Category Archives: Science

Who Will Answer?

Posted on by
1

By James Howard Kunstler

Source: Kunstler.com

Why on earth would any American with a functioning brain believe what he /she /they is being told by the public health officialdom, the politicians, or the news media? For two years, they have lied to you about everything relating to the Covid-19 virus, including where it came from, how it was developed, who sponsored its development, how the vaccines happened to come onstage thirty seconds after the disease entered the scene, how well the vaccines worked, how safe the vaccines were, and whether there were other cheap and effective treatments for the disease.

So, here we are with nearly 200-million Americans fully vaccinated (and 230-million with at least one dose), plus 47-million overall officially registered cases of Covid illness (conferring immunity among the survivors), plus X-number people infected with no symptoms, or people who didn’t get tested when sick, or didn’t bother going to see a doctor or report to a hospital, plus X-number of people with natural immunity to Covid for one reason or another (maybe a high number, based on the Diamond Princess cruise ship ratio of a Pareto-type 80 / 20 distribution) — and now, in the fall of 2021, here comes another surge of Covid-19 among both the vaxxed and un-vaxxed.

Did all that vaxxing help? It apparently did nothing to prevent transmission of the disease. The vaxxed were spreading it as effectively as the unvaxxed, and the vaxxed were catching the disease as easily, too, though supposedly suffering not as badly as the unvaxxed (if you choose to believe the official press releases, and why would you believe them?). Then, along came the reports of “adverse reactions” to the vaccines, many of them quite grave — clots, strokes, infarctions, neurological havoc, organ failure. In mid-October this year, the VAERS registry had it at 17,000 deaths and 26,000 permanent disabilities, and the rule-of-thumb was that these represented only 10 percent of the actual number of adverse events because the VAERS website was so badly designed that it crashed half the time any doctor tried to use it… plus the doctors were being silenced and punished for voicing any distrust of the vaccines.

Then why the mad rush to vaccinate all the children in America? There have been next-to-zero covid deaths among children besides a few hundred with grave co-morbidities like cancer or cystic fibrosis — and the hospitals had a cash subsidy incentive from the federal government to list them as dying “with Covid.” Children are far more likely to suffer harm from the vaccines than from the Covid-19 disease. The child vax experiment is only just underway, and there are already enough cases of myocarditis and other disorders to be very concerned. The medical establishment has no idea what the long-term effects on children might be, in particular on their reproductive systems, since the chief active ingredient in the vaccines, the spike protein, has a proclivity for the sexual organs. It happens, too, by the way, that mothers who got vaxxed in early 2021 are just now giving birth to babies with myocarditis and other signature disorders of adverse mRNA vaccine reactions. Keep your eye on that sub-plot of the story.

One wonders: is this child vax campaign an attempt to eliminate the last major control group in the population? (Or just to eliminate a big demographic chunk altogether?) Is it tied in some way to beating the release date for Pfizer’s “Comirnaty” vaccine — which would vacate the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) that protects the pharma companies from liability? Despite delirious propaganda from the likes of National Public Radio, the bad news is out, and the bad news is that the Covid vaccines for children are bad news. Parents ought to object to any official attempts to coerce them into vaxxing their kids, but will they? I’d guess that the reaction will be ferocious. Stand by on that.

Meanwhile, what would be an intelligent response to Covid-19 at this point? Well, how about letting it burn through the population as expeditiously as possible, along with an aggressive nationwide early treatment program using existing effective drugs such as ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, fluvoxamine, budesonide, monoclonal antibodies, for starters, along with vitamin D3, quercetin, zinc, selenium, N-acetyl L-cysteine (NAC)? That would minimize fatalities and confer superior natural immunity throughout the whole population.

Of course, one of the whopper lies you’re being told is that this early treatment protocol doesn’t work. Dozens of clinical studies in other countries and direct clinical experience in this country tell the opposite story: the early treatment protocols work remarkably well. The big question, eventually, will be: who might be held responsible in the public health and medical bureaucracies for militating against early treatment? Was it sheer epic incompetence, or something more malevolent?

Malfeasance Behind the FDA Vax OK for Children

Posted on by
1

By F. William Engdahl

Source: New Eastern Outlook

On October 27 the US Food and Drug Administration Advisory Panel on Vaccines recommended the agency allow Pfizer to amend its Emergency Use Authorization for its COVID vaccine to include children 5 through 11 years old. Two days later the FDA officially approved the rollout. Major media are treating this as a positive development to protect young children. On closer inspection it is anything but that. The FDA is today shockingly corrupt under the Acting Director and is little more than a rubber stamp for Big Pharma, and especially Pfizer, where the former FDA head sits on the board.

The FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee voted 17 to 0, with one abstention, to give a green light allowing Emergency Use Authorization for the Pfizer-BioNTech experimental mRNA to children between 5 and 12 years. The expert who abstained later explained he did so because of limited safety and efficacy data provided. Previously the FDA had approved the vaccine for 12 and older. Adding to the stench of corruption around the latest vote, the Biden Administration a week earlier announced it had already purchased enough Pfizer vaccine to inoculate all 28 million 5- to 11-year-olds in the US. Did they know the fix was in?

‘…Just the Way it Goes’

The record of the FDA, the major drug oversight agency in the US Government, regarding safety and risks of the experimental gene-altered mRNA vaccines of Pfizer, is one of criminal malfeasance, defined as willful violation of a public trust or obligation that causes harm or death. Their latest ruling is even more egregious for blatant conflicts of interest and scientific fraud. Both Pfizer, who conducted the tests on the efficacy of their own vaccine on the 5-11 year age group, and the FDA experts, admitted that they had no idea if the vaccine was safe for such a young population.

Dr. Eric Rubin, professor of immunology at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health voted to approve the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, noting, “The data show that the vaccine works and is pretty safe … and yet we’re worried about a side effect that we can’t measure yet, but it’s probably real.” That is hardly confidence-building. He then stated, “we’re never going to learn about how safe this vaccine is unless we start giving it. That’s just the way it goes.”

This cold-blooded nonchalance is even more astonishing in light of the fact that the incidence of serious side effects in the 5-11 age group who allegedly have tested positive for the corona virus is essentially zero. According to data of the US Government Centers for Disease Control, the Infection Fatality Rate for children from 0-17 years is 0.0002 per 100,000 and far lower for the 5-11 years. A research study by Johns Hopkins University found that risk of severe illness or death from covid19 in a study of 48,000 children is essentially zero if no other morbidity risk such as leukemia, diabetes or asthma is present. Moreover, risk of infecting other children is also very low.

In their submission to FDA for approval, Pfizer stated the vaccination was needed for the 5-11 age group to prevent covid disease transmission. Yet in their FDA hearing on questioning, Dr. William Gruber, senior vice president of Pfizer Vaccine Clinical Research and Development, said they did not even assess whether the vaccine prevents transmission. We might ask why is this at all needed then if the risk to children is zero and there is no evidence of children transmission?

Even more shocking is the statement by Pfizer about its tests. First there were no animal tests on rats or such first. They admitted that the tested human group was so small that they could not test for myocarditis or pericarditis. Yet those are among the most reported negative effects for all others that have had the Pfizer jab. In its FDA application Pfizer noted that the number of participants in the current clinical development program was “too small to detect any potential risks of myocarditis associated with vaccination,” and that “to evaluate long-term sequelae of post-vaccination myocarditis/pericarditis” in participants 5 to <12 years of age will not be studied until after the vaccine is authorized for children.”

Flawed Pfizer Tests

The tests Pfizer made were also fatally flawed. According to Dr. Josh Guetzkow, of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, the Pfizer study was not double-blind. Further, Pfizer cherry-picked subjects to evidently better their results. Three thousand children age 5-11 received Pfizer’s COVID vaccine, but only 750 of those children were selectively included in the company’s safety analysis. And Pfizer dismissed cases with adverse vaccine effects in their FDA filing: “Few serious Adverse Events, none of which were related to vaccine, and no AEs leading to withdrawal were reported.” They give no explanation how that was determined. Just trust Pfizer.

And post-vaccination follow up was less than 2 months for one test cohort and only 2.4 weeks for a second. The Pfizer report to FDA read, “Supplemental safety expansion group data were analyzed from approximately 1500 vaccine recipients with a median follow-up time of 2.4 weeks after Dose 2. These supplemental data demonstrate an acceptable safety profile…” It can take months or longer for side effects to manifest. Vaccine experts recommend at least 18-24 month post-vaccine follow up, not 3 months or 2.4 weeks. This is not serious science.

As well, it seems the FDA and or Pfizer wrongly name the vaccine in the title as “BNT162B2 [COMIRNATY (COVID-19 VACCINE, MRNA)] .“Yet the actual FDA text calls it “Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine (BNT162b2).”

The separate company, BioNTech of Mainz, Germany, has a similar but “legally different” vaccine, trade-named Comirnaty, that is not available in the USA. The distinction is essential as it was the basis in August for the corrupt FDA to give Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine an extension of Emergency Use Authorization but to misleadingly declare its full approval for Comirnaty vaccine of BioNTech. This is deliberate fraud and allowed the Biden Administration to mandate vaccination of US government workers (curiously except for White House and Congress), military, and any company with more than 100 employees.

Conflicts of Interest?

The corruption of the FDA extends to the members of the Vaccine Advisory Committee. Many of the members of the current 18 person committee have direct ties to Pfizer or to the pro-Pfizer Gates Foundation.

Prof. Holly Janes of the Fred Hutch Cancer Research Center in Seattle designed the flawed Pfizer tests. Her institute is funded by Gates Foundation money. FDA committee member Dr. Steven Pergam is also with the Gates-funded Fred Hutch center. Acting committee chair, Arnold S. Monto was a paid consultant to Pfizer. Committee member Archana Chatterjee worked on a Pfizer research project related to vaccines for infants between 2018-2020. Geeta K. Swamy is chair of the “Independent Data Monitoring Committee for the Pfizer Group B Streptococcus Vaccine Program,” a committee sponsored by Pfizer. Duke University states that “Dr. Swamy serves as a co-investigator for the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine trial.” FDA Committee member Gregg Sylvester was a vice president for Pfizer Vaccines. Ofer Levy, professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School is on record vigorously supporting Pfizer covid vaccines for children 12 and older. And FDA committee member Paul Offit professor of pediatrics at The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia called openly last June for covid vaccine permission for children.

When we compare the actions of corrupt FDA Acting Director Janet Woodcock during the August FDA extension of emergency use authorization for Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, she refused then to even allow the vaccine committee to meet to debate the issue. Several months before in June 2021 three members of the FDA Vaccine Committee resigned in protest over Woodcock’s refusal to heed the near unanimous vote of the advisory committee to approve an Alzheimer’s drug called Aduhelm against the wishes of nearly every member on the panel.

Clearly Woodcock has been busy in the meantime stacking the advisory committee with pro-Pfizer members. Not to be forgotten is the fact that after he left as head of the FDA under Trump, Scott Gottlieb immediately joined the board of directors of…Pfizer Inc. Woodcock served under him at FDA.

Woodcock has been at FDA since 1986, almost as long as Fauci at NIAID. Woodcock was Biden’s choice to head FDA, but a massive opposition from 28 groups including state attorneys general and citizen groups forced him to name her “acting,” which does not need Congressional scrutiny. Woodcock was directly responsible for the original FDA approval of deadly opioids over the objections of her own scientists and other advisors.

Already California has moved to make public school admission contingent on covid vaccination, anticipating Pfizer approval. This spread of the deadly Pfizer vaccine to children who have near zero risk of serious disease makes no public health sense. It is simply prima facie evidence of medical malfeasance at the highest levels of the US Government including FDA, with plausible criminal intent. The FDA decision will now be used to argue for similar inclusion of essentially no risk children for the vaccine jab.

Covid: Open Questions That Disturb the Mind

Posted on by
Reply

By John Hawkins

Source: OpEdNews.com

“Seems, madam? Nay, it is. I know not seems.”

– Shakespeare, Hamlet, (1.2.77), Hamlet to his mother, Gertrude

It’s all happening. We seem to be falling apart at the seems. Covid-19 may be a crypto-consciousness virus after all. Consciousness is how we’re different from, and superior to, other animals, and it’s our apparent Achilles’ heel. Aliens in outer space probably laugh their asses off at the condition of our inner space.

So many questions keep popping up about the rise of Covid-19 and how we responded to it in America. What’s ‘shifty’ Fauci been up to? Where’d the virus originate? How come DARPA was already preparing for it? Why did the Trump administration lift the money moratorium on gain-of-function (g-o-f) research after Obama had shut it down? How come Peter Thiel, CEO of PayPal, had the magical fortesight to invest in Abcellera, a Vancouver-based lab that was the first to receive antibodies from a Seattle patient in February 2020 (giving them a head start in the race for solutions), and what made Abcellera bring Thiel on as a director in October 2020? How come Nancy Pelosi isn’t being impeached for her monetary gains related to insider knowledge of Covid-19-related stocks? How is it possible that vaccines began coming out the pharmaceutical yin yang as soon as Trump was told to take a powder by the voters (most of whom were actually counted this time around)?

Let’s consider some of these worries one by one, soberly (put the fuckin bong down), and with rational relish. What do we actually know, and what just seems to be? Spoiler Alert: No conspiracy theories ahead.

A Faucian Bargain?

Recently, Dr. Anthony Fauci was said to be caught in a lie — new information seemingly reveals that he knew that NIH funds he approved as the director of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases were being used to do gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The Intercept was one of the first to report on it with “Ecohealth Alliance Conducted Risky Experiments On MERS Virus In China.” A couple of days ago the standard in British journalism, The Daily Mail, amplified the same message with “NIH ADMITS to funding gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses at China’s Wuhan lab despite Dr. Fauci repeatedly insisting to Congress that it did not happen.” Well, they mostly mean Rand Paul. Net conclusion: Fauci knew. Oh-oh.

Well, what do we know about this guy? His name means “jaws.” This is scary, conjuring up images of Peter Benchley Cape Cod communities consumed by fear of being devoured by multiple iterations of machine-like killers of the wide sarcasto sea (note: viruses are said to be neither dead nor alive, but feast on their host); and also, one thinks of Jaws from James Bond, whose name had to be changed from the original anti-semitic insinuation implied by his “hoodlum” name, Sol “Horror” Horowitz. But still, you can picture him in Tarantino’s Inglorious Basterds going to work on Nazi brains. Anyway, let’s just leave Italians out of this. You know where it’s going to lead.

Now as far reputation goes, it’s another story. Seemingly, sorta. If there ever was a poster boy for the Deep State that PBS’s own Bill Moyers described a while back, Tony Fauci’s your guy. Government service for 50 years. Wiki is kind enough to tell us that Fauci “has acted as an advisor to every U.S. president since Ronald Reagan,” including the present president, Joe Biden, and that “From 1983 to 2002, Fauci was one of the world’s most frequently-cited scientists across all scientific journals.” His service and peer respect translating eventually to a Presidential Medal of Freedom, the highest civilian award in the United States. Heady stuff, not to be trifled with by petty or false accusations. Whether Democrats or Republicans were in control, Fauci was there behind the scenes as director of the NIH’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID).

And as poster boy for the Deep State, he has been massively rewarded, as you’d (or he’d) expect. Fauci, the highest paid civil servant, currently earns approximately $450,000 annually. Forbes puts this in helpful perspective: “Fauci out-earned the U.S. president ($400,000); four-star generals in the military ($282,000); and roughly 4.3 million other federal employees.” He makes roughly twice as much as Mitch McConnell and Nancy Pelosi — or, put differently, he earns what they make combined annually, and probably deserves it twice as much, as the two congressional leaders spend most of their time very much stoking what the Bard from Duluth calls the Disease of Conceit. Still, Fauci is one of the very few public servants ever made “fabulously wealthy” — a one percenter — by being a govo. It’s difficult, without tax records, to know how many windfall leaves Fauci had raked in during his career, but It’s nice, as Borat would say.

Last June I wrote about these very same allegations against Fauci, which, even then, were gathering dust: Dr. Fauci is currently under MSM siege, especially from the right, for his supposed knowledge of gain-of-function activity at the Wuhan lab. His voluminous email collection is now being combed for evidence that he encouraged the Chinese to continue with the dangerous research that Obama had closed down funding for in 2014. Any continued g-o-f research, which Fauci is on the record as supporting (seeing potential for vaccine development, not WW3), would have to be conducted overseas. Critics of Fauci, director of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), claim he snuck around Trump to get funding to Wuhan and DJ didn’t know anything about it, according to the Weekend Australian.

The Forbes piece linked-to above suggests that Fauci always had “exemption” loopholes working for him, and that in December 2017, two years before the Covid-19 alarms were raised, NIH and Dr. Fauci’s NIAID quietly restarted funding, with guidance, for what was then termed “enhanced potential pandemic pathogens.” It appears he didn’t tell Trump about the re-start. The Forbes piece goes on, “News of the funding restart surprised many in the scientific community.” A reasonable question to ask, we’ll see, is did the Department of Defense (DoD) pressure him to continue pursuing g-o-f research?

But Fauci’s interest in g-o-f went beyond feel-good research to be ahead of the curve should a global virus outbreak occur, to actually aggressively championing research related to defense against bioweapons. In a 2002 report hosted at openthebooks.com, NIAID Strategic Plan for Biodefense Research, and authored by Fauci, we read:

The mission of NIAID is to carry out the research needed to understand the pathogenesis of these microbes and the host response to them, and to translate this knowledge into useful interventions and diagnostic tools for an effective response. Accordingly, NIAID is committed to an agenda of basic and translational research for bioterrorism defense, working with partners in academia, industry, and other private and public-sector agencies.

This mission statement helps explain why Fauci would want to work with WIV, in China, in the first place. They are willing to do what the US was loathe to do under Obama.

But there’s more. As I wrote last year in a piece titled, “The Age of Synthetic Biology: Start the War Games!,” 16 years after Fauci’s Report, a more substantive framework for a massive development of new bio and chemical weapons, under the rubric of synthetic biology, was developed by “our” government. The framework is titled: Biodefense in the Age of Synthetic Biology (2018). In the framework, the multiple scientific community authors state:

…synthetic biology makes it possible to synthesize genomes and use those to generate, or “boot,” copies of naturally occurring organisms in the laboratory, opening new opportunities for the acquisition of existing, regulated pathogens… and synthetic biology tools could be used to synthesize and boot entirely new organisms, potentially incorporating genetic material from multiple existing organisms.

Note the similarities in missions and means between the Fauci report and the Framework.

Here’s the link.

Here’s the Quick and Easy: The US government has begun intentionally developing syn bio WMD in the field of synthetic biology with fully expressed intention of uncovering the most lethal response from viruses, and other bio weapons, so that we beat the Russkies (and other foes, presumably not the Chinese, if we’re willing to fund g-o-f research with them). Basically, “we” are beating the snot out of and waterboarding viruses and the like until they scream out their poetry of hatred for us; then we “cure” it. The lazy or hurried reader will find my highlighted areas in the framework so that you may quickly get the gist, although a fuller reading is recommended.

Further, the vaccine-development benefits that Fauci argued for seem to have come to fruition through the DARPA Pandemic Prevention Platform (P3) government-private-academic coalition that made the miraculous (and under-reported) burgeoning vaccines possible. Yes (No!) Yes, the Department of Defense P3 program aims specifically to develop a scalable, adaptable, rapid response platform capable of producing relevant numbers of doses against any known or previously unknown infectious threat within 60 days of identification of such a threat in order to keep the outbreak from escalating and decrease disruptions to the military and homeland.

The partners joined by P3 had been conducting ‘war games’ against a virus outbreak to make sure its infrastructure and response frameworks were up and running effectively. By coincidence, a real life pandemic emerged to test the engine for real. It passed. From the time syn biology lab in Vancouver received the antibody of the first American survivor to the identification and production of a monoclonal solution and partnership with Big Pharma (Eli Lilly) was within mission scope. Also, by coincidence, Jared Adams, chief of communications at DARPA, told me in an email: “The P3 program is two years into a four-year effort, so the goal of being able to identify and respond to a viral threat is not fully mature.” Thus, P3 is scheduled to end next year some time.

DARPA P3 pamphlet explaining flow of gene data as it heads toward a “cure.”

This activity happened under Trump. (And, sure, maybe behind his back, too. You get the feeling that there was a lot of goofy backstabbing and nefarious deep-state hijinks going on.) Key here is that the vaccines are, essentially, a military miracle. That’s where the story is. In a 60 Minutes episode last April titled, “Military programs aiming to end pandemics forever,” the DoD crowed about a coming era when pandemics are wiped out. Speaking with P3 partner Vanderbilt infectious disease researcher Dr. James Crowe, 60 Minutes’ Bill Whitaker elicits an eye-opening exchange, after a voice-over tells us that in 2005 scientists intentionally recreated the 1918 so-called Spanish Flu:

Bill Whitaker: So you find the antibodies in survivors who are almost 100 years old or more. Then what?

Dr. James Crowe: Well, once we have the genetic sequence, which is the DNA sequence, it’s a string of letters that encodes the antibody, essentially, we have the recipe to make it again. And — now we have a drug substance that we can use to prevent or treat that infection.

Voice Over: Dr. Crowe and CDC scientists infected lab animals with the deadly 1918 virus and cured them.

Bill Whitaker: And what happened?

Dr. James Crowe: Well, the antibody, like a heat-seeking missile, floats around in the animal, finds the virus, latches onto the virus and inactivates. Stops it — in its tracks — for us, after we had done that, we realized, “Wow, your body is a library of everything you’ve ever seen. Then we started thinking, as medical researchers, we could find the cure to virtually anything that had ever occurred — on the planet. [The video of this episode is difficult to locate, but here’s the transcript.]

Wow, DARPA claims that it has the technology to address any virus that comes along and develop a solution to it in 60 days. But can it do so without g-o-f? A contracting spokesperson for DARPA told me that the agency does not support g-o-f.

The most “recent” allegations aside, Fauci is eagerly on the record as affirming his support for gain-of-function research. And the reason for it is the promise of ending pandemics that such research holds out to humanity. Viruses bye-bye today, tomorrow cancer? Who knows? I don’t know. Do you know, reader?

Fauci is innocent until proven guilty of some criminal complaint in a court of law — and not before. If it turns out he lied to Congress about g-o-f research taking place at WIV, then he should be, at least, forced into retirement. If something nastier news develops — Fauci is shown without a doubt to have contributed to the development of Covid-19 that then accidentally escaped from the Wuhan lab — then we deal with it then. Right now, investigators are still trying to determine the origin of the novel coronavirus.

A House Foreign Affairs Committee Report has drawn a conclusion about the Origins of the Covid-19 virus. In their summary statement they write:

It is the opinion of Committee Minority Staff, based on the preponderance of available information; the documented efforts to obfuscate, hide, and destroy evidence; and the lack of physical evidence to the contrary; that SARS-CoV-2 was accidentally released from a Wuhan Institute of Virology laboratory sometime prior to September 12, 2019. The virus, which may be natural in origin or the result of genetic manipulation, was likely collected in the identified cave in Yunnan province, PRC, sometime between 2012 and 2015. Its release was due to poor lab safety standards and practices, exacerbated by dangerous gain-of-function research being conducted at inadequate biosafety levels, including BSL-2. The virus was then spread throughout central Wuhan, likely via the Wuhan Metro, in the weeks prior to the Military World Games. Those games became an international vector, spreading the virus to multiple continents around the world.

But a non-political, scientific quest continues nevertheless.

A very clear and thoughtful read on the continuing effort to find Covid-19’s origin is found in a recent New Yorker piece, “The Mysterious Case of the COVID-19 Lab-Leak Theory: Did the virus spring from nature or from human error?” by Carolyn Kormann. She ends her piece by pointing at humans as cause — one way or the other:

…humans have changed the equation. Calling viruses zoonotic obscures the role we play in their evolution, whether in the wilderness, a wet market, or a lab. What is an ecological niche when humans have their hands in everything? Nature’s staggering diversity includes human nature. Somehow, sars-CoV-2 found its ecological niche in us.

It sure seems that way.

It All Makes Sense Once You Realize They Want to Kill Us

Posted on by
6

By Mike Whitney

Source: The Unz Review

“It is now apparent that these products in the blood stream are toxic to humans. An immediate halt to the vaccination programme is required while an independent safety analysis is undertaken to investigate the full extent of the harms, which the UK Yellow Card data suggest includes thromboembolism, multi-system inflammatory disease, immune suppression, autoimmunity and anaphylaxis, as well as Antibody Dependent Enhancement (ADE).” Tess Lawrie, Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy

“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.” Ephesians 6:12

Question– Have the mRNA vaccines been tested on animals?

Answer– Yes, they have.

Question– Were the animal trials successful?

Answer– Yes and no.

Yes, the experiments on mice showed that a low dose of the vaccine induces a robust antibody response to the infection.

But, no, the antibodies were not able to attack the spike protein from a different strain of the virus.

Question– I’m not sure what that means? Do you mean that the vaccine DOES provide some limited protection from the original (Wuhan) virus, but does not necessarily provide protection from the variants?

Answer– That’s right, but it’s a bit more complicated than that because– as the virus changes — the antibodies that helped to fight the original virus can actually enhance the “infectivity” of the variant. In other words, vaccine-generated antibodies can switch-sides and increase the severity of the illness. Simply put, they can make you sicker or kill you. Scientists have known this for a long time. Check out this clip from a 2005 research paper:

“A jab against one strain might worsen infection with others….

In the.. study, Gary Nabel of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.. injected mice with spike protein from a SARS virus taken from a human patient infected in early 2003. They then collected the antibodies the animals produced.

In lab experiments, they showed that these antibodies were unable to attack spike protein from a different strain of SARS, isolated from a patient infected in late 2003….The team next tested whether the antibodies would attack spike proteins from two SARS strains isolated from civets, from which the virus is thought to have originally jumped into humans. In this case, they found hints that the antibodies actually boosted the ability of the virus to infect cells.…

The results show that the virus changes over time, so that a strain that crops up in one outbreak might be quite different from that in a later outbreak. “This virus is not standing still and we need to take this into account,” Nabel says.

This raises the prospect that a vaccine against one strain of SARS virus could prove ineffective against others. Worse, a jab against one strain might even aggravate an infection with SARS virus from civets or another species. “It’s obviously a concern,” Nabel says..
This would not be the first case where exposure to one strain of a virus can worsen infection with another.” (“Caution raised over SARS vaccine”, Nature)

Question– I’m still confused. Can you summarize what they’re saying?

Answer– Sure. They’re saying that scientists have known for nearly two decades that vaccines narrowly aimed at just one protein are bound to fail. They’re saying that the spike protein is highly-adaptable and capable of changing its shape to survive. They’re saying that vaccines aimed at the spike protein will inevitably produce variants that evade vaccine-generated antibodies. They’re saying that by narrowing the vaccine’s focus to the spike protein alone, the drug companies have ensured that previously helpful antibodies will do an about-face, allow the virus to enter healthy cells, replicate at will, and cause sickness or death. They are saying that the current crop of vaccines is in fact perpetuating the pandemic. And–since the science has been clear for the last 16 years– we can add one more observation to the list, that is, that the current approach to mass vaccination is neither haphazard, slapdash or random. It is intentional. The vaccination campaign managers are deliberately ignoring the science in order to sustain a permanent state of crisis. Science is being manipulated to achieve a political objective.

Question– I think you’re exaggerating, but I’d like to get back to the animal trials instead of arguing politics. As you probably know, the reports in the media do not square with your analysis, in fact, all of the articles in the MSM say the animal trials were a rousing success. Here’s a short blurb that I found today that confirms what I’ve been saying:

“…vaccination of nonhuman primates with the mRNA vaccine induced robust SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing activity and notably, rapid protection in the upper and lower airways….” (Covid-19, NIH.gov)

Question– Are you suggesting the authors are lying?

Answer– No, they are not lying. They’re just not telling you the whole truth, and you need to know the whole truth so you can make an informed decision. The vaccines DO provide some (temporary) protection. We don’t dispute that. They also trigger a strong immune response. We don’t dispute that either. But what difference does it make? Let me explain: Let’s say, you have a really bad head cold so you take a new medication that you think will relieve the pain. And–sure enough– an hour after taking the pills– Presto — your congestion and headache are completely gone. That’s fantastic, right? Wrong, because what you fail to realize is that the medication is laced with slow-acting strychnine that kills you three days later. Do you still think it was a good idea to take the medication?

Of course, not. And the same rule applies to these vaccines which do, in fact, boost your antibodies and provide some fleeting “immunity”. But they can also kill you. Don’t you think that should be factored in to your decision? Keep in mind, people have died 3, 4, 5 weeks after inoculation without any prior warning. Many of them might have even been bursting with antibodies, but they’re still dead. Can you see the problem?

Question– Okay, but there’s still this matter about the animal trials. The media says that the drug companies performed the animal trials and they were successful. Do you disagree with that?

Answer– They were not successful and the “fact checkers” that were hired to discredit vaccine critics like me, have deliberately mischaracterized what happened in the trials. For example, here’s a typical “fact checker” article titled “COVID-19 vaccines did not skip animal trials because of animal deaths” by Reuters. Here’s an excerpt:

“Posts claiming that COVID-19 vaccine producers skipped animal trials due to the animals in those trials dying are false. Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson, which have been granted emergency authorization use by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the United States, all conducted animal trials and had no significant safety concerns to report.”

Sounds reassuring, right? But then they say:

“Due to time constraints and the urgency to find a vaccine for COVID-19, Moderna and Pfizer did receive approval to run animal testing and early trials on humans at the same time, as opposed to fully completing animal trials before moving on to human trials. This, however, does not mean animal trials were skipped or that the safety of the vaccines were compromised.”

Let me see if I got this straight: The drug companies were in such a hurry that they conducted their minimalist animal trials at the same time as their human trials (which is unprecedented) and then rushed the results to the FDA so they could be rubber stamped and waved through under the Emergency Use Authority?

Is that how it went down?

Yes, it is.

But if they were rushed through in a couple months, then the “fact checkers” are tacitly admitting that there is no long-term safety data. And there IS no long-term safety data, nor is there any attempt to disprove the research from the earlier trials where the ferrets, mice and other animals died following injection of mRNA vaccines. They don’t deny it, they just ignore it as if sweeping it under the rug will make it all go away. Here’s a clip from the research paper that Reuters refers to in its article:

“We demonstrate that the candidate vaccines… respectively—induce strong antigen-specific immune responses in mice and macaques….Both (vaccines) protected 2–4-year-old macaques from challenge with infectious SARS-CoV-2, and there was reduced detection of viral RNA in immunized macaques as compared to those that received saline.” (Note–We’ve already acknowledged that the vaccines do produce a strong immune response. Here’s more:)

“Neutralizing GMTs declined by day 56 (35 days after dose 2), consistent with the contraction phase; however, they remained well above the GMT of the human sera panel. The duration of the study was not long enough to assess the rate of decline during the plateau phase of the antibody response.” (“BNT162b vaccines protect rhesus macaques from SARS-CoV-2”, Nature)

Can you see what’s going on? The trial was only 56 days-long, in fact, none of the animal trials exceeded 56 days. Think about that for a minute. The reason the animals died in prior trials is because they were exposed to a mutated version of the (wild) virus that eventually killed them. That’s how ADE (antibody-dependent enhancement) works. It doesn’t happen overnight and it doesn’t happen in 56 days. It takes much longer than that for a mutated version of the virus to emerge and reinfect the host. The drug companies know that. They’re not stupid. So the fact that the animals mounted a strong immune response is completely irrelevant. We KNOW they mounted a strong immune response. We also know they died some months later when a different strain of the virus emerged. Bottom line: The production of antibodies does not mean a drug is safe.

The obvious purpose of the trials was to get the vaccines over the finish-line before anyone figured out what was going on. It’s the same reason why the drug companies “unblinded” their human trials after the vaccines got the green light from the FDA. Shortly after the trials were concluded, the people in the placebo arm were allowed to get vaccinated.

Why would they do that? Why would they vaccinate the people who willingly allowed themselves to be guinea pigs for the sake of public health, only to vaccinate them shortly after, thus, eliminating any chance of finding out what the long-term safety issues might be? It makes no sense, does it?

Take a look at this short clip from the British Medical Journal whose scientists are equally bewildered:

“The (drug) companies say they have an ethical obligation to unblind volunteers so they can receive the vaccine. But some experts are concerned about a “disastrous” loss of critical information if volunteers on a trial’s placebo arm are unblinded…

Although the FDA has granted the vaccines emergency use authorization, to get full license approval two years of follow-up data are needed. The data are now likely to be scanty and less reliable given that the trials are effectively being unblinded.

Consumer representative Sheldon Toubman, a lawyer and FDA advisory panel member, said that Pfizer and BioNTech had not proved that their vaccine prevents severe covid-19. “The FDA says all we can do is suggest protection from severe covid disease; we need to know that it does that,” he said.

He countered claims, based on experience with other vaccines, six weeks of follow-up was long enough to detect safety signals. Six weeks may not be long enough for this entirely new type of “untested” [mRNA] vaccine, Toubman said.

Goodman wants all companies to be held to the same standard and says they should not be allowed to make up their own rules about unblinding. He told The BMJ that, while he was “very optimistic” about the vaccines, “blowing up the trials” by allowing unblinding “will set a de facto standard for all vaccine trials to come.” And that, he said, “is dangerous.”

(“Covid-19: Should vaccine trials be unblinded?” The British Medical Journal)

Do you like his choice of words: “blowing up the trials”? Do you think it is a fair description of what the drug companies did?

Yes, it is.

And what possible motive would the drug companies have to blow up the trials? I can see only two possibilities:

  1. They think their vaccine is so terrific, it will save the lives of many of the people in the placebo group.
  2. They expect a high percentage of the people in the vaccine group to get either severely sick or die, so they want to hide the evidence of vaccine-linked injury.

Which is it?

You know the answer. Everyone watching this farce knows the answer.

Question– Okay, so let’s cut to the chase: Are the vaccines are safe or not?

No, they are not safe. The way we decide whether a drug is safe or not is by putting it through a rigorous process of testing and clinical trials. After the testing, the data is passed on to physicians, statisticians, chemists, pharmacologists, and other scientists who review the data and make their recommendations or criticisms. That didn’t happen with the Covid vaccines, in fact, all the normal standards and protocols were suspended in the name of “urgency”. But many believe that the “urgency” was manufactured to push through vaccines that would never have been approved on their own merits. All you have to do is look through the vaccine injury data (VAERS) and you’ll see this is the most lethal medical intervention of all time and, yet, the public health experts, the media and the government keep crowing that they’re “safe and effective”. It’s nonsense and the drug companies know it’s nonsense which is why they reject all liability for the people that are going to be killed by these “poison-death shots.”

Do you know what goes on inside your body after you are injected with one of these “gene based” vaccines?

Once the vaccine enters the bloodstream it penetrates the cells that line the blood vessels forcing them to produce spike proteins that protrude into the bloodstream like millions of microscopic thorns. These thorns activate blood platelets which trigger blood clotting followed shortly after by an immune response that destroys the infected cells thus weakening the vascular system while draining the supply of killer lymphocytes. In this way, the vaccine launches a dual attack on the body’s critical infrastructure causing widespread tissue damage throughout the circulatory system while leaving the immune system less able to fend off future infection.

Now if you think you can have a long-and-happy without a functioning circulatory system, then none of this matters. But if you’re bright enough to realize that wreaking havoc on your vascular system is the fast-track to the graveyard, then you’ll probably understand that injecting these “poison-death shots” is a particularly bad idea.

By the way, it’s a real stretch to call these hybrid injections, “vaccines”. They have about as much in common with a traditional vaccine as a python does with a coffee table. Nothing. The “vaccine” moniker was chosen in order to shore-up public confidence, that’s all. It’s part of a marketing strategy. There is no real similarity. The majority of people trust vaccines and see them as a shining example of medical achievement. The drug companies wanted to tap into that trust and use it for their own purposes. That’s why they called it a “vaccine” instead of “gene therapy” which more accurately describes ‘what it does.’ But–like we said– it’s just a marketing strategy.

Have you ever wondered how the drug companies were able to roll out their own-individual vaccines just weeks apart from each other? That’s a pretty good trick, don’t you think; especially since vaccine development typically takes from 10 to 15 years. How do you think they managed that? Here’s an excerpt from an article which provides a little background on the topic:

“The virus behind the outbreak that began in Wuhan, China, was identified on Jan. 7. Less than a week later — on Jan. 13 — researchers at Moderna and the NIH had a proposed sequence for an mRNA vaccine against it, and, as the company wrote in government documents, “we mobilized toward clinical manufacture.” By Feb. 24, the team was shipping vials from a plant in Norwood, Mass., to the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, in Bethesda, Md., for a planned clinical trial to test its safety.” (“Researchers rush to test coronavirus vaccine in people without knowing how well it works in animals”, Stat)

Got that? “The virus broke out in Wuhan…on Jan. 7, and less than a week later Moderna had a proposed sequence for an mRNA vaccine against it???

Really? Is that the same Moderna that had been playing-around with mRNA for over a decade but was never able to successfully bring a vaccine to market?

Yep, the very same company. Here’s more:

“And by Feb. 24, the team was shipping vials from a plant in Norwood, Mass??”

Wow! Another Covid miracle! You almost get whiplash watching these companies crank out their “wonder drugs” at record-breaking speed.

Keep in mind, there’s a very high probability that the virus was man-made, (In other words, it’s a bioweapon.) and the people who have been implicated in the funding and creation of that bioweapon are also closely aligned with the big drug companies that have produced the antidote in record time that has already netted tens of billions of dollars in profits for a drug for which there was no reliable animal testing, no long-term safety data, and no formal regulatory approval.

So I’ll ask you again: Doesn’t that all sound a bit suspicious?

Is it really that hard to see the outline of a political agenda here? After all, aren’t the drug companies working with the regulatory agencies that are working with the public health officials that are working with the media that are working with the corrupted politicians that are working with the Intel agencies that are working with the meddling globalist billionaires that are working with the giant private equity firms that oversee the entire operation pulling the appropriate strings whenever needed?

It sure looks like it.

And, don’t the tectonic social changes we’ve seen in the last year have more to do with a broader scorched-earth campaign launched by the “parasite class” against the rest of humanity than they do with a fairly-mild virus that kills mainly old and frail people with multiple underlying health conditions?

Right, again. In fact, many have noticed the cracks in the pandemic artifice from the very beginning, just as many have pointed out that the virus-meme is just the mask behind which parasites continue to conduct their global restructuring project. In short, it’s all about politics; bare-knuckle, take-no-prisoners NWO politics.

Answer– You’ve asked a number of questions about the animal trials, but none about the biodistribution and the pharmacokinetics studies that were done at the same time. Why is that? (Note--Pharmacokinetics; “the branch of pharmacology concerned with the movement of drugs within the body.”)

Question– I didn’t know there were any. Did the media report on them?

Answer– No, they didn’t. They completely ignored them, even though they were produced by Pfizer and provide essential information about where the substance in the vaccine goes in the body, in what amounts, and for how long. By knowing how the drug is distributed, it is possible to make educated assumptions about its effect on the organs and other tissue. In other words, these studies are invaluable. The Doctors for Covid Ethics have done extensive research on the studies and written a report titled “The Pfizer mRNA vaccine: pharmacokinetics and toxicity”. Here’s a few excerpts that help to illustrate the dangers of the vaccines:

“As with any drug, a key consideration for the toxicity of the COVID mRNA vaccines is where exactly in the body they end up, and for how long they will stay there. Such questions, which are the subject of pharmacokinetics, are usually thoroughly investigated during drug development. Initial studies on pharmacokinetics and also on toxicity are carried out in animals… this document has rather far-reaching implications: it shows that Pfizer—as well as the authorities that were apprised of these data— must have recognized the grave risks of adverse events after vaccination even before the onset of clinical trials. Nevertheless, Pfizer’s own clinical trials failed to monitor any of the clinical risks that were clearly evident from these data, and the regulatory authorities failed to enforce proper standards of oversight. This dual failure has caused the most grievous harm to the public….

What do Pfizer’s animal data presage for biological effects in humans?

  • Rapid appearance of spike protein in the circulation.
  • Toxicity to organs with expected high rates of uptake, in particular placenta and
    lactating breast glands
  • Penetration of some organs might be higher with the real vaccine than with this
    luciferase model…The rapid entry of the model vaccine into the circulation means that we must expect the spike protein to be expressed within the circulation, particularly by endothelial cells. ( Endothelial- The thin layer of cells lining the blood vessels) We have seen before that this will lead to activation of blood clotting through direct activation of platelets and also, probably more importantly, through immune attack on the endothelial cells….

Summary

Pfizer’s animal data clearly presaged the following risks and dangers:

  • blood clotting shortly after vaccination, potentially leading to heart attacks, stroke, and venous thrombosis
  • grave harm to female fertility
  • grave harm to breastfed infants
  • cumulative toxicity after multiple injections

With the exception of female fertility, which can simply not be evaluated within the short period of time for which the vaccines have been in use, all of the above risks have been substantiated since the vaccines have been rolled out—all are manifest in the reports to the various adverse event registries. Those registries also contain a very considerable number of reports on abortions and stillbirths shortly after vaccination, which should have prompted urgent investigation.
….
Of particularly grave concern is the very slow elimination of the toxic cationic lipids. In persons repeatedly injected with mRNA vaccines containing these lipids… this would result in cumulative toxicity. There is a real possibility that cationic lipids will accumulate in the ovaries. The implied grave risk to female fertility demands the most urgent attention of the public and of the health authorities.

Since the so-called clinical trials were carried out with such negligence, the real trials are occurring only now—on a massive scale, and with devastating results. … Calling off this failed experiment is long overdue. Continuing or even mandating the use of this poisonous vaccine, and the apparently imminent issuance of full approval for it are crimes against humanity.” (“The Pfizer mRNA vaccine: pharmacokinetics and toxicity”, The Doctors for Covid Ethics)

Don’t you think people are entitled to know what the government wants to inject into their bodies? Don’t you think they have a right to know how it will effect their immune systems, their vital organs and their overall health? Don’t you think they have the right to decide for themselves which drugs they will take and which they will refuse to take?

Forcing someone to take a drug he does not want, is not just wrong. It’s unAmerican. Which is why people should reject vaccine mandates as a matter of principle. They are an attack on personal liberty, the foundation of our constitutional system. It’s a principle worth dying for.

As for the mass vaccination campaign, it is the most maniacally-genocidal project ever concocted by man. There’s simply no way to calculate the amount of suffering and death we are about to face for trusting people whose policies were obviously shaped by their undiluted hatred of humanity. As German microbiologist Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi said:

“In the end, we’re going to see mass illness and deaths among people who normally would have had wonderful lives ahead of them.”

It is a great tragedy.

WHO WILL BE ‘BRAVE’ IN HUXLEY’S NEW WORLD?

Posted on by
1

By John W. Whitehead & Nisha Whitehead

Source: Waking Times

“ ‘Science?’….’Yes,’ Mustapha Mond was saying, ‘that’s another item in the cost of stability. It isn’t only art that’s incompatible with happiness; it’s also science. Science is dangerous; we have to keep it most carefully chained and muzzled…I’m interested in truth, I like science. But truth’s a menace, science is a public danger. As dangerous as it’s been beneficent. It has given us the stablest equilibrium in history…But we can’t allow science to undo its own good work. That’s why we so carefully limit the scope of its researchers…We don’t allow it to deal with any but the most immediate problems of the moment. All other enquiries are most sedulously discouraged…Our Ford himself did a great deal to shift the emphasis from truth and beauty to comfort and happiness…[but] People still went on talking about truth and beauty as though they were the sovereign goods. Right up to the time of the Nine Years’ War. That made them change their tune all right. What’s the point of truth or beauty or knowledge when the anthrax bombs are popping all around you? That was when science first began to be controlled – after the Nine Years’ War. People were ready to have even their appetites controlled then. Anything for a quiet life. We’ve gone on controlling ever since. It hasn’t been very good for truth, of course. But it’s been very good for happiness. One can’t have something for nothing. Happiness has got to be paid for. You’re paying for it, Mr. Watson – paying because you happen to be too much interested in beauty. I was too much interested in truth; I paid too.’ “ ~Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World

Where does one start in discussing the famed fiction novel of Huxley? Although most agree that there is a definite brilliance to the piece, most are also confused as to what was Huxley’s intention in writing the extremely influential dystopic vision. Was it meant to be taken as an exhortation? An inevitable prophecy? Or rather…was it meant as an Open Conspiracy?

What do I mean by an Open Conspiracy?

If we are going to talk about such things our story starts with H.G. Wells, whom Aldous acknowledged he was most certainly influenced by, particularly by Wells’ novels “A Modern Utopia,” “The Sleeper Awakes,” and “Men Like Gods,” when writing his “Brave New World.”

Although Aldous is quoted as referring to Wells as a “horrid, vulgar little man,” (Wells was indeed not a very likeable individual) it was not for reasons one might first assume. Aldous did share a Wellsian perspective in that society should be organised based on a caste system. Perhaps this was one of the reasons Aldous was so fascinated with learning about India’s Hindu religious beliefs and practices, which had coexisted for centuries with a deeply ingrained caste system to which India is still struggling to remove itself from to this day. This is not to say that one caused the other, or that Hinduism has not offered a plethora of great works and insights, but that it had become corrupted and thoroughly intertwined with upholding India’s caste system at some point one cannot deny; that it was used to justify a system of hierarchy from slave to the god-like state of a Brahmin and that British imperialists had always been greatly fascinated by this form of social organization one cannot deny.

Aldous was always interested in the subject of religion, but more so for its uses in behaviourism and mental conditioning achieved through such techniques as entering states of trance where an individual’s suggestibility could be manipulated. Hypnopædia was not just some quirky sci-fi concoction. It is also why Aldous was so interested in the work of Dr. William Sargant, whom Aldous repeatedly refers to in his writings and lectures and who was involved with the Tavistock Institute and MKUltra. More on this in Part two.

These spiritual/religious studies are what shaped the core thesis of Aldous’ book “Doors of Perception” which is considered the instruction manual for what started the counterculture movement. The title is influenced by the poet William Blake who wrote in 1790 in his book “The Marriage of Heaven and Hell,”:

“if the doors of perception were cleansed then everything would appear to man as it is, Infinite. For man has closed himself up, till he sees all things through narrow chinks of his cavern“

Another major influence for “Doors of Perception” was again H.G. Wells, from his book “The Door in the Wall,” which examines the contrast between aesthetics and science and the difficulty in choosing between them. The protagonist Lionel Wallace is unable to bridge the gap between his imagination and his rational, scientific side which leads to his death.

Aldous writes in his “Doors of Perception,”:

“That humanity at large will ever be able to dispense with Artificial Paradises seems very unlikely…Art and religion, carnivals and saturnalia [ancient Roman pagan festival], dancing and listening to oratory – all these have served, in H.G. Wells’s phrase, as Doors in the Wall…Under a more realistic, a less exclusively verbal system of education than ours, every Angel (in Blake’s sense of that word) would be permitted as a sabbatical treat, would be urged and even, if necessary, compelled to take an occasional trip through some chemical Door in the Wall into the world of transcendental experience. If it terrified him, it would be unfortunate but probably salutary. If it brought him a brief but timeless illumination, so much the better. In either case the Angel might lose a little of the confident insolence sprouting from systematic reasoning and the consciousness of having read all the books…But the man who comes back through the Door in the Wall will never be quite the same as the man who went out…”

Aldous was always chasing the perfect drug that would be minimal in its physically destructive effects but would allow an individual to tap into an almost consumer state of a religious/spiritual out-of-body experience, a transcendence that promised a connection with the Infinite, inner peace and enlightenment.

Enlightenment and inner peace in a pill, ready for whenever one needed a short holiday from the “illusion” of reality.

The name Soma, which Aldous used to name his fantasy ideal drug in “Brave New World,” was based off a plant whose juices were used to create the spiritual drink which was described in both the ancient religious practices of the Vedic tradition and Zoroastrianism, which called the plant and spiritual drink by the same name, Soma. Today, it is a mystery as to what plant they were referring to in these texts. Huxley no doubt chased after this dragon the entire latter half of his life, and indeed, psilocybin mushrooms are theorised as one of the potential candidates for what could have been named Soma centuries ago.

It is perhaps here that people are the most confused about the character of Huxley. After all, he was obviously walking the walk so to speak, thus didn’t he truly believe that psychedelics were the path to freedom through enlightenment?

Well, the argument has been made that Huxley’s approach to LSD [and other psychedelics] was essentially oligarchic, that it was to be regarded as a dangerous substance to be sampled only by such fine and visionary minds as his own. That is, those who had the mental strength, the mental stamina to reach enlightenment; those who were too weak to sustain such mental rigours would become the very opposite, and risked falling into the dark pit of complete madness, although this in of itself was perceived by many to be a form of clairvoyance. After all, what is it to be mad in a world that is sickeningly and inhumanely “normal”? This is most certainly how Ken Kesey thought when writing his “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest,” that madness itself was a form of liberation from the shackles of capitalist societal constraints.

Perhaps madness was the goal, it was after all, much more attainable that the promised enlightenment…

As William Sargant noted in his book “Battle for the Mind: A Physiology of Conversion and Brain-Washing” J.F.C. Hecker was studying the dancing mania phenomenon that occurred during the Black Death, which was a social phenomenon that arose in Europe between the 14th and 17th centuries. It involved groups of people who would begin to dance erratically during the Plague, sometimes thousands at a time until they would fall from exhaustion or from injuries. It was thought to have arisen in Aachen, Germany in 1374 and quickly spread throughout Europe with one of the last observations of it occurring in 1518 in Alsace, France.

Hecker observed in his research on the dancing mania that heightened suggestibility had the capability to cause a person to “embrace with equal force, reason and folly, good and evil, diminish the praise of virtue as well as the criminality of vice.”

Such a state of mind was likened to the first efforts of the infant mind, Sargant writes “this instinct of imitation when it exists in its highest degree, is also united a loss of all power over the will, which occurs as soon as the impression on the senses has become firmly established, producing a condition like that of small animals when they are fascinated by the look of a serpent.”

I wonder if Sargant imagined himself the serpent…

It is no wonder that the Tavistock Institute and the CIA became involved in looking at the effects of LSD and how to influence and control the mind. And perhaps it is no coincidence that Aldous Huxley was in close correspondence with William Sargant to which Sargant even refers to Aldous’ “insights” multiple times in his book “Battle for the Mind.”

Aldous is also quoted in a lecture he delivered to the Tavistock Group, California Medical School in 1961:

“There will be, in the next generation or so, a pharmacological method of making people love their servitude, and producing dictatorship without tears, so to speak, producing a kind of painless concentration camp for entire societies, so that people will in fact have their liberties taken away from them, but will rather enjoy it, because they will be distracted from any desire to rebel by propaganda or brainwashing, or brainwashing enhanced by pharmacological methods. And this seems to be the final revolution.”

Aldous goes on to state a year later in a lecture titled “The Ultimate Revolution” at UC Berkeley Language Center 1962:

“Today we are faced, I think, with the approach of what may be called the ultimate revolution, the final revolution, where man can act directly on the mind-body of his fellows…we are in process of developing a whole series of techniques which will enable the controlling oligarchy who have always existed and presumably will always exist to get people to love their servitude. This is the, it seems to me, the ultimate in malevolent revolutions shall we say, and this is a problem which has interested me many years and about which I wrote thirty years ago, a fable, Brave New World, which is an account of society making use of all the devices available and some of the devices which I imagined to be possible making use of them in order to, first of all, to standardize the population, to iron out inconvenient human differences, to create, to say, mass produced models of human beings arranged in some sort of scientific caste system.”

Yes, yes we get it. This is all to be taken as “warnings” to the public, a terrible necessity that will come about if over-population is not addressed (as he makes clear in his Brave New World Revisited). With over-population comes over-organization which in turn leads to the scientific advances in technology which we are told by Aldous can only lead to totalitarianism. Thus, population growth and advances in the sciences are the greatest threat to humankind. Wait, that sounds oddly very much like the reasonings of Mustapha Mond, have we come around full circle, what exactly does Aldous agree and disagree with here? Are we to have a scientific dictatorship in order to avoid a totalitarian system in the form of a scientific dictatorship?

In H.G. Wells’ “Open Conspiracy: Blueprints for a World Revolution,” he describes his vision for a Modern Religion:

‘…if religion is to develop unifying and directive power in the present confusion of human affairs it must adapt itself to this forward-looking, individuality-analyzing turn of mind; it must divest itself of its sacred histories…The desire for service, for subordination, for permanent effect, for an escape from the distressful pettiness and mortality of the individual life, is the undying element in every religious system.

The time has come to strip religion right down to that [service and subordination is all Wells wants to keep of the old relic of religion]…The explanation of why things are is an unnecessary effort…The essential fact…is the desire for religion and not how it came about…The first sentence in the modern creed must be, not “I believe,” but “I give myself.” ‘

Hmm, is this the same Revolution as Aldous is speaking about? After all, there is a lot of similarity between H.G. Wells’ description of his “Modern Religion” and what Aldous is preaching in his “Doors of Perception,” to which Wells is undoubtedly a large influence. The desire to escape from the distressful pettiness and mortality of the individual life, that the explanation for why one does something is not important, only to be motivated by the desire for release, for a complete catharsis that only the fervour of a “religious,” a “spiritual” experience can bring about.

It is the desire for, not the care for why. To believe is not even acceptable, because to believe pertains to thought, it is merely a matter of surrender, that you give yourself. It is not to act with reason but to be possessed by its very opposite; to be in a state of existence where there are no words, and thus there are no thoughts, just direct sensory feeling.

The ultimate achievement is to completely surrender oneself to the external world, perhaps to a dictatorship without tears…

The reader should be aware that Wells wrote a book titled “The New World Order” in 1940, and is the first that I am aware of to pioneer this now-infamous term. The reader should also be aware that Julian Huxley (Aldous Huxley’s brother) was a co-author of “The Science of Life,” a part of Wells’ trilogy “The Outline of History” (1919), “The Science of Life” (1929), and “The Work, Wealth, and Happiness of Mankind” (1932) to which Wells made no qualms should be regarded as the new Bible. Julian was also a prominent member of the British Eugenics Society, serving as its Vice-President from 1937-1944 and its President from 1959-1962. Interesting life choices from the authors of the “new Bible.”

In addition, Aldous’ grandfather Thomas Huxley (“Charles Darwin’s bulldog”) was the biology teacher of H.G. Wells and was one of the largest influences in Wells’ life, promoting the works of Charles Darwin and Thomas Malthus, for more on this refer to my paper. Although Thomas Huxley lived before the time of the “science” of Eugenics, he was a stout Malthusian and thus one can rather safely say would have been a eugenicist if offered the chance.

Thus, we should regard Aldous’ mention of the stylish ‘Malthusian belt’ in his “Brave New World,” under a more somber light perhaps…

And now we are ready to walk through the doors of perception on Aldous himself, the true Huxley behind the projected illusion. We may not find Infinity at the end of this excursion, but we will most certainly be better equipped to tell the difference between Huxley’s self and non-self, between what is real and what is false.

COVID Has A Lower Mortality Risk To Children Than The Flu, Car Accidents, Suicide & More

Posted on by
Reply

By Arjun Walia

Source: The Pulse

The risks of severe illness and death from COVID for children has not been put in context of other risks. Right now, many parents are stricken with fear and worry about their child contracting COVID. Putting COVID in the context of other risks may help change the perspective of parents and also question whether or not making COVID vaccines mandatory for children is the right decision.

When it comes to morality risk to children, COVID-19 has a lower annual mortality risk than car accidents, influenza, and for 5-14 year olds, suicide (Leonhardt, 2021). In fact, the survival rate of COVID for people under the age of 19 according to recent pre-print study by two Stanford scientists is nearly 100 percent.

Seroprevalence data from eight locations around the world: England, France; Ireland; Netherlands; Spain; Atlands, USA; New York, USA; Geneva, Switzerland show the infection fatality rate for 0-9 year olds to be less than 1 in 200,000 (less than 5 in 1 million) and 1/55,000 for 10–19-year-olds.

Even the risk of hospitalization as a result of a COVID infection is quite low. If infected with COVID-19, children ages 0-9 have on average a chance of 0.1% or 1/1000 of being hospitalized and, for ages 11-19 a 0.2% or 1/500 chance of being admitted to the hospital
(Herrera-Esposito, 2021).

In Canada, as of May 28, 2021, there were 259,308 confirmed cases of SARS-CoV-2 infections in Canadians 19 years and under. Of these, 0.48% were hospitalized, 0.06% were admitted to ICU, and 0.004% died. According to this data, seasonal influenza is associated with more severe illness than COVID-19.

Given Canada’s numbers, the discussion around “keeping children safe at school” is not a policy concern if it was not one for the seasonal flu. Yes, children may be a source of transmission, but they are not at risk of COVID by being at school.

While many studies suggest pre-symptomatic/asymptomatic spread may comprise > 40% of vertical transmission, numerous large observational population studies show that children are POOR COVID-19 spreaders. This includes studies from Ireland, Iceland, Italy, France, and Australia. For a link to a more complete reference list, see Washington University Pediatric & Adolescent Ambulatory Research Consortium.

In comparison to the vaccine, a study out of the University of California shows that the risk of myocarditis is greater after two doses of the Pfizer vaccine than being hospitalized for COVID for boys ages 12-15. The research was led by led by epidemiologist Dr. Tracy Høeg, an epidemiologist studying COVID in kids.

There have been multiple reports of death from myocarditis following COVID vaccination, including a 13-year-old Michigan boy who died June 16, three days after he received his second dose of Pfizer’s COVID vaccine. Preliminary autopsy results indicated that following his vaccination his heart become enlarged and was surrounded by fluid. As of August 7th, there were 106 reported incidents of myocarditis/pericarditis in Ontario, Canada in people under the age of 25.

Pfizer BioNTech study included 2,260 children and adolescents, 12-15 years of age, 1,131 of whom received the vaccine. This is a very small number of adolescents and does not permit an evaluation of rare but serious side-effects, such as effects that may happen in only 1:5,000 adolescents. Furthermore, with most of the adolescents followed for only 1 or 2 months after their 2nd dose, there is no data to support long-term safety.

Furthermore, the science regarding waning vaccine immunity and the science regarding natural immunity is something to consider as well, as well as the data showing that the vaccines offer a very low absolute risk reduction.

On the 22nd of September, Høeg gave her testimony to the U.S. House of Representatives providing an excellent summary regarding the latest data on COVID and kids. In it she cites data illustrating that drowning, vehicle accidents, homicide, cancer, cardiovascular disease, flu, and suffocation are all greater threats when it comes to mortality for children.

She also touches upon concerns like long COVID, and the Delta variant, and other affects the pandemic and health policy is having on the mental and physical health of children.

She outlines how the delta variant has resulted in increased case numbers in children, but the severity of the disease per case does not appear to have increased. When it comes to long COVID, a recent report from the Office of National Statistics (ONS, 2021) in the UK that she sites, the prevalence of persistent symptoms 12-16 weeks after COVID were no different between those with a COVID infection and controls.

I feel that our country’s failure to do a risk-benefit analysis as well as good scientific studies of the interventions we imposed upon children to mitigate one disease has created numerous additional and avoidable public health crises in our youth. For a disease that relatively spares them, this generation has suffered an incredible amount during the pandemic and, unfortunately, the effects of this will likely travel with them for the rest of their lives.

Høeg.

Sunetra Gupta, an infectious disease epidemiologist from the University of Oxford, Carl Heneghan, an NHS urgent care doctors and Professor of Evidence Based Medicine at the University of Oxford, as well as Alberto Giubilini, senior research fellow in infectious diseases at Oxford, make their position on vaccinating children quite clear below. They published an opinion article in the European Journal of Medical Ethics in July 2021, explaining why children should not be required or encouraged to take the COVID-19 vaccine.

The risks of COVID-19 for children and young people are minimal. For example, ‘[i]n the USA, UK, Italy, Germany, Spain, France and South Korea, deaths from COVID-19 in children remained rare up to February 2021 (ie, up to the time the study had available data about), at 0.17 per 100 000 population’.7 The long-term risks of the novel COVID-19 vaccines on a population of millions of children are at the moment unknown, given that the clinical trials involved a few thousands of subjects over a few months period.

Vaccinating children would be a way of treating them as mere means to serve other people’s interests or some form of collective good. We already did this through indiscriminate lockdowns and other restrictions, such as school closure. Using children as means or even mere means in this way is not necessarily wrong, but it can only be justified if the cost imposed is sufficiently small and the benefit sufficiently large.7 Unfortunately, currently available COVID-19 vaccines do not meet either condition, given our current state of knowledge. Not only would vaccinating children pose risks on them without any substantial direct benefit.

Also, vaccinating children can only offer collective good if this reduces infection levels in the community. However, while COVID-19 vaccines almost certainly will provide long-term protection against severe disease and death, their infection blocking effects are incomplete and very likely to be transient. This means there is actually no collective benefit to trade off against individual harm to children, unless we perform mass vaccination on a regular basis, for example, annually. But this would compound the potential harms.

Planet of the Living Dead (Halloween 2021)

Posted on by
1

By Mickey Z.

Source: Dissident Voice

The only thing we have to fear…

(the dude who signed Executive Order 9066)

Halloween is an odd holiday. The ostensible concept — as it has evolved to become — is to shock, startle, frighten, petrify, horrify, and/or terrify… all while consuming enough high fructose corn syrup to keep the American Dental Association content for another century or two. Every year, as October 31 nears, loyal consumers squander a small fortune to adorn their soon-to-be-foreclosed-upon abodes with Made-in-China images of tombstones, skulls, ghouls, goblins, monsters, zombies, and even the occasional bloody severed limb or two. But let’s face it, none of these cardboard depictions remotely compare to the real-life horrors we passively accept as normal.

Who needs Dracula when we’ve got ruling class vampires sucking us dry — stealing not only our blood but also our jobs, homes, health, autonomy, sovereignty, and future? Why bother with Michael Myers when legions of Y chromosome ghouls unleash far worse cruelty — every minute of every day — via male pattern violence? Never forget:

  • No zombie is more frightening than those stumbling around in masks and chanting “trust the science.” 
  • Never mind Jason and his hockey mask when you’ve got “Brandon” playing left wing. 
  • Bats, pumpkins, and skeletons vs. pornographers, pimps, and pedophiles? No contest. 
  • Elm Street’s Freddie ain’t got nothing on corporations transformed into “persons” — set free to pillage the ecosystem and co-opt our minds. 
  • And I’ll take Godzilla’s side over pesticide, genocide, and ecocide. 

Here’s one more 24/7 real-life nightmare far more dreadful than anything the Halloween-Industrial Complex can conjure up: When all those kids come knocking on your door, expecting brightly colored toxins called “candy,” you might wish to remind yourself that across the globe, an estimated 10,000 extra children are dying each month thanks to unnecessary lockdowns and restrictions. 

Cue the ominous music: 10,000 dead. Every single month. From preventable causes. Because most of the world bought into the Covid lies. The next time you’re at a sporting event or a concert (for the vaccinated-only, of course), take a good, slow look around you and get a feel for what 10,000 looks like. It’s a whole lot more terrifying than the whir of a chainsaw echoing down a desolate Texas highway. Remember: “We’re all in this together.”

You Don’t Have To Wait For Halloween To See Monsters, Because They Are Already All Around Us

Posted on by
4

By Michael Snyder

Source: End of the American Dream

A lot of Americans will dress up like monsters this Halloween, but there is no way that they could ever be as frightening as the actual monsters that walk our halls of power on a daily basis.  Some of the things that I am going to share with you in this article are deeply disturbing, but they need to be revealed because the people that have been doing these things need to be held accountable.  Real life horror movies play out in secret facilities all across America day after day, and much of the time the incredibly sick things that are being done to animals are being funded by our tax dollars.  But because the corporate media keeps very quiet about these “experiments”, most Americans never hear about what is really going on behind closed doors.

The good news is that some brave investigators are starting to pull back the veil and reveal the truth about the horrific animal abuse that is taking place.

Here is one example of what I am talking about…

“Our investigators show that Fauci’s NIH division shipped part of a $375,800 grant to a lab in Tunisia to drug beagles and lock their heads in mesh cages filled with hungry sand flies so that the insects could eat them alive,” White Coat Waste told Changing America. “They also locked beagles alone in cages in the desert overnight for nine consecutive nights to use them as bait to attract infectious sand flies.”

How sick do you have to be to do something like that to innocent little puppies?

Dr. Anthony Fauci and the others that were involved in funding this research are monsters.

And it turns out that this wasn’t the first time that they funded this sort of “experimentation”.

Back in 2016, they spent more than 18 million dollars to torture beagles “for 22 months” before finally killing and dissecting them…

Fauci’s team had previously, in 2016, strapped the infectious sand flies to beagles at the NIAID lab in Bethesda, Maryland, allowing them to feed on the dogs for 22 months.

The White Coat Waste Project alleges that the dogs developed infectious legions before researchers killed and dissected them.

This procedure cost $18,430,917.

Fauci and everyone else involved in such “experiments” aren’t just criminals.

They are monsters in the worst sense of the word.

If you are sickened by what you have read already, you may want to stop, because there is more.

What Fauci and his minions did to 44 beagle puppies at a facility in Menlo Park, California has no place in a civilized society…

Another procedure – which the NIH funded to the tune of $1.8m – saw 44 beagle puppies undergo a ‘cordectomy,’ which saw their vocal cords cut to stop them barking.

That experiment, which took place in Menlo Park, California, saw the dogs then pumped full of drugs, before being killed and dissected.

What would “justice” look like for crimes of this magnitude?

The next time someone in the corporate media tries to call Fauci a “hero”, it should make you want to vomit.

Of course Fauci and his minions have moved on from just experimenting on animals.

Today, innocent people all over the globe are the guinea pigs.

And it turns out that Fauci’s NIH is now publicly admitting to funding incredibly twisted research on “a bat coronavirus” at the Wuhan Insitute of Virology just before the pandemic hit…

White House coronavirus adviser Dr. Anthony Fauci and National Institutes of Health Director Francis Collins have declared under oath that they did not fund the dangerous gain-of-function virus research in China that now is believed be the origin of the COVID-19 pandemic.

But now the NIH has admitted in a letter to the leading Republican on the House Oversight Committee that the U.S. funded an experiment at the Wuhan Insitute of Virology in which a bat coronavirus was modified, creating a virus that made mice “sicker” than the original virus.

We all know the rest of the story.

But after everything that has transpired, Fauci and his minions are still treated like heroes, and that is because we have a national love affair with evil.

If you doubt this, just consider the “holiday” that is coming up.  It is a festival of evil, darkness and death, and yet Americans will spend more than 1o billion dollars celebrating it this year…

The 2021 Halloween season is breaking the bank this year.

According to the National Retail Federation’s annual survey, Americans are expected to spend $10.14 billion this year on Halloween-related items. The price tag grew by $2 billion in comparison to last year’s numbers.

Unless you are already sold out to evil, why in the world would anyone want to celebrate such a “holiday”?

By now, pretty much everyone understands that our modern “Halloween” comes directly from a very wicked ancient pagan festival known as “Samhain”.

Over the years, many have told me that they just celebrate Halloween for some “innocent fun” and that the holiday doesn’t mean anything evil to them.

But what if you celebrated a Satanic black mass and put a bunch of “positive” labels on all of the various elements of that ritual?

Would that make it okay?

Of course not.

Giving evil an “alternative” name does not transform it into something good.

So stop pretending.

Fauci and his minions call the evil they are committing “scientific research”, and millions upon millions of Americans are willing to go along with their torture of animals “for the greater good”.

Of course “the greater good” is now being used to justify all sorts of nightmarish crimes against humanity.

We live at a time when the level of evil on this planet is reaching a great crescendo, and it is truly sickening to watch.

But when things are at their darkest, that is when light is needed the most, and so let us all endeavor to be the greatest lights to this world that we possibly can.