Corona Virus News & Info

[Goldhedge]

(Ukraine part at 50 min mark)

93% BRITISH COLUMBIA'S APRIL COVID DEATHS WERE VAXED & UKRAINIAN SOLDIERS EXPOSE "NAZI BATTALIONS"​

Welcome to The Daily Wrap Up, a concise show dedicated to bringing you the most relevant independent news, as we see it, from the last 24 hours.

93% British Columbia's April COVID Deaths Were Vaxed & Ukrainian Soldiers Expose "Nazi Battalions"

Welcome to The Daily Wrap Up, a concise show dedicated to bringing you the most relevant independent news, as we see it, from the last 24 hours. All Video Source Links Can Be Found Here At The Last American Vagabond: https://www.thelastamericanvag…

www.bitchute.com

 

[the_shootist]

The only real Nazis there ever were, and still are, have been thrown out of 109 countries over history...

 

[Goldhedge]

https://bit.ly/3M4Zn48

My guess what the comms are in those 4 Bill Gates Tweets?

1. They're here. They've come for me and you won't be seeing me for awhile.

2. but I'm not cooperating, I'm fully immune to them. My support structure is sound so they can't pressure me into flipping.

3. We have countermeasures in place we've been working on for two years that are almost ready.

4. We're all working hard to make sure we never have to deal with someone like Trump ever again.

Brian Cates ✪✪✪

My guess what the comms are in those 4 Bill Gates Tweets? 1. They're here. They've come for me and you won't be seeing me for awhile. 2. but I'm not cooperating, I'm fully immune to them. My support structure is sound so they can't pressure me into flipping. 3. We have countermeasures...

t.me

[Forwarded from CatTheGreat]
Seriously, find me a Republican who’s gotten Covid this spring?

Brian Cates ✪✪✪

Seriously, find me a Republican who’s gotten Covid this spring?

t.me

 

[Goldhedge]

25 States Now Report Mysterious Hepatitis Cases in Children​

by RTM Staff
May 10, 2022

Health officials in Hawaii confirmed they are investigating a case of acute hepatitis in a child, coming after the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stated there are more than 100 cases among children across the United States.

It’s now the 25th state to report a case of at least one case of unexplained hepatitis among children in recent days. The state’s Department of Health said Monday that the child, who is under the age of 10, was hospitalized with abdominal pain and fever in Maui in late April.

The child “was hospitalized for several days with abdominal pain and fever at the end of April. An extensive medical investigation was performed … At this time, no cause has been determined,” the agency told local media. It’s not clear if the child is still hospitalized.

The health department is now working with the CDC to identify the cause of the hepatitis case.

In a teleconference last week, a CDC official, Dr. Jay Butler, said that 109 cases have been reported along with five deaths. A significant number of liver transplants have also been needed, Butler said.

25 States Now Report Mysterious Hepatitis Cases in Children

The list keeps growing.

resistthemainstream.org

 

[Goldhedge]

COVID-19 Vaccine Producer Hid Evidence of Problems: Report​

by RTM Staff
May 10, 2022

Executives at a company that produced millions of COVID-19 vaccine doses attempted to hide evidence that some of the doses were contaminated, according to a congressional report released on May 10.

Emergent BioSolutions “took repeated steps to conceal its quality failures from the federal government and other third parties by limiting access to Bayview, tampering with drug-substance labels to impede FDA oversight, and strategizing to withhold information from HHS following the cross-contamination event in March 2021,” a report from the House Oversight Committee and the Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis concluded.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and its parent agency, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), identified deficiencies in the manufacturing process at Emergent’s Baltimore, Maryland facility—known as Bayview—in 2020.

In early 2021, Johnson & Johnson announced that up to 15 million doses of its COVID-19 vaccine at the facility became contaminated.

Documents obtained by the committees showed that Emergent rejected requests from Johnson & Johnson to visit the site around that time ahead of a follow-up FDA inspection.

COVID-19 Vaccine Producer Hid Evidence of Problems: Report

Here are the claims.

resistthemainstream.org

 

[arminius]

An email from PRISM...

When we tell our friends, family, and the general public that drug and vaccine industry executives are criminals and killers, that is not hyperbole or allegorical. We mean it quite literally. Before we remind you of the criminal and civil convictions of drug/vaccine/pesticide companies let's look at what the FDA and their partners in pharma are willing to do.

A KILLER DRUG

Remdesivir, is a toxic drug that was originally formulated by Gilead Sciences to treat Hepatitis C, but didn't work, then was repurposed to treat the fake Ebola virus, proved to be ineffective, and then was repurposed again to treat Covid. It was granted approval by the FDA after small clinical trials with 1,000 people and was shown to have little or no affect on hospitalized patients who supposedly were infected with the Covid virus.

Some of the side-effects of Remdesivir are vomiting, liver damage, multiple-organ dysfunction syndrome, septic shock, acute kidney injury, kidney failure, low blood pressure, and it has a 53% death rate. Even WHO recommends against using it, but Anthony Fauci likes it a lot and speaks in favor of it. Drug company scientists, putting a positive spin on Remdesivir, admits that is is deadly but by "tweaking the drug molecules structure" the drug could possibly be delivered in smaller doses, even with a pill. Does anybody even know what that means? They figure it's worth tinkering around with Remdesivir in the lab because it may prove effective against Omicron and other fake viruses and their "variants."

Another plus for Remdesivir is the cost of treatment - $2600 per person. This amounts to millions of dollars in revenue for a hospital that puts a few hundred patients on the toxic drug. Nurses who have seen patients die from Remdesivir have a nickname for it, "Run-Death-Is-Near." An apt appraisal.

Naturally, the FDA and their kindly partners in the drug/vaccine/pesticide industry would pull Remdesivir off the market considering how highly dangerous it is and because even WHO recommends against its use. But no - the FDA is now allowing this deadly drug to be given to children as young as 28 days old and up. Can there be anything more cynical, more psychopathic, more evil than giving this drug to newborn babies knowing that it will surely injure and kill them? These are the greedy, destructive monsters who millions of people all over the world have decided will be allowed to take charge of their bodies. To those of us with our common sense still intact, this is unfathomable.

LEGAL CONSEQUENCES

Below are a few reminders of the crimes these drug/vaccine/pesticide company executives are capable of committing and have paid the price for - a price they can easily afford to pay and continue on destroying lives. They need more than fines, they need to be imprisoned.

Of the top ten biggest pharmaceutical settlements in history, Pfizer comes in second at $2.3 billion in 2009, Johnson and Johnson is third at $2.2 billion in 2013, Merck is sixth in at $950 million in 2011, AstraZeneca is eighth at $520 million in 2010.

PFIZER – The criminal fines alone, in 2009, totaled $1.3 billion. $1 billion in fines were for allegations under the False Claims Act. They falsely promoted pain killers Bextra and Celebrex, the antipsychotic drug Geodon, the antibiotic Zyvox and the anti-epileptic drug Lyrica. The company was also accused of paying kickbacks related to these drugs and submitting false claims. Other lawsuits include those regarding Protonix which harms kidneys, Prempro which causes a long list of harmful side effects, and Chantix which causes suicidal thoughts and psychiatric disorders. Pfizer pulled Bextra off the market after paying a $386 million settlement.

In 2017 Pfizer was ranked last in a reputation list among pharma companies. Pfizer was the first drug/vaccine company to get approval from WHO to sell their Covid vaccines.

The CEO of Pfizer is a close friend of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and vowed to turn Israel into a human experimental laboratory of mRNA vaccines which is now well underway.

JOHNSON & JOHNSON – The criminal fines in 2013 totaled $485 million, and civil settlements amounted to $1.72 billion. In early 2000, Risperdal a schizophrenia drug was illegally promoted by the drug company to treat elderly dementia patients for anxiety, agitation, depression, hostility and confusion. They also marketed the drug to children and people with mental disabilities. Invega and Natrecor also were illegally marketed for off-label and unapproved uses.

A Few J&J highlights

1995 – Incurs $7.5 million fine for destroying documents regarding Retin A.

2001 – Pays $860 million in class action lawsuit for misleading customers regarding Acuvue soft contact lenses.

2010 - Pays $81 million settlement for misbranding anti-epileptic drug Topamax.

2010 – Pays $85 million for similar charges regarding deadly heart drug Natrecor.

2011 – Several J&J’s baby products were discovered to contain carcinogens.

2013 - The U.S. Justice Department charged J&J $2.2 billion in criminal fines regarding Risperdal for unapproved uses.

Now – J&J’s Covid vaccine is causing injury and death from blood clots. The FDA is requiring warning labels.

MERCK – Took Vioxx off the market in November 2004 after a study conclusively demonstrated that Vioxx users have more heart attacks and strokes than patients receiving a placebo. The assessed penalties related to sales of Vioxx were $321,636,000 in criminal fines, $426,389 in civil settlements, and $201,975,00 distributed to Medicaid states. Merck’s own “studies” failed to detect the risks until over 20 million people had taken the drug. Merck made a “hit list” of doctors who criticized Vioxx with labels that said, “neutralize,” “neutralized” or “discredit” next to their names. They created a fake medical journal in which to publish studies about Vioxx and paid ghost writers to write articles about the drug. The FDA estimates Vioxx killed 27,785 people. In March, 2021, Merck teamed up with Johnson & Johnson to help J&J make their Covid vaccine.

ASTRAZENECA – Their drug Seroquel was approved for limited use for acute manic episodes of schizophrenia only. They illegally marketed the drug for everything from Alzheimer’s to anger management. They paid kickbacks to doctors for writing articles about uses for the drug that had not been approved. For this they were fined $520 million.

AstraZeneca and drug giant Novartis merged in December 1999 to form Syngenta. Syngenta manufactures arguably, the deadliest weed killer on the planet - paraquat (Gramoxone). The tiniest amount ingested is deadly. Syngenta covered up evidence that paraquat also can cause Parkinson’s disease. There are at least 20 lawsuits that have been filed against Syngenta.

AstraZeneca manufactures a breast cancer drug tamoxifen that causes blood clots, strokes, and endometrial cancer. AstraZeneca lobbied California regulators not to ad tamoxifen to their list of carcinogens. In 2003 AstraZeneca pleaded guilty to criminal and civil charges relating to the illegal marketing of the prostate cancer drug Zoladex.

AstraZeneca is one of the founders of breast cancer awareness month.

BAYER/MONSANTO – In June 2020, Roundup maker Bayer announced a $10 billion settlement to resolve cancer lawsuits connected to its weedkiller Roundup. Bayer’s $8.8 billion to $9.68 billion deal covers approximately 95,000 cases and provides an additional. $1.25 billion for future cases. Bayer still faces 30,000 plus cases from plaintiffs who have not agreed to participate in the settlement.

MODERNA – ModeRNA Therapeutics was formed to commercialize the research of stem cell biologist Derrick Rossi and develop treatments for various diseases. Mice, rats and monkeys were used in their research, none of which can be extrapolated to humans. In 2014 Moderna scrapped their mRNA therapeutics platform saying the treatment would never be safe enough for humans. In 2018 they increased their development of vaccines and in 2020, Anthony Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the NIH received $483 million from taxpayers to get their Covid vaccine ready roll out at “warp speed.” The Bill and Melinda Gates foundation is listed on their website as strategic collaborators. On June 25, 2021, the FDA added a warning label on both Moderna’s and Pfizer’s Covid vaccines regarding the risk of heart attacks (myocarditis) if injected with the vaccines. However, drug companies that manufacture vaccines cannot be sued regardless of the hundreds of thousands of people they kill or injure with their vaccines. Fauci's wife, Christine Grady, heads the department of bioethics at the NIH where her husband works.

These then are the criminals who have caused lockdowns, bankruptcies, suicides, mask wearing, and countless deaths and injuries from their toxic jabs. Anyone who places their trust in these monsters are condemned to pay a heavy price.

 

[arminius]

​ When Healing Meets Marketing​

​ The Perfect Storm​

​ by Jon Rappoport​

​ (To read about Jon's mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)​

(The latest Episode of Rappoport Podcasts -- Episode 8 -- "My Early Years in Journalism: Finding my voice and a future; the strange trip and the heroes" -- is up. To listen, click here. To learn more about This Episode of Rappoport Podcasts, click here.) ~~~ I wrote this article in 2010. It’s truer now than it was then: DECEMBER 5, 2010. About ten years ago, I decided that the medical cartel could become the most dangerous of all power groups on the planet. I have not changed my mind. My decision is based on looking up the road 40 or 50 years and inferring what the picture will look like then. It's clear to me that drug companies, as they carve up markets and create new markets, are eagerly anticipating the day when every human, from cradle to grave—actually from inside the womb—has the status of Patient. A person is born a patient and dies a patient. And in between, he receives 40 or 50 key diagnoses of physical and mental diseases/disorders and takes prescribed drug and surgery treatments. More than that, though, he is stamped with the label, Patient, and he learns that everyone is in the same boat. “We're all patients, this is a medical world, and it's normal to be disabled in some way.” People become proud, yes, proud to be victims. They wear their diagnoses as badges of honor. If you can't see this trend, you're not looking. And universal health care insurance guarantees continuous treatment all the way along the line. Every medical diagnosis becomes an excuse not to perform, not to excel, not to pursue big goals with large ambition. Nowhere in the search to gain recognition as a victim do circumstances conspire so well as in the medical arena. It's perfect. There's no argument. The doctor told you you have X disease. That's that. It's not political. It's not agenda-driven. It's science. The proof is laid out on a silver platter. You ARE a victim. In the coming future, every move a person makes, every step he takes will come under the umbrella of the doctor. And, again, the main supporter of this system will be the patient himself. That's how beautiful the marketing is. In case you've been living in a cave for the last 30 years, drug companies and their researchers can invent any vague disease label they want to—and then they can invent five or six sub-categories of the label—and they can set out rules on how to diagnose each sliver of the label—and of course the doctors will make these diagnoses and prescribe drugs. It's marketing and “healing” at the same time. Parents who don't have a clue will submit their children to this system—especially if the government pays for it—and the children will grow up trained to think of themselves as patients/victims...and the only contest will be: who has the most drastic diagnoses and treatments? Who can most proudly wear the badge of honor as Patient? “Last month, they had to remove my head for five minutes while they fixed my brain.” “Wow. Well, they put me in a body cast for three months and I couldn't move, except for my left thumb.” Cradle to grave. If you go back and read Huxley's Brave New World again, you'll notice the factor of “patient pride.” It isn't just that the society is controlled, the citizens are idealistic about it. That's where the victim industry is heading. Against it, we have, what? A little thing called individual freedom. Which includes the right to refuse medical treatment, no matter who prescribes it under what regulations. People imagine that this right is some arcane matter best debated in medical-ethics journals. It's an obscure curio. They couldn't be more wrong. As I've been writing, the ObamaCare plan contains the seeds of a future in which, by law, the citizen will have less freedom to determine his own medical fate. The walls will gradually close in. The Founders knew what they were talking about when they warned of the incursion of government and the loss of freedom. At every crossroad, since then, the issue of freedom has resurfaced as the unavoidable key factor. Well, we're at one of those crossroads again.​

 

[Ensoniq]

COVID-19 Vaccine Producer Hid Evidence of Problems: Report​

by RTM Staff
May 10, 2022

Executives at a company that produced millions of COVID-19 vaccine doses attempted to hide evidence that some of the doses were contaminated, according to a congressional report released on May 10.

Emergent BioSolutions “took repeated steps to conceal its quality failures from the federal government and other third parties by limiting access to Bayview, tampering with drug-substance labels to impede FDA oversight, and strategizing to withhold information from HHS following the cross-contamination event in March 2021,” a report from the House Oversight Committee and the Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis concluded.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and its parent agency, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), identified deficiencies in the manufacturing process at Emergent’s Baltimore, Maryland facility—known as Bayview—in 2020.

In early 2021, Johnson & Johnson announced that up to 15 million doses of its COVID-19 vaccine at the facility became contaminated.

Documents obtained by the committees showed that Emergent rejected requests from Johnson & Johnson to visit the site around that time ahead of a follow-up FDA inspection.

COVID-19 Vaccine Producer Hid Evidence of Problems: Report

Here are the claims.

resistthemainstream.org

their poison was contaminated?

thats as silly as an alcohol swab on the lethal injection site during an execution

 

[Goldhedge]

You wanna know how I know the US government created C19?

We have NIH emails proving the US government knew that C19 was man-made, all the way back in January, 2020. A virus the US government claims killed 6.26 million people, and they aren’t the least bit interested in finding out whose responsible.

Idk about you, but if another country made a biological weapon and released it on the world population, killing millions; I MIGHT be interested in knowing who’s responsible for it.

BioClandestine

You wanna know how I know the US government created C19? We have NIH emails proving the US government knew that C19 was man-made, all the way back in January, 2020. A virus the US government claims killed 6.26 million people, and they aren’t the least bit interested in finding out whose...

t.me

 

[Goldhedge]

A 'truth teller'...?

 

[Goldhedge]

 

[UcoOnca]

Pfizer’s Covid Vaccine Protection Against Omicron Fades Just Weeks After Second And Third Doses, Study Finds

Levels of protective antibodies against omicron are “transient” after the second and third doses of Pfizer’s Covid-19 vaccine, researchers found.

www.forbes.com

Neutralizing Antibodies Against the Omicron Variant (BA.1) After Receiving the BNT162b2 Vaccine

This cohort study examines neutralizing antibodies against the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant (BA.1) after the second and third doses of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine among Danish adults.

jamanetwork.com

 

[SongSungAU]

LOL! Not that Fauci has any credibility but he promised to quit ...

Video clip:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1525988898320666631

 

[Uglytruth]

archive.ph

Missouri Bill Prevents Doctors Being Disciplined If They Prescribe Ivermectin or Hydroxychloroquine​

By Naveen Athrappully

May 18, 2022 Updated: May 18, 2022
biggersmaller
Print

0:000:00

1

Missouri lawmakers passed legislation that prevents state licensing boards from disciplining doctors who prescribe ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine.
Sponsored by Rep. Brenda Kay Shields (R-Mo.), HB 2149 also bars pharmacists from questioning doctors or disputing patients regarding the usage of such drugs and their efficacy.
With a convincing 130–4 vote in the House, HB 2149 passed both chambers on May 12 and currently heads to the office of Gov. Mike Parson to be potentially signed into law.
“The board shall not deny, revoke, or suspend, or otherwise take any disciplinary action against, a certificate of registration or authority, permit, or license required by this chapter for any person due to the lawful dispensing, distributing, or selling of ivermectin tablets or hydroxychloroquine sulfate tablets for human use in accordance with prescriber directions,” reads the draft of the bill (pdf).
It adds, “A pharmacist shall not contact the prescribing physician or the patient to dispute the efficacy of ivermectin tablets or hydroxychloroquine sulfate tablets for human use unless the physician or patient inquires of the pharmacist about the efficacy of ivermectin tablets or hydroxychloroquine sulfate tablets.”
Critics of the bill have noted that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not given approval for usage of the drugs. Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine have been divisive drugs and politically polarized throughout the pandemic.
“But, nevertheless, the Missouri legislature has chosen to ‘own the libs’ by issuing a gag order against every pharmacist in this state from offering their medical opinion on taking either one of those medications—even if it could kill their patient,” wrote former Democratic nominee Lindsey Simmons in a May 12 Twitter post.
Although 22 countries across the world have approved the use of ivermectin in treating COVID-19, the FDA maintains that the current data show the drug to be ineffective. Large doses can be dangerous, it says.
A recent study published in the International Journal of Infectious Diseases analyzed a national federated database of adults that compared ivermectin with the FDA-approved COVID-19 medication, remdesivir.
“After using propensity score matching and adjusting for potential confounders, ivermectin was associated with reduced mortality vs remdesivir,” researchers wrote. “To our knowledge, this is the largest association study of patients with COVID-19, mortality, and ivermectin.”
According to The Associated Press, Missouri state Rep. Patty Lewis, a Democrat, agreed to the bill to satisfy a group of conservatives in the Senate. She added that the bill will not change anything significantly as medical boards do not engage in punishing doctors who prescribe drugs legally.

 

[Uglytruth]

That's why the counterfeiting usurers hate it so much. It is like garlic to Dracula... Kryptonite to Superman... Ivermectin to Fauci.

 

[Ensoniq]

Screw that SmallPox Bill Gates rumor and get ready for……

MONKEYPOX

spreading across Europe (whatever that means) and a first reported case in the US.

At least we won’t have all this arguments about ineffective tests and whether the virus actually exists

Monkeypox outbreak: Everything you should know about the virus so far

The smallpox-related virus has been mostly affecting men who have sex with men. Authorities are trying to curb its spread without perpetuating stigma.

www.euronews.com

 

[Ensoniq]

Not to poke too much fun but you old prog rockers from the early 70s will remember Peter Gabriel of Genesis fame was afflicted with this during the Lamb Lies Down Tour

 

[arminius]

At least we won’t have all this arguments about ineffective tests and whether the virus actually exists

Wanna bet? Seriously. You can prove the virus really exists?

 

[Ensoniq]

Wanna bet? Seriously. You can prove the virus really exists?

i Personally believe the virus exists and I don’t think they have a reliable large volume test for it. i believe it kills people and the can look at the genetic sequence to confirm but the PCR, the antigen test and the rapid reagent test are all junk and not reliable

that wasn’t my point though - I was drawing the comparison between COVID where honorable people are arguing it’s never been isolated and is just the flue

and the obvious monkeypox lump, bumps, and mumps that are undeniable

 

[arminius]

All tests for 'viruses' are total junk and have no possibliity of reliability.

Is it not possible that an external poison can come in contact with the skin and cause lumps bumps mumps and pox?

 

[arminius]

Shall we go around in circles.

Here's conclusion of a medical report from the 1880s:

VACCINATION
Proved Useless & Dangerous

FROM FORTY-FIVE YEARS OF
REGISTRATION STATISTICS

by Alfred R. Wallace, LL.D.

SECOND EDITION
WITH CORRECTIONS, NOTES, AND AN APPENDIX
BY ALEXANDER WHEELER​

Wallace site comment: Published as a thirty-eight page pamphlet in 1885; a Revised Second Edition, edited by Alexander Wheeler, was printed in 1889 (this copy). To the end of this work I have appended the relevant S509, "Forty-five Years' Registration Statistics. A Correction.," a letter to the Editor which was published in The Vaccination Inquirer of 1 February 1895. Original pagination indicated within double brackets. This document with original book page numbers can also be found on the Wallace site at http://www.wku.edu/~smithch/S374-509.htm

London
EW ALLEN, 4 AVE MARIA LANE
1889

​

*************************

CONCLUSION FROM THE EVIDENCE.​

The result of this brief enquiry may be thus summarized
(I.)-Vaccination does not diminish Smallpox mortality, as shown by the 45 years of the Registrar-General's statistics, and by the deaths from Small-pox of our "re-vaccinated" soldiers and sailors being as numerous as those of the male population of the same ages of several of our large towns, although the former are picked, healthy men, while the latter include many thousands living under the most unsanitary conditions.
(2.)-While thus utterly powerless for good, vaccination * is a certain cause of disease and death in many cases, and is the probable cause of about 10,000 deaths annually by five inoculable diseases of the most terrible and disgusting character, which have increased to this extent, steadily, year by year, since vaccination has been enforced by penal laws!
*the operation itself kills many. the registrar-General gives, under the heading of Cow-pox and other effects [erysipelas, &c.] of vaccination for the years 1881-1886, the following deaths of infants under one year. In the country, 255 deaths. In London, 61. Total for 6 years, 316.--ED.
(3.)-The hospital statistics, showing a greater mortality of the unvaccinated than of the vaccinated, have been proved to be untrustworthy; while the conclusions drawn from them are shown to be necessarily false.
If these facts are true, or anything near the truth, the enforcement of vaccination by fine and imprisonment of unwilling parents, is a cruel and criminal despotism, which it behoves all true friends of humanity to denounce and oppose at every opportunity.
Such legislation, involving as it does, our health, our liberty, and our very lives, is too serious a matter to be allowed to depend on the misstatements of interested officials or the dogmas of a professional clique. Some of the misstatements and some of the ignorance on which you have relied, have been here exposed. The statistical evidence on which alone a true judgment can be founded, is as open to you as to any doctor in the land. We, therefore, demand that you, our representatives, shall fulfil your solemn duty to us in this matter, by devoting to it some personal investigation and painstaking research; and if you find that the main facts as here stated are substantially correct, we call upon you to undo without delay the evil you have done.​

WE, THEREFORE, SOLEMNLY URGE UPON YOU THE IMMEDIATE REPEAL OF THE INIQUITOUS REPEAL LAWS BY WHICH YOU HAVE FORCED UPON US A DANGEROUS AND USELESS OPERATION-AN OPERATION WHICH HAS ADMITTEDLY CAUSED MANY DEATHS, WHICH IS PROBABLY THE CAUSE OF GREATER MORTALITY THAN SMALL-POX ITSELF, BUT WHICH CANNOT BE PROVED TO HAVE EVER SAVED A SINGLE HUMAN LIFE.

 

[arminius]

 

[arminius]

 

[Ensoniq]

Shall we go around in circles.

Here's conclusion of a medical report from the 1880s:

VACCINATION
Proved Useless & Dangerous

FROM FORTY-FIVE YEARS OF
REGISTRATION STATISTICS

by Alfred R. Wallace, LL.D.

SECOND EDITION
WITH CORRECTIONS, NOTES, AND AN APPENDIX
BY ALEXANDER WHEELER​

Wallace site comment: Published as a thirty-eight page pamphlet in 1885; a Revised Second Edition, edited by Alexander Wheeler, was printed in 1889 (this copy). To the end of this work I have appended the relevant S509, "Forty-five Years' Registration Statistics. A Correction.," a letter to the Editor which was published in The Vaccination Inquirer of 1 February 1895. Original pagination indicated within double brackets. This document with original book page numbers can also be found on the Wallace site at http://www.wku.edu/~smithch/S374-509.htm

London
EW ALLEN, 4 AVE MARIA LANE
1889

​

*************************

CONCLUSION FROM THE EVIDENCE.​

The result of this brief enquiry may be thus summarized
(I.)-Vaccination does not diminish Smallpox mortality, as shown by the 45 years of the Registrar-General's statistics, and by the deaths from Small-pox of our "re-vaccinated" soldiers and sailors being as numerous as those of the male population of the same ages of several of our large towns, although the former are picked, healthy men, while the latter include many thousands living under the most unsanitary conditions.
(2.)-While thus utterly powerless for good, vaccination * is a certain cause of disease and death in many cases, and is the probable cause of about 10,000 deaths annually by five inoculable diseases of the most terrible and disgusting character, which have increased to this extent, steadily, year by year, since vaccination has been enforced by penal laws!
*the operation itself kills many. the registrar-General gives, under the heading of Cow-pox and other effects [erysipelas, &c.] of vaccination for the years 1881-1886, the following deaths of infants under one year. In the country, 255 deaths. In London, 61. Total for 6 years, 316.--ED.
(3.)-The hospital statistics, showing a greater mortality of the unvaccinated than of the vaccinated, have been proved to be untrustworthy; while the conclusions drawn from them are shown to be necessarily false.
If these facts are true, or anything near the truth, the enforcement of vaccination by fine and imprisonment of unwilling parents, is a cruel and criminal despotism, which it behoves all true friends of humanity to denounce and oppose at every opportunity.
Such legislation, involving as it does, our health, our liberty, and our very lives, is too serious a matter to be allowed to depend on the misstatements of interested officials or the dogmas of a professional clique. Some of the misstatements and some of the ignorance on which you have relied, have been here exposed. The statistical evidence on which alone a true judgment can be founded, is as open to you as to any doctor in the land. We, therefore, demand that you, our representatives, shall fulfil your solemn duty to us in this matter, by devoting to it some personal investigation and painstaking research; and if you find that the main facts as here stated are substantially correct, we call upon you to undo without delay the evil you have done.​

we have similar view on vaccination effectiveness (not) and the risk and harm that comes from trying

I don’t know how you can say all tests for viruses are junk. Most virus can be seen under SEM. Even the cheap SEMs have 10 nanometer resolution

most human viruses are more than twice that size and some are 100 times that size.

I’ve run SEM and gold sputtering and seen for myself. The problem with covid19 is indistinguishability from other coronaviruses. Then they play games like not isolating or using “it” for the PCR reference. I read they used a common cold virus for that. Makes it damn easy to find it if you look for something almost everyone has

im not convinced there’s a large scale cost effective way to quantify Covid 18 vs 19 vs other biosimilars but Im convinced you can test for and even distinguish different types by appearance. I’ll post a size table an an SEM below

all respect to you man, Im not trying to argue just to share my experience and my conclusion

 

[arminius]

all respect to you man, Im not trying to argue just to share my experience and my conclusion

Good, thanks. So am I.

Nice drawings and pictures. Can you prove any of those you call viruses are actually infective, or even ALIVE as it seems they characterize 'viruses'. In other words, can you in any way prove that that lump of material pictured wants to somehow travel to a human, latch on, invade that humans cells and take them over to replicate, invade more cells and continue that process until that human sickens and expires? And if 'viruses' are obligate intracellular parasites, how do they survive outside the cell in order to find new cells to parasitize?

 

[viking]

we have similar view on vaccination effectiveness (not) and the risk and harm that comes from trying

I don’t know how you can say all tests for viruses are junk. Most virus can be seen under SEM. Even the cheap SEMs have 10 nanometer resolution

most human viruses are more than twice that size and some are 100 times that size.

I’ve run SEM and gold sputtering and seen for myself. The problem with covid19 is indistinguishability from other coronaviruses. Then they play games like not isolating or using “it” for the PCR reference. I read they used a common cold virus for that. Makes it damn easy to find it if you look for something almost everyone has

im not convinced there’s a large scale cost effective way to quantify Covid 18 vs 19 vs other biosimilars but Im convinced you can test for and even distinguish different types by appearance. I’ll post a size table an an SEM below

all respect to you man, Im not trying to argue just to share my experience and my conclusion

View attachment 260042View attachment 260044

Which one of those is the corona virus?

 

[Ensoniq]

Good, thanks. So am I.

Nice drawings and pictures. Can you prove any of those you call viruses are actually infective, or even ALIVE as it seems they characterize 'viruses'. In other words, can you in any way prove that that lump of material pictured wants to somehow travel to a human, latch on, invade that humans cells and take them over to replicate, invade more cells and continue that process until that human sickens and expires? And if 'viruses' are obligate intracellular parasites, how do they survive outside the cell in order to find new cells to parasitize?

my experience is filtration and chromatography to separate, concentrate, purify bacteria, virus and other particles, viral loading or density is quantitated either by assay or cytometry (a counting method). I’m no expert in these areas and only try9ng to describe my understanding. I certainly don’t understand the “infection” incentive or method

Im not experienced in Microbiology but I understand that viruses are not alive (unlike bacteria or parasites). They have no respiration or growth capability and the infected cell is what produces copies

That’s the limit of my knowledge - I’m familiar with the typical reproduction cycle they call “lytic” because the cell lyses or bursts to let the copies loose to,spread. ive understood but have no personal experience that this is observable

 

[Ensoniq]

Which one of those is the corona virus?

Upper right “sars”

 

[the_shootist]

COVID UPDATE: What is the truth?

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[bulloncoins]

Long read....very good article. How this knowledge has not divided the medical community is beyond me.

 

[SongSungAU]

COVID UPDATE: What is the truth?

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

View attachment 260073

Thanks. I downloaded a PDF copy of it in case they remove it from the website.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9062939/pdf/SNI-13-167.pdf

.

 

[arminius]

“Stop arguing about the existence of the virus”​

by Jon Rappoport
May 20, 2022

(To join our email list, click here.)

The headline of this article has become a battle cry among some “alternative journalists,” activists, lawyers, and doctors.
As my readers know, I’ve devoted considerable space, over the past two years, to presenting evidence that SARS-CoV-2 is a scientific fairy tale, a con, and the virus doesn’t exist.
So when I hear this battle cry, I’m motivated to mention a few significant points.
Let me start by countering the claim that debating the existence of the virus is wasting time.
Here’s a shocker. A person can do more than one thing at the same time. For example, he can expose/oppose the toxic vaccine. He can expose the murderous COVID treatments (ventilators, sedatives, antiviral drugs). He can expose using simple flu-like illness to create fraudulent COVID case numbers.
And he can ALSO expose the fact that the virus has never been isolated (discovered) or sequenced.
So highlighting the non-existence of the virus doesn’t rule out dealing with other vital concerns.
This may come as a surprise, but it’s even possible to go to court to challenge a vaccine mandate, while ALSO arguing elsewhere that the virus doesn’t exist. I know. Amazing, right?
Those alarmed by “the virus doesn’t exist” also say: making that statement leaves us open to being called whackos, and leaves us unable to convince people that all our other criticisms of the pandemic are true.
I would counter that in two ways. Millions of people already believe we’re whackos, even those of us who take a sacred blood oath that the virus is real.
And second, people going against the grain, when their vital issue is still in the budding stage, are always called nuts. Trust me, there was a time when criticizing vaccines made people look like total whackos in the eyes of the general public—and it took decades of fighting the consensus to bring that criticism into the open, where many people saw the truth about jabs.
Here’s another fun fact. The entire medical cartel thrives on the insane proposition—launched with fervor more than a hundred years ago—that people suffer from thousands of distinct diseases, each of which is caused by a single germ, which must be treated by a toxic drug and prevented by a toxic vaccine.
It is this great lie that that has killed millions upon millions upon millions of people.
Therefore, the very real question about the existence of viruses in general is more than a weird preoccupation.
Next, those who claim, “OF COURSE viruses exist,” don’t know what the hell they’re talking about. They’re merely PARROTING what they learned in school or what researchers baldly claim in studies.
“Well, all virologists can’t be wrong.”
Yes, Virginia, they can all be wrong. Just as vaccinologists can all be wrong about “the remarkable safety and efficacy of vaccines.”
Some of the OF COURSE VIRUSES EXIST people are new to the way blogs and videos work. They’ve never encountered commenters in any great numbers before. So when a few dozen committed people suddenly tell them they should examine their premises more carefully and consider what really goes on in virology labs, these OF COURSE people are annoyed and irritated. They don’t like being challenged on basic issues. They don’t like feeling that the floor might suddenly shift under their feet. So they turn on their arrogance machines.
So be it.
The issue isn’t going away. Nor should it.
Despite growing digital censorship, the internet is still the Wild West in certain respects. People are going to say THE VIRUS DOESN’T EXIST, and VIRUSES DON’T EXIST.
And foundations will shake.
Foundations of the medical cartel, and foundations underlying people’s cherished assumptions.
In any area of human life, there are conflicts between “this is strategy” and “this is the truth.” There always will be.
Trying to shortchange the truth or casually say the truth is a lie doesn’t work.
NO ONE who is reading this article has ever been in a virology lab and witnessed the step by step process of “discovering a new virus.” I find that stunning. And yet all sorts of people are quite ready to assert with great finality that they know all about isolating viruses.
If by chance, someone reading this article HAS actually been in a lab and “discovered a virus,” you can bet your bottom dollar he won’t let you or me in there with a full film crew and our outlier experts asking very pointed questions about each “scientific” move he makes, as he “isolates a virus.”
To which somebody might reply: “Well, I’ve never seen a car being made in a factory, but I drive one with full confidence.”
Yes, but when the “virus discovered in a lab” results in you or someone you love being dosed with a drug or vaccine that maims you or kills your family member, you damn well should want to get into “that factory where the car is made.”
But you can’t. They won’t let you…
…Despite the fact that, as I’ve documented many times, the US medical system kills, by a very conservative estimate, 225,000 people a year, or 2.25 million people per decade. [0]
Chew on THAT for a while.
Here is one of my articles on the subject of virus isolation:
—Dr. Andrew Kaufman refutes “isolation” of SARS-Cov-2; he does step-by-step analysis of a typical claim of isolation; there is no proof that the virus exists—
The global medical community has been asserting that “a pandemic is being caused by a virus, SARS-Cov-2.”
But what if the virus doesn’t exist?
People have been asking me for a step-by-step analysis of a mainstream claim of virus-isolation. Well, here it is.
“Isolation” should mean the virus has been separated out from all surrounding material, so researchers can say, “Look, we have it. It exists.”
I took a typical passage from a published study, a “methods” section, in which researchers describe how they “isolated the virus.” I sent it to Dr. Andrew Kaufman [1], and he provided his analysis in detail.
I found several studies that used very similar language in explaining how “SARS-CoV-2 was isolated.” For example, “Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 from Patient with Coronavirus Disease, United States, (Emerging Infectious Diseases, Vol. 26, No. 6 — June 2020)” [2].
First, I want to provide a bit of background that will help the reader understand what is going on in the study.
The researchers are creating a soup in the lab. This soup contains a number of compounds. Human cells, monkey cells, antibiotics, other chemicals, random genetic material.
The researchers assume, without evidence, that “the virus” is in this soup, because they’re dropped a mucus sample from a patient in the soup. At no time do they separate the purported virus from the surrounding material in the soup. Isolation of the virus is not occurring.
They set about showing that the monkey (and/or human cells) they put in the soup are dying. This cell-death, they claim, is being caused by “the virus.” However, as you’ll see, Dr. Kaufman dismantles this claim.
There is no reason to infer that SARS-CoV-2 is in the soup at all, or that it is killing cells.
Finally, the researchers assert, with no proof or rational explanation, that they were able to discover the genetic sequence of “the virus.”
Here are the study’s statements claiming isolation, alternated with Dr. Kaufman’s analysis:
STUDY: “We used Vero CCL-81 cells for isolation and initial passage [in the soup in the lab]…”
KAUFMAN: “Vero cells are foreign cells from the kidneys of monkeys and a source of contamination. Virus particles should be purified directly from clinical samples in order to prove the virus actually exists. Isolation means separation from everything else. So how can you separate/isolate a virus when you add it to something else?”
STUDY: “…We cultured Vero E6, Vero CCL-81, HUH 7.0, 293T, A549, and EFKB3 cells in Dulbecco minimal essential medium (DMEM) supplemented with heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum (5% or 10%)…”
KAUFMAN: “Why use minimal essential media, which provides incomplete nutrition [to the cells]? Fetal bovine serum is a source of foreign genetic material and extracellular vesicles, which are indistinguishable from viruses.”
STUDY: “…We used both NP and OP swab specimens for virus isolation. For isolation, limiting dilution, and passage 1 of the virus, we pipetted 50 μL of serum-free DMEM into columns 2–12 of a 96-well tissue culture plate, then pipetted 100 μL of clinical specimens into column 1 and serially diluted 2-fold across the plate…”
KAUFMAN: “Once again, misuse of the word isolation.”
STUDY: “…We then trypsinized and resuspended Vero cells in DMEM containing 10% fetal bovine serum, 2× penicillin/streptomycin, 2× antibiotics/antimycotics, and 2× amphotericin B at a concentration of 2.5 × 105 cells/mL…”
KAUFMAN: “Trypsin is a pancreatic enzyme that digests proteins. Wouldn’t that cause damage to the cells and particles in the culture which have proteins on their surfaces, including the so called spike protein?”
KAUFMAN: “Why are antibiotics added? Sterile technique is used for the culture. Bacteria may be easily filtered out of the clinical sample by commercially available filters (GIBCO) [3]. Finally, bacteria may be easily seen under the microscope and would be readily identified if they were contaminating the sample. The specific antibiotics used, streptomycin and amphotericin (aka ‘ampho-terrible’), are toxic to the kidneys and we are using kidney cells in this experiment! Also note they are used at ‘2X’ concentration, which appears to be twice the normal amount. These will certainly cause damage to the Vero cells.”
STUDY: “…We added [not isolated] 100 μL of cell suspension directly to the clinical specimen dilutions and mixed gently by pipetting. We then grew the inoculated cultures in a humidified 37°C incubator in an atmosphere of 5% CO2 and observed for cytopathic effects (CPEs) daily. We used standard plaque assays for SARS-CoV-2, which were based on SARS-CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) protocols…”
STUDY: “When CPEs were observed, we scraped cell monolayers with the back of a pipette tip…”
KAUFMAN: “There was no negative control experiment described. Control experiments are required for a valid interpretation of the results. Without that, how can we know if it was the toxic soup of antibiotics, minimal nutrition, and dying tissue from a sick person which caused the cellular damage or a phantom virus? A proper control would consist of the same exact experiment except that the clinical specimen should come from a person with illness unrelated to covid, such as cancer, since that would not contain a virus.”
STUDY: “…We used 50 μL of viral lysate for total nucleic acid extraction for confirmatory testing and sequencing. We also used 50 μL of virus lysate to inoculate a well of a 90% confluent 24-well plate.”
KAUFMAN: “How do you confirm something that was never previously shown to exist? What did you compare the genetic sequences to? How do you know the origin of the genetic material since it came from a cell culture containing material from humans and all their microflora, fetal cows, and monkeys?”
—end of study quotes and Kaufman analysis—
My comments: Dr. Kaufman does several things here. He shows that isolation, in any meaningful sense of the word “isolation,” is not occurring.
Dr. Kaufman also shows that the researchers want to use damage to the cells and cell-death as proof that “the virus” is in the soup they are creating. In other words, the researchers are assuming that if the cells are dying, it must be the virus that is doing the killing. But Dr. Kaufman shows there are obvious other reasons for cell damage and death that have nothing to do with a virus. Therefore, no proof exists that “the virus” is in the soup or exists at all.
And finally, Dr. Kaufman explains that the claim of genetic sequencing of “the virus” is absurd, because there is no proof that the virus is present. How do you sequence something when you haven’t shown it exists, and you don’t have an isolated specimen of it?
Readers who are unfamiliar with my work (over 375 articles on the subject of the “pandemic” during the past year [4]) will ask: Then why are people dying? What about the huge number of cases and deaths? I have answered these and other questions in great detail. The subject of this article is: have researchers proved SARS-CoV-2 exists?
The answer is no.

---

SOURCES:
[0] https://www.jhsph.edu/research/cent...care-policy-center/Publications_PDFs/A154.pdf
[1] https://andrewkaufmanmd.com/
[2] https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/6/20-0516_article
[3] https://www.thermofisher.com/us/en/home.html
[4] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/category/covid/

 

[arminius]

Is the virus real? Steve Kirsch suggests a debate​

by Jon Rappoport
January 25, 2022

(To join our email list, click here.)

My readers know that, for the past two years, I’ve been making the case that the virus is a scientific fiction, a con, and a cover story for tyranny that would make Hitler, Stalin, and Mao blush with envy.

Recently, the question has been attracting wider coverage: Does SARS-CoV-2 exist?

Entrepreneur, inventor, and philanthropist, Steve Kirsch, says yes. He offers to set up a 5-hour live video debate. He’ll send his experts and other side will send theirs. They’ll go at it.

What about the usual form of scientific debate, called the written word?

Buckle up.

Kirsch: “I don’t think the folks I’d ask to do this would want to spend time writing papers…They don’t even have the time to prepare their own papers. Doing written documents is much more time consuming than talking because people spend the time to make it bulletproof.”

Heaven forbid.

Kirsch: “None of the people on our team require that all discussions be in writing only.”

Of course not. Why would his team of scientists insist on the method by which science is accomplished?

Kirsch: “One of the commenters [to an article by Kirsch] wrote this: ‘But when someone really knows their shit they would much rather handle it in a live conversation; it’s much more efficient (you don’t spend hours writing) and it reaches a wider audience, and that audience has the benefit of tone and body language to affirm (or negate) the veracity and substance of what is being said.’”

Kirsch: “I agree with that.”

Truly awesome.

Tone and body language. Yes, of course. You know, that was Galileo’s problem when he was tried by the Inquisition for insisting the Earth rotated, and journeyed around the sun. If only he’d stood up straighter and spoken with unwavering clarity (in the manner of, say, a Walter Cronkite). He might have won his case. Because tone and inflection equal science. We all realize that. Obviously, Galileo didn’t know his shit.

Spending hours writing arguments about the existence of the virus—who would have the audacity to insist on that? As Kirsch points out, his experts are busy. It’s rude to interrupt them and ask them to make their case bulletproof. Science on Video tends to be based on “we KNOW we’re sure” and “the truth is OBVIOUS” and “WE’RE the pros.” That’s good enough, and you can sell it. If you, again, display convincing tone and body language.

In medical school, they teach this. “One day you students will be called on to defend your actions and opinions with pure bullshit. I tell you that now, to prepare you for the moment. How do you shape and transmit the bullshit? Do you do it through tiresome written reports, which run the risk of exposing the truth, engraved on the page, or do you stand up before a panel and look those people in the eye and tell a story that wows them? Do you fumble to clarify a point, or do you gloss it over with a quick-hitting generality that covers a crack in your armor? Careers are won and lost on that basis.”

Kirsch believes an exchange of papers between debaters is futile. Who can, or is willing to, pore through them and analyze them? And do those written exchanges actually cover all essential points? But with video, we NEVER EVER see opponents talking past each other or quickly changing the subject to avoid unpleasant revelations. Certainly not. We never see opponents smirking like entitled monkeys and making ad hominem accusations. We never witness slippery logic sliding by before it can be isolated and corrected. We never witness grandstanding for the audience’s benefit. It’s never show biz on parade. No mainstream expert would dare intone, “Ahem, in my many years as professor of so-and-so at such-and-such, having engaged in intense research on this question, and having authored over 60 papers on this very subject…”

And then there is the suggestion, as the commenter states, that the audience can decide…on the winner in the debate. Yes. What else is a debate FOR? Science is a democracy, and the audience is the proof of the pudding. Once they vote up or down, the deed is done. This is why, in medical journals, at the bottom of every paper and study, you see the poll question: “DO YOU THINK THIS ANALYSIS IS ACCURATE? CAST YOUR BALLOT. Depending on the outcome, we will maintain the study in our archive or retract it with an apology. Everyone can vote. You do not need to be a subscriber. We work for our audience every day. If the majority of you believes one of our authors has convinced you that the moon is a slice of soft brie on a plate or an elephant’s ass, we concur. This is called consensus, and what else could science be?”

Not long ago, I crashed my Gulfstream in the Himalayas, and after a harrowing journey to the GeFunkte Hospital in Berlin, as I was lying on the operating table, two surgeons debated whether I needed one or two transplanted hearts. Later, I was told a live stream of this discussion had been piped into the hospital waiting room, and the patients expressed an overwhelming preference for two hearts, based on the charismatic presentation of Surgeon Number One, who had studied Voice and Drama at the Julliard School in New York. So…two hearts it was. You can read about the groundbreaking operation in the Medical Journal of Audience Participation.

Published blow-by-blow descriptions of “isolating viruses” are quite dense to begin with. Perhaps one person in two hundred thousand can plow through them and understand them. Therefore, the debate about the existence of a virus starts with something in writing that, for most people, is impenetrable.

It’s no surprise that these descriptions are viewed with suspicion.

“We’re the expert virologists. Only we understand what we’re doing.”

“I see. So understanding virus isolation is like understanding RNA development and insertion into lipid nanoparticles which are injected into a few billion people.”

“Yes, exactly. Only we understand that whole process.”

“Got it. I have grave doubts about everything you’re claiming about the vaccine, but I completely accept everything you’re saying about the existence of the virus.”

In this particular debate about the existence of the virus, the devil really is in the details.

The details concerning exactly how virologists believe they are isolating viruses and sequencing them. As I say, reading the studies, one sees immediately that the accounts of these procedures are laden with technical terms and technical steps.

Those elements have to be analyzed and taken apart, to see whether they make scientific sense. In fact, a debate in writing is the sane way to proceed.

Settling the question of virus-isolation via video would be quite a challenge. An exceptional amount of good will and patience, from the mainstream virologists, would be required. I’ve never seen medical “experts” show those qualities, when the basic assumptions of their professions are on the line. I’ve seen them get up on their high horse, growl, bloviate, dismiss, generalize, tap dance, boil over, accuse, pretend to be oh so reasonable, with their pants on fire.

Someone will say, “But…but, let’s wrap all this up in one sitting. Video will accomplish that. I have things to do, places to go. We live in a fast-food world, face it.”

Yes, you have to go to the store with your mask on and maintain distancing; you have to look for a restaurant that won’t make you flash your vaccine passport; you have to show up at the school board meeting to tell the members what they can do with their mandate forcing your kid to take the shot; when they refuse to listen to you, you have to sell your house, pack up your belongings, and move with the kids from New York to Florida; and all the while, you have to keep deleting voice messages from your brother who’s telling you only the injection will save you and the family wants you institutionalized.

All these and so many more to-do’s begin with the assumption that a virus exists.

So a debate on this point ought to be complete and rigorous.

If the only possibility is a video, have a go. But the written word is far superior.

“Counsel, you have a video where the defendant discusses how he can steal a billion dollars from the pension fund?”

“Yes, Your Honor. But we also have a letter of agreement between the defendant and the head of the Montebello crime family. The letter reveals the defendant has already stolen the money, and will give it to the mob in exchange for certain favors.”

“A letter, you say? Words? Sentences? In writing, on a page? Signed? And it can be read?”

“Yes, sir. Writing is an older form of expression. It’s now being phased out. But it stands up quite well. It’s bulletproof.”

 

[newmisty]

Ex-WHO Scientist David Bell: Will New Pandemic Treaty Cause Permanent Lockdowns? | TEASER

May 21
2022

With the World Health Organization (WHO) set to discuss a global pandemic treaty and far-reaching amendments to the 2005 International Health Regulations, we sit down with Dr. David Bell, an expert in global health and infectious disease.



“Even though it doesn’t directly change sovereignty, in effect, it does. It takes away the ability of the people of that country to make their own decisions,” says Dr. Bell.



And more importantly, these proposals will create a bureaucracy “whose existence is dependent on pandemics,” says Dr. Bell. “They’ll have a very vested interest in finding outbreaks, declaring them potential pandemics, and then responding. It’s the way that they will survive.”



And it appears that they will make lockdowns “a permanent feature of pandemic responses,” Dr. Bell says.



Dr. Bell is a public health physician. He has previously worked at the World Health Organization, as programme head for malaria and febrile diseases at the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics (FIND) in Geneva, and as director of Global Health Technologies at the Intellectual Ventures Global Good Fund. He is now on the board of Pandemics, Data, and Analytics (PANDA), a group studying the world’s response to COVID-19.

 

[Goldhedge]

Why Anger towards the Unvaccinated was Intentional Psychological Manipulation​

A look at a study from 2020​

nakedemperor.substack.com

As the first wave of the pandemic died down in 2020, the narrative was already being pushed that vaccines were the only way out. However, even before it was clear that the vaccines would predominantly be mRNA based, many were rightly hesitant to receive a novel vaccine that had been produced at warp speed.

With The Science™ so convinced that their solution was the only solution, something had to be done to increase uptake. Even though there were many opposing opinions (that were ignored), it was thought that without high rates of vaccine uptake, the pandemic would likely be prolonged.

Something had to be done about vaccine hesitancy, so along came Yale University with a study which began in July 2020. The study, which was not published online until October 2021 (once everyone was vaccinated) was to test “how persuasive messaging affects COVID-19 vaccine uptake intentions”.

Recent studies had shown that explaining vaccine herd immunity increased willingness to receive a vaccine and reduced the time people would wait to get vaccinated. However, other work found that prosocial appeals did not increase vaccination intentions and prosocial concerns were absent in densely populated areas. They were unsure whether saying “get vaccinated to protect others” would increase willingness to vaccinate.

The authors of the study suggested that something else would be needed to get people to encourage others close to them to get vaccinated and to hold negative judgments of those who don’t get vaccinated.

“Viewing vaccination through the lens of a collective action problem suggests that in addition to increasing individuals’ intentions to receive a vaccine, effective public health messages would also increase people’s willingness to encourage those close to them to vaccinate and to hold negative judgments of those who do not vaccinate. By encouraging those close to them to vaccinate, people are both promoting compliance with social norms and increasing their own level of protection against the disease. Also, by judging those who do not vaccinate more negatively, they apply social pressure to others to promote cooperative behavior. This would be consistent with theories of cooperation, like indirect reciprocity or partner choice, that rely on free riders being punished or ostracized for their past actions to encourage prosocial outcomes. Thus, effective messaging could have outsized effects on promoting vaccination if it both causes people to vaccinate themselves and to encourage those around them to do so.”​

They divided the study in to two experiments. The first experiment tested “a large number of treatment messages. One subgroup of messages draws on the ideas that mass vaccination is a collective action problem and highlighting the prosocial benefit of vaccination or the reputational costs that one might incur if one chooses not to vaccinate. Another subgroup of messages built on contemporary concerns about the pandemic, like issues of restricting personal freedom or economic security”.

The messages that were tested in the first experiment were:

• Baseline (To end the COVID-19 outbreak, it is important for people to get vaccinated against COVID-19 whenever a vaccine becomes available. Getting the COVID-19 vaccine means you are much less likely to get COVID-19 or spread it to others. Vaccines are safe and widely used to prevent diseases and vaccines are estimated to save millions of lives every year.)
• Self-Interest (Stopping COVID-19 is important because it reduces the risk that you could get sick and die. COVID-19 kills people of all ages, and even for those who are young and healthy, there is a risk of death or long-term disability. Remember, getting vaccinated against COVID-19 is the single best way to protect yourself from getting sick.)
• Community Interest (Stopping COVID-19 is important because it reduces the risk that members of your family and community could get sick and die. COVID-19 kills people of all ages, and even for those who are young and healthy, there is a risk of death or long-term disability. Remember, every person who gets vaccinated reduces the risk that people you care about get sick. While you can’t do it alone, we can all protect every-one by working together and getting vaccinated.)
• Community Interest + Guilt ((3) (Imagine how guilty you will feel if you choose not to get vaccinated and spread COVID-19 to someone you care about.)
• Community Interest + Embarrassment ((3) + Imagine how embarrassed and ashamed you will be if you choose not to get vaccinated and spread COVID-19 to someone you care about.)
• Community Interest + Anger ((3) + Imagine how angry you will be if you choose not to get vaccinated and spread COVID-19 to someone you care about.)
• Not Bravery (Soldiers, fire-fighters, EMTs, and doctors are putting their lives on the line to serve others during the COVID-19 outbreak. That's bravery. But people who refuse to get vaccinated against COVID-19 when there is a vaccine available because they don't think they will get sick or aren't worried about it aren't brave, they are reckless. By not getting vaccinated, you risk the health of your family, friends, and community. There is nothing attractive and independent-minded about ignoring public health guidance to get the COVID-19 vaccine. Not getting the vaccine when it becomes available means you risk the health of others. To show strength get the vaccine so you don't get sick and take resources from other people who need them more, or risk spreading the disease to those who are at risk, some of whom can’t get a vaccine. Getting a vaccine may be inconvenient, but it works.)
• Trust in Science (Getting vaccinated against COVID-19 is the most effective means of protecting your community. The only way we can beat COVID-19 is by following scientific approaches, such as vaccination. Prominent scientists believe that once available, vaccines will be the most effective tool to stop the spread of COVID-19. The people who reject getting vaccinated are typically ignorant or confused about the science. Not getting vaccinated will show people that you are probably the sort of person who doesn’t understand how infection spreads and who ignores or are confused about science.)
• Personal Freedom (COVID-19 is limiting many people’s ability to live their lives as they see fit. People have had to cancel weddings, not attend funerals, and halt other activities that are important in their daily lives. On top of this, government policies to prevent the spread of COVID-19 limit our freedom of association and movement. Remember, each person who gets vaccinated reduces the chance that we lose our freedoms or government lockdowns return. While you can’t do it alone, we can all keep our freedom by getting vaccinated.)
• Economic Freedom (COVID-19 is limiting many people’s ability to continue to work and provide for their families. People have lost their jobs, had their hours cut, and lost out on job opportunities because companies aren’t hiring. On top of this, government policies to prevent the spread of COVID-19 have stopped businesses from opening up. Remember, each person who gets vaccinated reduces the chance that we lose our freedoms or government lockdowns return. While you can’t do it alone, we can all keep our ability to work and earn a living by getting vaccinated.)
• Community Economic Benefit (Stopping COVID-19 is important because it is wreaking havoc on our economy. Thousands of people have lost their jobs and are unable to pay their bills. Many others have been laid off by their employers and do not know when they will be called to return to work. Remember, every person who gets vaccinated reduces the risk that someone else gets sick. While you can’t do it alone, we can all end this outbreak and strengthen the national economy by working together and getting vaccinated.)

This was a large trial. Over 4,000 participants were randomly assigned to one of the treatment messages or a placebo group which looked at the effectiveness of bird feeders.

The first baseline message described how important it was to receive a vaccine so as to reduce your own risk and reduce transmission. It also emphasised that it was safe, effective and saved millions of lives.

The subgroup of messages focussed on “what other people might think of someone who chooses to be a free rider by not vaccinating”.

The fourth, fifth, and sixth messages added an invocation of an emotion, Guilt, Embarrassment, or Anger, to the Community Interest message. These messages prompted people to think about how they would feel if they chose not to get vaccinated and spread COVID-19 to someone else in the future. Emotions are thought to play a role in cooperation, either by motivating an individual to take an action because of a feeling that they experience or restraining them from taking an action because of the emotional response it would provoke in others. Further, anticipated emotional states have been shown to promote various health behaviors, like vaccination.​

​

The seventh and eighth messages evoked concerns about one’s reputation and social image, which influences their attractiveness as a cooperative partner to others. The seventh, a Not Bravery message, reframed the idea that being unafraid of the virus is not a brave action, but instead selfish, and that the way to demonstrate bravery is by getting vaccinated because it shows strength and concern for others (“To show strength get the vaccine so you don’t get sick and take resources from other people who need them more”). The eighth message was a Trust in Science message that highlights that scientists believe a vaccine will be an effective way of limiting the spread of COVID-19. This message suggests that those who do not get vaccinated do not understand science and signal this ignorance to others (“Not getting vaccinated will show people that you are probably the sort of person who doesn’t understand how infection spreads and who ignores or are confused about science.”).​

​

The final three messages drew on concerns about restrictions on freedom and economic activity that were widespread during the COVID-19 pandemic. A pair of messages focused on how vaccination would allow for a restoration of Personal Freedom (“Government policies to prevent the spread of COVID-19 limit our freedom of association and movement”) or Economic Freedom (“Government policies to prevent the spread of COVID-19 have stopped businesses from opening up”). These messages take a value that is commonly invoked in individuals’ decision to not vaccinate and reframed vaccination as something that would actually restore freedoms that had been taken away. The final message, Community Economic Benefit, argues that a vaccine will help return people’s financial security and strengthen the economy This message is similar to the Community Interest messages that are described above, but instead focuses on cooperating to restore the economy (“We can all end this outbreak and strengthen the national economy by working together and getting vaccinated”).​

The authors found that the baseline message only produced a modest increase in intention to vaccinate. However, Community Interest plus Guilt, Embarrassment, Anger, Not bravery, Trust in Science and Personal Freedom messages all produced largest effects with Not Bravery, Community Interest and Embarrassment messages being the most promising. It was predicted that using those messages would increase vaccine uptake by 10.4 - 15.9 percent.

When they looked at the effects of the messages for advising a friend to receive a vaccine and the effect for negatively judging someone who refuses to receive one, the Not Bravery, Trust in Science, Personal Freedom, Community Interest, Guilt and Embarrassment messages all had large effects on the outcomes. The embarrassment message increased uptake by 27 percent. The Not Bravery message increased uptake by 21 percent when looking at the negative judgment of non-vaccinators.

They even broke it down further and examined what would work best on those who endorsed liberty, men versus women, age, risk takers, Democrats versus Republicans etc etc.

Next, they took the best performing messages and tested them on a nationally representative sample in September 2020.

This time, Community Interest + Embarrassment messages worked the best for vaccine uptake. When it came to giving advice to others and negative judgements of non-vaccinators, Not Bravery, Trust in Science and both Community Interest message produced the desired effects.

The most effective message when advising others was the Community Interest + Embarrassment message and the Not Bravery and Trust in Science were best for judging non-vaccinators.

With the Trust the Science message the authors noted that it “had large effects on beliefs and actions toward others but appeared ineffective in changing an individual’s own intended vaccination behavior”.

The authors conclude that

“Not only does emphasizing that vaccination is a prosocial action increase uptake, but it also increases people’s willingness to pressure others to do so, both by direct persuasion and negative judgment of non-vaccinators. The latter social pressure effects may be enhanced by highlighting how embarrassing it would be to infect someone else after failing to vaccinate.​

​

Our findings are consistent with the idea that vaccination is often treated as a social contract in which people are expected to vaccinate and those who do not are sanctioned. In addition to messages emphasizing the prosocial element of vaccination, we observed that messages that invoked reputational concerns were successful at altering judgment of those who would free ride on the contributions of others. This work could also help explain why social norm effects appear to overwhelm the incentive to free ride when vaccination rates are higher. That is, messages that increased intentions to vaccinate also increased the moralization of non-vaccinators suggesting that they are fundamentally linked to one another.​

​

It remains important to convince the mass public of the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines to ensure that the threshold for herd immunity is reached. Our experiments provide robust evidence that appealing to protecting others has effects on intentions to get vaccinated and to apply social pressure to others to do so as well.”​

The wording throughout this study is almost identical to that used over the last few years.

• “Safe and effective”
• “Getting vaccinated is the single best way to protect yourself”
• “Reduces the risk that members of your family could get sick and die”
• “How guilty would you feel?”
• “How embarrassed and ashamed would you feel?”
• “How angry would you be?”
• “People who don’t get vaccinated aren’t brave but reckless”
• “There is nothing attractive and independent minded about ignoring public health guidance”
• “You risk the health of others”
• “Trust the Science”
• “People who reject vaccination are ignorant or confused about the science”
• “Not getting vaccinated means you are probably the sort of person who doesn’t understand science”
• “It reduces the chance of lockdowns”

How many times did you hear someone parrot one or more of the lines above almost word for word?

You may have naively believed that the fear, pressure and psychological toll of the pandemic caused your friends, family or colleagues to act in an unrecognisable way but it was all carefully planned. They conducted a study (and I’m sure this wasn’t the only one) to see which pressure points would work best on different parts of the population and then carefully released mountains of propaganda (funded by you) to turn your friends and family against you. This nudging was all done to get you to take a vaccine you decided you didn’t want.

The ethics statement in the study says the experiments conducted were fielded under an exemption granted by the University. It’s not difficult to understand why.

Whether mass vaccination was the only way out of the pandemic or not, behaviourally nudging citizens to guilt each other into taking a novel treatment was not the way a civilised society should have acted.

They wanted you to get angry in order to get vaccinated but they failed. But they wanted you to get angry, so get angry. Get angry that the population was psychologically manipulated to turn on one another. Get angry that your friends and family were nudged into parroting the phrases used in the study to make you feel guilty, stupid or embarrassed. Get angry that you were socially ostracised and de-invited from events. Get angry that your colleagues made you lose your job. And if you were one of those who tried to convince someone to get vaccinated, get angry that you were so easily manipulated.

Why Anger towards the Unvaccinated was Intentional Psychological Manipulation

A look at a study from 2020

nakedemperor.substack.com

 

[Ensoniq]

^^

brilliant

to me though, the harder they tried the more suspicious I became

I wasnt going to get mRNA but I was thinking about getting the conventional variety - now it’s hell no and never again

 

[Goldhedge]

THEY WILL HANG FOR WHAT THEY'VE DONE -- CHRISTOPHER JAMES​

Christopher James, A Warrior Calls channel on Bitchute, joins me to discuss the many GOOD things that are happening as the enemies of humanity inevitably face justice for the many crimes they have committed. Dr. David Martin, like Christopher James, is one of many patriots who are moving mountains to bring the sociopathic murders to justice...

...and YOU can do YOUR part too:
https://prosecutenow.com/

THEY WILL HANG FOR WHAT THEY'VE DONE -- Christopher James

✅ Rejuvenate Your Hair, Nails, Joints, & Skin Here: Get 51% Off Here ➡️ http://healthwithsgt.com/ This is my FAV trusted source ^^^^ Christopher James, A Warrior Calls channel on Bitchute, joins me to discuss the many GOOD things that are h…

www.bitchute.com

 

[Densus]

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

THEY WILL HANG FOR WHAT THEY'VE DONE -- Christopher James

✅ Rejuvenate Your Hair, Nails, Joints, & Skin Here: Get 51% Off Here ➡️ http://healthwithsgt.com/ This is my FAV trusted source ^^^^ Christopher James, A Warrior Calls channel on Bitchute, joins me to discuss the many GOOD things that are h…

www.bitchute.com

 

[specsaregood]

New Study Finds That Long COVID May Not Actually Exist​

New Study Finds That Long COVID May Not Actually Exist

A new National Institutes of Health (NIH) study is raising questions about just how real “long COVID” is.

The study found that there was no evidence of long-term COVID-19 infection in patients who were six or more weeks removed from the onset of symptoms, even if those patients reported that they were experiencing “long COVID.” Further, the study found that individuals who reported having long COVID were disproportionately women and individuals with history of anxiety disorders.

“Exploratory studies found no evidence of persistent viral infection, autoimmunity, or abnormal immune activation in participants with PASC,” the authors concluded. “Abnormal findings on physical examination and diagnostic testing were uncommon.”

The study enrolled 189 people with lab-documented cases of COVID-19, who were at least six weeks from the onset of symptoms, and 120 control participants who tested negative for COVID-19 antibodies. Fifty-five percent of those who had been infected reported symptoms consistent with PASC (long COVID), while 13% of the control group reported symptoms of PASC. Those who had PASC symptoms reported lower quality of life on standardized tests.

Participants were given a physical examination, lab tests and questionnaires, cognitive tests and a cardiopulmonary evaluation. The researchers concluded that there was no identifiable cause of the PASC symptoms in most cases. The authors noted some limitations, including the fact that most participants had only mild cases of COVID-19 and that the rate of PASC symptoms could be increased due to persons with symptoms being more motivated to enroll in the study.

The publication of the findings has ignited further debate about whether long COVID is a legitimate physical ailment, or more often a psychological disorder that persists after recovering from the virus. Clinical research on the subject is mixed. Some alarmists about long COVID have cited it as a reason to further impose policies like mask and vaccine mandates.