine_Flu/Flu_Pope/flu_pope.html

Most recent books in French: Pétrole, une guerre d’un siècle : L’ordre mondial anglo-américain (Jean-

Cyrille Godefroy éd., 2007) et OGM : semences de destruction: L’arme de la faim (Jean-Cyrille Godefroy éd., 2008).

10. Ibid.

12. Jane Bryant et al., “The One Click Group Response: Prof. David Salisbury Threatens Legal Action”, 4 March 2009. Download

13. William Engdahl, op.cit.

14. L’Humanité: http://www.humanite.fr/Grippe-A-Ils-ont-organise-la-psychose

 15. Tweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal (Lower Chamber of the Dutch Parliament.)

16. Martin Enserink, in “Holland, the Public Face of Flu Takes a Hit”, Science, 16 October 2009, Vol. 326, n° 5951, pp. 350–351 ; DOI : 10.1126/science.326_350b.

17. L’Humanité, op.cit., http://www.mondialisation.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16818 TheEuropean Parliament will investigate the WHO and the “pandemic” scandal: http://www.santelog.com/modules/connaissances/actualite-sante-le-député-européen-w.-wodarg-dénonce-«-une-fausse-pandemie-»_2483.htm

18. Sylvie Simon, op. cit. http://www.next-up.org/pdf/AlisonKatzOpenLetterMargaretChanWHO.pdf

19. William Engdahl, op. cit.

20. Conversation with Tom Jefferson: C’est toute une industrie qui espère une pandémie de grippe, Der Spiegel, 21 July 2009.

21. Ibid.

22. Article in Dutch, Louise Voller & Kristian Villesen, “Mystisk ændring af WHO’s definition af enpandemi“, Copenhagen Information, 15 November 2009.

23. http://polidics.com/cia/top-ranking-cia-operatives-admit-al-qaeda-is-a-complete-fabrication.html

24. http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17184

25. http://leconservateur.bafweb.com/index.php?2007/10/11/978-un-juge-britannique-met-en-garde-contre-le-film-d-al-gore-une-verite-qui-derange;timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/article2632660.ece

The Puppet Masters: Is There Really a Deep State?

The danger posed by the Deep State is that it wields immense power but is unelected and unaccountable, Phil Giraldi writes.

By Philip Giraldi (via Global Research)

As a former intelligence officer, I find it amusing to read articles in the mainstream media that blithely report how the latest international outrages are undoubtedly the work of CIA and the rest of the U.S. government’s national security alphabet soup. The recurring claim that the CIA is somehow running the world by virtue of a vast conspiracy that includes the secret intelligence agencies of a number of countries, using blackmail and other inducements to corrupt vulnerable politicians and opinion makers, has entered into the DNA of journalists worldwide, frequently without any evidence that the current crop of spies is capable to doing anything more complicated than getting out of bed in the morning.

One problem with the theory about total global dominance through espionage is the sheer logistics of it all. Directing political and economic developments in two hundred nations simultaneously must require a lot of space and a large staff. Is there a huge office hidden in Langley? Or the Pentagon? Or in the White House West Wing itself? Or is it in one of the secure facilities that have been popping up like mushrooms just off of the Dulles Toll Road in Herndon Virginia?

To provide evidence that intelligence agencies extend their tentacles just about everywhere, the other claim that is nearly always made is that all former spooks are part of the conspiracy, as once you learn the secret handshake to join CIA, NSA or the FBI you never stop being “one of them.” Well, that might be true in some cases but the majority of former spooks are quite happy to be “former,” and one might also observe that many voices in the anti-war movement, such as it is, come from intelligence, law enforcement or military backgrounds. Of course, the conspiracy theorists will explain that away by claiming that it is a conspiracy within a conspiracy, making the dissidents little better than double agents or gatekeepers who are put in place to make sure that the opposition doesn’t become too effective.

Given the fact that how the so-called American “Deep State” actually gets together and plots is unknown, one would have to concede that it is an organization without much structure, unlike the original Turkish Deep State (Derin Devlet), which coined the phrase, that actually met and had centralized planning. I would suggest that the problem is one of definitions and it also helps to know how the national security state is structured and what its legitimate mission is. The CIA, for example, employs about 20,000 people, nearly all of whom work in various divisions that collect information (spying), analysis, technology and also are divided into staffs that work transnationally on issues like terrorism, narcotics, and nuclear proliferation. The overwhelming majority of those employees have political views and vote but there is a consensus that what their work entails is apolitical. The actual politics of how policy comes out the other end is confined to a very small group at the top, some of whom are themselves political appointees.

To be sure, one can and probably should oppose the policies of regime change that the Agency is engaged in worldwide but there is one important consideration that has to be understood. Those policies are set by the country’s civilian leadership (president, secretary of state and national security council) and they are imposed on CIA by its own political leadership. The Agency does not hold referenda among its employees to determine which foreign policy option is preferable any more than soldiers in the 101st Airborne are consulted when they receive orders to deploy.

Nearly all current and former intelligence officers that I know are, in fact, opposed to the politics of U.S. global dominance that have been pretty much in place since 9/11, most particularly as evidenced by the continued conflict with Russia, the ramping up of aggression with China, and the regime change policies relating to Syria, Iran and Venezuela. Those officers often consider the invasions and exercise of “maximum pressure” to have been failures. Those policies were supported by truculent language, sanctions and displays of military readiness by the Trump Administration but it now appears clear that they will all be continued in one form or another under President Joe Biden, likely to include even more aggression against Russia through proxies in Ukraine and Georgia.

The officers engaged in such operations also observe that regime change has basically come out of the closet since 2001. George W. Bush announced that there was a “new sheriff in town” and the gloves would be coming off. Things that the intelligence agencies used to do are now done right out in the open, using military resources against Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria while the biggest change of all, in Ukraine in 2014, was largely engineered by Victoria Nuland at the State Department. The National Endowment for Democracy (NED) was also active in Russia supporting opposition parties until the Kremlin forced them to leave the country.

So, it is fair to say that the Deep State is not a function of either the CIA or the FBI, but at the same time the involvement of John Brennan, James Clapper and James Comey in the plot to destroy Donald Trump is disturbing, as the three men headed the Agency, the Office of National Intelligence and Bureau. They appear to have played critical leadership roles in carrying out this conspiracy and they may not have operated on their own. Almost certainly what they may have done would have been either explicitly or implicitly authorized by the former President of the United States, Barack Obama, and others in his national security team.

It is now known that President Barack Obama’s CIA Director John Brennan created a secret interagency Trump Task Force in early 2016. Rather than working against genuine foreign threats, this Task Force played a critical role in creating and feeding the meme that Donald Trump was a tool of the Russians and a puppet of President Vladimir Putin, a claim that still surfaces regularly to this day. Working with Clapper, Brennan fabricated the narrative that “Russia had interfered in the 2016 election.” Brennan and Clapper promoted that tale even though they knew very well that Russia and the United States have carried out a broad array of covert actions against each other, including information operations, for the past seventy years, but they pretended that what happened in 2016 was qualitatively and substantively different even though the “evidence” produced to support that claim is weak to nonexistent.

I would, nevertheless, argue that their behavior, though it exploited intelligence resources, was not intrinsic to the organizations that they led, that the three of them were part and parcel of the real Deep State, which consists of a consensus view on running the country that is held by nearly all of the elements that together make up the American Establishment, with its political power focused in Washington and its financial center in New York City. It should come as no surprise that those government officials who are complicit in the process are often personally rewarded with highly paid sinecure jobs in financial services, which they know nothing about, when they “retire.”

The danger posed by the Deep State, or, if you choose, the Establishment, is that it wields immense power but is unelected and unaccountable. Even though it does not actually meet in secret, it does operate through relationships that are not transparent and as the media is part of it, there is little chance that its activity will be exposed. One notes that while the Deep State is mentioned frequently in the national media there has been little effort to identify its components and how it operates.

Viewed in that fashion, the argument that there exists a cohesive group of power brokers who really run the country and are even able to coopt those who are ostensibly dedicated to keeping the country safe becomes much more plausible without denigrating the many honest people who are employed by the national security agencies. The Deep State conspirators don’t have to meet to plot as they all understand very well what has to be done to maintain their supremacy. That is the real danger. The Biden Administration will surely demonstrate over the next several months that the Deep State is still with us and more powerful than ever as it operates both inside and outside the government itself. And the real danger comes from the Democrats now in charge, who are if anything more given to playing with consensus politics that involve phony threats than were the Republicans.

Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is https://councilforthenationalinterest.orgaddress is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org

The US’ 2020 Elections: From Conspiracy Theory To Conspiracy Fact

By Andrew Korybko (via One World)

Time magazine admitted in a report last week that a self-described “conspiracy” run by a “well-connected cabal of powerful people” “got states to change voting systems and laws” and “successfully pressured social media companies” among other achievements aimed at “democratically” toppling Trump, the revelation of which represents an attempt by the Democrats to flex their newfound post-election narrative power over their opponents as well as possibly provoke the most unstable at-risk ones among them to overreact in a violent way that could then be exploited for justifying the next phase of their “conspiracy”. 

The Cat’s Out Of The Bag

The Democrats and their supporters previously defamed everyone speculating about secretly concerted efforts against former President Trump in the run-up to and after last year’s elections as “conspiracy theorists”, and such individuals even risked being deplatformed from social media for exercising their constitutionally enshrined freedom of speech depending on how they articulated their personal views in this respect. They were told that publicly expressing such an interpretation of events is equivalent to spreading “disinformation” and attempting to “delegitimize” the “democratic” outcome of the US’ electoral process. That makes it all the more surprising then that Time magazine admitted in a report last week that a self-described “conspiracy” run by a “well-connected cabal of powerful people” “got states to change voting systems and laws” and “successfully pressured social media companies” among other achievements aimed at “democratically” toppling Trump. In other words, “conspiracy theory” became “conspiracy fact”. 

Politically Inconvenient Questions

This naturally begs the question of why that pro-Democrat media outlet would so proudly brag about “The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign That Saved the 2020 Election”, as its piece is titled. Time can’t be “discredited” by the Democrats otherwise they’d inflict the same such damage against the dozens of individuals named in their report who voluntarily cooperated with journalist Molly Ball in order to show, as one of them phrased it, that “the system didn’t work magically” and that “democracy isn’t self-executing”. Whether they intended to or not, they confirmed this hitherto so-called “conspiracy theory” as a “conspiracy fact”, thereby vindicating every Trump supporter who earlier expressed such sentiments. Not only that, but they also tacitly acknowledged that those who were deplatformed were victims of the same self-described “conspiracy” run by a “well-connected cabal of powerful people”. It’s seemingly inexplicable why they’d do this, but deeply reflecting on the deliberate decision to reveal all of this provides some plausible explanations.

The Democrats’ Post-Election Narrative Power Flex

The first is that, since “Every Democrat Is A Wannabe Dictator”, the party wanted to flex its newfound post-election narrative power to humiliate its opponents. The message being sent is simple enough, and it’s that they’re able to not only get away with literal “conspiracies” such as this one, but are powerful enough to weaponize the institutions under their control (Big Tech, government, mass media, etc.) in order to politically suppress those who dare to call them out on it. As predicted in the author’s analysis late last year about how “Biden’s America Would Be A Dystopian Hellhole”, the Democrats want to rapidly impose a de facto one-party dictatorship onto the rest of the country in collaboration with their “Republican In Name Only” (RINO) allies. They’re drunk enough on power after having successfully pulled off what RT’s Nebojsa Malic rightly described as a Color Revolution and thus winning what the author of the present piece earlier called the Hybrid War of Terror on America that they’re excited to move full speed ahead towards this goal without any hesitation. 

Maximum Demoralization Motives

The Trump-inspired “Make America Great Again” movement is mired in a political war with the RINOs while simultaneously struggling to purge itself of subversive QAnon elements. This makes it weaker than it ever was at any moment since its inception and thus unable to adequately organize any meaningful political resistance to this scheme. There’s never been a better moment for the Democrats to strike in dealing what they hope will be the death blow to their most important opponents’ morale, especially since their revelation was disclosed at the time that swamp-captured Trump decided to ally with the GOP Establishment in the likely misplaced hope that the party can regain control of Congress during the 2022 midterm elections. The intense frustration that some of the Democrats’ opponents might understandably feel about all of these overwhelming developments happening at once might even incite some of the most unstable and at-risk ones such as the QAnon cultists to overreact in a violent way that could then be exploited for justifying the next phase of this “conspiracy”.

Dictatorship Through “Democratic” Motions

After all, there’s little doubt among the Democrats’ opponents that the party is now going all out in its attempt to impose a de facto one-party dictatorship onto the rest of the country, especially after Time proudly bragged about how they pulled off the first phase of their self-described “conspiracy” to “democratically” topple Trump due to the “secret” efforts of a “well-connected cabal of powerful people”. Even though they’ve made it clear that they’ll weaponize their control over institutions to politically suppress others through defamatory attacks, deplatforming, and perhaps worse on the basis of indisputable narrative double standards, they still want to complete their full seize of power by going through superficially “democratic” motions. It would therefore greatly advance their grand strategic goal if an unstable, at-risk, and uncontrollably distressed Trump supporter was triggered by this revelation to plot or even God forbid carry out a domestic terrorist attack. In fact, that doesn’t even have to happen in reality since the context is already set to invent that allegation if needed. 

Confusion Reigns

One of the implied supplementary objectives of admitting to the “conspiracy” against Trump by a “well-connected cabal of powerful people” is to make it impossible for anyone to really know what to believe anymore. For this reason, any reports about domestic terrorist attacks or plans by Trump supporters in response to Time’s surprising disclosure can’t be taken at face value since there will always be the lingering but nevertheless plausible doubt that such allegations are also part of the larger “conspiracy” that was recently confirmed. As such, it wouldn’t be surprising if many people suspected that such an attack was a false flag or that those implicated in planning something of the sort were entrapped by the secret police (FBI), if the latter even happened at all that is. The intent in so directly addressing this isn’t to automatically extend credibility to those interpretations, but just to draw attention to how likely they are to emerge in the aftermath of Time’s scandalous report. 

American Solidarity” Is The Only Realistic Solution

The domestic political impact would nevertheless be the same whether they really happened as might be reported or not since those incidents would certainly be exploited to advance the Democrats’ grand strategic goal of imposing a de facto one-party state onto the rest of the country. Admittedly, there doesn’t seem to be anything that dissidents can do to stop this, except perhaps immediately organizing an “American Solidarity” movement modeled off of its historic Polish counterpart, even if it too might take years to have any noticeable effect, if any at all considering the drastically different domestic political conditions in which it would peacefully operate. Not only would any attempt to organize violent resistance be illegal and arguably immoral, but it would simply facilitate the Democrats’ plans by providing real evidence of what they’d describe as a domestic terrorist plot for justifying the accelerated implementation of the next phase of their “conspiracy”. For these reasons, “American Solidarity” is the only realistic (albeit possibly long-term) solution to this predicament. 

Concluding Thoughts

The Democrats made a deliberate decision to have one of their most prominent mouthpieces so proudly brag about the self-described “conspiracy” that a “well-connected cabal of powerful people” pulled off against Trump. This was done to humiliate and demoralize their political opponents, as well as likely provoke the most unstable and at-risk ones such as the most radical QAnon cultists into overreacting by committing acts of violence that could then be exploited as the justification for next phase of their “conspiracy”. The messages being sent are several: the Democrats have successfully captured control of all institutions and are now weaponizing them to politically suppress their opponents on the basis of double standards; this revelation was widely known long ago by all sides but only publicly acknowledged by the culprits at this point due to its strategic timing; and nobody can ever take the Democrats’ and their proxies’ (including institutions’) statements at face value any more. In truth, while one Hybrid War on America just ended, another has only begun.

HOW BITE THAT? McDonald’s sorry after customer found ‘fragments of human teeth’ in his McMuffin

The white fragments have been sent away for analysis and an investigation launched after the alleged find in Japan

MCDONALD’S have launched an investigation after a customer claimed to have found “tooth-like” fragments in his McMuffin.

By Gerard du Cann (via The Sun)

The alleged unwelcome discovery was made in Japan after a 58-year-old man bit into his sausage egg McMuffin.

The fast-food company told local media they would investigate to find out where in the supply chain the white pieces entered the patty and the customer was given a refund.

The enquiry could stretch all the way back to the US, where meat in the McMuffin was reportedly processed.

The fragments were sent away for analysis and a McDonald’s spokesperson told The Sun Online food quality and safety was a top priority for the company.

They said: “This is an isolated matter and the local team will continue to liaise directly with the customer as the investigation is carried out.”

After images of the teeth-like objects were posted online some social media users commented on how difficult the investigation would be.

One comment read: “They’ll have to check the dental records of everyone on the processing line.”

Another added: “Check the DNA! Then we’ll know for sure where it came from.”

Claims of disturbing discoveries are not unheard of in fast food.

In April a teen claimed to be have been left disgusted after biting into his McDonald’s burger to find a huge dead bug.

Last month an Australian man claimed to have found hair and a safety pin sticking out of his KFC chicken.

And earlier in the year a couple accused Burger King of serving them food crawling with maggots – although managers insisted their burger had been thoroughly cooked on the grill.

Another Lawsuit Against Merck Alleging Gardasil HPV Vaccine Caused Life-Changing Disability

By Arjun Walia (via Collective Evolution)

IN BRIEF

  • The Facts: Another lawsuit has been filed alleging severe injury and disability as a result of the HPV vaccine. This time it’s on behalf of teenager Michael Colbath alleging that his debilitating injuries were caused by the HPV Vaccine.
  • Reflect On: Why are those who raise concerns always considered “anti-vax conspiracy theorists” and ridiculed? Should freedom of choice always remain when it comes to vaccines?

What Happened: Another lawsuit has been filed against Merck for allegedly causing another life-changing disability. As lawyer Robert F. Kennedy Jr. explains, “Before he got the Gardasil (human papillomavirus) vaccine, our client Michael Colbath was a superlative athlete and scholar. A happy, healthy and active boy. In the months following his first injection, exhaustion and extreme fatigue forced Michael away from the sports and hobbies that had been centerpieces of his life. He had trouble staying awake during the school day. After his second Gardasil injection, Michael developed severe foot pain in both feet, so severe that he needed crutches to attend school. He had trouble waking up in the morning and getting out of bed.”

He goes on to explain:

As his symptoms worsened, multiple physicians and specialists treated him for migraine headaches; body pains and muscle aches; chronic fatigue; hypersomnolence (sleeping 15-22 hours in a 24-hour period), sleep drunkenness, unrefreshing sleep; excessive sweating, lightheadedness, and tachycardia; tunnel vision on standing; difficulty with concentration and memory; confusion and brain fog; intermittent or episodic paralysis, numbness; and stomach pains.

Michael’s post-Gardasil injuries and diagnoses, including postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), idiopathic hypersomnia (IH), myalgic encephalomyelitis / chronic fatigue syndrome (ME / CFS), complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) and gastroparesis, kept him from his passions, sports and hobbies. He missed most of high school and only his formidable self-discipline allowed him to complete his school work at home — he could not walk or move unassisted, he earned his Eagle Scout award using a knee scooter.

If Mrs. Colbath had known that Gardasil could create these health issues, she never would have allowed him to receive it.

This is the fifth Gardasil lawsuit Baum Hedlund and I have filed against Merck challenging the company’s dangerous and defective HPV vaccine for causing severe and life changing injuries. In addition to Mike’s case filed this week, we have filed cases on behalf of Sahara Walker of WisconsinZach Otto of Colorado and Julia Balasco of Rhode Island. While each case is unique, they share common threads: All of our clients were happy, healthy, bright, active kids with unlimited potential until they received the Gardasil HPV vaccine. We look forward to getting these cases in front of a jury as soon as possible.

Kennedy and his team are currently engaged in five lawsuits regarding injury as a result of the HPV vaccine. I recently wrote about Sahara Walker, a 19 year old girl from Wisconsin who suffered debilitating injuries after receiving the vaccine. You can read more about that here.

How Necessary Is The Gardasil Vaccine? The HPV vaccine is heavily marketed as a preventer of cervical cancer, but many studies have called this assumption into question. For example, in a recent study published in The Royal Society of Medicine, researchers conducted an appraisal of published phase 2 and 3 efficacy trials in relation to the prevention of cervical cancer and their analysis showed “the trials themselves generated significant uncertainties undermining claims of efficacy” in the data they used. The researchers emphasized that “it is still uncertain whether human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination prevents cervical cancer as trials were not designed to detect this outcome, which takes decades to develop.”  The researchers point out that the trials used to test the vaccine may have “overestimated” the efficacy of the vaccine.

Another interesting thing to note about HPV infections is when it comes to women in particular, approximately 70 percent of those who get an infection will clear it all by themselves within the first year, you don’t even have to detect it. Keep in mind that only a handful of HPV infections can actually lead to cancer. Within two years, approximately 90 percent of these infections will clear all by themselves. By three years, 10 percent of that original group will still have an HPV infection, and 5 percent of this 10 percent will have progressed into what are known as a precancerous lesion. There are three types of precancerous lesions, CIN1, which requires no treatment, C1N2 and the most severe, CIN3.

So now you have that small group (the remaining 5 percent)…who have precancerous lesions and now let’s look at that moving into invasive carcinoma. What we know then is that amongst women with CIN3 lesions, it takes five years for about twenty percent of them to become invasive carcinomas. That’s a pretty slow process. It takes about thirty years for forty percent of them to become invasive cervical carcinomas. – Dr. Diane Harper, one of a select few specialists in OB/GYN (in the world) who helped design and carry out the Phase II and Phase III safety and effectiveness studies to get Gardasil approved.

In a study published in Autoimmunity Reviews, the authors note that “The decision to vaccinate with the HPV vaccine is a personal decision, not one that must be made for public health. HPV is not a lethal disease, in 95 percent of the infections; and the other 5 percent are detectable and treatable in the precancerous state.”

This is why cervical cancer is usually diagnosed among the elderly, because it takes a long time to develop. This means that one has a very long time to treat pre-cancerous lesions that have the potential to develop into full blown cancer.

Not only is the efficacy of the vaccine called into question by many researchers, the supposed protection it provides, if any, only lasts a few years. Ask yourself, how likely is it for your 11 year old daughter/son to develop an HPV infection that will lead to cancer in a few decades, before she’s/he’s even done high school? The main cause of HPV infections is sexual intercourse.

Harper told CBS a few years ago that “the benefits (of the vaccine) to public health is noting, there is no reduction in cervical cancer.” She also emphasized that parents “must know that deaths occured” and that not all deaths have been reported. This information is accurate, we know this in the United States, for example, because of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. It stems from the National Childhood Vaccine Injury act, which protects pharmaceutical companies from liability and uses tax-dollars to pay for vaccine injuries. Multiple countries have a program like this in place, and the United States has now paid more than $4 billion to families of vaccine injured children. The main takeaway is that the FDA Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) is estimated to capture only 1 percent of vaccine injuries.

 A study published in 2013 in Current Pharmaceutical Design carried out a review of HPV vaccine pre- and post-licensure trials to assess the evidence of their effectiveness and safety. They found that,

HPV vaccine clinical trials design, and data interpretation of both efficacy and safety outcomes, were largely inadequate. Additionally, we note evidence of selective reporting of results from clinical trials (i.e., exclusion of vaccine efficacy figures related to study subgroups in which efficacy might be lower or even negative from peer-reviewed publications). Given this, the widespread optimism regarding HPV vaccines long-term benefits appears to rest on a number of unproven assumptions (or such which are at odds with factual evidence) and significant misinterpretation of available data.

For example, the claim that HPV vaccination will result in approximately 70% reduction of cervical cancers is made despite the fact that the clinical trials data have not demonstrated to date that the vaccines have actually prevented a single case of cervical cancer (let alone cervical cancer death), nor that the current overly optimistic surrogate marker-based extrapolations are justified. Likewise, the notion that HPV vaccines have an impressive safety profile is only supported by highly flawed design of safety trials and is contrary to accumulating evidence from vaccine safety surveillance databases and case reports which continue to link HPV vaccination to serious adverse outcomes (including death and permanent disabilities).

We thus conclude that further reduction of cervical cancers might be best achieved by optimizing cervical screening (which carries no such risks) and targeting other factors of the disease rather than by the reliance on vaccines with questionable efficacy and safety profiles.

Not long ago researchers from Mexico’s National Institute of Cardiology looked at 28 studies published through January 2017—16 randomized trials and 12 post-marketing case series—pertaining to the three HPV vaccines currently on the market globally. In their July 2017 peer-reviewed report, the authors, Manuel Martínez-Lavin and Luis Amezcua-Guerra, uncovered evidence of numerous adverse events, including life-threatening injuries, permanent disabilities, hospitalizations and deaths, reported after vaccination with GlaxoSmithKline’s bivalent Cervarix vaccine and Merck’s quadrivalent or nine-valent HPV vaccines.

Mary Holland, a former a professor on the faculties of Columbia Law School and the New York University School of Law for the past eighteen years who taught courses on human rights, recently retired as the Director of the NYU Graduate Lawyering Program. She co-authored a book titled “The HPV Vaccine On Trial: Seeking Justice For A Generation Betrayed.”

The HPV Vaccine on Trial is a shocking tale, chronicling the global efforts to sell and compel this alleged miracle. The book opens with the vaccine’s invention, winds through its regulatory labyrinths, details the crushing denial and dismissal of reported harms and deaths, and uncovers the enormous profits pharma and inventors have reaped. Authors Holland, Mack Rosenberg, and Iorio drill down into the clinical trial data, government approvals, advertising, and personal accounts of egregious injuries that have followed in countries as far-flung as Japan, Australia, Colombia, India, Ireland, the U.K. and Denmark. The authors have written an unprecedented exposé about this vaunted vaccine.

Written in plain language, the book is for everyone concerned – parents, patients, doctors, nurses, scientists, healthcare organizations, government officials, and schools. Ultimately, this book is not just about the HPV vaccine, but about how industry, government, and medical authorities may be putting the world’s children in harm’s way.

A study published in the journal Pediatrics found that many paediatricians don’t strongly recommend the HPV vaccine. Since then it’s now known that vaccine hesitancy is rising among many doctors, scientists, academics and people of all backgrounds and professions. The question to ask is, why?

At a World Health Organization (WHO) conference on vaccine safety, Dr. Heidi Larson a Professor of Anthropology and the Risk and Decision Scientist Director at the Vaccine Confidence Project Emphasized this point, having  stated,

The other thing that’s a trend, and an issue, is not just confidence in providers but confidence of health care providers. We have a very wobbly health professional frontline that is starting to question vaccines and the safety of vaccines. That’s a huge problem, because to this day any study I’ve seen…still, the most trusted person on any study I’ve seen globally is the health care provider.

A study published in the journal EbioMedicine  as far back as 2013 outlines this point, stating in the introduction,

Over the past two decades several vaccine controversies have emerged in various countries, including France, inducing worries about severe adverse effects and eroding confidence in health authorities, experts and science. These two dimensions are at the core of vaccine hesitancy (VH) observed in the general population. VH is defined as delay in acceptance of vaccination, or refusal, or even acceptance with doubts about its safety and benefits, with all these behaviours and attitudes varying according to context , vaccine and personal profile, despite the availability of vaccine services VH presents a challenge to physicians who must address their patients’ concerns about vaccines and ensure satisfactory vaccination coverage.

A Typical Response From Merck For A Supposed Vaccine Injury? A 14-year-old boy named Christopher Bunch passed away more than a year ago, and the mother and father claimed that it was as a result of the HPV vaccine. His mother started a petition over a year ago claiming that her son “died as a direct result of the HPV vaccine.”

The father of the boy, Elijah Eugene Mendoza-Bunch, wrote this via his Facebook page, in January of 2020.

So back on December 11th 2019 I sent an email to CEO Ken Frazier of Merck song to speak with him about the HPV VACCINE and how it killed my son and how it is destroying lives. Well here we are January 25th (the day I got it in the mail) and this is the response from Merck….

As you can see, the letter states that,

“The safety and efficacy of our HPV vaccines have been established in a clinical development program that started more than 20 years ago and involved more than 49,000 individuals. Safety has continued to be evaluated after approval in multiple studies in several million people, in long-term follow up studies and through our extensive ongoing pharmacovigilance monitoring program in place throughout the world. Multiple independent scientific organizations and major regulatory and public health authorities, including the World Health Organization (WHO), the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have repeatedly evaluated the safety of HPV vaccines. The results of these evaluations continue to be reassuring

Is Aluminum a Concern? The HPV vaccine does use an aluminum adjuvant, something that’s come under fire over the past few years. You can read and learn more about that here.

The Takeaway: This isn’t even the tip of the iceberg, there are many papers published in various journals over the past decade pointing out the same thing. There are also many published studies and papers that claim the vaccine is completely safe and very effective. This is why it can be a confusing topic to look into and why we believe that informed consent in place of an HPV vaccine mandate for children should be in place.

What do you think? One thing is for certain, people should be free to engage in conversations about controversial topics. This is one thing the mainstream fails to do, and always seems to deem the type of information presented in this article as a result of “anti vax conspiracy theorists.” Instead of using ridicule, it would be great if the concerns being raised about vaccine safety were actually spoken about openly and transparently, and most importantly, actually acknowledged and addressed.

Do we really want to live in a world where we can’t talk to each other? Why do we have such a hard time seeing from the perspective of another and trying to understand where they are coming from and why they feel the way they do? Do we really want to create a world where we are forced into certain actions by our government at the threat of losing certain rights and privileges?A world where we are so polarized? Should people not be free to do what they want with their body, especially if the evidence to suggest that they are harming others if they don’t is weak and unsubstantiated?

When it comes to vaccines specifically, a quote from a paper published in the International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy by professor Paddy Rawlinson, from Western Sydney University, provides some good insight into what I am referring to.

Critical criminology repeatedly has drawn attention to the state-corporate nexus as a site of corruption and other forms of criminality, a scenario exacerbated by the intensification of neoliberalism in areas such as health. The state-pharmaceutical relationship, which increasingly influences health policy, is no exception. That is especially so when pharmaceutical products such as vaccines, a burgeoning sector of the industry, are mandated in direct violation of the principle of informed consent. Such policies have provoked suspicion and dissent as critics question the integrity of the state-pharma alliance and its impact on vaccine safety. However, rather than encouraging open debate, draconian modes of governance have been implemented to repress and silence any form of criticism, thereby protecting the activities of the state and pharmaceutical industry from independent scrutiny. The article examines this relationship in the context of recent legislation in Australia to intensify its mandatory regime around vaccines. It argues that attempts to undermine freedom of speech, and to systematically excoriate those who criticise or dissent from mandatory vaccine programs, function as a corrupting process and, by extension, serve to provoke the notion that corruption does indeed exist within the state-pharma alliance.

CDC Quietly Removes Website Headline Claiming “Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism”

Government finally makes necessary change after failing to provide adequate evidence in court to support their claim

By NWO Report (via Global Research)

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has removed a headline from its website claiming that “vaccines do not cause autism” following a legal challenge questioning that assertion.

The change was quietly made last August, with no announcement, following a lengthy legal battle with the group Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) that began in 2017.

Here is the original:

And here is the edited version:

From ICAN’s website:

Instead of walking away after the CDC effectively admitted it did not have the studies ICAN sought, ICAN sued the CDC in federal court. The suit focused on the CDC’s claim that “Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism” on the basis that the CDC had not specifically listed the precise studies that it asserts support that claim. This lawsuit also quoted from the deposition of Dr. Stanley Plotkin, the godfather of vaccinology, who admitted under oath that he was “okay with telling the parent that DTaP/Tdap does not cause autism even though the science isn’t there yet to support that claim.”

This resulted in the CDC, under court order, presenting 20 studies supporting the claim that vaccines don’t cause autism, which the Institute of Medicine (IOM) found did not hold muster.

The IOM concluded that it could not identify a single study to support that DTaP does not cause autism. Instead, the only relevant study the IOM could identify found an association between DTaP and autism.

The Harmful Effects of Antifa. Crisis of America’s Left

By Diana Johnstone (via Global Research)

A historic opportunity is being missed. The disastrous 2016 presidential election could and should have been a wakeup call. A corrupt political system that gave voters a choice between two terrible candidates is not democracy. 

This should have been the signal to face reality. The U.S. political system is totally rotten, contemptuous of the people, serving the corporations and lobbies that pay to keep them in office. The time had come to organize a genuine alternative, an independent movement to liberate the electoral system from the grip of billionaires, to demand a transition from a war economy to an economy dedicated to improving the lives of the people who live here. What is needed is a movement for the pacification of America, at home and abroad.

That is a big order. Yet this approach could meet with wide support, especially if vigorous young people organized to stimulate popular debate, between real live people, from door to door if necessary, creating a mass movement for genuine democracy, equality and peace. This is as revolutionary a program as possible in the present circumstances.  A moribund left should be coming back to life to take the lead in building such a movement.

Quite the opposite is happening.

Provoking a new Civil War?

The first step toward preventing such a constructive movement was a false interpretation of the meaning of the Trump victory, massively promoted by mainstream media. This was essentially the Clintonite excuse for Hillary’s loss. Trump’s victory, according to this line, was the product of a convergence between Russian interference and the votes of “misogynists, racists, homophobes, xenophobes, and white supremacists”. The influence of all those bad people indicated the rise of “fascism” in America, with Trump in the role of “fascist” leader.

In this way, criticism of the system that produced Trump vanished in favor of demonization of Trump the individual, making it that much easier for the Clintonites to solidify their control of the Democratic Party, by manipulating their own leftist opposition.

The events of Charlottesville resembled a multiple provocation, with pro- and anti-statue sides provoking each other, providing a stage for Antifa to gain national prominence as saviors. Significantly, Charlottesville riots provoked Trump into making comments which were seized upon by all his enemies to brand him definitively as “racist” and “fascist”. This gave the disoriented “left” a clear cause: fight “fascist Trump” and domestic “fascists”. This is more immediate than organizing to demand that the United States end its threats against Iran and North Korea, its open and covert project to reshape the Middle East to ensure Israel’s regional dominance, or its nuclear buildup targeting Russia. Not to mention its support for genuine Nazis in Ukraine. Yet that trillion dollar policy of global militarization contributes more to violence and injustice even in the United States than the remnants of thoroughly discredited lost causes.

The Left and Antifa

All those who are sincerely on the left, who are in favor of greater social and economic equality for all, who oppose the endless aggressive foreign wars and the resulting militarization of the American police and the American mentality, must realize that, since the Clintonian takeover of the Democratic Party, the ruling oligarchic establishment disguises itself as “the left”, uses “left” arguments to justify itself, and largely succeeds in manipulating genuine leftists for its own purposes.  This has caused such confusion that it is quite unclear what “left” means any more.

The Clintonian left substituted Identity Politics for the progressive goal of economic and social equality, by ostentatiously coopting women, blacks and Latinos into the visible elite, the better to ignore the needs of the majority. The Clintonian left introduced the concept of “humanitarian war” to describe its relentless destruction of recalcitrant nations, seducing much of the left into supporting U.S. imperialism as a fight for democracy against “dictators”.

Antifa contributes to this confusion by giving precedence to the suppression of “bad” ideas rather than to the development of good ones through uninhibited debate. Antifa attacks on dissidents tend to enforce the dominant neoliberal doctrine that also raises the specter of fascism as pretext for aggression against countries targeted for regime change.

Antifa’s excuses

Antifa has several favorite arguments to justify itself those who criticize its use of force and intimidation to silence its adversaries.

1. Its violence is justified by the implicit violence of its enemies who if left alone plan to exterminate whole groups of people.

This is demonstrably untrue, as Antifa is notoriously generous in distributing the fascist label. Most of the people Antifa targets are not fascists and there is no evidence that even “racists” are planning to carry out genocide.

2. Antifa is engaged in other political activity.

That is completely beside the point. Nobody is criticizing that “other political activity”. It is the violence and the censorship which are the hallmarks of the Antifa brand, and the target of criticism. Let them drop the violence and the censorship and get on with their other activities. Then nobody will object.

3. Antifa defends threatened communities.

But that is certainly not all they are doing. Nor is that what its critics are objecting to. Actual defense of a truly threatened community is best done openly by respected members of the community itself, rather than by self-styled Zorros who arrive in disguise. The problem is the definition of the terms. For Antifa, the victim community can be a whole category of people, such as LGBTQI, and the threat may be a controversial speaker at a university who could say something to hurt their feelings. And what community was being defended by Linwood Kaine, younger son of the Democratic Party Vice Presidential candidate, Senator Tim Kaine, when he was arrested in St Paul, Minnesota, last March 4 on suspicion of felony second-degree riot for attempting to break up a pro-Trump rally at the State Capitol? Although Kaine, dressed in black from head to toe, resisted arrest, the matter ended there. What downtrodden community was the young Kaine defending other than the Clintonite Democrats? His own privilege as a family member of the Washington political elite?

4. Antifa claims that it is in favor of free speech in general, but racists and fascists are an exception, because you can’t reason with them, and hate speech is not speech but action.

This amounts to an astounding intellectual surrender to the enemy. It is an admission of being unable to win a free argument. The fact is that speech is indeed speech, and should be countered by speech. You should welcome the chance to debate in public in order to expose the weaknesses of their position. If indeed “you can’t reason with them”, then they will shut down the discussion and you don’t have to. If they resort to physical attack against you, then you have the moral victory. Otherwise, you’re giving it to them.

5. Antifa insists that the Constitutional right to free speech applies only to the State. That is, only the government is banned from depriving citizens of the right to free speech and assembly. Among citizens, anything goes.

This is a remarkable bit of sophistry. Bullying and intimidation are okay if done by an unofficial group. In keeping with neoliberalism, Antifa is out to privatize censorship, by taking over the job itself.

Verbal Violence 

The verbal violence of Antifa is worse than their physical violence insofar as it is more effective. The physical violence is usually of minor consequence, at most temporarily preventing something that will happen later. It is the verbal violence that succeeds most in preventing free discussion of controversial issues.

Alarmed by the proliferation of pro-Antifa articles on CounterPunch, I ventured to write a critique, Antifa in Theory and Practice. My criticism was not personal; I did not mention the authors of those pro-Antifa CounterPunch articles and my mention of author Mark Bray was respectful. The result was a torrent of vituperation on CounterPunch’s FaceBook page, as well as in a hostile email exchange with star Antifa champion Yoav Litvin. This culminated with a hit piece by Amitai Ben-Abba published on CounterPunch itself. Note that both Litvin and Ben-Abba are Israelis, but pro-Palestinian, which provides the two with impeccable left credentials.

These reactions provided a perfect illustration of Antifa discussion techniques. It is a sort of food fight, where you just throw everything you can pick up at the adversary, regardless of logic or relevance. On the FaceBook page, Litvin, on the basis of my past carefully objective articles on French politics, accused me of “shilling for Marine Le Pen”. Irrelevant and inaccurate.

In his hit piece Ben-Abba dragged in this totally off-topic assertion:

Much in the same way that her early ’00spseudo-historical denial of the massacre in Srebrenica worked to embolden Serbian nationalists, her present analysis can embolden white supremacists.”

Need I point out that I never denied the “massacre” but refuse to label it “genocide”, nor did Serbian nationalists ever need my humble opinion in order to be “emboldened” – especially since the war was over by then.

I happily grant that there are issues raised in my initial article that deserve debate, such as immigration or whether or not the “fascism” of the early twentieth century still exists today. Indeed my whole point was that such issues deserve debate. That’s not what I got. Ben-Abba came up with this imaginary allusion to the immigration issue:

“‘antifa’ is a broader umbrella term that allows formerly unaffiliated folks (like the sans-papiers migrant baker who makes Johnstone’s croissants) to participate in defense of their communities against neo-fascist intimidation.”

Very funny: I am exploiting some poor undocumented baker and preventing him from being defended. Aside from the fact that I very rarely to eat a croissant, the bakers in my neighborhood are all fully documented, and moreover this largely immigrant neighborhood is the scene of frequent peaceful street demonstrations by African sans-papiers clearly not intimidated by neo-fascists. They obviously do not need Antifa to protect them. This fantasy of omnipresent neo-fascism is as necessary to Antifa as the fantasy of omnipresent anti-Semitism is to Israel.

Antifa rhetoric specializes in non sequitur. If you agree with some conservative or libertarian that it was wrong to destroy Libya, then you are not only guilty of association with a pre-fascist, you are a supporter of dictators and thus probably a fascist yourself. This has been happening in France for years and it’s just getting started in the United States.

The Antifa specialty is labeling anti-war activists and writers as “red-brown”, red for left and brown for fascist. You may pretend to be on the left, but if we can find the slightest association between you and someone on the right, then you are a “red-brown” and deserve to be quarantined.

By claiming to defend helpless minorities from a rising fascist peril, Antifa arrogates to itself the right to decide who is, or might be, “fascist”.

Whatever they think they are doing, whatever they claim to be doing, the one thing they really are doing is to tie the left into such sectarian intolerance that any broad inclusive single-issue anti-war movement becomes impossible.  Indeed, it is precisely the imminent danger of nuclear World War III that leads some of us to call for a non-exclusive single issue anti-war movement – thus setting ourselves up as “red-brown”.

That is why Antifa – unwittingly let us say – is running interference for the war party.

It is most unfortunate to see CounterPunch become a platform for Antifa. It didn’t have to. The site is quite able to reject articles, as it has systematically rejected contentions about 9/11 or as it rejected David Cobb’s and Caitlin Johnstone’s (no relative) right to respond. It could have taken a principled stand against calls for violence and censorship. It did not do so. It is one thing to encourage debate and quite another to sponsor mud wrestling.

Diana Johnstone is the author of Fools’ Crusade: Yugoslavia, NATO, and Western Delusions. Her new book is Queen of Chaos: the Misadventures of Hillary Clinton. She can be reached at diana.johnstone@wanadoo.fr

Antifa in Theory and in Practice

By Diana Johnstone (via Global Research)

First published by Global Research on October 11, 2017.

See Diana Johnstone’s followup article 

Fascists are divided into two categories: the fascists and the anti-fascists.” – Ennio Flaiano, Italian writer and co-author of Federico Fellini’s greatest film scripts.

In recent weeks, a totally disoriented left has been widely exhorted to unify around a masked vanguard calling itself Antifa, for anti-fascist.  Hooded and dressed in black, Antifa is essentially a variation of the Black Bloc, familiar for introducing violence into peaceful demonstrations in many countries. Imported from Europe, the label Antifa sounds more political.  It also serves the purpose of stigmatizing those it attacks as “fascists”.

Despite its imported European name, Antifa is basically just another example of America’s steady descent into violence.

Historical Pretensions

Antifa first came to prominence from its role in reversing Berkeley’s proud “free speech” tradition by preventing right wing personalities from speaking there. But its moment of glory was its clash with rightwingers in Charlottesville on August 12, largely because Trump commented that there were “good people on both sides”. With exuberant Schadenfreude, commentators grabbed the opportunity to condemn the despised President for his “moral equivalence”, thereby bestowing a moral blessing on Antifa.

Charlottesville served as a successful book launching for Antifa: the Antifascist Handbook, whose author, young academic Mark Bray, is an Antifa in both theory and practice. The book is “really taking off very fast”, rejoiced the publisher, Melville House. It instantly won acclaim from leading mainstream media such as the New York TimesThe Guardian and NBC, not hitherto known for rushing to review leftwing books, least of all those by revolutionary anarchists.

The Washington Post welcomed Bray as spokesman for “insurgent activist movements” and observed that:

“The book’s most enlightening contribution is on the history of anti-fascist efforts over the past century, but its most relevant for today is its justification for stifling speech and clobbering white supremacists.”

Bray’s “enlightening contribution” is to a tell a flattering version of the Antifa story to a generation whose dualistic, Holocaust-centered view of history has largely deprived them of both the factual and the analytical tools to judge multidimensional events such as the growth of fascism. Bray presents today’s Antifa as though it were the glorious legitimate heir to every noble cause since abolitionism. But there were no anti-fascists before fascism, and the label “Antifa” by no means applies to all the many adversaries of fascism.

The implicit claim to carry on the tradition of the International Brigades who fought in Spain against Franco is nothing other than a form of innocence by association. Since we must revere the heroes of the Spanish Civil War, some of that esteem is supposed to rub off on their self-designated heirs. Unfortunately, there are no veterans of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade still alive to point to the difference between a vast organized defense against invading fascist armies and skirmishes on the Berkeley campus. As for the Anarchists of Catalonia, the patent on anarchism ran out a long time ago, and anyone is free to market his own generic.

The original Antifascist movement was an effort by the Communist International to cease hostilities with Europe’s Socialist Parties in order to build a common front against the triumphant movements led by Mussolini and Hitler.

Since Fascism thrived, and Antifa was never a serious adversary, its apologists thrive on the “nipped in the bud” claim: “if only” Antifascists had beat up the fascist movements early enough, the latter would have been nipped in the bud.  Since reason and debate failed to stop the rise of fascism, they argue, we must use street violence – which, by the way, failed even more decisively.

This is totally ahistorical.  Fascism exalted violence, and violence was its preferred testing ground. Both Communists and Fascists were fighting in the streets and the atmosphere of violence helped fascism thrive as a bulwark against Bolshevism, gaining the crucial support of leading capitalists and militarists in their countries, which brought them to power.

Since historic fascism no longer exists, Bray’s Antifa have broadened their notion of “fascism” to include anything that violates the current Identity Politics canon: from “patriarchy” (a pre-fascist attitude to put it mildly) to “transphobia” (decidedly a post-fascist problem).

The masked militants of Antifa seem to be more inspired by Batman than by Marx or even by Bakunin.

Storm Troopers of the Neoliberal War Party

Since Mark Bray offers European credentials for current U.S. Antifa, it is appropriate to observe what Antifa amounts to in Europe today.

In Europe, the tendency takes two forms. Black Bloc activists regularly invade various leftist demonstrations in order to smash windows and fight the police. These testosterone exhibits are of minor political significance, other than provoking public calls to strengthen police forces. They are widely suspected of being influenced by police infiltration.

As an example, last September 23, several dozen black-clad masked ruffians, tearing down posters and throwing stones, attempted to storm the platform where the flamboyant Jean-Luc Mélenchon was to address the mass meeting of La France Insoumise, today the leading leftist party in France. Their unspoken message seemed to be that nobody is revolutionary enough for them. Occasionally, they do actually spot a random skinhead to beat up.  This establishes their credentials as “anti-fascist”.

They use these credentials to arrogate to themselves the right to slander others in a sort of informal self-appointed inquisition.

As prime example, in late 2010, a young woman named Ornella Guyet appeared in Paris seeking work as a journalist in various leftist periodicals and blogs. She “tried to infiltrate everywhere”, according to the former director of Le Monde diplomatique, Maurice Lemoine, who “always intuitively distrusted her” when he hired her as an intern.

Viktor Dedaj, who manages one of the main leftist sites in France, Le Grand Soir, was among those who tried to help her, only to experience an unpleasant surprise a few months later.  Ornella had become a self-appointed inquisitor dedicated to denouncing “conspirationism, confusionism, anti-Semitism and red-brown” on Internet.  This took the form of personal attacks on individuals whom she judged to be guilty of those sins. What is significant is that all her targets were opposed to U.S. and NATO aggressive wars in the Middle East.

Indeed, the timing of her crusade coincided with the “regime change” wars that destroyed Libya and tore apart Syria.  The attacks singled out leading critics of those wars.

Viktor Dedaj was on her hit list. So was Michel Collon, close to the Belgian Workers Party, author, activist and manager of the bilingual site Investig’action. So was François Ruffin, film-maker, editor of the leftist journal Fakir elected recently to the National Assembly on the list of Mélenchon’s party La France Insoumise. And so on. The list is long.

The targeted personalities are diverse, but all have one thing in common: opposition to aggressive wars. What’s more, so far as I can tell, just about everyone opposed to those wars is on her list.

The main technique is guilt by association. High on the list of mortal sins is criticism of the European Union, which is associated with “nationalism” which is associated with “fascism” which is associated with “anti-Semitism”, hinting at a penchant for genocide. This coincides perfectly with the official policy of the EU and EU governments, but Antifa uses much harsher language.

In mid-June 2011, the anti-EU party Union Populaire Républicaine led by François Asselineauwas the object of slanderous insinuations on Antifa internet sites signed by “Marie-Anne Boutoleau” (a pseudonym for Ornella Guyet). Fearing violence, owners cancelled scheduled UPR meeting places in Lyon. UPR did a little investigation, discovering that Ornella Guyet was on the speakers list at a March 2009 Seminar on International Media organized in Paris by the Center for the Study of International Communications and the School of Media and Public Affairs at George Washington University. A surprising association for such a zealous crusader against “red-brown”.

In case anyone has doubts, “red-brown” is a term used to smear anyone with generally leftist views – that is, “red” – with the fascist color “brown”. This smear can be based on having the same opinion as someone on the right, speaking on the same platform with someone on the right, being published alongside someone on the right, being seen at an anti-war demonstration also attended by someone on the right, and so on. This is particularly useful for the War Party, since these days, many conservatives are more opposed to war than leftists who have bought into the “humanitarian war” mantra.

The government doesn’t need to repress anti-war gatherings. Antifa does the job.

The Franco-African comedien Dieudonné M’Bala M’Bala, stigmatized for anti-Semitism since 2002 for his tv sketch lampooning an Israeli settler as part of George W. Bush’s “Axis of Good”, is not only a target, but serves as a guilty association for anyone who defends his right to free speech – such as Belgian professor Jean Bricmont, virtually blacklisted in France for trying to get in a word in favor of free speech during a TV talk show. Dieudonné has been banned from the media, sued and fined countless times, even sentenced to jail in Belgium, but continues to enjoy a full house of enthusiastic supporters at his one-man shows, where the main political message is opposition to war.

Still, accusations of being soft on Dieudonné can have serious effects on individuals in more precarious positions, since the mere hint of “anti-Semitism” can be a career killer in France. Invitations are cancelled, publications refused, messages go unanswered.

In April 2016, Ornella Guyet dropped out of sight, amid strong suspicions about her own peculiar associations.

The moral of this story is simple. Self-appointed radical revolutionaries can be the most useful thought police for the neoliberal war party.

I am not suggesting that all, or most, Antifa are agents of the establishment. But they can be manipulated, infiltrated or impersonated precisely because they are self-anointed and usually more or less disguised.

Silencing Necessary Debate

One who is certainly sincere is Mark Bray, author of The Intifa Handbook. It is clear where Mark Bray is coming from when he writes (p.36-7):

“… Hitler’s ‘final solution’ murdered six million Jews in gas chambers, with firing squads, through hunger an lack of medical treatment in squalid camps and ghettoes, with beatings, by working them to death, and through suicidal despair. Approximately two out of every three Jews on the continent were killed, including some of my relatives.”

This personal history explains why Mark Bray feels passionately about “fascism”. This is perfectly understandable in one who is haunted by fear that “it can happen again”.

However, even the most justifiable emotional concerns do not necessarily contribute to wise counsel. Violent reactions to fear may seem to be strong and effective when in reality they are morally weak and practically ineffectual.

We are in a period of great political confusion. Labeling every manifestation of “political incorrectness” as fascism impedes clarification of debate over issues that very much need to be defined and clarified.

The scarcity of fascists has been compensated by identifying criticism of immigration as fascism. This identification, in connection with rejection of national borders, derives much of its emotional force above all from the ancestral fear in the Jewish community of being excluded from the nations in which they find themselves.

The issue of immigration has different aspects in different places. It is not the same in European countries as in the United States. There is a basic distinction between immigrants and immigration. Immigrants are people who deserve consideration. Immigration is a policy that needs to be evaluated. It should be possible to discuss the policy without being accused of persecuting the people. After all, trade union leaders have traditionally opposed mass immigration, not out of racism, but because it can be a deliberate capitalist strategy to bring down wages.

In reality, immigration is a complex subject, with many aspects that can lead to reasonable compromise. But to polarize the issue misses the chances for compromise. By making mass immigration the litmus test of whether or not one is fascist, Antifa intimidation impedes reasonable discussion. Without discussion, without readiness to listen to all viewpoints, the issue will simply divide the population into two camps, for and against. And who will win such a confrontation?

A recent survey* shows that mass immigration is increasingly unpopular in all European countries. The complexity of the issue is shown by the fact that in the vast majority of European countries, most people believe they have a duty to welcome refugees, but disapprove of continued mass immigration. The official argument that immigration is a good thing is accepted by only 40%, compared to 60% of all Europeans who believe that “immigration is bad for our country”.  A left whose principal cause is open borders will become increasingly unpopular.

Childish Violence

The idea that the way to shut someone up is to punch him in the jaw is as American as Hollywood movies. It is also typical of the gang war that prevails in certain parts of Los Angeles. Banding together with others “like us” to fight against gangs of “them” for control of turf is characteristic of young men in uncertain circumstances. The search for a cause can involve endowing such conduct with a political purpose: either fascist or antifascist. For disoriented youth, this is an alternative to joining the U.S. Marines.

Source: TheFreeThoughtProject.com

American Antifa looks very much like a middle class wedding between Identity Politics and gang warfare. Mark Bray (page 175) quotes his DC Antifa source as implying that the motive of would-be fascists is to side with “the most powerful kid in the block” and will retreat if scared. Our gang is tougher than your gang.

That is also the logic of U.S. imperialism, which habitually declares of its chosen enemies: “All they understand is force.”  Although Antifa claim to be radical revolutionaries, their mindset is perfectly typical the atmosphere of violence which prevails in militarized America.

In another vein, Antifa follows the trend of current Identity Politics excesses that are squelching free speech in what should be its citadel, academia. Words are considered so dangerous that “safe spaces” must be established to protect people from them. This extreme vulnerability to injury from words is strangely linked to tolerance of real physical violence.

Wild Goose Chase

In the United States, the worst thing about Antifa is the effort to lead the disoriented American left into a wild goose chase, tracking down imaginary “fascists” instead of getting together openly to work out a coherent positive program. The United States has more than its share of weird individuals, of gratuitous aggression, of crazy ideas, and tracking down these marginal characters, whether alone or in groups, is a huge distraction. The truly dangerous people in the United States are safely ensconced in Wall Street, in Washington Think Tanks, in the executive suites of the sprawling military industry, not to mention the editorial offices of some of the mainstream media currently adopting a benevolent attitude toward “anti-fascists” simply because they are useful in focusing on the maverick Trump instead of themselves.

Antifa USA, by defining “resistance to fascism” as resistance to lost causes – the Confederacy, white supremacists and for that matter Donald Trump – is actually distracting from resistance to the ruling neoliberal establishment, which is also opposed to the Confederacy and white supremacists and has already largely managed to capture Trump by its implacable campaign of denigration. That ruling establishment, which in its insatiable foreign wars and introduction of police state methods, has successfully used popular “resistance to Trump” to make him even worse than he already was.

The facile use of the term “fascist” gets in the way of thoughtful identification and definition of the real enemy of humanity today. In the contemporary chaos, the greatest and most dangerous upheavals in the world all stem from the same source, which is hard to name, but which we might give the provisional simplified label of Globalized Imperialism. This amounts to a multifaceted project to reshape the world to satisfy the demands of financial capitalism, the military industrial complex, United States ideological vanity and the megalomania of leaders of lesser “Western” powers, notably Israel. It could be called simply “imperialism”, except that it is much vaster and more destructive than the historic imperialism of previous centuries. It is also much more disguised. And since it bears no clear label such as “fascism”, it is difficult to denounce in simple terms.

The fixation on preventing a form of tyranny that arose over 80 years ago, under very different circumstances, obstructs recognition of the monstrous tyranny of today. Fighting the previous war leads to defeat.

Donald Trump is an outsider who will not be let inside. The election of Donald Trump is above all a grave symptom of the decadence of the American political system, totally ruled by money, lobbies, the military-industrial complex and corporate media. Their lies are undermining the very basis of democracy. Antifa has gone on the offensive against the one weapon still in the hands of the people: the right to free speech and assembly.

Diana Johnstone is the author of Fools’ Crusade: Yugoslavia, NATO, and Western Delusions. Her new book is Queen of Chaos: the Misadventures of Hillary Clinton. She can be reached at diana.johnstone@wanadoo.fr

The mRNA COVID Vaccine Is Not a Vaccine

By Makia Freeman (via Global Research)

First posted by Global Research on January 15, 2021

It’s NOT a vaccine. The mRNA COVID vaccine now being militarily deployed in many nations around the world, is NOT a vaccine. I repeat: it is not a vaccine. It is many things indeed, but a vaccine is not one of them. We have to awaken to the fact that the COVID scamdemic has rapidly accelerated the technocratic and transhumanistic aspects of the New World Order (NWO) to the point where people are blindly lining up to get injected with a “treatment” which is also a chemical device, an operating system, a synthetic pathogen and chemical pathogen production device. As covered in previous articles, this new COVID vax is a completely new kind of technology, potentially even more dangerous than your average toxic vaccine. In this article, we will explore in more depth what this mRNA vaccine is.

Doctors David Martin and Judy Mikovits Expose How So-Called COVID Vaccine is Not a Vaccine

Listen to this short excerpt featuring doctors David Martin and Judy Mikovits (who have both been very outspoken thus far in exposing the COVID plandemic) who are speaking with Robert Kennedy Jr. and lawyer Rocco Galati, who is representing a Canadian freedom group suing the government for the entire COVID scam. David Martin makes some extremely important points about how we can’t accurately label the device Moderna and Pfizer are pushing as a vaccine, because both medically and legally, is not a vaccine:

“This is not a vaccine … using the term vaccine to sneak this thing under public health exemptions … This is a mRNA packaged in a fat envelope that is delivered to a cell. It is a medical device designed to stimulate the human cell into becoming a pathogen creator. It is not a vaccine! Vaccines actually are a legally defined term … under public health law … under CDC and FDA standards, and a vaccine specifically has to stimulate both an immunity within the person receiving it, but it also has to disrupt transmission … They have been abundantly clear in saying that the mRNA strand that is going into the cell is not to stop transmission. It is a treatment. But if it was discussed as a treatment, it would not get the sympathetic ear of public health authorities, because then people would say “What other treatments are there?”

The use of the term vaccine is unconscionable … because it actually is the sucker punch to open and free discourse … Moderna was a started as a chemotherapy company for cancer, not a vaccine manufacturer for SARS … if we said we’re going to give people prophylactic chemo for the cancer they don’t have, you’d be laughed out of a room, because it’s a stupid idea. That’s exactly what this is! This is a mechanical device, in the form of a very small packet of technology, that is being inserted into the human system to activate the cell to become a pathogen manufacturing site.

The only reason why the term [vaccine] is being used is to abuse the 1905 Jacobsen case that has been misrepresented since it was written. If we were honest with this, we would actually call it what it is: it is a chemical pathogen device, that is actually meant to unleash a chemical pathogen production action within the cell. It is a medical device, not a drug, because it meets the CDRH [Center for Devices and Radiological Health] definition of a device.

It is made to make you sick … 80% of the people who are exposed to allegedly the virus [SARS-Cov-2] have no symptoms at all … 80% of people who get this injected into them have a clinical adverse event. You are getting injected with a chemical substance to induce illness, not to induce a[n] immuno-transmissive response. In other words, nothing about this is going to stop you transmitting anything. This is about getting you sick, and having your own cells be the thing that get you sick.”

Judy Mikovits also chips in with this:

“It’s a synthetic pathogen. They’ve literally injected this pathogenic part of the virus into every cell of the body … it can actually directly cause multiple sclerosis, Lou Gehrig’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease … it can cause accelerated cancer … that’s what the expression of that piece of virus … has been known to do for decades.”

mRNA vaccine COVID software of life

The mRNA vaccine operating system “software of life”. Image credit: Moderna

COVID Vaccine is an Operating System, Says Moderna

The COVID mRNA Vaccine is an operating system which can program your DNA, and therefore program you, at your core essential blueprint level. Is this an exaggeration? No it’s not. Moderna states on their website that their mRNA technology platform is a “software of life” and “functions very much like an operating system on a computer.” This is straight from their website:

“It is designed so that it can plug and play interchangeably with different programs. In our case, the “program” or “app” is our mRNA drug – the unique mRNA sequence that codes for a protein.”

The Game Plan: Making Every Human into a Digital Node on the Control Grid

We are fast moving into the world of transhumanism, where our natural biological bodies are hijacked and infiltrated with synthetic parts, starting at the nanoparticle level. The NWO controllers want to download some kind of Microsoft office system or software into your body and brain, and hook you up to the JEDI and/or Amazon-CIA cloud, so they can have direct access to your brain. Then, they can roll out “vaccines” which are not vaccines to continually update you, just like computer software gets regular updates. Viruses, real or not, and vaccines, real or not, are just means to achieve this goal.

Turning Humans into Commodities via Social Credit Currency

Alison McDowell sums up the current transhumanistic NWO path of highest probability below, which involves social credit, 5G, the Smart Grid and AI to induce planetary-wide compliance:

“Within the tech-no-logic system, total compliance will be demanded. Approved behavior becomes currency, tokenized on blockchain and monitored by sensors and AI. They are training us for a future where we compete with one another to see who is the best behaved, the most docile. Surviving will mean conforming to the strident terms of psychopathic financial agreements. To obtain the data needed to verify claims embedded in twisted “pay for success” deals, our mother, the earth, must be remade as a geo-fenced digital prison using 5G and satellite constellations. All of your data will be added to your “permanent record” to evaluate your value as human capital for investor portfolios. The billionaires envision a future where freedom is a privilege limited to themselves, their functionaries, and the robots they control. Be assured AI is already keeping tabs, and social credit scoring is well underway.”

It is a grim future, however it is not set in stone. I agree wholeheartedly with McDowell that we do NOT have to accept this as our fate or experience such a painful timeline IF we can wake up quickly and change. However, we must first accept this is the probable path we are on. Like it or not, this is the current trajectory. How do we change it? Firstly by looking within. To change ourselves, we must change our inner world and change our perception, and so therefore change our reality:

“This planned future, however, is NOT preordained. Totalitarian transhumanism is not a foregone conclusion. Trudell’s remedy? Change our perception of reality through active non-cooperation. Manifest in our hearts, minds, and actions the world we desire. Where they engineer disconnect, RECONNECT with intention; not only with one another, but with ALL our relations and the land and the spiritual beings that exist beyond our senses. We must synchronize to change the vibrational reality, and that power exists within us as children of the earth.”

This is not airy-fairy talk, but rather a realization that we are participating in co-creating a nightmare world by allowing our perception to be programmed to bring about the NWO. They are using our energy to do it! To reclaim our sovereignety, we must reclaim our perception by breaking down the programming that was inserted into us.

Final Thoughts: A Technocratic, Transhumanistic Tool

It is vital to know, and to tell others, that the current mRNA COVID vaccine is not a vaccine. This is not just because calling it a vaccine gives Big Pharma legal immunity from damages, but also for all the reasons listed above. These devices are designed to reprogram you at the fundamental level. They are not vaccines, they are not drugs, and in my opinion, they are not treatments or medicine. As scary as these terms are, I would go beyond just calling them chemical devices, operating systems, synthetic pathogens and chemical pathogen production devices, which are already illuminating terms and horrible enough. I would call them technocratic, transhumanistic tools to permanently change your genetics and transform you into a synthetic human. They are symbolic of just how swiftly the NWO agenda is being made manifest in our physical reality, and hopefully a wake-up call to everyone to strive harder to stop this dark, nefarious agenda while there is still time.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

This article was originally published on The Freedom Articles.

Makia Freeman is the editor of alternative media / independent news site The Freedom Articles, author of the book Cancer: The Lies, the Truth and the Solutions and senior researcher at ToolsForFreedom.com. Makia is on Steemit and Parler.

Sources

https://thefreedomarticles.com/10-things-to-know-experimental-covid-vaccines/

https://www.bitchute.com/video/6LYagqLH5SGa/

https://www.modernatx.com/mrna-technology/mrna-platform-enabling-drug-discovery-development

http://www.aevamagazine.co.uk/timpsila-strong-medicine-for-a-tech-no-logic-age—alison-mcdowell.html

Featured image: NOT a Vaccine: the mRNA COVID vax is a chemical pathogen production device and a technocratic, transhumanistic tool to repgrogram you. Image credit: Jordan Henderson

What’s the Point of Impeaching Trump Twice?

By Andrew Korybko (via OneWorld)

Despite Trump agreeing to leave the White House next Wednesday after losing the election under contentious circumstances, the Democrats and their “Republican In Name Only” (RINO) allies pushed Trump’s historic second impeachment through the House on allegations that he “incited insurrection” in order to delegitimize his legacy, intimidate his supporters, and establish the “legal” precedent for de facto criminalizing the “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) movement that he inspired as a “domestic terrorist” organization in order to pave the way for one-party rule.

Impeachment 2.0

A lot of folks are confused about why there was such a rush to impeach Trump for the historic second time despite him agreeing to leave the White House next Wednesday after losing the election under contentious circumstances. The motivation clearly isn’t to remove him from office but to advance a more devious agenda being pushed by the Democrats and their “Republican In Name Only” (RINO) allies. These anti-Trump forces will stop at nothing in order to delegitimize his legacy and intimidate his supporters, as well as de facto criminalize the Trump-inspired “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) movement as a “domestic terrorist” organization in order to pave the way for one-party rule. These are the only explanations that make any sense for explaining their obsession with impeaching him before he leaves.

“The Great (Political) Reset”

Regarding the first motivation, the American Establishment wants to return to as much of the pre-Trump domestic political status quo as is realistically possible, to which end they plan to reverse practically all of his legacy after the Democrats seized control of both chambers of Congress and the Presidency. The RINOs will go along with this since their vested interests were always threatened by the self-professed “outsider” who they voted to impeach as revenge for his failed crusade to “drain the swamp”. The swiftness with which these policy reversals take place might surprise some Americans, but will be “justified” on the basis that everything that the supposed “Insurrectionist-in-Chief” has done is a “danger to the country” in hindsight. Trump’s supporters will understandably be enraged, but they won’t be able to do much of anything to stop this process.

State-Sponsored Intimidation

That’s because many of them are intimidated after they saw how quickly their leader was accused of “insurrection” despite arguably never having done anything of the sort if one actually takes the time to read the speech that he gave at his Save America Rally and subsequent now-deleted tweets which are misleadingly being used as “evidence” to support this ridiculous claim. They, too, fear that they’ll be caught up in the “anti-insurrectionist” witch hunt if they dare to exercise their constitutionally enshrined freedoms of speech and peaceful assembly to protest the dark path that their country is nowadays treading. After all, if the House can impeach the President for purely political reasons on such a false pretext after he was already completely censored from social media, then there’s nothing stopping them from being victimized too.

De Facto “Domestic Terrorists”

Therein lies the crux of the issue since the worst-case scenario is that this development is exploited by the Democrats and their RINO allies as the “legal” precedent for de facto criminalizing MAGA as a “domestic terrorist” organization. President-Elect Biden himself declared that those who stormed the US Capitol were “domestic terrorists”, and Senator Richard Durbin and Representative Brad Schneider plan to reintroduce their 2019 “Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act” in the wake of what recently happened. Although that proposed piece of legislation doesn’t explicitly ban MAGA, the US’ official definition of “domestic terrorism” is broad enough that it could be abused to encompass all of the movement’s supporters after the events of 6 January and Trump’s subsequent impeachment for “inciting insurrection” if the Democrats and RINOS choose to do so.

“American Solidarity” Is The Answer

There’s no credible reason to dismiss that scenario either since America is hurtling towards de facto one-party rule in the aftermath of that attack, which arguably wasn’t anywhere near as violent or destructive as the last half-year of nationwide riots provoked by Antifa and “Black Lives Matter”(BLM) even though this recent incident was far more symbolic by virtue of the fact that it took place in the US Capitol. The author predicted the impending Democrat-RINO dictatorship and other disturbing outcomes in his piece from last year about how “Biden’s America Would Be A Dystopian Hellhole”, which should be read as a glimpse of what’s likely to come. Under these difficult conditions, he recently proposed the establishment of an “American Solidarity” movement modeled off of its Polish predecessor as the most peaceful, legal, and effective form of resistance.

Concluding Thoughts

The real reasons behind Trump’s second impeachment can be summed up by the meme that he retweeted over a year ago in December 2019 ahead of his first impeachment and which was selected as the cover photo of this article. The image conveyed the powerful message that “In reality they’re not after me. They’re after you. I’m just in the way”, which is exactly what’s happening nowadays even much more than before. Unlike back then, this time Trump’s supporters are directly threatened by this witch hunt since it’ll likely turn against them soon after their political hero leaves off in less than a week’s time. The Democrats and their RINO allies — who function as the public proxies of the anti-Trump faction of America’s permanent military, intelligence, and diplomatic bureaucracies (“deep state”) — will now punish MAGA to ensure that a “second Trump” never rises.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

This article was originally published on OneWorld.

Andrew Korybko is an American Moscow-based political analyst specializing in the relationship between the US strategy in Afro-Eurasia, China’s One Belt One Road global vision of New Silk Road connectivity, and Hybrid Warfare. He is a frequent contributor to Global Research.

The Media Destroyed America

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts (via Global Research)

It did not take long for the Lie Machine, aka American media, to create the false news and fake narrative of the “storming of the US Capitol” on January 6 by a “white supremacist insurrection.”  

Here is an example from Bloomberg Weekend Reading on January 23, 2021: 

“The scenes from the first day of Joe Biden’s presidency unfolded against the backdrop of a devastated U.S. economy, continuing fallout from a white supremacist insurrection, and a coronavirus death toll surpassing 400,000.”[1]

The fake narrative is accepted everywhere.  It is endemic in the world press.  Even news sources such as RT and Sputnik which endeavor to give us real news instead of presstitute lies have repeated the insurrection story. 

President Trump was impeached by the House on the sole basis of this fake news story, and now stands to be tried in the Senate on the same fake news charges.  

On the basis of the same fake news story, two Florida banks in which Trump had multi-million dollar deposits closed Trump’s accounts. 

Signature Bank in New York also closed Trump’s account.

As did Germany’s Deutsche Bank.

New York mayor Bill de Blasio, who permitted Antifa and BLM to loot and burn Manhattan, has terminated the city’s contracts with Trump businesses that run ice skating rinks and a carousel in Central Park and a golf course in the Bronx.

The PGA of America voted  to take the PGA Championship away from Trump’s New Jersey Golf course.

See this.

Other sources report that conventions are avoiding his hotels and that creditors will not renew loans.

That fake news can have such real world consequences should scare every American to death. 

Notice also how the fake news story worsens with each repeat. On January 6, the alleged insurrection was by “Trump supporters.”  By January 23  Trump supporters had been morphed into “White supremacist insurrectionists.”  

The entire world now believes in something that does not exist.

This is an example of what it means to live in The Matrix.  Everyone lives in a false world created by lies repeated endlessly by pressitutes.

The ruling lies are lies that enable Establishment agendas by getting rid of non-establishment explanations and shutting down non-establishment leaders. Trump had to go because he was in the way of Establishment agendas. An example is being made of Trump as a lesson to others who value service to the people higher than service to the Establishment.

There is no doubt whatsoever that Trump won reelection.  The accumulated evidence of electoral fraud is overwhelming.  Yet the Lie Machine was able to prevent the evidence being presented and examined.  All the presstitutes ever said was that “there is no evidence of fraud,” followed by “all who support examining the evidence are enemies of democracy.”  

In other words, democracy is a stolen election.  If you protest the theft, you are an enemy of democracy. 

On December 29, 2020, almost two months after the November presidential election and after almost two months of demonization of Trump for saying the election was stolen, the Gallup Poll reported that its survey found that Donald Trump had displaced Obama as the man most admired by Americans.  See this. Yet the most admired man lost the election.

The fact that a presidential election could be stolen in plain view, attested to by numerous experts and a thousand signed affidavits, could go unexamined by the media, state and federal attorneys general, courts, and Congress, shows the power of the Establishment and the impotence of the media which, far from free, is in total service to the Establishment. The public never heard about the evidence from TV, newspapers, or NPR.

Clearly, in America there is no such thing as democracy.  An election was stolen and nothing was done about it.  The Establishment was able to eliminate a president who did not serve its purposes and nothing was done about it.  

The people learned that their vote means nothing and, therefore, there is no democracy. A government controlled by the Establishment is unaccountable to the people.

Perhaps there is a silver lining. It has been a long time since government policy served the public.  The public accepted the situation, because most people believed it was in some way a democratic outcome.  Now they know that “American democracy” was nothing but a mask for Establishment self-interests.  Perhaps the stolen election will serve as a wake-up call to bring the population out of its insouciance.  There are signs that the Establishment is concerned that it will, thus the new domestic terrorism bill which will be used to criminalize dissent as terrorism.

For those who are indoctrinated by media repetition that “there is no evidence of electoral fraud,” let’s assume this lie is correct.  The fact remains that the system has failed the people.  Whether the election was stolen or not, 74 million Americans according to the official vote count and 94 million Americans according to expert estimates of Trump’s true vote count believe that the election was stolen.  Yet, the concerns of these millions of Americans were dismissed out of hand as fraudulent claims.  The presstitutes claimed repeatedly that the only fraud was the claim of fraud.

The Democrats, the media, and the institutions put in place to ensure a free society failed totally in their responsibility to address the sincere concerns of half or more of the voting population.  This in itself is a failure of democracy, a failure of the Establishment. 

Those who expressed their concerns were not only dismissed but also demonized, threatened and punished as “enemies of democracy.”  

The lesson cannot be more clear:  An enemy of democracy is all who challenge the controlled explanation.  

The US enters the year 2021 as a country that has moved from the list of democracies to the list of authoritarian governments and is rapidly becoming a totalitarian country in which freedom of speech, freedom of association, and due process are dead letter Constitutional protections. The Gestapo knock at the door, the NKVD knock at the door have come to America.

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

This article was originally published on the author’s blog site, PCR Institute for Political Economy.

EXCLUSIVE! LIN WOOD: “I BELIEVE THE MILITARY IS IN CONTROL”, “JOE BIDEN IS A FAKE PRESIDENT”

Lin Wood: “I believe the military is in control”, “Joe Biden is a fake president” 1/24/21

https://rumble.com/vd88id-exclusive-lin-wood-i-believe-the-military-is-in-control-joe-biden-is-a-fake.html

Lin Wood answers YOUR questions on #PCRadio
Visit: www.redvoicemedia.com

#linwood #electionfraud #stolenelection

“I DON’T KNOW WHAT I’M SIGNING.” CREEPY JOE BIDEN – “SIGN HERE.” KAMALA DEVIL HARRIS

Thank you for helping to promote and support https://EarthNewspaper.com and https://BitChute.com/EarthNewspaper by subscribing and linking to these websites, and disseminating the informative news, videos, articles, films, books, art, music, science, technology, poetry, and empowering solutions that are published.

“We put together, the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics”
Creepy Joe Biden

Creepy Joe Biden Tells The Truth Part 1 by Infotoons (0:42)
https://www.bitchute.com/video/RUxSILh5X6IO

The Most Extensive Voter Fraud Organization In The History Of American Politics by Creepy Joe Biden (0:13)
https://www.bitchute.com/video/UgRwm79BY3H7

EarthNewspaper.com
All The Honest News Fit To Publish
With over 1,450 articles and videos published and archived
https://EarthNewspaper.com

EarthNewspaper.com All The Honest News Fit To Publish
Visit Our BitChute Channel with over 1,475 videos uploaded.
https://BitChute.com/EarthNewspaper

Mark John Robert David Elsis
by Mark R. Elsis
https://MarkRElsis.com

Articles And Other Creations
by Mark R. Elsis
https://EarthNewspaper.com/ArticlesAndOtherCreationsByMarkRElsis

The Last Significant Person That Had To Be Assassinated
by Mark R. Elsis
https://EarthNewspaper.com/TheLastSignificantPersonThatHadToBeAssassinated

Kent State, Monday, May 4, 1970
Monday, May 4, 2020
by Mark R. Elsis
https://EarthNewspaper.com/KentStateMondayMay41970

There Will Be 72,556 Extra Suicides This Year In The United States
Because Of The Massive Unemployment
As of May 3, 2020, the cold hard facts are there will be 72,556 extra suicides this year because of the massive unemployment caused by the unprecedented crisis.
by Mark R. Elsis
https://EarthNewspaper.com/ThereWillBe72556ExtraSuicidesThisYear

47 Days Of Murder By Israel
by Mark R. Elsis
https://EarthNewspaper.com/47DaysOfMurderByIsrael

The Day The United States Died
Thursday, June 6, 1968
by Mark R. Elsis
https://EarthNewspaper.com/TheDayTheUnitedStatesDied

Harry Chapin
One Of The Greatest Men On Earth
by Mark R. Elsis
https://Harry-Chapin.com

Good Friday, April 6, 1917
by Mark R. Elsis
https://EarthNewspaper.com/GoodFridayApril61917

Climate Change Denial
by Mark R. Elsis
https://EarthNewspaper.com/ClimateChangeDenial

Extinction
by Mark R. Elsis
https://LoveCommunities.com/Extinction

Love Communities
For Our Future Generations
by Mark R. Elsis
https://LoveCommunities.com

A Violent Insane Asylum
by Mark R. Elsis
https://GoogleCensorship.com

Resonate Love
144 Poems
by Mark R. Elsis
https://ResonateLove.net

David Ferrer
Should be inducted into the International Tennis Hall of Fame
by Mark R. Elsis
https://EarthNewspaper.com/DavidFerrer

Thank You Dad
by Mark R. Elsis
https://Lovearth.net/ThankYouDad

Michael Jackson
The Genesis Of Beat It
by Mark R. Elsis
https://MichaelJackson.net

John Denver
Love Is Why I Came Here In The First Place
by Mark R. Elsis
https://EarthNewspaper.com/JohnDenver

Meetings And Stories
by Mark R. Elsis
https://MeetingsAndStories.com

LasVegasShooting.com and VegasShooting.com
by Mark R. Elsis
https://EarthNewspaper.com/LasVegasShooting

John Fitzgerald Kennedy Timeline
The Most Comprehensive Timeline On John Fitzgerald Kennedy
by Mark R. Elsis
https://November221963.com

911 Trial
by Mark R. Elsis
https://911Trial.com

Hitler’s Peace Plans
Edited and Written by Mark R. Elsis
https://HitlersPeacePlans.com

Robin Williams
My Two Meetings With Robin
by Mark R. Elsis
https://Lovearth.net/RobinWilliams

American Exceptionalism
Fifty Ways The American Dream Has Become A Nightmare
by Mark R. Elsis
https://AmericanExceptionalism.net

Holocaust Revisionism
by Mark R. Elsis
https://HolocaustRevisionism.com

Homo Sapiens Population Is Crashing
Culling The Herd Since 1987
by Mark R. Elsis
https://EarthNewspaper.com/Depopulation

Deputy Führer Rudolf Hess
A Courageous Hero For Peace
by Mark R. Elsis
https://RudolfHess.net

Future Generations
by Mark R. Elsis
https://FutureGenerations.com

Stolen Election
by Mark R. Elsis
https://EarthNewspaper.com/StolenElection

Stand Down
Exposing NORAD’s Wag The 911 Window Dressing Tale
by Mark R. Elsis
https://StandDown.net

Who Authorized The Assassination Of John Lennon?
by Mark R. Elsis
https://John-Lennon.net

We Have Passed The Point Of Sustainability
Zero Population Growth Will Occur Between 2020 To 2029
by Mark R. Elsis
https://Overpopulation.Lovearth.net

Rainforests Biodiversity Scale Of Destruction
by Mark R. Elsis
https://Rainforests.Lovearth.net

ZUCKERBERG FORCES INSTAGRAM USERS TO FOLLOW JOE BIDEN ACCOUNT

article – https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/01/instagram-forcing-users-follow-biden-white-house-account-not-pathetic-even-users-repeatedly-un-follow-page/
Odysee Channel: https://odysee.com/@SaltyCracker:a
Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/SaltyCracker
Website: https://saltycrackermerch.com/
Merchandise: https://saltycrackermerch.com/salty-merch/
PayPal: https://tinyurl.com/ycmmuc9z
Twitter: https://twitter.com/SaltyCracker9
SubscribeStar: https://tinyurl.com/tcolt9z
DLive: https://dlive.tv/TheSaltyCracker
Parler: https://parler.com/profile/TheSaltyCracker/ 
Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/s7sIruG9mgWl/

–Disclaimer–
These are the opinions and ramblings of a lunatic. They are for entertainment purposes only and are probably wrong. You listen at your own risk.

“Q Anon” May Have Been an FBI Psyop

By Swiss Policy Research (via Global Research)

A recent Reuters investigation may indicate that “Q Anon” was in fact an FBI cyber psyop.

The “Q Anon” phenomenon has generally been regarded as a hoax or prank, originated by online message board users in late October 2017, that got out of control. The “Q Anon” persona was preceded by similar personae, including “FBI anon”, “CIA anon” and “White House insider anon”.

“Q Anon” originally called himself “Q clearance patriot”. Former CIA counterintelligence operative Kevin M. Shipp explained that an actual “Q clearance leaker” – i.e. someone possessing the highest security clearance at the US Department of Energy, required to access top secret nuclear weapons information – would have been identified and removed within days.

However, in November 2020 Reuters reported that the very first social media accounts to promote the “Q Anon” persona were seemingly “linked to Russia” and even “backed by the Russian government”. For instance, the very first Twitter account to ever use the term “Q Anon” on social media had previously “retweeted obscure Russian officials”, according to Reuters.Social Media Blackout? FBI Emails Are Not ‘Trending Social Media Facebook, Twitter, Buzzfeed, Or Snapchat

These alleged “Russian social media accounts”, posing as accounts of American patriots, were in contact with politically conservative US YouTubers and drew their attention to the “Q Anon” persona. This is how, in early November 2017, the “Q Anon” movement took off.

But given the recent revelations by British investigator David J. Blake – who for the first time was able to conclusively show, at the technical level, that the “Russian hacking” operation was a cyber psyop run by the FBI and FBI cyber security contractor CrowdStrike – the Reuters report may in fact indicate that “Q Anon” was neither a hoax nor “Russian”, but another FBI psychological cyber operation.

Of note, US cyber intelligence firm New Knowledge, founded by former NSA and DARPA employees and tasked by the US Senate Intelligence Committee, in 2018, with investigating alleged “Russian social media operations” relating to the 2016 US presidential election, was itself caught faking a “Russian social media botnet” in order to influence the 2017 Alabama senate race.

If the “Q Anon” persona – similar to the Guccifer2.0 “Russian hacker” persona played by an FBI cyber security contractor – was indeed an FBI psychological operation, its goal may have been to take control of, discredit and ultimately derail the supporter base of US President Trump. In this case, the “Q Anon” movement may have been a modern version of the original FBI COINTELPRO program.

Postscript

Contrary to some media claims, the person or people behind the “Q Anon” persona have never been identified. Some media speculated that James Watkins, the owner of the 8chan/8kun message board, on which “Q” was posting his messages, might be “Q” or might be linked to “Q”, but Watkins denied this. In September 2020, the owner of QMap, a website aggregating “Q” messages, was identified as a Citigroup employee, but again no actual link to “Q” could be established.

5G APOCALYPSE: THE EXTINCTION EVENT

A full length documentary by Sacha Stone exposing the 5G existential threat to humanity in a way we never imagined possible!

Please SHARE this as widely as you feel drawn. Use it to target your local bureaucrats, technocrats, health practitioners, government agencies and more than anything else, your family and friends. 

Featuring in this film: weapons development experts, biologists, molecular & cellular biologists, blood microscopists, activists, as well as good leaders out there on the frontline. We know what this technology is – we know how it was conceived and we know where it is intended to take people and the planet. We need to draw the line here.

Source: https://sachastone.com/5g-apocalypse-the-extinction-event/

* Don’t forget to give a thumbs up and share if you liked this video. 
For regular updates, subscribe to this channel by clicking on the red button and visit our blog: http://free2shine.net

* As much as we value your physical health, your spiritual health is so much more precious. We live on this earth for a moment, but then it is eternity… 
Where do you stand with God?
God has revealed Himself in His Word, the Bible. He is righteous and cannot stand sin. None of us are righteous because we have all sinned. God in His mercy, sent His only Son to die in our place, take our punishment and make a way for us to be reconciled to Him. Jesus Christ rose from the dead and is alive today. That means there is hope! He can set you free and make you new if you call on Him, repent and put your trust in Him. It is not too late! God is good and He said that He will never turn away anyone who comes to Him.
Free New Testaments available to all at http://free2shine.net

* Fair use notice:
This video may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material has been made available for the purposes of education and understanding of current issues.

JOE BIDEN’S SPEECH INTERRUPTED BY HUNTER BIDEN ACCEPTING PLEA DEAL!

SUBSCRIBE & SHARE MY VIDEOS!
__________________________________________________________________________
https://www.bitchute.com/channel/olin_live/
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCcqMlNTpaOUj76-8f_c08Hg
https://www.minds.com/thepicts/
https://rumble.com/user/OlinLive
https://ugetube.com/@OlinLive
https://gab.com/OlinLive
https://parler.com/profile/OlinLive/posts
__________________________________________________________________________
SOURCES:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=4589&v=Ec3mkoSWf0A&feature=youtu.be
https://streamable.com/wivkpj
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=39&v=vfb9FIpobL4&feature=youtu.be

Rudy Giuliani’s Claim of Inappropriate Pics of Children On Hunter Biden’s Laptop Deemed Fake News. Is It?

By Arjun Walia (via Collective Evolution)

IN BRIEF

  • The Facts: Former Mayor of New York Rudy Giuliani has been outspoken about inappropriate pictures and messages of children that have supposedly been found on Hunter Biden’s laptop. These allegations are being deemed a “conspiracy theory” by mainstream media.
  • Reflect On: Why is there so much censorship of information without appropriate investigation? Should people not have the right to view information openly, freely and transparently?

What Happened: A few days ago, a top Republican senator mentioned the possibility that the Federal Bureau of Investigation investigated whether there was child pornography on a laptop and hard drive that supposedly belonged to Hunter Biden. He did so when Journalist Maria Bartiromo asked Sen. Ron Johnson, the chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee about a Business Insider report that described faint handwriting on a subpoena served last year to a Delaware business that was given a water-damaged MacBook Pro to repair but was never retrieved along with a hard drive. The hardware purportedly contained data about foreign business dealings and other matters related to the son of former Vice President Joe Biden. You can watch a clip of that interview here.

On October 16th, American attorney, cybersecurity advisor and politician Rudy Giuliani, who also served as Mayer of New York City from 1994 to 2001 claimed on his Youtube Channel that he has come across evidence that this laptop and hard drive do belong to Hunter Biden, and that there’s a signature to prove it which he has in his possession. He also thoroughly explains the story about Hunter’s supposed laptop and how it came into the possession of the Delaware business. Furthermore, he claimed that there were photos of activity on the laptop that anyone “would have a hard time describing, and really should be left to more private discussion.”

Giuliani has since mentioned that Hunter Biden had numerous pictures of girls, who were just children, on the laptop as well as inappropriate messages, and that he has turned this evidence over the the Delaware State Police. He has expressed that the Chinese government may have access to this kind of thing in order to blackmail the Biden family into doing whatever they want.

Andrii Derkach, a politician the US Treasury believes to be a “Russian agent,” claimed on Friday that another device belonging to Hunter was given to Ukrainian police.

We saw this perspective with Jeffrey Epstein, where multiple sources, including a high ranking intelligence official, claimed that part of his job was to blackmail high level politicians and businessman by having compromising videos and pictures of them with children. Christopher Mason, a  TV host and journalist/reporter who has known Ghislaine Maxwell for decades has gone on record and said he was told that Epstein rigged his multiple homes with cameras and kept tapes of everyone/everything. He says Maxwell has access to this footage. You can read more about that here.

Approximately one month ago Hunter Biden, the son of presidential candidate Joe Biden, apparently sent thousands of dollars to individuals allegedly involved in sex trafficking, according to a report recently released by Senate Republicans. According the report, Biden “has sent funds to non-resident alien women in the United States who are citizens of Russia and Ukraine and who have subsequently wired funds they have received from Hunter Biden to individuals located in Russia and Ukraine…The records also note that some of these transactions are linked to what “appears to be an Eastern European prostitution or human trafficking ring.”

Facebook Fact-Checker Politifact Weighs In: According to Politifact, a Facebook Fact Checker,  “There is no evidence that a laptop previously belonging to Hunter Biden contains child pornography. The allegation originated on an anonymous internet forum that’s a known source of online disinformation.”

They mention that a rumour quickly emerged that “Hunter Biden has 25,000 pics of him torturing and raping children under age 10 in China on his laptop.”

These allegations seems to have stemmed from multiple tweets by radio host Wayne Root claimed ,without evidence, stating that he has that Hunter Biden’s laptop contains videos of him sexually abusing and torturing Chinese children.

CBS News interviewed the owner of the computer store, John Paul MacIsaac, and they state that he was “unable and unwilling to answer key questions about how the laptop supposedly arrived in his store, and eventually, how the data was shared with Giuliani. CBS News interviewed MacIsaac for almost two hours on Wednesday and throughout the interview he contradicted himself about his motivations, raising questions about the truthfulness of one of the central figures in the story.”

The New York Post also interviewed him, you can listen to that entire interview here.

Giuliani claimed “dangerous people” are involved in the Hunter Biden laptop scandal – leaving the Mackbook repairman who leaked it fearing for his life.

According to Politico,

More than 50 former senior intelligence officials have signed on to a letter outlining their belief that the recent disclosure of emails allegedly belonging to Joe Biden’s son “has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”

The letter, signed on Monday, centers around a batch of documents released by the New York Post last week that purport to tie the Democratic nominee to his son Hunter’s business dealings. Under the banner headline “Biden Secret E-mails,” the Post reported it was given a copy of Hunter Biden’s laptop hard drive by President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, who said he got it from a Mac shop owner in Delaware who also alerted the FBI.

Biden has of course denied all allegations.

Regardless of What You Believe About This Story, Child Trafficking and Sexual Abuse in places of power exists, and persists.

There are a number of examples of child sexual abuse in places of power. The Jeffrey Epstein/Ghislaine Maxwell cases are a great example of that, both involved and implicated in trafficking children for sexual purposes, and possible blackmail purposes as well.

Not long ago, As The Hill reports, “The Pentagon’s Defense Criminal Investigative Service subsequently identified hundreds of DOD-affiliated individuals as suspects involved in accessing child pornography, several of whom used government devices to use and share the images.” You can read more about that here.

There are many credible examples from Royal Families, the Vatican, big finance, big politics, Hollywood and more. If you’d like to go a bit more in depth and see some of this evidence, you can refer to this article I published last year.

Our Interview With A Survivor of Child Sex Trafficking: 

Anneke Lucas is an author, speaker, advocate for child sex trafficking victims, founder of the non-profit organization Liberation Prison Yoga, and creator of the Unconditional Model.

Her work is based off her 30-year journey to restore her mental and physical wellbeing after surviving some of the worst atrocities known to humankind before the age of 12. Sold as a young child into a murderous pedophile network by her family, she was rescued after nearly six years of abuse and torture.

We recently conducted an interview with her. Below is a clip from the four part series, as it was a very long and detailed interview. You can access the full interview and start your free trial HERE on CETV, a platform we created to help combat internet censorship and allow us to continue to do our work and get the word out about various issues and topics.

The Takeaway

Right now the citizenry is completely separated in their beliefs with regard to what’s happening, especially in big politics. Stories today are instantly jumped on and deemed false by ‘fact-checkers’ even when there is legitimate evidence behind the claims. Should people not have the right to examine information, opinions and evidence and decide for themselves what is and what isn’t? The amount of information censorship happening today is truly unprecedented.

This type of states is simply a reflection of an evolving human consciousness. We are becoming more aware, and we are questioning actions taken by governments that do not resonate. We are living in times where truth tellers, like Julian Assange and Edward Snowden, are exiled and thrown in jail for simply exposing unethical and immoral actions by powerful governments and corporations. What does it say about our world if we’ve come to the point where activists exposing harmful actions are completely silenced and ridiculed? What’s going on here? How did we get to this point and how do we change it? Why do we continue to rely and ask governments to make meaningful changes on our planet? Does voting simply hold up and perpetuate a system that’s no longer capable of helping the human race and our planet move forward in the direction it needs to take?

THIS ARTICLE WAS FIRST PUBLISHED October 21st 2020 on Collective Evolution

Another Alleged Epstein & Prince Andrew Victim Comes Forward Implicating Joe Biden & “Many Others”

By Richard Enos (via Collective Evolution)


IN BRIEF

  • The Facts: Recent events such as the arrest of Jeffrey Epstein seem to be causing more victims of sex trafficking who had stayed silent for so long to come out and speak.
  • Reflect On: Can we create a safe and open space for alleged victims of sex trafficking to speak out with confidence, and trust that our growing discernment will ensure that the truth rises to the top?

Members of the Awakening Community often wonder, aside from our personal work being done to look inside and heal, forgive, and raise our vibration, if there is a need for external actions in the world that will help move us forward in our collective journey and foster a better and more harmonious world.

Might I suggest that at this precise moment in our history, it is incumbent upon us to come together as a community to provide a safe and sacred space to those who have been victimized by the massive, coordinated global pedophilia and trafficking rings whose full scope and influence on our world we are just starting to fathom. And that means listening to what they have to say, and aspiring to use their testimony to gain a better understanding of our world and what has been happening under the cover of darkness and privilege, difficult as this may be for many of us to accept.

Women and men who have for decades lived silently in fear of being further harmed or even killed if they spoke out, now see a ray of hope in the recent convictions of members of the NXIVM cult and the arrest of Jeffrey Epstein. There is now a sense that the fundamental complicity or at least the willful ignorance about these rings at the highest levels of global law enforcement is changing, and that many of the good people in these organizations are now being empowered to investigate and prosecute such crimes. It has previously been said to me that officers wishing to pursue leads into human trafficking crimes were often dissuaded from further action and told, ‘That’s not what the taxpayers are paying you to do.’

I know of victims who are not ready to come out in public, either because they are not far enough along in their healing journey, or they still cannot fully believe that government, law enforcement, and the judiciary are now on their side. When we consider how much we have uncovered about the far-reaching complicity of powerful institutions to silence victims and protect high-level perpetrators, there is justification for these feelings.

Discernment

For those who are coming out of hiding and providing testimony, heightening our powers of discernment is critical to the process. We will not be creating a safe space if we simply believe anything we hear from anybody, for there are sure to be attempts at disinformation and manipulation for ulterior motives. At the same time, we must withhold snap judgments, and temper the application of our pet conspiracy theories so that we can focus on allowing each person to feel and be heard.

Our discernment will require us to take each testimony word by word, case by case, and ask ourselves about the motivation behind it, if the facts line up and there is consistency, and whether or not there seems to be a hidden agenda. The testimony of Christine Blasey-Ford and her allegations of attempted rape against Brett Kavanaugh in his Supreme Court nomination hearings serve as an example in which red flags were lifting up at every turn, especially in the way mainstream media unequivocally pronounced her to be credible and honest every step of the way. Her testimony could clearly be seen as having a political agenda behind it.

The Testimony Of Jessica Collins

By and large, most cases will be more subtle. One person who has recently come out with a video claiming to be a victim of Jeffrey Epstein and [Prince] Andrew Windsor certainly seems worthy of our attention. Although she does not claim to be a victim of child trafficking (she was first abducted as a student at the Catholic University of America, after she went for what she thought was a legitimate job interview), the testimony of Jessica Collins is compelling. She put a link to the video below multiple times on Twitter on September 3rd:

A look into some earlier tweets and other information reveals that Jessica’s 18-year old daughter died of Opioids in 2017, which Jessica does not believe was a suicide. In a tweet on September 3rd, she discloses that only because she believes her daughter was murdered is she speaking out. And she herself does not believe that the Department of Justice and Law Enforcement are truly attempting to prosecute these crimes at this time:

There is a lot to sift through in the testimony of Jessica Collins. I won’t go over it here but would refer you to this Before It’s News article to examine some of the more salacious claims. My purpose here is to pass on this video to our readers to share and evaluate for themselves, based on the following request made by Jessica in the video itself:

My name is Jessica Collins. I live in Virginia. Today is September 3rd, 2019. If anything happens to me it’s because this information is true and I have a lot more information about who I was trafficked to and the government people who are in the White House today.

If you could redistribute this video please save it and redistribute it. If anything happens to me at least I have this out. I have been threatened. My car was disabled by a government employee when the Jeffrey Epstein news broke.

I have been without a vehicle for 40 days. I don’t know what else to say.

Please save this video. Please redistribute. Please try and spread it. There is no way that this is going to get out there in the media. Must we the American people do the work?

The government is involved and I was trafficked for nearly 17 years. Please try to help by redistributing this, tweeting it, talking about it. I do everything that I can. Thank you for listening. Together we can get to the bottom of this and hold the criminals accountable.

Jessica Collins’ last tweet was on September 6th. There don’t seem to be any communications from her since then. Let us pray that she is safe and finds a way to tell her whole story.

The Takeaway

We have to allow everyone who comes forward as a victim of sex trafficking the chance to speak until they have been fully heard. We must have confidence that the truth will ultimately rise to the top and shine so brightly that attempts at dark deception and manipulation, clever as they may be, will no longer prevail.

THIS ARTICLE WAS ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED 19 SEPTEMBER, 2019

Swine flu: “They Organized the Panic”. Inquiry into the Role of Big Pharma and WHO by Council of Europe

Bruno Odent interviews Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg

By Bruno Odent (via Global Research)

New Development: The German President of the Health Committee of the Council of Europe, Wolfgang Wodarg, is issuing accusations against the pharmaceutical lobbies and the governments. He has intitiated the start of an investigation by that body concerning the role played by the pharmaceutical in the campaign of panic about the virus.

Ex-member of the SPD, Wolfgang Wodarg is a doctor and epidemiologist. His request for a commission of inquiry into the role of pharmaceutical companies in the management of swine flu outbreak by WHO and the nation states was granted unanimously by the members of the Health Committee of the Council of Europe…

What made you suspicious about the influence of pharmaceutical companies had on the decisions being taken in respect of swine flu?

Wolfgang Wodarg. We are facing a major failure of national institutions responsible for warning about risks and responding in case a pandemic occurs. In April when the first alarm came from Mexico I was very surprised at the figures furnished by the World Health Organization (WHO) to justify the declaration of a pandemic. I was immediately suspicious: the numbers were very low and the alarm level very high. There were not even into a thousand patients when there was already talk of the pandemic of the century. And the alert was decreed extreme based on the fact that the virus was new. But the characteristic of influenza disease is to develop very quickly with viruses which take on new forms each time, by dwelling in new hosts, animal, human etc.

There was nothing new in itself to that. Each year a new virus of this “flu” type appears. In reality there was no reason to sound the alarm at this level. This was only possible because in early May the WHO changed its definition of a pandemic. Before that date there had to be not only a disease which had broke out in several countries at once but also one that had very serious consequences with the number of deaths above the usual average. This aspect was removed from the new definition, to retain the rate of spread of disease as the only criteria. And they claimed that the virus was dangerous because people had not been able to develop immunity against it. Which was false for this virus. Because it was observed that people aged over 60 years already had antibodies. That is to say they had already been in contact with similar viruses. That is why also there are virtually no people aged over 60 who have developed the disease. Yet those were the people who were recommended to be vaccinated quickly.

Among the things that aroused my suspicions there was therefore on one side this determination to sound the alarm. And on the other side, some curious facts. Such as, for example, the recommendation by WHO to carry out two injections for vaccines. That had never been done before. There was no scientific justification for this. There was also the recommendation to use only special patented vaccines. There was however no reason for not adding, as it is done every year, specific antiviral particles of this new H1N1 virus, “completing” the vaccine used for seasonal influenza. This was not done because they preferred to use patented vaccine materials that major laboratories had designed and manufactured to be ready in case of a pandemic developing. And by proceeding in this way they did not hesitate to endanger the persons vaccinated.

What danger?

Wolfgang Wodarg. To provide products rapidly, adjuvants were used in some vaccines, whose effects have not been adequately tested. In other words, they wanted absolutely to use these new patented products instead of developing vaccines according to traditional methods of production which are much simpler, more reliable and less costly. There was no medical reason for this. It was only for marketing purposes.

How could anyone justify that?

Wolfgang Wodarg. To understand we must return to the episode of avian influenza from 2005 to 2006. It was then that new international plans were defined for dealing with a pandemic alarm. These plans were officially developed to ensure rapid manufacturing of vaccines in case of an alert. This led to negotiations between pharmaceutical companies and governments. On the one hand the labs committed themselves to keep ready to develop the preparations, on the other hand, states assured them they would buy them all. After this strange deal the pharmaceutical industry took no economic risk by engaging in new fabrications. And it was sure to touch the jack pot in the case of a pandemic outbreak.

Do you disagree with the diagnoses and even the potential severity of influenza A?

Wolfgang Wodarg. Yes, it’s just a normal kind of flu. It does not cause a tenth of deaths caused by the classic seasonal flu. All that mattered and that led to the great campaign of panic which we have seen was that it was a golden opportunity for representatives from labs who knew they would hit the jackpot in the case of a pandemic being declared. 

Those are very serious accusations you’re making. How was such a process made possible within the WHO?

Wolfgang Wodarg. A group of people in the WHO is associated very closely with the pharmaceutical industry.

Will the investigation by the Council of Europe also work in this direction?

Wolfgang Wodarg. We want to clarify everything that brought about this massive operation of disinformation. We want to know who made decisions, on the basis of what evidence and precisely how the influence of the pharmaceutical industry came to bear on the decision-making. And the time has come at last for us to make demands on governments. The purpose of the inquiry is so that there are no more false alarms of this type in the future. So that the people may rely on the analysis and the expertise of national and international public institutions. The latter are now discredited, because millions of people have been vaccinated with products with inherent possible health risks. This was not necessary. It has also led to a considerable mismanagement of public money.

Do you have any concrete figures on the extent of this mismanagement?

Wolfgang Wodarg. In Germany it comes to 700 million euros. But it is very difficult to know the exact figures because we are talking on one side about vaccines resold to foreign countries and most firms do not communicate due to the principle of respect for “business secret” regarding the amounts in contracts concluded with States and any indemnification clauses contained therein.

Will the work of “lobbying” by pharma companies on the National Institutes of Health also be dealt with by the investigation of the Council of Europe?

Wolfgang Wodarg. Yes we will examine the attitude of institutions like the Robert Koch Institute in Germany or Pasteur in France who should in fact have advised their governments from a critical standpoint. In some countries certain institutions have done so. In Finland and Poland, for example, critical voices were raised to say: “we do not need that.

Has the tremendous global operation of disinformation also been possible because the pharmaceutical industry had “representatives” even within the governments of the most powerful countries?

Wolfgang Wodarg. As regards the ministries, that seems to me to be obvious. I can not explain how specialists, very smart people who know the problems of the influenza disease by heart, did not notice what was happening.

So what happened?

Wolfgang Wodarg. Without going as far as saying direct corruption, which I am certain does exist, there were many ways for labs to exercise their influence over decisions. A very concrete example, is how Klaus Stöhr, who was the head of the epidemiological department of the WHO at the time of bird flu, and who therefore prepared the plans to cope with a pandemic that I mentioned above, in the meantime had become a top executive of the company Novartis. And similar links between Glaxo and Baxter, etc. and influential members of the WHO. These large firms have “their people” in the cogs and then they pull strings so that the right policy decisions are taken. That is to say, the ones that will allow them to pump as much money from taxpayers.

But if your survey succeeds, will it not be a support for citizens to insist their governments demand accountability from these large groups?

 
Wolfgang Wodarg. Yes, you’re right, this is one of the major issues related to this investigation. States could indeed take advantage of this to contest contracts drawn up in, let us say, improper conditions. If it can be shown that it was under the influence of firms that the process was initiated then they will have to be push to ask for reimbursement. But that’s just the financial side, there is also the human side, persons who were vaccinated with products that were inadequately tested.
 

So what kind of risk have these healthy people unknowingly taken by getting vaccinated?

Wolfgang Wodarg. Again, the vaccines were developed too quickly, some adjuvants were insufficiently tested. But there is worse to come. The vaccine developed by Novartis was produced in a bioreactor from cancerous cells. A technique that had never been used until now.

Why, I’m obviously not an expert, but how can one claim to make a vaccine from diseased cells?

Wolfgang Wodarg. Normally one uses chicken eggs on which viruses are grown. We need in fact to work on living cells. Because viruses can only multiply in this way and so do, by definition, the virus preparations that go with it. But this process has a big flaw, it is slow and it takes a lot of eggs. And it is long and complex technically. Another potentially excellent technique is to grow the virus in living cells in bioreactors. This requires cells which grow and divide very quickly. It’s a bit like the method used to culture yogurt, which is also produced in a bio-reactor. but in this context the cell was so upset in its environment and its growth that it grows like a cancer cell. And it is on these rapidly multiplying cells that they grow the virus. But to manufacture the vaccine the virus must be re-extracted from these cells on which they were implanted. And it can therefore happen that during the manufacturing process of the vaccine, residue of cancerous cells remain in the preparation. In the same way as it happens in conventional manufacturing with eggs. Thus we know that in the case of a classic influenza vaccination, side effects can occur in people who are allergic to egg albumin found in egg white. It can not be excluded that proteins, remains of a cancer cell present in a vaccine produced by bio-reactor, may generate a tumour on the person vaccinated. According to a true principle of precaution, before such a product is allowed on the market, there should therefore be 100% certainty that such effects are actually excluded.

And wasn’t this done?

Wolfgang Wodarg. It was not. The EMEA (European Medicines Agency), an institution under the responsibility of the European Commissioner for Economic Affairs, based in London, which gives permission to release vaccines on the market in Europe, gave the green light for commercializing this product arguing, namely, that this mode of manufacture was not a “significant” risk. This was very differently appreciated by many experts here in Germany and by an independent drug institution, which instead sounded the alert and voiced their objections. I took these warnings seriously. I studied the case and intervened in the context of the Bundestag health committee of which I was a member so that the vaccine would not be used in Germany. I made it known that I was certainly not opposed to the development of vaccines with this technique. But first it had to have a total guarantee of innocuousness. The product has therefore not been used in Germany where the government terminated the contract with Novartis.

What is the name of this vaccine?

Wolfgang Wodarg. Obta flu.

But that means that in other European countries like France the product can be marketed without any problem?

Wolfgang Wodarg. Yes, it obtained permission from EMEA and can be used anywhere in the EU.

What alternative do you intend to propose so that further scandals of this type are avoided?

Wolfgang Wodarg. The WHO should be more transparent, so we know clearly who decides and what type of relationship exists between participants in the organization. It should also be flanked by at least one elected chamber, which should be able to react very critically and where everyone can express themselves. This enhanced public scrutiny is essential.

Isn’t the question of another system capable of handling a matter which is in fact a common good for citizens across the planet coming to the surface?

Wolfgang Wodarg. Can we go on allowing the production of vaccines and the conduct of these productions to organizations whose goal is to win as much money as possible? Or is the production of vaccines not something that States must absolutely monitor and implement themselves? That’s why I think we should abandon the system of patents on vaccines. That is to say, the possibility of monopolization of vaccine production by a large group. For this option requires that we sacrifice thousands of lives, simply in the name of respect for these monopoly rights. You’re right, that particular claim has become evident for me.

WHO Appoints H1N1 Cover-Up Committee

By James Corbett (via Global Research)

Reports that the WHO is appointing an ‘independent’ committee to investigate its own conduct in the H1N1 panic of 2009 has been tempered by the fact that one of the committee’s members, John Mackenzie, was in fact one of the advisors who urged the WHO to declare a pandemic in the first place. He also has ties to vaccine manufacturers, making him part of the very charge being investigated: that the WHO relied on advisors with a financial interest in declaring a pandemic regardless of the facts on the ground.

Evidence continues to mount that the WHO declared a pandemic for the relatively mildH1N1 outbreak last year in order to trigger billions of dollars of automatic vaccine contracts for the benefit of WHO advisers with connections to Big Pharma. In the face of growing opposition and a loss of credibility due to the conflicts of interests among key WHO advisors, WHO Director Margaret Chan called Monday for a “frank, critical, transparent, credible and independent review of our performance” before entering a closed-door meeting with the “independent experts.” No photographers were allowed inside and press was allowed only occasional access to the meeting.

Hopes for a genuinely independent investigation into the scandal were quickly dashed, however, when it was discovered that one of the group’s members, Professor John Mackenzie of Curtin University in Australia, was a member of the very panel that advised the WHO to declare the H1N1 pandemic. In fact, Mackenzie is already on record with his assessment of his own actions: “I think we did everything right,” he toldDer Spiegel earlier this year.

Clues to the likely findings and recommendations of the group in Geneva can be derived from other comments Mackenzie made to the German paper: “The system of pandemic levels needs to be revised,” he was quoted as saying. “We need to fine-tune phase 6 so that the severity of the disease is also taken into account.” Analysts are expecting the review to find that the WHO was a victim of fog of war and loose definitions for a pandemic and that no individual will be held responsible for the billions of dollars that have been spent around the world on vaccines that governments are now giving awayand may ultimately have to throw out.

Also at issue is why the WHO changed its definition of a pandemic virus just as it was considering whether the emerging swine flu may fit that critera. A definition available on the website before the panic specifically listed “enormous numbers of deaths and ilness” as a criterion for declaring a pandemic. By April, the definition had been changedto specifically allow for “mild” pandemics.

The cover-up committee is being formed ahead of the final report of the ongoing Council of Europe investigation into the scandal. Just last month, the Council released a draft report of its investigation into the affair, delivering a blistering critique of the WHO and its motives for declaring the H1N1 pandemic:

Some members of these advisory bodies evidently have professional links to certain pharmaceutical groups – notably through receiving extensive research grants from the big pharmaceutical groups – so that the neutrality of their advice could be contested. To date, WHO has failed to provide convincing evidence to counter these allegations and the organisation has not published the relevant declarations of interest taking such a reserved position, the Organisation has joined other bodies, such as the European Medicines Agency (EMEA), which likewise, have still not published such documents. -“The handling of the H1N1 pandemic: more transparency needed” 

The Council of Europe committee inquiry was spearheaded by Wolfgang Wodarg, the former chair of the Council’s health committee who made waves last year for saying that the WHO faked the pandemic to make money for vaccine manufacturers. The committee is expected to be quite critical of the WHO, leading many to speculate that the WHO-sanctioned group in Geneva is an attempt to get ahead of the damage and issue a limited hangout on the issue.

The independent group is expected to finish its meeting on Wednesday. No word yet if they will address the fact that flu vaccines actually increase the risk of contracting H1N1, or what the effect might be if a vaccine-pushing WHO ignores this information.

The H1N1 panic started last March, with the WHO estimating as many as two billion infections and millions of deaths. Newly released data shows that the 2009 flu season was actually much less deadly than the regular flu season.

Did the WHO Knowingly Hype Swine Flu?

By Michael Fumento (via Global Research)

Having spread H1N1 swine flu hysteria for nearly a year, the World Health Organization’s “swine flu czar,” Keiji Fukuda, last week finally “fessed up” to agency wrongdoing. But it’s like listening to Enron admitting to a tabulation error. “I think we did not convey the uncertainty” about the risks of the flu strain, he said.

Sorry, but this was no poor communications problem. Indeed, earlier this year Wolfgang Wodarg, an epidemiologist with the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europeaccused the WHO of creating a “false pandemic” that’s “one of the greatest medicine scandals of the century.”

At the least, by portraying as a raging razorback what proved to be more of a pathetic piglet, the WHO needlessly scared the public, wasted vast billions of dollars, destroyed the value of the term “flu pandemic” and perhaps left the organization’s reputation “tarnished” and “irreparably damaged,” as one authority put it.

A year ago, Fukuda was comparing swine flu’s potential with the Spanish flu, which killed an estimated 20 million to 50 million worldwide in 1918-19, with more than half a million here. (Extrapolating to today’s population, that would be 1.5 million.) Now, with the annual U.S. epidemic ending, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates we’ve had had perhaps 12,000 total deaths — a third of the usual number. (Almost all the infections this year were swine flu.) About 140 million doses of swine flu vaccine appeared headed for the trash heap. France and Japan say their epidemics have been far milder. Last July an Associated Press headline declared, “Britain Braces for 100,000 Swine Flu Cases a Day.” Actual deaths: 457.

It’s not as if the WHO knew nothing about the mildness of H1N1 early on. I wrote about it on May 1, subsequently publishing 14 articles in major publications on what I immediately dubbed hysteria. If Iknew better, there’s no reason the WHO shouldn’t have known better.

Indeed, when the WHO officially labeled swine flu a pandemic in June, it was 11 weeks into the outbreak, and yet fewer people had died worldwide (144) than succumb to seasonal flu every few hours.

In contrast, the mildest true pandemic in the 20th century killed at least a million people. A recent WHO document stated that “best-case scenarios” of a new pandemic “project global excess deaths in the range of 2 million to 7.4 million,” and the WHO’s own official definition required “simultaneous epidemics worldwide with enormous numbers of deaths and illness.”

Slapping the “pandemic” label onto swine flu directly led to the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology‘s “plausible scenario” of as many as 90,000 excess flu deaths, while flu book author John Barry told Washington Post readers to expect “89,000 to 207,000” extra deaths. Yet in Australia, with the epidemic already well under way and no vaccine, people were dying at a lower rate.



So given the mild course swine flu was taking, how could the WHO justify declaring a pandemic? Easy. It rewrote the definition! The new one, viewable here and published last July, simply eliminates severity as a factor. This renders the definition meaningless, since flu always causes “simultaneous epidemics worldwide.” Instead, it closely matched the new definition to swine flu by requiring that the straincontain either animal or mixed-human animal genetic material.

Now, Fukuda and other WHO officials insist the definition was never changed. In a January virtual conference, Fukuda stated, “Did WHO change its definition of a pandemic? The answer is no: WHO did not change its definition.” Two weeks later, on tape at a press conference, he insisted, “Having severe deaths has never been part of the WHO definition.”

Meanwhile, here’s a news item from last May in which Fukuda himself discusses the forthcoming change, and here’s an official 2009 WHO report explaining the change in retrospect. You know, the change that never occurred.

You don’t vociferously deny doing something you obviously did with no reason. So what was it?

In part, it was CYA for the WHO. The agency was losing credibility over the refusal of avian flu H5N1 to kill as many as 150 million people worldwide, as its “avian flu czar” had predicted in 2005. Around the world, nations heeded the warnings and spent vast sums developing vaccines and making other preparations. So when swine flu conveniently trotted in, the WHO essentially crossed out “avian,” inserted “swine” and WHO Director-General Margaret Chan arrogantly boasted, “The world can now reap the benefits of investments over the last five years in pandemic preparedness.”

But the WHO also saw an opportunity to push a political agenda.

In a September speech, Chan said the swine flu pandemic should be exploited to fight for “changes in the functioning of the global economy,” and to “distribute wealth on the basis of” values “like community, solidarity, equity and social justice.” And this is supposed to be a health agency?

It would help explain why the agency hyped avian flu, why in the 1980s it exaggerated HIV infectionsby as much as 12-fold and why it spread hysteria over severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2003. SARS ultimately killed a day’s worth of seasonal flu victims (and no Americans) before vanishing.

Yet with one cry of “wolf!” after another, says Europe’s Wodarg, the WHO is merely destroying “much of the credibility” we’ll need if there does appear “a killer on a large scale.”

Sadly, with the swine flu debacle, that credibility may already have vanished.

Canada: The 2009 Killer H1N1 Vaccine

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky (via Global Research)

Of relevance to the current debate on the Covid19 vaccine, this article on the H1N1 vaccine was first published on November 20, 2009.

In 2009, the Canadian media provided us with detailed coverage on the adverse health impacts of the vaccine including two recorded deaths, one in Quebec and the other in Manitoba. What is the situation today with regard to media coverage? With some exceptions, the mainstream media is not informing the public. And reports on the adverse impacts of the covid-19 vaccine published by social media and the online independent media are the object of various forms of censorship.

“It is a serious thing [vaccine] that has the potential to kill” according to Dr. Neil Rau, an infectious disease expert, in a CTV interview, but do not worry: “leading experts insist, the benefits of the H1N1 vaccine vastly outweigh the risks” (Swine Flu Support Center, emphasis added)

A new development in the H1N1 Vaccine Saga is unfolding in Canada.

Whereas health officials are pushing for an acceleration of the vaccination program,  there is evidence of  so-called “unusual adverse reactions” including three recently recorded deaths directly resulting from the vaccine.

In the meantime, health authorities have called for the withdrawal of 170,000 (higher risk) doses of the vaccine produced by GlaxoSmithKline. The initiative, of which the importance is being downplayed, is said to have come from the manufacturer GlaxoSmithKline, which expressed concern on higher than normal adverse reactions to the vaccine.

“Canada’s H1N1 flu vaccine manufacturer has asked the provinces to temporarily discontinue vaccinating Canadians from a lot of vaccine shipped in October due to a higher risk of adverse reactions, says a Manitoba health official.

Dr. Joel Kettner, Manitoba’s chief public health officer, said Thursday that GlaxoSmithKline has asked that the October batch be taken out of circulation because it produced serious and immediate anaphylactic reactions in one out of 20,000 vaccinations, compared with one out of 100,000 in other shipments.

“We’ve been asked by the manufacturer GSK to not use this vaccine at this time pending further investigation,” he said. (Winnipeg Free Press, 20 November 2009)

The government is involved in a cover-up. The initial headlines stated “more than 100,000 doses”, but then read on, the number is 170,000 doses.

The CTV report admits that “it is a serious thing, it has the potential to kill”.

Too Late to Withdraw the 170,000 Defective Doses

The question is whether the doses can be withdrawn or whether they have already been used. The first news reports from Manitoba indicate that:

Of the 63,000 doses shipped [to Manitoba], only 630 remained unused by the four regional health authorities in Manitoba that received them. (Ibid)

This report would suggest that the risky GSK vaccine doses have already been used.

A subsequent report confirms that out of the 63,000 doses, 900 unused doses of the H1N1 vaccine were withdrawn by health authorities “after health authorities received word other vaccines from the same batch have been causing higher rates of allergic reactions than expected.” (Flu vaccine batch pulled in Manitoba, Winnipeg Sun, 20 November 2009).

The question is what happened to the remaining 62,100 doses of the higher risk vaccine batch, which were used to vaccinate people in Manitoba?

Has there been a followup regarding those people in Manitoba who received the higher risk H1N1 vaccine injection? What is the situation in other provinces in which the higher risk vaccine does were distributed?

Manitoba Health authorities casually confirm, in this regard, that “most of the vaccine Manitoba received from the suspect lot had already been used by the time the province received the alert on Wednesday” [November 18, 2009]. (Winnipeg Free Press, 20 November 2009, emphasis added)

Manitoba and Quebec : Three deaths resulting from the H1N1 Vaccine

The news reports have highlighted deaths resulting from the H1N1 flu (often unconfirmed), while obfuscating several recorded deaths resulting directly from the vaccine. These vaccine related deaths are occurring at the very outset of the vaccination program,

According to CTV News, 20 November 2009) “The province is currently investigating two deaths — both adults who died within seven days of getting the H1N1 shot” (Family questions if H1N1 shot caused Manitoba woman’s death, November 20, 2009, emphasis added).

Manitoba officials acknowledge  69 “adverse events” after people received the swine flu shot, including the two deaths. (CBC.ca report, 17 November 2009)

However, unless the families speak out, the authorities will not provide details. CTV interviewed the family of one of the victims. No details on the other death in Manitoba are available:

“The family of a 38-year-old Manitoba woman who died five days after receiving the H1N1 vaccine are looking for answers as to why it happened.

Soo Lee Wong and her daughter, Angela Truong, both got the H1N1 shot on November 5th.

The family says Wong, who had diabetes, started getting sick a day after getting vaccinated and died a few days later.

Doctors told the family Wong died of a blood infection. More tests will be done to see if the vaccine played any role.

Wong’s husband, Thoon Truong, is also caring for his seven-year-old daughter Angela, who has been in the hospital with a fever and swollen, painful legs.

He wants to know whether the two cases related to the vaccine or to something else.

The province is currently investigating two deaths — both adults who died within seven days of getting the H1N1 shot.

Although it’s still early, Manitoba’s chief medical officer of health Dr. Joel Kettner says immunizations were not likely the cause of the deaths. CTV News | Family questions if H1N1 shot caused Manitoba woman’s death, November 20, 2009)

It should be noted that these two deaths in Manitoba may have been associated with the injection of the higher risk H1N1 vaccine doses, which health authorities had called for withdrawal.

Quebec: One Death

An 80-year-old Quebec man was reported dead after taking the H1N1 Swine Flu vaccination. Health officials have dismissed the case, “stating that it’s too soon to link the death and vaccine.”  Quebec man dies after taking H1N1 vaccine, Digital Journal, 18 November 2009).

The Quebec health authorities have refused to provide details:

“Quebec’s Director of Public Health Protection, Dr. Horacio Arruda, did not know why the man took the vaccine and that final test results, which are expected to come in December, will determine whether or not the man died from the vaccine.

Canada.com reports the man died in the last three weeks but provincial officials declined to reveal details, citing confidentiality concerns. Arruda has said that most allergic reactions occur right away, which is the reason why many patients are asked to stay in the centers, “We can’t say there is a causal association between the death and the flu shot.”

Nevertheless, Arruda is confident that the death will not discourage people from taking the vaccine but urged that serious reactions to the H1N1 shot are rare, “I understand that everyone is worried.”” (Quebec man dies after taking H1N1 vaccine, Digital Journal, 18 November 2009)

The statements by senior health officials are notoriously ambiguous: while they concur that: “there is no evidence the vaccine is dangerous.”, they nonetheless acknowledge the deaths resulting from the vaccine (Statement of Quebec’s Director of Public Health Protection, Dr. Horacio Arruda, (The Canadian Press: Quebec health officials investigating possible death from H1N1 vaccine. November 18, 2009).

There is No Monopoly on Post-Truth

By Anders Koskinen (via Intellectual Takeout)

Jennifer Rubin’s Washington Post op-ed calling for Americans to put an end to our new post-truth society might have been laudable. Unfortunately for her, she fails to realize that her piece is a fine example of politically-biased, mainstream media spin-doctoring.

Furthermore, Rubin’s piece demonstrates that when either side pretends that one party or one ideology has a monopoly on political spin or propaganda, such statements only work to disprove that theory entirely.

While concern over last week’s events at the Capitol are not unfounded, Rubin’s analysis of the problems of American political culture are not confined to the validity of the 2020 presidential election results and President Donald Trump’s rhetoric thereon. Instead, she engages in a series of invectives decrying conservative talking points, completely neglecting to mention the post-truth wordsmithing of Democratic politicians, progressive academics, or publications such as The New York Times or her own Washington Post. Post-truth America is supposedly an entirely conservative construct:

In this world, masks don’t work and Ukraine has the DNC server. White evangelicals tell their flocks there is a war on Christians. Radio talk-show hosts tell us there are terrorists among refugees fleeing violence in Central America. There is a whole industry — extending to issue-oriented advocacy groups and think tanks — designed to con the mob and infuriate them.

An interesting selection of issues and talking points. However, there are an additional set of claims that ought to be included as a complement to Rubin’s list.

The post-truth American society is also one in which gender is a spectrum of feeling rather than a biological fact. Journalists claim that America was founded in 1619 for the purpose of creating the slave trade. Professors tell us that “all white people are complicit with racism,” and that statement is somehow accepted rather than decried as being racist itself. There is a whole industry—extending to identitarian movements, progressive think tanks, and apologetic and coddling mass media programs—designed to enable and excuse the mob no matter how many cities they burn or how ill-founded their reasons for doing so are.

Post-truth America is one in which protestors chanting “Not my president” in 2016 were legitimately airing grievances, but in 2021 Rubin argues that lawyers engaged in litigation regarding potential election fraud in 2020 should be punished by bar associations. In addition, lawmakers who objected to the certification of the election “need to be identified as such for as long as they participate in public life.”

I would posit that if we need to introduce “House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy who objected to the certification of the 2020 presidential election results,” then we should also introduce “Senator Maize Hirono who attempted to impose a religious test on federal judiciary appointees.”

Neither side of any issue is devoid of ill-intentioned propagandists. The left still needs to learn that people are not as easily categorized as Rubin attempts. There will be people who engage in disreputable rhetoric in any institution or group. The idea that the Democratic party is somehow immune from this is laughable.

Rubin’s latest article may just be another example of a writer engaging in what Tim Groseclose described in his book Left Turn:

Many liberal journalists and scholars are opposed to the very idea of objective studies of media bias. That is, not only do they not want to conduct such studies themselves, they do not want anyone to conduct them.

Such people, I believe, do not want the media bias debate to be settled by data and objective measures. Instead, they want it to remain one that is settled by who has the smoothest rhetoric and who can shout the loudest.

It does not matter who engages in post-truth statements, nor how often they do so, nor how egregious the post-truth statements themselves actually are. With the liberal bias of newsrooms, the rhetoric will continue to be that media bias is non-existent and that post-truth doublespeak is solely the domain of far-right ideologues who ought to be ostracized from polite society.

That is not the truth, but it is the post-truth spin that Rubin, The Washington Post, and other liberal politicos and media personalities want everyone to believe.

To restore America to a truth-valuing society we must eliminate all post-truth statements, not just the ones that we are predisposed to find repulsive based on our own political preferences.

To favor one side over the other in this regard will only drag the country further into a post-truth society where Newspeak quickly becomes America’s first official language.

Macaulay Culkin Supports Digital Removal of Trump from ‘Home Alone 2’

By Randy DeSoto  (via The Western Journal)

“Home Alone” actor Macaulay Culkin says he supports digitally removing a cameo by Donald Trump in the 1992 sequel to the popular film.

In response to a tweet that read, “petition to digitally replace trump in ‘home alone 2’ with 40-year-old macaulay culkin,” the childhood star responded, “Sold.”

In response to a second tweet in which Trump was replaced with empty space in the movie, Culkin tweeted: “Bravo.”

In “Home Alone 2: Lost in New York,” Kevin McCallister, played by Culkin, gets separated from his family at the airport and ends up boarding a flight to New York instead of Miami.

While in the Big Apple, he decides he might as well take in the sights and heads to Central Park and ultimately to The Plaza Hotel, where he checks in.

The Plaza was owned at the time by Trump, who agreed the movie could be shot on his property if he got a cameo in the picture.

In the scene, Kevin has just entered the hotel and bumps into the New York businessman, whom he asks for directions to the lobby.

Last month in the Insider, “Home Alone 2” director Chris Columbus recounted that Trump “did bully his way into the movie,” but the audience loved seeing him.

“When we screened it for the first time, the oddest thing happened – people cheered when Trump showed up onscreen,” Columbus said.

“So I said to my editor, ‘Leave him in the movie. It’s a moment for the audience.’”

Though not as successful as the 1990 original, “Home Alone 2” was a box office hit, grossing about $173.6 million, which would be roughly $320.2 million in today’s dollars.

Canadian viewers do not see the seven-second scene featuring Trump when the movie airs on CBC, according to The Hollywood Reporter.

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation explained that the former reality television star was edited out along with other parts of the film to make room for advertisements.

The edits were made in 2014, before Trump got into politics.

While many knew the New Yorker through his NBC hit reality television series “The Apprentice,” which launched in 2004, Trump’s celebrity actually extends to the 1980s.

His New York Times No. 1 best-selling book, “The Art of the Deal,” made the real estate mogul a household name in 1987.

Norway Investigates 29 Deaths in Elderly Patients After Pfizer Covid-19 Vaccination

By Arjun Walia (via Collective Evoloution)


In Brief

  • The Facts:Norway has registered a total of 29 deaths among people over the age of 75 who’ve had their first Covid-19 vaccination shot, raising questions over which groups to target in national inoculation programs.
  • Reflect On:Should freedom of choice always remain here? Should governments and private institutions not be allowed to mandate this vaccine in order to have access to certain rights and freedoms?

What Happened: 29 patients who were quite old and frail have died following their first dose of the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccination. As a result, Norwegian officials have since adjusted their advice on who should get the COVID-19 vaccine.

This doesn’t come as a surprise to many given the fact that the clinical trials were conducted with people who are healthy. Older and sick people with co-morbidities were not used in the trials, and people with severe allergies and other diseases that can make one more susceptible to vaccine injury were not used either. It can be confusing given the fact that vaccination is being encouraged for the elderly in nursing homes and those who are more vulnerable to COVID-19.

Steinar Madsen, medical director of the Norwegian Medicines Agency (NOMA), told the British Medical Journal (BMJ) that “There is no certain connection between these deaths and the vaccine.”

On the 15th of January it was 23 deaths, Bloomberg is now reporting that a total of 29 deaths among people over the age of 75 who’ve had their first COVID-19 shot. They point out that “Until Friday, Pfizer/BioNTech was the only vaccine available in Norway”, stating that the Norwegian Medicines Agency told them that as a result “all deaths are thus linked to this vaccine.”

“There are 13 deaths that have been assessed, and we are aware of another 16 deaths that are currently being assessed,” the agency said. All the reported deaths related to “elderly people with serious basic disorders,” it said. “Most people have experienced the expected side effects of the vaccine, such as nausea and vomiting, fever, local reactions at the injection site, and worsening of their underlying condition.”

Madsen also told the BMJ that,

There is a possibility that these common adverse reactions, that are not dangerous in fitter, younger patients and are not unusual with vaccines, may aggravate underlying disease in the elderly. We are not alarmed or worried about this, because these are very rare occurrences and they occurred in very frail patients with very serious disease. We are not asking for doctors to continue with vaccination, but to carry out extra evaluation of very sick people whose underlying condition might be aggravated by it. This evaluation includes discussing the risks and benefits of vaccination with the patient and their families to decide whether or not vaccination is the best course.

The BMJ article goes on to point out that the Paul Ehrlich Institute in Germany is also investigating 10 deaths shortly after COVID-19 vaccination, and closes with the following information:

In a statement, Pfizer said, “Pfizer and BioNTech are aware of reported deaths following administration of BNT162b2. We are working with NOMA to gather all the relevant information.

“Norwegian authorities have prioritised the immunisation of residents in nursing homes, most of whom are very elderly with underlying medical conditions and some of whom are terminally ill. NOMA confirm the number of incidents so far is not alarming, and in line with expectations. All reported deaths will be thoroughly evaluated by NOMA to determine if these incidents are related to the vaccine. The Norwegian government will also consider adjusting their vaccination instructions to take the patients’ health into more consideration.

“Our immediate thoughts are with the bereaved families.”

Vaccine Hesitancy is Growing Among Healthcare Workers: Vaccine hesitancy is growing all over the globe, one of the latest examples comes from Riverside County, California. It has a population of approximately 2.4 million, and about 50 percent of healthcare workers in the county are refusing to take the COVID-19 vaccine despite the fact that they have top priority and access to it.  At Providence Holy Cross Medical Center in Mission Hills, one in five frontline nurses and doctors have declined the shot. Roughly 20% to 40% of L.A. County’s frontline workers who were offered the vaccine did the same, according to county public health officials. You can read more about that story here.

Vaccine hesitancy among physicians and academics is nothing new. To illustrate this I often point to a conference held at the end of 2019 put on by the World Health Organization (WHO). At the conference, Dr. Heidi Larson a Professor of Anthropology and the Risk and Decision Scientist Director at the Vaccine Confidence Project Emphasized this point, having  stated,

The other thing that’s a trend, and an issue, is not just confidence in providers but confidence of health care providers. We have a very wobbly health professional frontline that is starting to question vaccines and the safety of vaccines. That’s a huge problem, because to this day any study I’ve seen…still, the most trusted person on any study I’ve seen globally is the health care provider.

A study published in the journal EbioMedicine  as far back as 2013 outlines this point, among many others.

Pfizer’s Questionable History:  Losing faith in “big pharma” does not come without good reason. For example, in 2010 Robert G. Evans, PhD, Centre for Health Services and Policy Research Emeritus Professor, Vancouver School of Economics, UBC, published a paper that’s accessible in PubMed titled “Tough on Crime? Pfizer and the CIHR.”

In it, he outlines the fact that,

Pfizer has been a “habitual offender,” persistently engaging in illegal and corrupt marketing practices, bribing physicians and suppressing adverse trial results. Since 2002 the company and its subsidiaries have been assessed $3 billion in criminal convictions, civil penalties and jury awards. The 2.3-billion settlement…set a new record for both criminal fines and total penalties. A link with Pfizer might well advance the commercialization of Canadian research.

Suppressing clinical trial results is something I’ve come across multiple times with several different medicines. Five years ago I wrote about how big pharma did not share adverse reactions people had and harmful results from their clinical trials for commonly used antidepressant drugs.

Even scientists from within federal these health regulatory agencies have been sounding the alarm. For example, a few years ago more than a dozen scientists from within the CDC put out an anonymous public statement detailing the influence corporations have on government policies. They were referred to as the  Spider Papers.

The Takeaway: Given the fact that everything is not black and white, especially when it comes to vaccine safety, do we really want to give government health agencies and/or private institutions the right to enforce mandatory vaccination requirements when their efficacy have been called into question? Should people have the freedom of choice? It’s a subject that has many people polarized in their beliefs, but at the end of the day the sharing of information, opinion and evidence should not be shut down, discouraged, ridiculed or censored.

In a day and age where more people are starting to see our planet in a completely different light, one which has more and more questioning the human experience and why we live the way we do it seems the ‘crack down’ on free thought gets tighter and tighter. Do we really want to live in a world where we lose the right to choose what we do with our own body, or one where certain rights and freedoms are taken away if we don’t comply? The next question is, what do we do about it? Those who are in a position to enforce these measures must, it seems, have a shift in consciousness and refuse to implement them. There doesn’t seem to be a clear cut answer, but there is no doubt that we are currently going through that possible process, we are living in it.

Call for Action: The Necessary Struggle of the Personal Conscience Against “The New World Order”

Enough Words have been Exchanged, Let Me Finally See Action!

By Dr. Rudolf Hänsel (via Global Research)


Photo by Mihai Vlasceanu on Pexels.com

What could be more natural than to enjoy and draw strength from the wisdom of great European poets and thinkers such as Goethe, Schiller, Rolland or Camus? Are we not all – every single one! – urgently called upon to stop degrading ourselves into blind servants of corrupt governments in the pay of a criminal billionaire clique, but to follow our personal conscience, to exercise our right to individual and collective resistance and to stand up against them? This act of outrage – often set apart from the inert herd – includes civil disobedience and other non-violent individual and collective actions. In the process, man comes to himself. Romain Rolland warned of the danger of the individual soul sinking into the abyss of the mass soul in his anti-war novel “Clerambeault” in a similarly dark time as today. (1) Free souls and strong characters would have to offer blinded governments and their string-pullers in the background a check – for the love of humanity.

Enough words have been exchanged, …

In the quote fragment borrowed from Goethe’s “Faust”, “Enough words have been exchanged, …”, there is a call for action to follow words. Many intrepid enlighteners in the alternative social media have indeed tirelessly informed us,Australia’s Naval Base in Papua New Guinea: Power Play in the South Pacific against China

– that we should have the courage to use our own minds,

– that power should not be handed over to any politician,

– that the planned and in parts already implemented “New World Order” of the so-called elite is a “crime against humanity” which they will one day have to answer for before a new “Nuremberg Trial”,

– that the call for social distancing and muzzling also has hidden aims,

– that stoking irrational fears (such as death by virus) is a tried and tested means of discipline and domination by those in power,

– that the corporate-owned and controlled media of lies (“journaille”) play a pathetic and sinister role in this,

– that one can give up the involuntary reflex of absolute mental obedience and

– that by rebelling against the illegally imposed restrictions on personal freedoms, one feels human again.

… let me also finally see action!

Why should the citizens of our generation not also succeed in doing what young and older men and women of the German resistance succeeded in doing three generations earlier: Standing up against screaming injustice and lawlessness. No, a border has tyrannical power! (Schiller) And the power to do so does not come from physical ability; it springs from an indomitable will. (Gandhi). Do not despair of humanity! Man is good. Evil will not triumph!

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Dr. Rudolf Hänsel is an educationalist and qualified psychologist.

Note

(1) Reinbeck bei Hamburg (1988). Translated from the French by Stefan Zweig. First published in 1920 by the Ollendorff publishing house in Paris. Original title “One against all” (1917).

Vaccines: “Death by Coincidence”. Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

By Robert F. Kennedy Jr (via Global Research)

Declarations by health officials and vaccine makers that deaths and injuries following COVID vaccinations are unrelated coincidences are becoming a pattern.


Photo by Alena Shekhovtcova on Pexels.com

They’re also depriving people of the information they need to make informed decisions.

The official handling last week of the deaths of two Danes and a Miami doctor following their COVID jabs highlights the gaping holes in the government’s surveillance system for detecting post-marketing vaccine reactions.

These incidents suggest that health officials will be unlikely to give the public authentic risk profiles for the emergency use COVID vaccines.

Accurate risk profiles allow regulators to determine if a medical intervention is causing more harm than good and consumers to make rational choices about their own use of a product.

Regulators usually develop risk assessments during preclinical trials by comparing health outcomes in individuals receiving the intervention against a placebo group. Such studies must be large enough to detect rare injuries and of sufficient duration to reveal ailments with long diagnosis horizons.

The existence of the placebo group makes it difficult to conceal or misattribute injuries. Conversely, the absence of a placebo group in post-vaccination surveillance systems makes it easy for self-interested pharmaceutical and regulatory officials to undercount injuries by attributing them to coincidence.

Coincidence is turning out to be quite lethal to COVID vaccine recipients.

Death by coincidence

Shortly after reporting the Danish deaths and prior to any autopsies, Tanja Eriksen, acting head of Denmark’s Pharmacovigilance Unit, told the Danish newspaper, EkstaBladet, that the Danish Medicines Agency had determined that coincidence probably killed the two Danish citizens whose deaths followed their vaccinations.

One of the deaths was a citizen who had “severe lung disease.” The existence of the comorbidity suggested that the death was therefore coincidental. The second citizen received the vaccine at a “very old age,” and therefore also expired from coincidence.

“When vaccinated in fragile groups, one would expect there to be deaths,” explained Eriksen, using logic seldom applied by health officials to deaths from the COVID-19 virus. “This will happen regardless of whether they are vaccinated or not.”

These simple declarations — that deaths and injuries following vaccination are unrelated coincidences — are becoming a pattern.

On Dec. 20, 2020, World Today News reported the death of an 85-year-old man in Kalmar, Sweden, one day after he received the vaccine. Dr. Mattias Alvunger of the Kalmar Hospital dismissed concerns about the death being related to the vaccine, calling the fact that it was reported to the Swedish Medical Products Agency as “routine.”

On January 1, Sonia Acevedo, a 41-year-old Portugese nurse and mother of two, died two days after receiving the Pfizer/BioNtech vaccine. Her father told the Daily Mail that she never drank alcohol and was in perfect health. Nevertheless, Portugal’s Health Authority dismissed her death as a sad coincidence.

Israel also reported two deaths from the coincidence pandemic: one in a 75-year-old man in Beit She’an, and the other an 88-year-old man. Both died two hours after vaccination. Israeli health officials warned the public not to attribute the deaths to the vaccine.

In Lucerne, Switzerland, a 91-year-old man died five days after getting Pfizer/BioNtech’s vaccine. Swiss authorities called any connection “highly unlikely.”

On January 3, Dr. Gregory Michael, a beloved Miami obstetrician and enthusiastic COVID-19 vaccine booster, died of a hemorrhagic stroke after receiving Pfizer/BioNtech’s vaccine. Dr. Michael developed acute idiopathic thrombocytopenia purpura (ITP) — a known vaccine side effect — immediately after receiving the jab. His platelet count dropped from 150,000 to zero and never rebounded.

An army of experts from around the world, involved in the vaccine program, consulted in doomed efforts to restore Dr. Michael’s platelet count. The inevitable brain hemorrhage killed him two weeks later. Michael’s wife said that her husband’s death was “100% linked to the vaccine. She added that he was physically healthy, exercised often, rarely drank alcohol, never smoked cigarettes and had no known comorbidities.

Nevertheless, Pfizer dismissed Michael’s injuries as another sad coincidence: “We do not believe at this time that there is any direct connection to the vaccine.” Pfizer pointed out that ITP is also caused by excess drinking and reasoned that “there have been no recorded safety signals identified in trials from vaccinations so far.”

On Tuesday, the New York Times quoted Dr. Jerry Spivak, a blood disorder expert at Johns Hopkins University, saying “I think it’s a medical certainty that the vaccine was related.”

But Pfizer/BioNtech would not have been likely to see the thrombocytopenia signals in its brief, under-enrolled clinical trials. Thrombocytopenia occurs in 1 in approximately every 25,000-40,000 doses of the MMR vaccine. It is also a similarly rare, but persistently reported side effect of hepatitis A, TB, HPV, chickenpox, DTaP, polio and HiB vaccines.Leading COVID Vaccine Candidates Plagued by Safety Concerns

An injury that occurs at that frequency would not likely be seen in Pfizer/BioNtech’s Phase II clinical trial because only 22,000 people received the vaccine. However, an injury of this severity occurring once in every 25,000 shots could debilitate or kill 12,000 of the 300 million Americans to whom the company hopes to give the jab.

The public can expect to see more of this strategic chicanery: When a healthy 32-year-old Mexican doctor was hospitalized with encephalitis — inflammation of his brain and spinal cord —  after receiving the Pfizer/BioNtech vaccine, Mexican doctors dismissed the injury as unrelated to the vaccination, reasoning that the condition had not been detected in Pfizer/ BioNtech’s clinical trials.

This week an Auburn, New York nursing home reported, without any apparent irony, that 32 of 193 residents have died since the facility began administering the Pfizer vaccine on Dec. 21. The company claims that its clients are dying of COVID-19 infections, not the vaccine.

Equally disturbing, additional deaths may have gone altogether unreported.

Among Dr. Michael’s many grateful patients was Tessa Levy, who had a scheduled appointment with him for the Tuesday after his death on Jan. 3. Michaels delivered all four of Tessa’s children, saving one of them with an ingenious split-second diagnosis of a rare heart condition that would have otherwise killed the boy.

Tessa is the daughter of my close friend, the famous Beverly Hills surgeon, Dr. George Boris. “He was a healthy, strong, vigorous guy,” Tessa told me about Michaels. “He never showed any health problems.”

On New Year’s Eve, Dr. Boris’s brother-in-law, Murray Brazner, also died suddenly, one week after receiving the Pfizer vaccine. Neither the vaccine company nor any health agency took notice of his sudden unexpected death. “No autopsy was performed, and his death isn’t recorded as a vaccine injury. It makes you wonder,” Dr. Boris told me.

Mr. Brazner’s death illustrates an even graver problem: Many injuries may be escaping notice by the surveillance system and the media. Unreported stories similar to Dr. Brazner’s tragedy are already common complaints on social media.

On Jan. 2, Janice Hisle lamented on Facebook that her friend’s mom, an Ohio woman, died after receiving the vaccine. According to Hisle, the woman developed a high fever hours after the jab and died a “couple days” later. “I am so angry for my friend,” she commented, “who is crying because relatives were not allowed to see her before she was vaccinated. They thought the vaccine would ‘open the door.’”

We could find no mention of the Ohio woman’s death in media records or official COVID-vaccine death tallies.

One might assume that if deaths following COVID-19 vaccine can be so easily dismissed or ignored, lesser injuries will also escape notice.

The all-too-familiar vaccine propaganda playbook

The routine of reflexively dismissing suspicious deaths and injuries as unrelated to vaccination not only calls into doubt the official data tallies on vaccine injuries, it also contrasts markedly with the habit among public health officials of authoritatively attributing every death to COVID-19 so long as the deceased tested positive for COVID within 60 days of death using a PCR test notorious for producing false positives.

In fact, the $48 billion COVID vaccine enterprise shares three defining features with every new vaccine introduced since 1986:

1. Systematic exaggeration of risk from the target disease. (Pharma calls this project “Disease Branding.”)

2. Systematic exaggeration of vaccine efficacy.

3. Systematically downplaying vaccine risks.

1. Exaggerating disease risk:

Regulatory agencies count every death as a COVID death, so long as the deceased tested positive for COVID within 60 days of death — no matter that he may have died in a motorcycle crash.

In September, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) admitted that 94% of individuals whose deaths the CDC officially attributed to COVID had other illnesses that may have actually killed them. The average deceased had 2.8 comorbidities. Yet in CDC’s official tabulations, CDC always presumes that COVID-19 did the killing.

But as we see from the examples above, when it comes to COVID vaccine injuries, the opposite presumption governs: the comorbidity is always the cause of death — even when, as with Dr. Michaels, there are no known comorbidities.

2. Systematic exaggeration of vaccine efficacy:

Pfizer touts a 95% efficacy rate in its clinical trials, but this is a meaningless measure of “relative efficacy” based on a tiny cohort of 94 people in the placebo group who got mild cases of COVID during the clinical trials.

The “absolute,” or “actual,” efficacy of the vaccine during clinical trials was 0.88%. According to the British Medical Journal, this means that health authorities must administer 155 vaccines to avert a single case of mild COVID.

3. Downplaying vaccine risks:

The true risk of vaccine injury will continue to be obscured by the habit among public health officials of routinely dismissing reported injuries as unrelated to vaccination.

The practices of systematically overestimating vaccine safety, underestimating vaccine deaths, and exaggerating risks of COVID-19 effectively deprive the public of their right to informed consent.

And so what do we really know about the true risk of COVID-19 vaccines?

Public health officials and industry spokespeople like to say that the risks of serious injury from vaccination are “one in one million.. However, in the first week of distribution, Americans took 200,000 COVID vaccines and reported 5,000 serious” (meaning missed workdays or medical intervention required) injuries.

This is an injury rate of 1 in every 40 jabs. This means that the 150 shots necessary to avert one mild case of COVID will cause serious injury to at least three people.

If the clinical trials are good predictors, that rate is likely to increase dramatically after the second shot (the clinical trials suggested that almost all the benefits of COVID vaccination and vast majority of injuries were associated with the second dose).

We don’t know the true risk of death from the vaccine since regulators have rendered virtually every death invisible by attributing them all to coincidence.

The 1-in-40 risk of “serious injury” from Pfizer’s COVID vaccine is consistent with what we know about other vaccines.

For many years, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has maintained a post-licensing surveillance system known as the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). Even government insiders like Surgeon General Dr. David Kessler acknowledged that VAERS is an abysmal failure.

Nevertheless, it is only by clinging to this “designed to fail” system that regulators and industry have maintained their pretense that current vaccine risk profiles are acceptable.

A 2010 study funded by HHS concluded that VAERS captured “fewer than 1% of injuries.” In other words, the actual injury rates from mandated vaccines are more than 100x what HHS has been telling the public!

The 2010 HHS study found that the true risk for serious adverse events was 26/1,000, or one in 37.

Similarly, Merck’s clinical trials for Gardasil found that an astonishing half of all vaccine recipientssuffered from adverse events, which Merck euphemistically called “new medical conditions,” and that 2.3% of vaccine recipients (1 in 43) suffered from autoimmune disease within six months of vaccination.

Similarly, a recent Italian study found that 46% of vaccine recipients (462 adverse events per 1,000 doses) suffered adverse events, with 11% of these rated “serious,” meaning 38 serious adverse events per 1,000 vaccinated individuals. These include grave gastrointestinal and “serious neurological disorders.” This amounts to a “serious” injury rate of 1/26.

Holocaust survivor Vera Sharav of the Alliance for Human Research Protection has observed that, “Everyone who gets any of these vaccines is participating in a vast medical experiment.”

Health officials generally concur that the granting of “emergency use authorization” to the rollout of experimental vaccine technologies with only a few weeks of safety testing, two years before the scheduled completion of Phase 2 testing, is a great human experiment, involving millions of subjects.

But researchers are unlikely to see all of the safety signals if a badly designed surveillance system allows local health officials and company employees the discretion to dismiss any serious injury as unrelated.

Brave New Dystopian World Order Unfolding. Silencing Dissent

By Stephen Lendman (via Global Research)



Brave new world dystopia is unfolding in plain sight, freedoms as once known fast eroding.

Are they heading for elimination altogether in the West and elsewhere?

Is totalitarian rule enforced by police state harshness becoming the new abnormal?

Is the US land of opportunity/land of the free and home of the brave a distant memory?

Eroding for years, life as once known in the US and West are on a fast track for elimination if not challenged to halt what’s underway.

Seasonal flu/influenza that occurs annually with no mass hysteria fear-mongering, house arrest by lockdowns and quarantines, face masks that harm health instead of protecting it, social distancing and all the rest have done infinitely more harm to most people than any number of illnesses combined.

Renamed (made-in-the-USA) covid, it’s a vehicle for transforming free societies into totalitarian ones — complementing what’s gone on up to now following the US state-sponsored 9/11 mother of all false flags.

What’s happening and hardening is what no one yearning to breathe free should accept.

But it’s going on and advancing, supported by Big Media.

It includes a diabolical scheme to silence dissent by eliminating truth-telling divergence from the falsified official narrative.

America’s Bill of Rights are fast disappearing.

October 2001 Patriot Act legislation trampled on them by greatly eroding the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, 8th and 14th Bill of Rights amendments to the US Constitution.

Calling for Patriot Act 2.0, Biden/Harris want the draconian 2001 law hardened for greater police state control to further weaken/then eliminate a free and open society.

Their stimulus plan calls for nationwide mass-vaxxing with high-risk, experimental, DNA-altering, hazardous to health mRNA vaccines that provide no protection and likely harm to countless numbers of people if taken as directed.

What’s planned includes issuance of digital vaccine passports — an unacceptable Big Brother intrusion into and for control over our lives.Beyond Orwell and Huxley: Brave New World Unfolding? Compulsory Vaccination, Digital Passports?

Will they be required ahead for air travel and free movement, along with access to employment, education, and other public places?

Will daily lives and routines no longer be possible without proof of covid immunity — not gotten from vaxxing?

Will what was inconceivable not long ago become reality ahead by what Biden/Harris and likeminded US hardliners have in mind?

Is the scheme a diabolical depopulation plot to eliminate maximum numbers of what Henry Kissinger once called “useless eaters” — in the US and worldwide?

A so-called US Vaccination Credential Initiative (VCI) was established.

Its sponsors include Microsoft, Oracle, the Mayo Clinic, the Commons Project, Change Healthcare, the Rockefeller Foundation, other corporate interests, likely mass-vaxxing advocate Bill Gates and US dark forces.

VCI calls itself “a coalition of public and private partners committed to empowering individuals with digital access to their vaccination records (sic).”

It’s part of a diabolical, deep state, Great Reset plot for draconian control over our lives — for ill, not good, to further erode and eliminate fundamental freedoms.

It’s unrelated to “protect(ing) and improv(ing) (our) health…safety, and privacy.”

Its aims are polar opposite the above mass deception.

It calls for digital access to health, vaxxing, and related information — for greater government intrusion into and control over our lives.

“Participating technology and other collaborating partners agree to support Vaccination Data Sources in issuing SMART Health Cards” — to aid diabolical aims sought by US dark forces at home and worldwide.

In response to what’s planned, UK-based Big Brother Watch (BBW) director Silkie Carlo said the following:

“Vaccine passports would create the backbone of an oppressive digital ID system and could easily lead to a health apartheid that’s incompatible with a free and democratic country,” adding:

“Digital IDs would lead to sensitive records spanning medical, work, travel, and biometric data about each and every one of us being held at the fingertips of authorities and state bureaucrats.”

“This dangerous plan would normalize identity checks, increase state control over law-abiding citizens, and create a honeypot for cybercriminals.”

BBW’s website warned about “(a) wave of emergency powers and extreme measures in response to (seasonal flu renamed covid that) brought about the greatest loss of liberty in (UK) history,” the US and other Western societies.

Vaccine passports are part of a diabolical plot to transform free societies into dystopian ones on the phony pretext of protecting our health and well-being that’s greatly harmed by what’s going on and planned.

VISIT MY WEBSITE: stephenlendman.org (Home – Stephen Lendman). Contact at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

My two Wall Street books are timely reading:

“How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion, and Class War”

https://www.claritypress.com/product/how-wall-street-fleeces-america/

“Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity”

https://www.claritypress.com/product/banker-occupation-waging-financial-war-on-humanity/

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG)

NICOLE GETS HER HANDS ON SOME COVID TESTS AND FINDS NANO PARTICLES LIVING WITHIN THEM

By Nicole Via Facebook



Nicole – got a couple of covid tests from a friend, and she wanted to break them down and see what was in the covid tests

https://www.facebook.com/nicole.soful.7/posts/1290237428007486?cft%5B0%5D=AZWFTqQxSlWnFSh3cdrAjdIuENnVSq6CA5GXcooVFDgN0MBvacmr2htJ2ToampilZIFaZBorqy8x3uDHNCcWabZtgflXUcK9WPImaQglPHSpMR3_RZwub0IgzaoRiqFf4dzMzFblTW60ssf0JDsaYYyz&tn=-UK-R

Indigenous Elders Share Stories About “Star People” Living Inside The Earth

By Arjun Walia (via Collective Evolution)



IN BRIEF

  • The Facts:Dr. Ardy Sixkiller Clarke, a Professor Emeritus at Montana State University who is Cherokee/Choctaw has been researching the Star People, and collecting encounters between them and Native Indians for many years. This article shares one of many.
  • Reflect On:Are we alone? If not, what are the implications when the public becomes fully aware of this? How will it change the way we look at reality? Science? Technology? History?

Belief in subterranean worlds has been handed down as myths or legends among generations of people from all over the world. For example, Socrates spoke of huge hollows within the Earth that were inhabited and vast caverns where rivers flowed. The Cherokee Indians tell that when they first came to the southeastern United States, they found many well-tended gardens but not the people who cared for them. Eventually, they discovered a group of people who lived underground and came out only at night to tend the gardens. They harvested the food and took it underground to their cities.These people were small, had blue skin and large black eyes. The sun rays were too harsh for them so they built their cities underground and only came out at night using the light of the moon. The Cherokee called them the “Moon People.”

The quote above comes from Dr. Ardy Sixkiller Clarke, a Professor Emeritus at Montana State University who is Cherokee/Choctaw and has been researching the Star People for many years, collecting encounters between them and Native Indians. I recently published two articles detailing indigenous stories of encounters with the “Star People.” One was regarding an indigenous elder who shared a story about the “Star People” that crashed on his reservation, which you can read here. The second article, published a few days ago, was about an elder who showed Dr. Clarke a petrified alien heart, which he claimed belonged to the Star People, and you can read that here.

These people were also mentioned in a 1797 book by Benjamin Smith Barton, who explains that they are called “moon-eyed” because they saw poorly during the day. Later variants add additional details, claiming the people had white skin and that they created the area’s pre-Columbian ruins. Barton cited his source as a conversation with Colonel Leonard Marbury.

In her book, Clarke recounts a story told to her by an 84 year-old elder, who she called “Uncle Beau.” According to him, “The old ones tell stories about people from the stars who lived underground near Tanana. There are many stories the old ones told about the Star People who live among them and went underground near Tanana. The Inupiat believe they came to Earth on a spaceship.”

Clarke then asked him if he’d ever seen a spaceship, to which he replied:

Plenty of times. I was born here in Athabaskan territory. I was here before Alaska became a state and my people lived here for thousands of years before any white man ever came here. There were spacecrafts visiting Alaska when it was called Alaxsxaq, and they will be visiting long after there is no more Alaska. I think they have always been here, just as the old ones said. The government knows about it, but there is little they can do. They were here long before there was a government. I think at this point, the military just tries to contain them and keep it quiet. They don’t want us to know about it.

There is also a military base near where Beau lives, and when Clarke asked if he had ever talked with anyone at the base about UFOs, he responded:

One of my niece’s boys used to work at the base about 10 years ago. They employed about one hundred civilians at the base. He said that one morning he went to work and the base was closed. They told the workers to go home. When he reported for work the following day, one of his friends who was stationed there told him that a UFO had landed the previous night. He said there was a place up there where the UFOs go underground. He said (his nephew) it was guarded night and day. No one was allowed near the site, but he said his friend who has a high security clearance told him about it.

He went on to explain how he thinks it’s a place where “the aliens and the military collaborate and where the aliens can go underground freely without us regular people seeing them. I don’t know what they are doing together, but I think that is how they use the place. My nephew’s friend said the aliens look like us. So maybe they are the ancestors.”

Now, having been working in this field for a long time, I’ve come across some very interesting connections. Tanana, Alaska, is right next to mount Hayes, Alaska. For those of you who don’t know, the US Government in conjunction with the CIA and Stanford Research Institute initiated a program called STARGATE, and one of its functions was to study remote viewing, which is the ability to perceive and describe a distant location regardless of distance.It’s an ability that allows the ‘viewer’ to be able to describe a remote geographical location up to several hundred thousand kilometres away (even more) from their physical location — a location that they have never been to.

Long story short, it was extremely successful, reputable, and accurate for intelligence collection. After its declassification in 1995, or at least partial declassification, the Department of Defense and those involved revealed an exceptionally high success rate.

To summarize, over the years, the back-and-forth criticism of protocols, refinement of methods, and successful replication of this type of remote viewing in independent laboratories has yielded considerable scientific evidence for the reality of the [remote viewing] phenomenon. Adding to the strength of these results was the discovery that a growing number of individuals could be found to demonstrate high-quality remote viewing, often to their own surprise… The development of this capability at SRI has evolved to the point where visiting CIA personnel with no previous exposure to such concepts have performed well under controlled laboratory conditions.” (source)

Multiple remote viewers from that program, after it was declassified, all of a sudden started talking a lot about extraterrestrial phenomena. One of the things discussed was the locations of multiple ET bases here on Earth. One of the program’s top viewers had successfully remote viewed 4 extraterrestrial ‘bases’ stationed on Earth. One was located underneath Mount Ziel, another was under Mount Perdido in Spain, another was under Mount Inyangani in Zimbabwe, and another was underneath Mount Hayes, Alaska. You can read more about that specific story here.

Lyn Buchanan, one of the STARGATE army remote viewers, claims that he was tasked to find out information on extraterrestrial groups that were/are visiting the planet. He also mentions these bases. You can read more about that here. (You can read more about that here: source)

These names are ever present within the CIA’s electronic reading room, so you can look them up and verify their credibility. After the declassification of the program, most of the people involved within the program also became publicly known.

So, what’s the point? Mount Hayes is right next to Tanana, Alaska, where Elder speaks of (as mentioned earlier in this article). And with regards to his nephew, there are multiple military bases within the vicinity such as Eielson Air Force Base. 

It’s interesting that I read this story shared by Dr. Clarke and then come across this connection with the remote viewing program.

Joe and I recently sat down and went a lot deeper into underground civilizations and how it relates to the extraterrestrial phenomenon. Below is a clip from our hour-long discussion on the topic on The Collective Evolution Show. Check out the clip below, and if you want to watch the entire broadcast you can sign up for CETV.

Another interesting story as told by Dr. Clarke comes from Mary Winston. At age 87, she was regarded as one of the only traditional artists still living. There are so many stories from indigenous elders about the Star People, it’s truly amazing and overwhelming.

According to Winston:

We have a story that our ancestors were brought to this land in great metal flying machines by the Star People. The ancestors lived on a cold planet, much like the arctic region. So they brought us here to colonize this planet. At that time ice covered the Earth. It was not like the Earth of today. We knew of the Star People from our grandparents. The stories were passed down for thousands of years. We were brought here by the Star People who live at the top of our world. They live under the North Pole. That is the top of the world. My grandfather talked with them when he was alive. He said they looked like us but that they had bigger eyes because on the home planet everyone lived underground. He said when we were first brought here we had big eyes too, but the sun and snow made our eyes small slits.

Clarke goes on to cite several other very interesting interviews with indigenous elders about living underground on our planet.

“My people tell of Star People who came to us many generations ago. The Star people brought spiritual teachings and stories and maps of the cosmos and they offered these freely. They were kind, loving and set a great example. When they left us, my people say there was a loneliness like no other.” (source) – Richard Wagamese, One of Canada’s foremost authors and storytellers from the Wabaseemoong First Nation in Northwestern Ontario.

The Takeaway

Several ancient texts from various cultures mention beings from ‘another world’ that exist within our own. One such world, referenced in Tibetan Buddhist and Hindu traditions, is Shambhala, which is described as a hidden kingdom within our own planet, a place we do not understand and is difficult to find. We’ve never really been down there ourselves, at least as far as we know.

It’s interesting to imagine what the Earth looks like at its core. Even though instruments can be used to determine the make up of it, to see it in its entirety would be fascinating.

Perhaps we should not be so quick to dismiss these stories

Operation Gladio: The Untold Story of the Unholy Alliance Between the Vatican, the CIA, and the Mafia

Review of Paul L. Williams Book 

By Global Research News

By Arif Jamal



After the Second World War ended, The Vatican, the CIA, the ex-Nazis, and the Sicilian/American Mafia forged an alliance to fight the Cold War against the former Soviet Union and the rising pro-Soviet governments in Europe and the rest of the world.

In a new book, Paul L. Williams offers new and disturbing evidence to expose what he calls the unholy alliance. Operation Gladio is likely to be a controversial book and may even be contested by several quarters. However, it would be difficult to reject the evidence author Paul L. Williams has provided. 

The story started as early as 1942 with the formation of the Vatican Bank. The same year ONI (Office of Naval Intelligence) recruited Lucky Luciano, a pre-eminent drug lord. The Swiss director of the US Office of Strategic Services (OSS) Allen Dulles came to the conclusion, “We’re fighting the wrong enemy.” Schutzstaffel (SS) sent Dulles a message through the Vatican that the Nazi government wanted to establish a separate peace with the United States; they wanted to fight the Soviets. Dulles met Prince Max von Hohenlohe in Bern. Hohenlohe found Dulles in agreement with him. Later, Dulles also met other Nazi officials to forge the new alliance. Chief of Special Intelligence for the OSS in China Col. Paul E Helliwell thought of another unholy alliance between the US intelligence community and organized crime groups. Consequently, the US intelligence agencies got drug lord Lucky Luciano released from jail, allowed him to build his narcotic empire, and simply watched the flow of drugs into the largely black ghettos of New York and Washington. The unholy alliance of the American spies and criminals was replicated everywhere, from Laos and Burma to Marseilles and Panama.

After Richard Nixon became president in 1969, the strategy of tension gained more impetus.  National Adviser Henry Kissinger issued orders to Licio Gelli to carry out terror attacks and coup attempts. The United States and the Vatican channeled millions of dollars for these operations. Most of the money was raised in questionable ways. The first major attack in Europe took place on December 12, 1969 when a bomb went off in the lobby of Banca Nazionale Dell’ Agricoltura in Milan, Italy. Seventeen people died in the explosion. Within an hour, three bombs exploded in Rome. According to official figures, 14,591 acts of violence with a political motivation took place between January 1, 1969 and December 31, 1987. In these terror attacks, 491 people died and 1,181 were injured. A large number of terror attacks took place in other European countries from 1965 to 1981. After a series of assassination attempts to kill French President De Gaulle failed, he denounced “the secret warfare of the Pentagon” and expelled the European headquarters of NATO.

In the Latin America, the CIA and the Vatican launched Operation Condor as the Latin American version of the Operation Gladio. The label was applied very liberally by the US intelligence agencies that “any government risked being so labeled if it advocated nationalization of private industry (particularly foreign-owned corporations), radical land reform, autarkic trade policies, acceptance of soviet aid, or an anti-American foreign policy.” The CIA and the Vatican started Operation Condor in the early 1970s when Opus Dei elicited support from Chilean bishops for the overthrow of the government of President Allende. The Catholic group was closely working with the CIA-funded organizations such as the Fatherland and Liberty, which was later turned into the dreaded Chilean secret police. “In 1971, the CIA began shelling out millions to the Chilean Institute for General Studies (IGS), an Opus Dei think tank, for the planning of the revolution.” Many members of the IGS joined the government after the coup. Hernan Cubillos became the foreign minister. He was the founder of Que Pasa, an OPUS Dei magazine, and publisher of El Mercurio, the largest newspaper in Santiago which was subsidized by the CIA.

Williams shows that the Vatican was fully involved in Operation Condor. The Pope was fully behind the purging of the left wing clerics; leaders of the military junta were devout Catholics. The Vatican did not abandon General Pinochet even when he was arrested in Britain for the murder of thousands of Chileans. Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Angelo Sodano wrote to the British government on behalf of the Pope to demand his release. Under Pinochet, hundreds of thousands Chileans had disappeared while more than four thousands had died. More than fifty thousand Chileans were tortured in the name of Catholic god. CIA’s dirty war was perpetuated in many Latin American countries with the help and blessing of the Vatican.

Williams quotes FBI whistle blower Sibel Edmonds who said,

“Between 1996 and 2002, we, the United States, planned, financed, and helped execute every major terrorist incident by Chechen rebels (and the Mujahideen) against Russia. Between 1996 and 20002, we, the United States, planned, financed, and helped execute every single uprising and terror related scheme in Xinjiang (aka East Turkistan and Uyhurstan). Between 1996 and 2002, we, the United States, planned and carried out at least two assassination schemes against pro-Russian officials in Azerbaijan.”

Operation Gladio is a highly well-researched book with some 1,100 endnotes and footnotes. This work is highly rich in details. It is an estimable scholarly and intellectual accomplishment which is unrivaled. His scholarly work fills a major lacuna in the study of the US foreign policy which was left by scholars such as Alfred McCoy, Peter Dale Scot, Martin A. Lee, Dale Yallop, and Sibel Edmonds.

Reviewed by Arif Jamal

Paul L. Williams is a journalist and author of The Vatican Exposed, Crescent Moon Rising, The Day of Islam, Osama’s revenge, and the Al-Qaeda Connection. He has written articles for The Wall Street Journal, USA Today, The Counter-Terrorist, NewsMax, and National Review. He is the winner of three first-place Keystone Press Awards for journalism. He has also served as a consultant for the FBI and as an adjunct professor of Humanities at the University of Scranton and Wilkes University.

Copyright Arif Jamal, The Washington Book Review, 2015

Ten Things You Need to Know about the Experimental COVID Vaccines

By Makia Freeman


Experimental COVID Vaccines

are coming to town, being rolled out worldwide as the transhumanistic New World Order (NWO) agenda dictates. This next phase of the COVID scamdemic is an incredibly dangerous one – the phase where authorities take their sovereignty-violating ways a step further by actually penetrating the body with poison disguised as medicine. These new COVID vaccines are even worse than your plain old regular toxic, carcinogenic and mutogenic vaccines, because some of them (the mRNA vaccines made by Pfizer and Moderna) are a dangerously new exotic creature: tools that actively hijack your genes and reprogram them. Here’s 10 things you need to know about the COVID vax, plus a list at the end of the article of just some of the horrendous injuries and deaths it has caused thus far.

Experimental COVID Vaccines: Never-Before-Used Tools to Modify and Program Your Genetics

The COVID vaccines produced by Pfizer and Moderna are called mRNA (messenger RNA) vaccines – a completely new type of vaccine that has never been licensed or used on humans before. We have absolutely no idea what to expect from this vaccine, nor no way to know if it will be effective or safe. Traditional vaccines introduce pieces of a weakened virus to stimulate an immune response. mRNA vaccines inject molecules of synthetic genetic material from non-humans sources into your cells, thus hijacking your genes and permanently reprogramming them to produce antibodies to kill the alleged SARS-CoV-2 virus causing COVID (although, as regular readers of The Freedom Articles know, the virus has never been isolated, purified or proven 100% to exist). These newly created proteins are not regulated by your DNA and are thus completely foreign to your body.

Experimental COVID Vaccines: mRNA Vax is an Operating System

The mRNA vaccines of Moderna and Pfizer could barely be regarded as medicine in the traditional sense. They are transhumanistic tools to synthetically alter you at the genetic level. In fact, Moderna has even admitted on their website that their new COVID vaccines are an “operating system” and the “software of life”:

“Recognizing the broad potential of mRNA science, we set out to create an mRNA technology platform that functions very much like an operating system on a computer. It is designed so that it can plug and play interchangeably with different programs. In our case, the “program” or “app” is our mRNA drug – the unique mRNA sequence that codes for a protein.”

Catherine Austin Fitts has recently been pointing out that these tools are ‘vaccines’ in name only, called so to give them legal immunity from liability, when actually they are operating systems:

“Just as Gates installed an operating system in our computers, now the vision is to install an operating system in our bodies and use “viruses” to mandate an initial installation followed by regular updates. Now I appreciate why Gates and his colleagues want to call these technologies “vaccines.” If they can persuade the body politic that injectible credit cards or injectible surveillance trackers or injectable brain-macine interface nanotechnologies are “vaccines,” then they can enjoy the protection of a century or more of legal decisions and laws that support their efforts to mandate what they want to do.”

“Why are we calling these formulations “vaccines”? If I understand the history of case law, vaccines, in legal terms, are medicine. Intentional heavy metal poisoning is not medicine. Injectible surveillance components are not medicine. Injectible credit cards are not medicine. Injectible brain-machine interface is not a medicine. Immunity for insurance companies is not the creation of human immunity. We need to stop allowing these concoctions to be referred to by a word that the courts and the general population define and treat as medicine and protect from legal and financial liability.”

Experimental COVID Vaccines: Safety Abandoned

Vaccines usually take 7-20 years to adequately research, test and bring to market. The slew of COVID vaccines produced by Big Pharma companies are being rushed to market in less than 12 months, which is nowhere enough time to meet established safety standards. No long-term safety studies were conducted, so no one has any real idea of the danger these vaccines could cause down the line. Many of the trials only lasted 3-4 months. Animal trials, an important part of safety testing, were skipped. While long-term safety is completely unknown, short-term safety looks extremely sketchy (see next section and list of links at end of article). It is no understatement to say that much of the worldwide population has just become Big Pharma’s guinea pigs.

Experimental COVID Vaccines: Dangerous Adverse Effects

The COVID vaccines promote disease enhancement due to pathogenic priming. In other words, they make people sicker than the disease would have. In Moderna’s trials alone, FDA documents record that 13 people died (6 from the vaccine and 7 from the placebo), while the FDA also issued a new warning regarding Bell’s Palsy as a potential side effect (results were correct up until December 3rd 2020). Since the rollout of the COVID vax, doctors and nurses have fainted live on TV (nurse manager Tiffany Dover fainted while speaking to the media about receiving the vaccine, and later died), contracted Bell’s palsy and become paralyzed. Some people have even died following the vaccine, including in places like Miami, Portugal, Israel, Switzerland, Iceland and more (see links in last section of article).Experimental COVID Vaccines: COVID Vax Only Designed to Stop Mild Symptoms

With the risks of the COVID vaccine so undeniably grave, you might think the benefits are large. Think again. Big Pharma has stated that the vaccine only protects against mild (not moderate or severe) symptoms, which makes the vaccine virtually pointless, given the large majority of people who allegedly have COVID have little or no symptoms whatsoever.
The study Will covid-19 vaccines save lives? Current trials aren’t designed to tell us published in the BMJ (British Medical Journal) by Professor Peter Doshi raises at least 2 very good points about the failure of the COVID vaccines to stop moderate/severe symptoms and to stop transmission. He quotes, among others, Moderna chief medical officer Tal Zaks:

“But what will it mean exactly when a vaccine is declared “effective”? To the public this seems fairly obvious. “The primary goal of a covid-19 vaccine is to keep people from getting very sick and dying,” a National Public Radio broadcast said bluntly. Peter Hotez, dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, said, “Ideally, you want an antiviral vaccine to do two things . . . first, reduce the likelihood you will get severely ill and go to the hospital, and two, prevent infection and therefore interrupt disease transmission.” Yet the current phase III trials are not actually set up