During the 1950s, the inactivated polio vaccine created by Jonas Salk was made using rhesus monkeys that were infected with SV40, a monkey virus that was later linked to cancer in humans.
From 1955 to 1963, hundreds of millions of people worldwide — in North and South America, Canada, Europe, Asia and Africa — received the vaccines, which at the time were heralded as a medical breakthrough.
In the archived 1956 video below, you can see a propaganda piece from that era, showing just how the ill-fated vaccine was made.
“Few back then grasped that these vaccines might also be a huge, inadvertent, uncontrolled experiment in interspecies viral transmission,” a 2004 article in The Lancet noted.
1950s propaganda reveals how polio vaccine was made
While Salk’s polio vaccine was considered a medical triumph of its time, its manufacturing process leaves much to be desired.
“Welcome to modern vaccinology. A hilariously unscientific process predicated on insane barbarism, rife with fraud and immense hubris,” Inversionism wrote on X, formerly Twitter.
The investigative journalist detailed the polio vaccine’s manufacturing process outlined in the video as follows:
Put all the glassware inside a hot steam bath or sterilize it.
Import Macaca mulatta monkeys from India for the experiments.
Prepare a mixture called “medium 199” — containing 2% calf serum, 200 units/ml penicillin, 200 g/ml dihydrostreptomycin and 50 units/ml Mycostatin (nystatin Squibb); the pH of the medium was brought to 7.0 by the addition of a NaHCO3 solution.
Euthanize the monkeys, remove their kidneys, and then place the kidney into a tube and hand-mince it with scissors into small bits.
After the kidney tissue was weighed and decapsulated, they put the tissue in a centrifuge tube where they washed it in phosphate-buffered saline and placed it in a trypsinization flask. Trypsin enzymes break down the proteins, which were then centrifuged at 800-1000 RPM for 10 minutes to separate the tissue and cells.
The kidney cells are then mixed with the medium 199 and incubated (fermented, rotted essentially) at 37C for 6-8 days. By the end of the 6-8 day period, the bottles and tubes were covered with a “confluent sheet of cell growth.”
Once the medium 199 is exhausted, half is siphoned off to be replaced by fresh medium 199.
They then add the “polio virus” for the first time. 3 different strains supposedly, with no other details on the source, isolation process, or genome determination.
The bottles continue to rock for 4 days in the solution culturing, fermenting and decaying, and then it’s ready for harvesting.
Scientists then visually look at the vials under a microscope to do a “titration test” to discern how much live virus is in the solution, hand counting particles that could be ANYTHING. (very scientific …)
Next is filtration, the most egregious part. They filter the solution first through porcelain filters (heavy metal risk), and then through MULTIPLE SHEETS OF ASBESTOS to drain out any kidney tissue or stray bacteria.
(This part of the process is not disclosed in the video but is detailed in the original paper on the polio vaccine process. They made multiple trivalent vaccine pools, with some having additional additives like sodium bisulfite, along with parabens, a known carcinogen and endocrine disruptor).
Now rabbits, monkeys, guinea pigs, and chickens are injected with the “live virus” vaccine solutions … to ensure it’s free of other pathogens.
Now the “climax” of the process as they call it, inactivation. This is where they mix the vaccine solution with formaldehyde, and then let it sit together for 66-68 hours. The narrator then hilariously says “then what remains can only do good, can provide humans with protection of paralytic polio.” “The enemy of man can now become his servant.”
Then the process of mass distribution. They get these massive tanks and mix in all the solutions, adjuvants, chemicals, and ingredients for mass production and “preservation.”
Before mass administration, they do a couple of experiments on mice and monkeys to ensure the vaccine is creating enough “polio-fighting antibodies” in humans.
The remainder of the process details the various “tests” they do as the vaccine lots are distributed, before really turning up the propaganda and showing President Eisenhower’s son receiving the polio vaccine.”
Paralyzed children, deaths reported following vaccination
By 1954, a large-scale study of Salk’s polio vaccine, which included 1 million children, took place. On April 12, 1955, Salk declared the shots to be safe and effective. In addition to being given widely throughout the U.S., by 1959, 90 countries were using it.
But there were signs of problems from the start.
After mass vaccination began, some subjects became paralyzed in the limb where the vaccine was given. Recalls of 250 cases of the shots from two laboratories ensued following the reports of parasitic illness.
“There were also reports of paralysis and death in several children,” Singapore Medical Journal reported. “Investigations showed that improperly inactivated vaccine had released live virus into more than 100,000 doses of the vaccine.”
“When Salk developed his vaccine, instead of using human tissues, as did the scientists who won a Nobel Prize for first growing poliovirus in tissue culture, he used minced-up rhesus macaque monkey kidneys, which were remarkably efficient poliovirus factories.
“Those who sought to supplant Salk’s formaldehyde-inactivated vaccine with live, attenuated oral vaccine also used monkey kidney cultures. Despite a manufacturing problem that, at best, left six children who received the vaccine paralyzed in the arm, and despite concerns about wild simian viruses, Salk’s shots were declared safe and effective after 1954 field trials.
“The next year, after grudging approval by skeptical government regulators, free Salk shots were made available throughout the USA. By 1960, scientists and vaccine manufacturers knew that monkey kidneys were sewers of simian viruses.”
Americans kept in the dark about monkey virus in polio shots
It was 1959 when the late Bernice Eddy, a researcher at the National Institutes of Health, conducted a study, injecting hamsters with the rhesus monkey kidney substrate used to make the polio vaccines. The majority of them developed tumors.
“Eddy’s superiors tried to keep the discovery quiet, but Eddy presented her data at a cancer conference in New York. She was eventually demoted, and lost her laboratory,” The Atlantic reported, but soon after researchers with Merck pharmaceutical company identified the cancer-causing virus in rhesus monkey kidney cells, naming it SV40 because it was the 40th monkey virus discovered.
According to Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder and president of the National Vaccine Information Center, in a presentation before the U.S. House of Representatives in 2003:
“Sadly, the American people were not told the truth about this in 1960. The SV40 contaminated stocks of Salk polio vaccine were never withdrawn from the market but continued to be given to American children until early 1963 with full knowledge of federal health agencies.
“Between 1955 and early 1963, nearly 100 million American children had been given polio vaccine contaminated with the monkey virus, SV40.”
Did SV40 in vaccines cause cancer?
While there wasn’t an “epidemic” of cancers that followed the widespread administration of polio vaccines contaminated with SV40, which suggests the virus alone may not be causing the cancers, researchers noted, “it seems possible that SV40 may act as a cofactor in the pathogenesis of some tumors.”
As further reported in Oncogene, at least three independent scientific panels agreed that “there is compelling evidence that SV40 is present in some human cancers and that SV40 could contribute to the pathogenesis of some of them.”
For instance, research published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1992 revealed that half the choroid plexus tumors and most of the ependymomas studied contained a segment of the T-antigen gene related to SV40.
“These results suggest that SV40 or a closely related virus may have an etiologic role in the development of these neoplasms during childhood,” the researchers wrote.
In 2002, meanwhile, The Lancet published evidence showing SV40 is significantly associated with some types of non-Hodgkin lymphoma after detecting it in 42% of non-Hodgkin lymphomas tested.
And in a 2004 review of the then-available evidence, it’s noted:
“Persuasive evidence now indicates that SV40 is causing infections in humans today and represents an emerging pathogen.
“A meta-analysis of molecular, pathological, and clinical data from 1,793 cancer patients indicates that there is a significant excess risk of SV40 associated with human primary brain cancers, primary bone cancers, malignant mesothelioma, and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.”
What else is lurking in vaccines?
While the SV40 polio vaccine contamination occurred decades ago, the controversy continues, as does the potential for present-day vaccines to be contaminated.
Research by cellular and molecular biologist Judy Mikovits, Ph.D., showed that many of our vaccines are contaminated with gammaretroviruses.
How did this happen?
In short, vaccine viruses were replicated and grown in animal cell cultures that were already contaminated with retroviruses. In other words, the root of the problem stems from the use of contaminated cell culture lines, similar to the problems with the original polio vaccine.
Meanwhile, microbiologist Kevin McKernan — a former researcher and team leader for the MIT Human Genome project — assessed the nucleic acid composition of four expired vials of the Moderna and Pfizer mRNA COVID-19 shots.
“DNA contamination that exceeds the European Medicines Agency (EMA) 330ng/mg requirement and the FDA’s 10ng/dose requirements” was found.
In addition to the spike protein and mRNA in COVID-19 shots, McKernan’s team discovered SV40 promotors.
McKernan explains that in many cases, when tumors are sequenced they’re found to contain sequences from SV40 and other viruses, which can integrate into your genome, causing disruptions and instability that can trigger the cell line to grow out of control.
In the case of COVID-19 shots, he says:
“The concern is if this DNA integrates the genome, one portion of the SV40 sequence is an SV40 promoter, a very strong promoter, which means it drives transcription wherever it lands in the genome.
“If this happens to drop itself in front of a proto-oncogene [a gene that has the potential to cause cancer] and drives a lot of expression off of a gene that’s known, if you hyper-express it and turn the cell cancerous, then we have a concern that DNA is in fact doing that.”
McKernan and colleagues have tried to spread the word about SV40 promotors and components in COVID-19 shots, but the media continue to try to discredit their findings,
much like what occurred with SV40 in the original polio vaccines.
Further, as for why the SV40 promoter and enhancer are in COVID-19 shots in the first place, it’s again related to the plasmid growth medium, which in this case is E. coli.
Since many types of cells continue to be used as growth mediums during vaccine production, including animal cell strains from chickens, dogs, monkeys, hamsters and insects, as well as cells from bacteria or yeast, and vaccines continue to be fast-tracked to market, it’s more important than ever for scientists and manufacturers to ensure that the treatment or preventative isn’t causing more harm than good.
The recent sparring between Elon Musk and the despicable Jonathan Greenblatt of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) has cast considerable light on the successful attempts by Jewish groups to dominate America’s foreign as well as some domestic policies, in part by taking away the First Amendment right to Freedom of Speech so their behavior cannot be challenged. As readers of Unz will be aware, Musk has threatened to sue the ADL for as much as $22 billion for defaming him and doing material damage to his business interests while also falsely smearing Musk himself and the platform for allegedly providing an antisemitic haven for “hate speech.” In Musk’s view, the ADL has put pressure on potential advertisers not to do business with him and to engage in a total boycott of his social networking sites.
Greenblatt’s argument is that material that he considers to be anti-semitic should not be allowed on any public forum, to include Musk’s site X, formerly known as Twitter. If Greenblatt were concerned with public incitements to kill Jews or damage their property there might be a case to be made, but the fact is that such behavior is already criminalized. Greenblatt is much more expansive than that, condemning any criticism of Jewish group or even individual behavior or the actions of Israel, which have included various war crimes and crimes against humanity to include targeting and killing Palestinian children and harvesting the organs of Palestinian prisoners. Israel is also a nation that is increasingly ethnically exclusive and has a state religion that is intolerant and repressive of other creeds, to include minority Christians and Muslims.
Beyond Musk, Greenblatt and the ADL have also focused on Tucker Carlson given his high profile and popularity among conservatives. Greenblatt repeatedly demanded that Fox News fire Tucker for discussing the “great replacement” theory as well as other white-nationalist talking points. Greenblatt has denounced Carlston’s alleged willingness “To use his platform as a megaphone to spread the toxic, antisemitic, and xenophobic ‘great replacement theory’ is a repugnant and dangerous abuse of his platform.” He called on advertisers to stop supporting the Carlson program and Fox with their dollars and was delighted when Carlson was finally fired in April. Many believe that the firing was in large part due to pressure from ADL and other Jewish groups.
In other words, in the America envisioned by Greenblatt and his friends who are pressuring advertisers not to support sites like X and passing laws penalizing or even criminalizing anyone who seeks to boycott Israel over its behavior, it will be more-or-less possible to speak freely on any subject as long as it does not involve Jews. That suggests an assumption by ADL that Jews have special status not enjoyed by anyone else. As a result Jews have been able to exploit their alleged singular and perpetual victimhood to assume de facto control over media sources of information as well as both major political parties using that old tried and true mechanism, money, and lots of it. It is a subject that in itself will not be open to discussion and which Greenblatt dismisses as an anti-semitic trope amounting to “hate speech.”
Interestingly enough, the wrath of Greenblatt is apparently not shared by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is regarded as no shrinking violet when it comes to promoting his country’s interests, as he sees them, and the dominance of Jewry worldwide. Netanyahu was in the United States last week for the annual meeting of the United Nations General Assembly but he made time to fly to California to visit Musk’s Tesla car assembly plant. The two men sat down to have a public chat in front of news cameras and, while it was clear that they were being polite and non-combative, it was also true that Netanyahu was careful not to accuse Musk of being an anti-semite or anything like that.
Netanyahu, who may have a better understanding than does Greenblatt of which way the wind is blowing regarding his country and Jewish power in general, might be playing a clever game in which he avoids a hard edged and dangerous Greenblatt approach while proceeding quietly with the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians and aggrandizing himself in power through his attack on the country’s courts. Netanyahu clearly understands that Israel has crossed the apartheid threshold vis-à-vis Palestine and its neighbors and that most of the world despises his country, to include many Americans who are beginning to see the light that they have been used and abused for the past 75 years. He has chosen to ignore the critics as the wisest path, in which he may be correct.
How have Jews in America and Canada as well as in Europe and Australasia become so politically powerful? Now that Musk has opened the door to discussing the Jewish issue with some candor, a number of articles and discussions have begun to appear in the media and some universities have even developed enough of a spine to start teaching true narratives on the Middle East supported by books that groups like ADL are seeking to ban. The most powerful piece to appear recently was on Mondoweiss, entitled “Biden’s Israel Policy is Scripted by Saban.”
Mondoweiss’s title refers to Israeli-American Hollywood-based media producer Haim Saban, who sums up his political philosophy with a pithy “I’m a one issue guy and my issue is Israel!” Saban has been the largest individual donor to the Democratic Party since the Clintons and his power has resulted in unswerving fealty to US interests as perceived through the optic of its relationship with the Jewish state. He is similar to megadonor Sheldon Adelson, now deceased, who performed the same service with the Republican Party. Sheldon’s wife Miriam, an Israeli, has maintained the legacy of keeping the GOP in line through control of political donations. The Adelsons were reportedly responsible for Donald Trump’s move of the US Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem and other concessions re the Palestinians, Iranians and Syrians. The withdrawal of the US from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) was due to pressure from the Adelsons, a move that was contrary to the actual US interest to monitor Iranian nuclear developments. Sheldon’s only failure was failing to convince Trump to bomb Iran.
Saban, who recently spent three hours in the Oval Office advising Joe Biden, is most clearly seen through his own comments on the relationship between the US and Israel. Hint: Israel’s interests always come first! For example, he shrugged off criticism of his giving money to AIPAC, “which supports Republican election deniers, because his one issue is Israel” saying in an interview: “The only goal of this organization is to prevent people who are against US-Israel relations from advancing and to support those who support relations between Jerusalem and Washington… Many Democrats called me and said ‘are you stupid? you’re a Democrat who supports [2020 election deniers]?’ I always say the same thing: It’s a specific, defined issue, and that is the US-Israel relationship. In that sense, I’m not interested in anything else.”
Re the Democratic Party leadership and Joe Biden, Saban observed that the party is “still solidly pro-Israel, and there are only about a dozen members of Congress who are anti-Israel.” Saban funded Hillary Clinton in 2008 but responded angrily when Obama “refused to echo Hillary Clinton’s call to ‘obliterate’ Iran if Iran attacked Israel.” Saban did not trust Obama on the issue of Israel and was initially rebuffed when he tried to arrange a meeting in 2010. He told a journalist that “I had a list of questions… And Chicago’—Obama campaign headquarters—‘could not organize that meeting. … I was ready and willing to be helpful, but ‘helpful’ is not to write a check for two thousand three hundred dollars. It’s to raise millions, which I am fully capable of doing.” Obama eventually came to respect Saban’s millions. “By 2013, President Obama was the speaker at a fundraiser at the Sabans’ house in L.A. attended by 120 people who paid between $16,200 and $32,400 each to attend.”
The result of the largesse is that Biden’s policy on the Middle East is now being scripted by Haim Saban, whose millions he requires for the upcoming 2024 campaign. It is as simple as that, appreciating that donation of cash in hand is better than platitudes about suffering Palestinians. That is what constitutes “truth” for both major political parties, who are de facto owned by the Adelsons and the Sabans who will always place Israel first. That Saban and Adelson (who is buried in Jerusalem) were and are both Israeli citizens and have been allowed to wield such power on behalf of a foreign country with which the US shares almost nothing in the way of actual values is shameful and it is also technically illegal or possibly even treasonous as they are acting as Foreign Agents. And it is more than that morally speaking – it is a disgrace. Joe Biden in particular should be ashamed of his folding when confronted by Jewish money as he is in charge, but it is apparently not an emotion that he is familiar with.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org.
Male mice fed doses of aspartame far lower than the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recommends got slower and dumber working through a maze — a literal and metaphorical test of human intelligence since ancient times, before Homer wrote of Theseus chasing the Minotaur through the mythic labyrinth in the “Iliad.”
According to a study published Aug. 31 in Scientific Reports, the mice passed on the learning and memory deficits to their first-generation offspring — but not second-generation offspring.
The researchers studied males and not females because they were looking for problems caused only by genes and not by direct exposure. Fetuses developing inside an exposed female would experience both.
Aspartame, an artificial sweetener found in more than 6,000 foods and medicines, has been linked to heart disease, obesity, mood disorders and other serious health issues. In the U.S., it’s sold under the brand names Equal and Nutrasweet.
Researchers led by Pradeep Bhide, Ph.D., at the Florida State University College of Medicine, provided adult 8-week-old male mice with free access to drinking water containing either 0.015% or 0.03% (by weight) of aspartame.
A third group of control mice drank plain water.
“A key public health implication of our findings,” the authors wrote, “is that the population at risk of aspartame’s adverse effects on learning and memory may be larger than current estimates, which consider the directly exposed individuals only. Our findings underscore the need for considering heritable effects as part of the safety evaluation of artificial sweeteners by regulatory agencies.”
Mice in the 0.015% and 0.03% aspartame groups consumed, on average, 43.2 milligrams and 86.4 milligrams of aspartame per kilogram of body weight per day.
“Milligrams per kilogram” (mg/kg), is a way to express dosages relative to a subject’s weight, to account for a larger subject requiring a larger dose to obtain a specific effect.
The FDA-recommended maximum daily intake value of aspartame for humans is 50 mg/kg but most consumers take in much less — 4.1 mg/kg.
Mice in the lower-concentration aspartame group received approximately this dose, while those in the 0.030% group got about twice the average daily intake. So low and high dosages were just 8.2% and 16.4% of the maximum “safe” agency-recommended intake, respectively.
Bihde’s study design was typical for mouse experiments except for his focus on male mice and their male or female offspring. Most studies examining the heritability of characteristics use female study animals.
He selected this mouse strain because a previous study showed the animals neither preferred nor avoided aspartame in drinking water, nor did they experience changes in weight or metabolism after exposure.
Aspartame recently was in the news as a possible cancer-causing agent. Based on what it termed “limited evidence” the World Health Organization considers the sweetener, at a maximum daily exposure limit of 40 mg/kg, as “possibly carcinogenic [cancer-causing] to humans.” WHO does not recommend using artificial sweeteners for weight control.
U.S. regulators disagree with the WHO’s position and even recommend a higher daily maximum intake.
As The Defender reported last week, industry representatives are paying dietary influencers on social media to promote artificially and naturally sweetened products to children.
Testing: How did the mice perform?
Mice in all three dosage groups underwent regular cognitive testing during the study. Researchers found deficits in spatial working memory in treated mice relative to controls at 4 weeks, an effect that persisted at weeks 8 and 12.
No differences between high- and low-dose groups were evident.
The spatial learning and memory test used a maze to determine how long it took mice to find a way out and the number of mistakes they made before escaping. This test began at 14 weeks after initial dosing and continued for 10 consecutive days.
Mice typically improved over time on this test, which was true for all three groups.
But mice ingesting aspartame found their way out of the maze much more slowly than control animals. Again, no difference was noticed between treatment groups.
“Learned helplessness,” a term from human psychology, describes a feeling of being stuck in a situation or circumstance and being “paralyzed” from acting.
Psychologists use learned helplessness tests to characterize depressive episodes. Animals undergoing learned helplessness testing are observed for how hard they try to avoid an apparently inescapable bad situation, for example, an electric shock.
To assess learned helplessness Bhide and co-authors used a tail suspension test, which involves hanging mice upside down by their tails to quantify the effort they expend in pulling up and righting themselves. They found no difference here between aspartame and control groups.
Cognitive dysfunction: the next generations
Treated and control mice were bred with stock females to produce second-generation test animals. Litters were of normal size, with pups meeting normal developmental milestones. However, several deficits noted in the original test mice were also seen in these unexposed animals.
The effects on spatial working memory for treated vs. control fathers were particularly pronounced. Offspring of both dosage groups also showed significant learning deficits compared to the control lineage.
But no differences were apparent between offspring of low- and high-dose aspartame fathers, or for reversal learning — a measure of how an animal unlearns old, ineffective behavior and develops new problem-solving strategies.
Deficits among first-generation mice in learned helplessness were also not evident.
To eliminate the question of whether these effects are a permanent part of the animals’ DNA, vs. a temporary effect on sperm cells, researchers bred first-generation males to produce second-generation litters.
To simplify their analysis they compared learning test responses of second-generation control group offspring only to the second-generation higher aspartame dosage group but found no second-generation effects.
Why just male mice?
Bhide’s focus on paternal lineage is unusual for inter-generational toxin exposure studies. Historically, most investigations consider only maternal exposures, particularly on events occurring during pregnancy or nursing.
Since a father’s biological involvement ends at conception, intergenerational effects must occur through effects on exposed males’ sperm cells. If these effects had been permanent, second-generation mice as well as first-generation offspring would show learning deficits, but this was not observed.
Until relatively recently, biologists believed that acquired characteristics were not heritable. While this remains true for most traits, scientists now recognize the potential for certain drug, food or toxic exposures to turn genes on or off temporarily.
Epigenetics is the emerging science describing how certain life events, including toxic exposures, may act as temporary genetic switches.
Epigenetics also explains how a drug or pesticide might cause harm to individuals with no history of exposure, and how this effect eventually disappears.
The alternative — permanent genetic damage — would continue to affect offspring for generations. The effects of aspartame lasted only one generation, which is consistent with transient, reversible epigenetic alterations to sperm cells.
Considering epigenetic effects, and not just direct contact with toxins, amplifies the potential harms of certain exposures and expands the scope of potential consequences to exposure that regulators should consider before licensing or approving certain products.
Angelo DePalma, Ph.D., is a science reporter/editor for The Defender.
US President Joe Biden initially planned on destroying the Nord Stream gas pipelines to deter Russia from launching its military operation in Ukraine, American journalist Seymour Hersh reported on Tuesday. However, Hersh alleged that the sabotage operation went ahead later not to deter Russia, but to damage the German economy.
The Nord Stream 1 and 2 gas pipelines, which connected Russia and Germany through the Baltic Sea, were destroyed in a series of underwater explosions exactly a year ago on Tuesday. Competing theories have emerged as to who was to blame, with mainstream media in the West blaming a Ukrainian commando unit and Seymour Hersh claiming that the CIA carried out the operation under direct orders from Biden.
In a blog post on Tuesday, Hersh alleged that US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan convened a series of meetings in late 2021, tasking intelligence officials with coming up with a means of deterring Russian President Vladimir Putin from sending troops into Ukraine.
“The White House’s policy was to deter Russia from an attack,” an intelligence source told Hersh. “The challenge it gave to the intelligence community was to come up with a way that was powerful enough to do that, and to make a strong statement of American capability.”
By January, as Russian forces were massing on the Ukrainian border, the CIA had “solved the problem,” the source said. With a plan in place to plant remotely-detonated explosives on the pipelines under the Baltic Sea, Biden warned in early February that in the event of military action by Russia, “there will no longer be a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it.”
Following Biden’s statement, which was delivered alongside German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, the CIA team tasked with sabotaging the pipelines received new orders, Hersh claimed. Instead of immediately destroying Nord Stream, the team was instructed to plant the explosives for detonation at a later date.
“It was then that we understood that the attack on the pipelines was not a deterrent because as the war went on we never got the command,” a member of the team told Hersh.
“We realized that the destruction of the two Russian pipelines was not related to the Ukrainian war,” the source continued. “But was part of a neocon political agenda to keep Scholz and Germany, with winter coming up and the pipelines shut down, from getting cold feet and opening up.”
According to Hersh’s earlier reporting, CIA divers planted the explosives last summer with the help of the Norwegian navy, using a NATO exercise in the region as cover. By the time the bombs were triggered in September, the flow of Russian gas to Germany via Nord Stream 1 had already been slowed to a trickle by Russia in response to Western sanctions, while Nord Stream 2 was never certified to begin operation by Scholz’s government. However, with the German economy heavily dependent on Russian gas, Biden reportedly feared that Scholz would choose reproachment with Moscow over support for Ukraine.
“The President of the United States would rather see Germany freeze than [see] Germany possibly stop supporting Ukraine,” Hersh declared earlier this year.
So we all remember the rhetorical question I asked three years ago, right? Who will fact check the fact checkers? Well, guess what. It isn’t a rhetorical question. It’s a real question with a real answer: I will! That’s right, let’s roll up our sleeves and get to work dismantling the dissembling disinfo dissertations of the would-be fact checkers and make fun of the clowns on the front lines of the infowar.
For those with limited bandwidth, CLICK HERE to download a smaller, lower file size version of this episode.
Canada’s special envoy to combat antisemitism is actually a government emissary to promote Jewish supremacy. In a stark example of the Liberals’ anti-Palestinian policies, they have given public resources and prestige to an aggressive apartheid proponent.
Last Friday foreign affairs minister Mélanie Joly tweeted, “I spoke with Canada’s Special Envoy on Preserving Holocaust Remembrance and Combatting Antisemitism Irwin Cotler today, where I congratulated him on his Israel Presidential Medal of Honour. Irwin, Canada is stronger because of your work to advance human rights everywhere.”
Cotler was one of 13 individuals recently given a prize by President Isaac Herzog for making “an extraordinary contribution to the State of Israel, the Jewish people, and all humanity.”
The apartheid state is right to celebrate Cotler. Married to a “close confidant” of Likud founder Menachem Begin, Cotler has committed his adult life to promoting colonialism. The former Liberal justice minister continues this work even as fascistic, Jewish supremacist extremists, have taken the reins of power in Israel.
In a sign of his devotion to apartheid, Canada’s Special Envoy on Preserving Holocaust Remembrance and Combatting Antisemitism recently co-wrote a National Post commentary in support of blocking the World Court from releasing a legal opinion on Palestine. In “Canada must continue to defend Israel against baseless United Nations attack”, Cotler responded (indirectly) to criticism of the Trudeau government submitting a statement opposing an International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory opinion as per a UN General Assembly resolution titled “Israeli Practices Affecting the Human rights of the Palestinian People in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem”. The resolution requested the UN legal authority deliver an advisory opinion on “the legal consequences arising from the ongoing violation by Israel of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination.” Cotler and the Trudeau government don’t believe the ICJ should assent to the General Assembly’s request to provide its legal opinion!
Previously, Cotler pressed the International Criminal Court to ignore Israeli war crimes and for Ottawa to relocate its embassy to Jerusalem. He’s attended events put on by the racist Jewish National Fund and met with far-right colonists seeking to cleanse occupied East Jerusalem of Palestinians. In May 2021 the former president of the Canadian Jewish Congress rallied behind Israel’s violence and earlier defended its shooting of ‘march of return’ protesters in Gaza as well as the 2014 and 2009 attacks on Gaza that left nearly 4,000 dead. Just after Israel killed 1,200 Lebanese in the summer of 2006 Cotler spoke to a conference of top Israeli military officials on the importance of managing the message in modern war.
As part of his government’s multifaceted contribution to Palestinian dispossession, Justin Trudeau made Cotler Canada’s inaugural special envoy three years ago. The envoy has $1.1 million to spend annually promoting the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s anti-Palestinian definition of antisemitism and protecting Israel from growing criticism. (A recent Ekos poll found that 38 per cent of Canadians with an opinion believe Israel maintains a system “similar to apartheid” and 20 percent labelled it a state that “restricted minority rights” while only 11 per cent consider it a “vibrant democracy.”). In a sign of his comfort with crying victimhood to enable supremacism, Cotler took on probably the only Canadian named by an official university inquiry to have fabricated claims of antisemitism to smear Palestine solidarity activists. Despite a 2017 McGill University inquiry concluding as much about Noah Lew, Cotler hired Lew as a policy and program analyst.
A Canadian Jewish News article about Cotler receiving the Israeli presidential prize offers some insight into Cotler’s commitment to denouncing human rights violations by enemies of the US empire. “I am feeling delighted at the recognition of my father for his tremendous work advancing human rights and doing so while making it very clear that it is synonymous with upholding the right of the State of Israel”, said Michal Cotler-Wunsh, a former member of the Israeli Knesset. Recently made Israel’s Special Envoy for Combating Antisemitism, Cotler-Wunsh’s comment suggests her father’s human rights campaigning is designed to build establishment credibility to better promote Jewish supremacy in Israel.
In a concrete example, Cotler’s Raoul Wallenberg Centre for Human Rights invited the new Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Karim Khan, to deliver its 2023 Elie Wiesel Distinguished Lectureship in Human Rights. According to the information available online, the May meeting wasn’t specifically about Israel. But does anybody believe the lecture wasn’t partly designed to influence the ICC prosecutor as part of the apartheid lobby’s aggressive campaign to have the court ignore Israel’s war crimes?
Another example of Cotler using his ‘human rights’ standing to advance Jewish supremacy is his response to calling Israel an apartheid state. Prior to all the major human rights groups finding that Israel was committing the crime of apartheid, Cotler repeatedly responded to activists’ claims that Israel was an apartheid state by invoking his role in challenging the “real” version in South Africa.
Cotler has succeeded in getting the dominant media to relay the idea he was central to the struggle against apartheid in South Africa and Nelson Mandela’s lawyer, which is a distortion well detailed in “Irwin Cotler And The Mandela Effect”. As being against South African apartheid has taken on greater mainstream status, Cotler has increasingly sought to identify as a leader in that struggle despite the fact he has a well-known association with the party that refused a House of Commons request to condemn Mandela’s imprisonment (Lester Pearson in 1964) and opposed taking action to lessen Canadian complicity with the racist regime (Pierre Trudeau 1968 – 84).
Cotler’s tale about struggling to oppose South African apartheid garners him moral standing to deflect criticism of Israeli apartheid. It also helps obscure the links/similarities between Israel and the South African regime.
When Cotler received the Lantos Foundation for Human Rights & Justice prize – named after arch Zionist former Democrat Congressman Tom Lantos who promoted both US invasions of Iraq – the Globe and Mail published a story headlined “Canadian Irwin Cotler, who helped free Mandela, given prestigious human-rights award.” Even though the August article had nothing explicitly to do with the Middle East, Canadian for Justice and Peace in the Middle East pushed the Globe to correct their headline. CJPME understands that Cotler’s Mandela tale serves his anti-Palestinian agenda.
Israel has great interest in developing ‘human rights’ activists and groups that defend it (or at least ignore its crimes). Liberal minded supporters of Israel don’t want to feel that they are backing oppression and Cotler is among those who help do that.
Objectively, Cotler’s human rights campaigning in service of US imperial aims has helped defend Israeli apartheid. Any honest person who agrees that all human beings have equal rights, including Palestinians, will understand that.
On March 6, 2020, the mayor of Austin, Texas, canceled the biggest tech and arts trade show in the world, South-by-Southwest, only a week before hundreds of thousands were to gather in the city.
In an instant, with the stroke of a pen, it was all gone: hotel reservations, flight plans, performances, exhibitors, and all the hopes and dreams of thousands of merchants in the town. Economic impact: a loss $335 million in revenue at least. And that was just to the city alone, to say nothing of the broader impact.
It was the beginning of US lockdowns. It wasn’t entirely clear at the time – my own sense was that this was a calamity that would lead to decades of successful lawsuits against the Austin mayor – but it turned out that Austin was the test case and template for the entire nation and then the world.
The reason was of course Covid but the pathogen wasn’t even there. The idea was to keep it out of the city, an incredible and sudden fallback to a medieval practice that has nothing to do with modern public health understanding of how a respiratory virus should be handled.
“In six months,” I wrote at the time, “if we are in a recession, unemployment is up, financial markets are wrecked, and people are locked in their homes, we’ll wonder why the heck governments chose disease ‘containment’ over disease mitigation. Then the conspiracy theorists get to work.”
I was right about the conspiracy theorists but I had not anticipated that they would turn out to be right about nearly everything. We were being groomed for nationwide lockdowns.
At this point in the trajectory, we already knew the gradient of risk. It was not medically significant for healthy working-age adults (which still to this day the CDC does not admit). So the shutdown likely protected very few if anyone.
The extraordinary edict – worthy of a tin-pot dictator of a dark age – completely overrode the wishes of millions, all on the decision of one man, whose name is Steven Adler.
“Was the consideration between maintaining that money, effectively rolling the dice, and doing what you did?” asked Texas Monthly of the mayor.
His answer: “No.”
Clarifying: “We made a decision based on what was in the best health interest for the city. And that is not an easy choice.”
After the shocking cancellation, which overrode property rights and free will, the mayor urged all residents to go out and eat at restaurants and gather and spend money to support the local economy. In this later interview, he explained that he had no problem keeping the city open. He just didn’t want people from hither and yon – the dirty people, so to speak – to bring a virus with them.
He was here playing the role of Prince Prospero in Edgar Allan Poe’s “The Masque of the Red Death.” He was turning the capital city of Texas into a castle in which the elite could hide from the virus, an action that also became a foreshadowing of what was to come: the division of the entire country into clean and dirty populations.
The mayor further added a strange comment: “I think the spread of the disease here is inevitable. I don’t think that closing down South Bay was intended to stop the disease from getting here because it is coming. The assessment of our public health professionals was that we were risking it coming here more quickly, or in a greater way with a greater impact. And the longer we could put that off, the better this city is.”
And there we have the “flatten the curve” thinking at work. Kick the can down the road. Postpone. Delay herd immunity as long as possible. Yes, everyone will get the bug but it is always better that it happens later rather than sooner. But why? We were never told. Flatten the curve was really just prolong the pain, keep our overlords in charge as long as possible, put normal life on hold, and stay safe as long as you can.
Prolonging the pain might also have served another surreptitious agenda: let the working classes – the dirty people – get the bug and bear the burden of herd immunity so that the elites can stay clean and hopefully it will die out before it gets to the highest echelons. There was indeed a hierarchy of infection.
In all these months, no one ever explained to the American public why prolonging the period of non-exposure was always better than meeting the virus sooner, gaining immunity, and getting over it. The hospitals around the country were not strained. Indeed, with the inexplicable shutdown of medical services for diagnostics and elective surgeries, hospitals in Texas were empty for months. Health care spending collapsed.
This was the onset of the great demoralization. The message was: your property is not your own. Your events are not yours. Your decisions are subject to our will. We know better than you. You cannot take risks with your own free will. Our judgment is always better than yours. We will override anything about your bodily autonomy and choices that are inconsistent with our perceptions of the common good. There is no restraint on us and every restraint on you.
This messaging and this practice is inconsistent with a flourishing human life, which requires the freedom of choice above all else. It also requires the security of property and contracts. It presumes that if we make plans, those plans cannot be arbitrarily canceled by force by a power outside of our control. Those are bare minimum presumptions of a civilized society. Anything else leads to barbarism and that is exactly where the Austin decision took us.
We still don’t know precisely who was involved in this rash judgment or on what basis they made it. There was a growing sense in the country at the time that something was going to happen. There had been sporadic use of lockdown powers in the past. Think of the closure of Boston after the bombing in 2013. A year later, the state of Connecticut quarantined two travelers who might have been exposed to Ebola in Africa. These were the precedents.
“The coronavirus is driving Americans into unexplored territory, in this case understanding and accepting the loss of freedom associated with a quarantine,” wrote the New York Times on March 19, 2020, three days after the Trump press conference that announced two weeks to flatten the curve.
The experience on a nationwide basis fundamentally undermined the civil liberties and rights that Americans had long taken for granted. It was a shock to everyone but to young people still in school, it was utter trauma and a moment of mental reprogramming. They learned all the wrong lessons: they are not in charge of their lives; someone else is. The only way to be is to figure out the system and play along.
We now see epic learning loss, psychological shock, population-wide obesity and substance abuse, a fall in investor confidence, a shrinkage of savings reflecting less interest in the future, and a dramatic decline in public participation in what used to be normal life events: church, theater, museums, libraries, fares, symphonies, ballets, theme parks, and so on. Attendance in general is down by half and this is starving these venues of money. Most of the big institutions in large cities like New York, such as Broadway and the Met, are on life support. The symphony halls have a third empty seats despite lowering prices.
It seems remarkable that this three-and-a-half year-long war against basic liberty for nearly everyone has come to this. And yet it should not be a surprise. All ideology aside, you simply cannot maintain much less cultivate a civilized life when governments, in combination with the commanding heights of media and large corporations, treat their citizens like lab rats in a science experiment. You only end in sucking away the essence and vibrancy of the human spirit, as well as the will to build a good life.
In the name of public health, they sapped the will to health. And if you object, they shut you up. This is still going on daily.
The ruling class that did this to the country has yet to speak honestly about what transpired. It was their actions that created the current cultural, economic, and social crisis. Their experiment left the country and our lives in shambles. We’ve yet to hear apologies or even basic honesty about any of it. Instead, all we get is more misleading propaganda about how we need yet another shot that doesn’t work.
History provides many cases of a beaten down, demoralized, and increasingly poor and censored majority population being ruled over by an imperious, inhumane, sadistic, privileged, and yet tiny ruling class. We just never believed we would become one of those cases. The truth of this is so grim and glaring, and the likely explanation of what happened so shocking, that the entire subject is regarded as something of a taboo in public life.
There will be no fixing this, no crawling out from under the rubble, until we get something from our rulers other than public preening about a job well done, in ads sponsored by Pfizer and Moderna.
Jeffrey A. Tucker is Founder and President of the Brownstone Institute. He is also Senior Economics Columnist for Epoch Times, author of 10 books, including Liberty or Lockdown, and thousands of articles in the scholarly and popular press. He speaks widely on topics of economics, technology, social philosophy, and culture.
I listen attentively when doctors and other health professionals who once shilled for the covidian tactics of ‘sheltering in place’ (what a quaint euphemism for imprisonment!), masks (how much more evidence do we need to show that they are and always have been useless for viral respiratory pathogens?), and, of course, the innovative mRNA-based jab, all the while never caring to spare a breath for natural immunity or early treatment, have a change of heart.
Well, after a bit of travelling down their personal roads to Damascus and seeing a light strong enough to make them revise their former gospels, they have had their conversion, have joined our side and are now front and centre on the resistance pulpit.
I acknowledge that we need all the help we can get and I am grateful for their assistance, but I am often mindful that the explanations offered by some of them, in their hindsight, only go so far. In fact, they fall far short of an appreciation that the whole phoney covid pandemic was an ‘operation’ perpetrated upon the globe by a powerful faction that sought not only to enrich their already rich selves but to enslave us and, with their bioweapons, to kill and maim.
It wasn’t just a matter of Pfizer, Moderna and Astrazeneca licking their chops at the opportunity to make wild profits by pushing an inadequately tested agent while nervous health officials erred on the side of ‘vaccinating’ everyone who breathed as a precautionary measure based on fearful and ignorant worry … No. It was more, it was more profound, it was more devilishly destructive and centrally planned.
Yes, there was — there is — a conspiracy, not just organic goosestepping and Sierpinski triangles. It was a bunch of high-placed people who set about controlling and literallydestroying a large swath of the world’s population, deliberately, and relentlessly.
They are still going at it and with more than just the lethal Jab. The ‘reset’ they planned includes widespread censorship, the destruction of foundational principles of medicine, digital identification, social credit permissions, total surveillance, a fraudulent climate ‘emergency’ leading to further restrictions upon human autonomy, and, naturally, more and more inoculations. The scale of their operation is immense and its fruits should be visible by now to anyone who dares to think.
Ignorance and corporate greed are not the prime movers. Not to finger the Globalist Cabal for the murderers they are is to let them off the hook and to dissipate the energies of our resistance. Not to connect the dots is to be left with a picture so incomplete that responsibilities are diffused and the most significant guilty parties are at leisure to continue their machinations unscathed.
I chanced to have a conversation with a health practitioner the other night, a person who had been coerced into the Jab to preserve his job, a person who joined us at Parliament here in Wellington as we protested the mandates, a person who has worked behind the scenes to assist others in the health care system who opposed the regimen of masks, quarantine and jabs. When I asked him point-blank whether he thought there was indeed a ‘depopulation agenda’, he shook his head. It was the proverbial bridge too far, but it gave me an idea.
Those celebrated doctors and nurses, familiar to MSM audiences as mouthpieces for the Programme at the outset, who influenced countless people to toe the line — what if they, in their new shining garb within the freedom community, painted the full picture?
I still can’t explain how any self-respecting health professional could have lost his or her wits so completely in 2020 so as to have discarded the principles of their discipline. Could they really have forgotten about natural immunity and early treatment and the need for a genuine vaccine to be tested over years for safety and efficacy?
But never mind. If our new apostles of good sense can now use their heft and influence to enlighten the many who waver in the middle about the true extent and depravity and the planned coordination informing the covidian psyops, they will have atoned for their earlier lapses and complicity. But unless they have the courage to go that far, I, for one, will regard their intentions with grave suspicion.
Unless they have the guts to serve up the whole enchilada, they can take their morsels elsewhere.
Western politicians are so obsessed with the idea of delivering a “strategic defeat” to Russia that they put themselves and their own nations in danger, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told the UN General Assembly on Saturday. The prolonged feeling of impunity has made the West blind to the risks to its own survival, he added.
“A goal of inflicting a ‘strategic defeat’ upon Russia has been declared,” Lavrov said, commenting on the current policies of the US and its allies. “This obsession has ultimately blurred the vision of the reckless politicians, who feel a sense of impunity,” he warned, adding that “all the while, [they] lose the sense of self-preservation.”
The minister pointed to a recent series of NATO exercises that, he said, involved simulating scenarios of nuclear strikes against Russia. According to Lavrov, these drills, which included the troops of the US and its European allies, were “unprecedented since the end of the Cold War.”
Modern Western nations are outright rejecting the principle of equality in international relations, Lavrov said, adding that this translates into the West’s “total intractability” in any negotiations. The Europeans and Americans that are used to “looking down upon the rest of the world” are “making promises left and right, including … legally binding ones,” the minister said, adding that all these promises eventually end up being reneged-on.
“As Russian President Vladimir Putin put it, the West is now the real ‘empire of lies’,” Lavrov said.
The international community urgently needs to see the existing world order reviewed, he told the UNGA. The US and its allies should finally forgo artificially containing other nations and admit the economic and financial weight of the Global South, he said, calling for the redistribution of quotas and voting rights with the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.
The UN Security Council should also be expanded as well, to include members “representing the global majority: [the nations] of Asia, Africa and Latin America,” the Russian minister stated. Any new council members should have authorities within their regions as well as such global organizations as the Nonaligned Movement or the Islamic Cooperation Organization, he added.
For the first time since its establishment in 1945, the UN is presented with a chance “for a true democratization of international affairs,” Lavrov said, adding that it “encourages optimism in those who believe in the rule of international law and seek the UN’s revival as the central coordination body of the world politics.” Nations should agree to solve common problems together, on the basis of a “fair balance of interests,” the minister said.
There is evidence that cancers are occurring in excess after people receive COVID-19 vaccinations, according to Dr. Harvey Risch.
Dr. Risch is professor emeritus of epidemiology in the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health at the Yale School of Public Health and Yale School of Medicine. His research has focused extensively on the causes of cancer as well as prevention and early diagnosis.
In an interview for EpochTV’s “American Thought Leaders,” Dr. Risch said patients must now wait months, not weeks, to get an appointment at an oncology clinic in New York.
There is difficulty in observing whether a vaccine can cause cancer, because cancer usually takes time to develop, Dr. Risch said. It can take anywhere from two years to 30 years, depending on the different types of cancer, from leukemia to colon cancer.
“What clinicians have been seeing,” said Dr. Risch, “is very strange things: For example, 25-year-olds with colon cancer, who don’t have family histories of the disease—that’s basically impossible along the known paradigm for how colon cancer works—and other long-latency cancers that they’re seeing in very young people.”
He said this is not how cancer normally develops.
“There has to be some initiating stimulus to why this happens,” he said.
Fighting Cancer
Dr. Risch said that in his opinion, cancer is something a healthy human body can fight and disable, as the non-normal cancerous cells are gobbled up when detected in a body with a functional immune system. If the immune system is compromised, however, it cannot cope with the task of neutralizing cancerous cells, and cancerous cells are left to multiply and grow, leading to symptoms of cancer.
“That’s the mechanism I think is most likely here,” Dr. Risch said. “We know that the COVID vaccines have done various degrees of damage to the immune system in a fraction of people who have taken them.”
That damage could translate to getting COVID more often, getting other infectious diseases, or getting cancer.
Another example Dr. Risch gave was breast cancer, which normally, if there is a remanifestation after surgical removal, the remanifestation occurs after two decades. However, vaccinated women are now seen to remanifest breast cancers in much shorter periods of time.
“Those are the initial signals that we’ve been seeing, and because these cancers have been occurring to people who were too young to get them, basically, compared to the normal way it works, they’ve been designated as turbo cancers,” Dr. Risch said.
“Some of these cancers are so aggressive that between the time that they’re first seen and when they come back for treatment after a few weeks, they’ve grown dramatically compared to what oncologists would have expected for the way cancer normally progresses,” he added.
“Be attuned to your body,” Dr. Risch recommended, for noticing any new signals the body might give.
Adverse Events After Vaccination
Dr. Risch also talked about the aspect of official medical agencies not recognizing someone as being vaccinated inside the first two weeks of vaccination. This happens, he said, because the medical agencies say that the effects of the vaccine need two weeks to start manifesting. Adverse effects occurring a few days after vaccinations were officially counted as health conditions manifesting in unvaccinated people, he said.
However, serious adverse events after receiving the vaccine have occurred within the first four days, Dr. Risch said. He said three-quarters of adverse effects are being recorded as happening to unvaccinated people.
The decision makers who were in charge during the pandemic “threw out the principles of public health six days into the pandemic and did the opposite of everything that we knew should be done for respiratory viruses,” he said.
One example was the denial of effective early treatment and unnecessary vaccinations, which show a “colossal failure of public health through this period,” he said.
Dr. Risch said that a lot of people are now less likely to be “propagandized” regarding COVID, and that news reports about a new variant that is going to take over the world in the next month are “propaganda to sell the next batch of vaccines coming out in a few weeks.”
“People are fed up with this and it’s going to be a lot more pushback,” he said.
Risks to Society
Dr. Risch said that while the individual risk of an adverse reaction to the vaccine is relatively low, once that risk manifests itself at a greater scale, when millions of people have received the vaccine, the result is that hundreds of thousands of people are left with injuries and serious adverse events that are often worse than the virus itself.
Dr. Risch’s opinion is that nobody should get vaccinated with an mRNA vaccine, as the new variants are mild and not life threatening. He has heard of a few hospitalizations that lasted for some days, but as most people had COVID in the past, they have some immunity to these new variants as well.
“There is no reason for people to be vaccinated now, to any degree,” he said.
He said COVID has become an illness similar to the flu in its degree of severity, and that propaganda to scare people is being pushed by the government on behalf of pharmaceutical companies to sell more vaccines.
“We live in social contact with each other and therefore spread low-level infections. This is part of human life that we take for granted and we try to treat it the best we can,” he said. “That’s how we should be managing this.”
It started slowly at first – a trickle of concerning reports that something wasn’t right. In January 2021, just weeks after the rollout of the COVID-19 vaccines, cases of myocarditis began cropping up.
Myocarditis – inflammation of the heart muscle – had never been linked to vaccines before. So when 28 cases were reported to the U.S. vaccine adverse event reporting system (VAERS) [1] that month, it raised eyebrows.
By February, the trickle had become a stream. VAERS received 64 more reports, including two deaths [2]. Then in March, Israel [3] and the military [4] started reporting cases too.
Something strange was going on. But the authorities ignored it.
In March, the FDA authorized the Johnson & Johnson vaccine without a whisper of myocarditis [5]. The CDC soon recommended it for all adults [6]. Colleges and businesses started mandating the shots [7]. It was full speed ahead.
Behind closed doors though, alarm bells were ringing. The CDC met with the military to discuss the myocarditis cases in young troops [8]. Israel was reporting dozens of cases, including in teenagers [9]. The FDA knew from Pfizer that there were nearly 60 cases already in its database [10].
But in public, it was denial and dismissal. The CDC director claimed she wasn’t aware of any military cases [11]. Pfizer hid its database numbers [12]. And the FDA rubber stamped authorization of the Pfizer vaccine for teenagers in May without a mention of myocarditis [13].
As myocarditis reports flooded into VAERS in the hundreds during the summer [14], young, healthy people continued being pressured to get vaccinated. Mandates rolled out across the country [15]. The authorities told the public the benefits outweighed the risks [16].
But patients started sharing their stories of being hospitalized with heart problems after vaccination [17]. Researchers began publishing case reports in medical journals [18]. And still, the CDC publicly downplayed concerns [19].
Behind closed doors, officials strategized about monitoring the alarming reports [20]. They expanded the criteria for identifying myocarditis cases [21]. More hospitals confirmed seeing unusual cases in vaccinated youths [22].
In June, the FDA quietly added warnings about myocarditis to the vaccine fact sheets [23]. The news dripped out slowly that CDC advisers now acknowledged a “likely association” [24].
But the full scope remained obscured. The authorities clung to the narrative that benefits outweighed risks [25]. They used incomplete data and rosy assumptions to claim the vaccines were still worth it for young people [26].
Millions of teenagers continued getting pressured to get vaccinated throughout the summer and fall [27]. It became painfully clear that the drive for widespread vaccination took precedence over transparency and caution.
It wasn’t until October 2021 that the warnings were taken more seriously. Nordic countries limited the Moderna vaccine due to myocarditis concerns [28]. The FDA and CDC were forced to address the risks more openly in meetings [29].
But still, they pushed ahead with expanding the shots to younger ages [30]. Five-year-olds started getting vaccinated in November despite a complete lack of safety data [31]. Booster doses were promoted for teenagers against the advice of their European counterparts [32].
The evidence continued piling up into 2022 that the vaccines were inflaming hearts [33]. Young people, almost all male, were suffering severe outcomes [34]. The FDA fully approved the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines with scarcely a mention of myocarditis [35].
Regulators around the world scaled back recommendations for boosters in young people as more safety signals emerged [36]. But the U.S. charged ahead, even permitting a fourth dose before any trial data was available [37].
Three years and over 1,600 confirmed VAERS reports later [38], the CDC finally admitted publicly that the mRNA vaccines cause myocarditis [39]. But authorities continue maintaining the stance that benefits outweigh risks across all groups [40].
Yet as researchers report finding heart abnormalities months later [41], it’s unclear if the full scope of risks is known. Some experts argue society lost sight of “first, do no harm” in the rush to vaccinate an entire population against COVID-19 [42].
Why were the early warning signs dismissed? How many ended up harmed from ignored or hidden signals [43]? And why does debate about vaccine prudence remain taboo despite mounting evidence condemning overly broad immunization policies [44]?
This story is far from over. As more studies probe long-term effects and deaths possibly caused by vaccine-induced myocarditis [45], questions will continue swirling.
The families forever changed want accountability. Recognition that mass vaccination programs failed to uphold informed consent [46]. And assurances that blindly “following the science” won’t again take precedent over individuals’ health [47].
Myocarditis turned out to be the tip of the iceberg when it came to underestimated vaccine risks [48]. Only time will tell the full scope of lives upended and lost in the race to inoculate the world [49].
Marc Dutroux, Belgian pedophile, sadist, and serial killer with friends in high places
By Aedon Cassiel | Counter – Currents | December 23, 2016
To reiterate a point that should be clear to the more astute reader, my goal in this series (part 1, part 2) has not been to defend “Pizzagate” as such. My goal has been to defend the people who want to investigate it against specific accusations levied against them by people who think Pizzagate has revealed no intriguing information at all—for a specific reason, which I will be honing in and focusing on much more directly in this closing entry.
Whereas the mainstream critics of Pizzagate would have you believe that the dividing line is between paranoid conspiracy theorist followers of “fake news” and level-headed people who follow trustworthy news sources and rely on cold, hard reason to determine the truth, my goal has been to show that—whatever is or is not happening with Pizzagate itself—this framing of the issue is arrogant, insulting, and the product of extremely narrow tunnel vision. … continue
This site is provided as a research and reference tool. Although we make every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and data provided at this site are useful, accurate, and current, we cannot guarantee that the information and data provided here will be error-free. By using this site, you assume all responsibility for and risk arising from your use of and reliance upon the contents of this site.
This site and the information available through it do not, and are not intended to constitute legal advice. Should you require legal advice, you should consult your own attorney.
Nothing within this site or linked to by this site constitutes investment advice or medical advice.
Materials accessible from or added to this site by third parties, such as comments posted, are strictly the responsibility of the third party who added such materials or made them accessible and we neither endorse nor undertake to control, monitor, edit or assume responsibility for any such third-party material.
The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded or otherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.
The word “alleged” is deemed to occur before the word “fraud.” Since the rule of law still applies. To peasants, at least.
Fair Use
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more info go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
DMCA Contact
This is information for anyone that wishes to challenge our “fair use” of copyrighted material.
If you are a legal copyright holder or a designated agent for such and you believe that content residing on or accessible through our website infringes a copyright and falls outside the boundaries of “Fair Use”, please send a notice of infringement by contacting atheonews@gmail.com.
We will respond and take necessary action immediately.
If notice is given of an alleged copyright violation we will act expeditiously to remove or disable access to the material(s) in question.
All 3rd party material posted on this website is copyright the respective owners / authors. Aletho News makes no claim of copyright on such material.
Aletho News
Aletho News 