By Richard Stockton
Published May 3, 2018Updated February 28, 2019
Inside the Aktion T4 program, the little-known Nazi euthanasia initiative that killed as many as 300,000 disabled people.
Both prior to and during the Holocaust, Nazi authorities executed a massive yet lesser-known program of targeted mass killing aimed at some of the most vulnerable people under their control: the disabled.
Starting as a euthanasia program that eliminated disabled infants and children deemed unfit to live and expanding in time to cover disabled adults and the elderly, the program ended in 1941 amid a welter of protests from many quarters of German society.
But the machinery for mass killing that this program developed would not lie idle for long. These victims — as many as 300,000 of them in total — helped the Nazis refine the methods they’d soon use to carry out the Holocaust.
This “rehearsal” for the Final Solution had no official name and was known in Germany only by the address where it was headquartered: 4 Tiergartenstraße, Berlin, which inspired the name Aktion T4.
The Roots Of The Aktion T4 Program
The ideological underpinnings of Aktion T4 were apparent in Nazi thinking from the party’s very beginnings. Nazi leaders had long preached the gospel of eugenics, calling for scientific control over Germany’s gene pool with the aim of improving it through state action.
In Mein Kampf, Adolf Hitler himself had spelled out the Nazi notion of “racial hygiene,” writing that Germany “must see to it that only the healthy beget children” using “modern medical means.” The Nazis believed this would produce Germans fit for the workforce, military service, and so on — while weeding out all others.
And as soon as the Nazis swept into power in 1933, they implemented laws that mandated sterilization for the physically and mentally disabled. It didn’t take much to become a victim of this program. Most victims were sent to be sterilized due to a vague diagnosis of “feeblemindedness,” while blindness, deafness, epilepsy, and alcoholism accounted for some of the other sterilizations.
All in all, the Nazis forcibly sterilized some 400,000 people. But once the war began in 1939, the Nazis’ plans for the disabled grew even darker.
The Test Case
In early 1939, an odd letter arrived at the office of the Nazi Party Chancellery from a German man and Nazi loyalist named Richard Kretschmar. He was trying to contact Hitler directly in hopes of gaining clearance to legally euthanize his own son, Gerhard, who had been born just a few months earlier with severe and incurable physical and mental disabilities including missing limbs, blindness, and convulsions (the original medical records are lost and secondhand accounts vary).
Kretschmar asked Hitler to let them have this “monster” put down. Hitler then sent his own physician, Dr. Karl Brandt, to look into the case. On inspection, Brandt decided the diagnosis had been correct, that he was an “idiot,” and there was no hope for improvement. Thus Gerhard was killed by lethal injection on July 25, 1939. His death certificate stated the cause of death as “heart weakness.”
Having now broken the ice, Hitler and company immediately set into a motion a plan that would call for the killing of the physically and mentally disabled in Germany en masse.
Aktion T4 Is Born
British historians Laurence Rees and Ian Kershaw made the case that the Aktion T4 program’s rapid spread was typical of the chaotic nature of Hitler’s government. In their estimation, Hitler had only to speak about something generally before some ambitious subordinate would almost instantly cobble together a full-scale program from nothing.
The sudden expansion of the Aktion T4 program would seem to exemplify that notion. Within three weeks of the killing of Gerhard Kretschmar, a fully fleshed-out bureaucracy had sprung into existence and was issuing paperwork to doctors and midwives all over Germany.
Hitler had authorized the creation of the Reich Committee for the Scientific Registering of Hereditary and Congenital Illnesses, led by Brandt and Nazi Chief of the Chancellery Philipp Bouhler, among others. These men then put a deadly system into place.
Upon the occasion of every birth, an official would have to fill out a form that included a section for describing physical or other observed defects that the child might have. Three doctors would then review the forms – without any of them actually examining the patient themselves – and mark it with a cross if they thought the child should be killed.
Two-out-of-three crosses were enough to warrant the removal of the child from their home under the guise of helping them get medical attention and then killing them. Aktion T4 was born.
As fitting as it is to imagine the Third Reich spontaneously developing a huge killing program like this overnight, it’s actually more likely that the idea had been floating around for a while prior to the first killing.
In private, Hitler and other top Nazis were prone to complaining that Britain and America (which both had eugenics laws of their own) were far ahead of Germany in their efforts to weed out undesirables via euthanasia. Back in the mid-1930s, Hitler had reportedly told subordinates that he preferred killing to sterilization but that “Such a problem could be more smoothly and easily carried out in war.”
And now, with World War II underway, the time to kill had begun.
The Methods Of Aktion T4
Whether or not the killing of Gerhard Kretschmar was part of a larger plan, what followed was a massive operation unlike anything the world had ever seen.
By the summer of 1939, hundreds of infants and young children had been removed from homes and healthcare facilities across Germany and were transported to one of six sites: Bernburg, Brandenburg, Grafeneck, Hadamar, Hartheim, and Sonnenstein. These were working asylums, so there was nothing unusual about new patients arriving and being housed in secure wards at first.
Once there, the children would typically be given fatal doses of luminal or morphine. Sometimes, however, the method of killing wasn’t so gentle.
One doctor, Hermann Pfannmüller, made a specialty of gradually starving the children to death. It was, according to him, a more natural and peaceful way to go than a harsh chemical injection that stopped the heart.
In 1940, when his facility in occupied Poland was visited by members of the German press, he hoisted one starving child over his head and proclaimed: “This one will last another two or three days!”
“The image of this fat, grinning man, with the whimpering skeleton in his fleshy hand, surrounded by other starving children, is still clear before my eyes,” one observer from that visit later recalled.
On the same visit, Dr. Pfannmüller complained about getting bad press from “foreign agitators and certain gentlemen from Switzerland,” by which he meant the Red Cross, which had been trying to inspect his hospital for nearly a year at that point.
After the early days of the program, the scope of Aktion T4 was expanded to include older children and adults with disabilities who couldn’t care for themselves. Gradually, the net was cast wider and wider and the methods of killing became more standardized.
Eventually, victims were sent directly to a killing center for “special treatment,” which by that point usually involved carbon monoxide chambers disguised as showers. Credit for inventing the “bath and disinfection” ruse goes to Bouhler himself, who suggested it as a means of keeping the victims quiet until it was too late.
High-ranking Nazis took note of this efficient method of killing and later put it to much wider use.
The Nazi Party had always had a difficult relationship with Germany’s religious community. It would be wrong to say they were forever at odds, but the church represented a separate, and largely independent, power system in the heart of what was fast becoming a dictatorship.
Early on, Catholic resistance to the Nazis led to the newly empowered party agreeing to hand over education of German children in Catholic states to the Church, while individual Protestant denominations gradually made their peace with Hitler. By about 1935, this culture war was dormant.
Or, it was, until news of the Aktion T4 program broke in 1940. Revelations about what was going on in the killing centers were bound to come out eventually, if only because the families of the victims all had nearly identical experiences: their child or disabled adult would be carted away by a charitable service working with the state, they’d get a few letters if the patient was able to write, and then there’d be a notification that their loved one had succumbed to measles and their body had been cremated as a health precaution.
No inquiries could be made and no visits were possible. It was inevitable that some families would eventually hear the same story from others and put two and two together, especially when the routine was the same across all six facilities.
Once people got wise, churches led the resistance to the Aktion T4 program by raising awareness, speaking out, and even distributing leaflets that brought the matter to the attention of many Germans for the first time.
The foreign press was even harsher on the Aktion T4 program.
In his 1941 book, The Berlin Diary, American Journalist William L. Shirer described Aktion T4 in a passage that began: “A word about a matter the Nazis would kill me over, if they knew I knew about it.” When the book was published and these words made it out of Germany, other American and British journalists did what they could but wartime secrecy largely kept the outside world in the dark.
The End Of The Aktion T4 Program
As a sop to the remaining pockets of resistance (and no doubt as a result of the fact that he had other things on his mind), Hitler finally agreed to halt the program in August 1941, after somewhere between 90,000 and 300,000 people had been killed. Virtually all of the victims were German or Austrian, and nearly half of them had been children.
But even after the ostensible halt of the killings in 1941, they eventually resumed and were simply folded into the larger program of the nascent Holocaust, making the true toll even harder to ever truly know.
This is only fitting considering that the ideologies, techniques, machinery, and personnel used in the Aktion T4 program would prove invaluable at the concentration camps of the Holocaust. In the words of the United States Holocaust Memorial and Museum:
The “euthanasia” program represented in many ways a rehearsal for Nazi Germany’s subsequent genocidal policies. The Nazi leadership extended the ideological justification conceived by medical perpetrators for the destruction of the “unfit” to other categories of perceived biological enemies, most notably to Jews and Roma (Gypsies).
And as was the case with the Holocaust as a whole, only some of the Nazis responsible for the Aktion T4 program ultimately faced justice.
Just after the war, Philipp Bouhler committed suicide after being captured. Meanwhile, the so-called Doctors’ trial of 1946-1947 saw the International Military Tribunal sentence several Nazi doctors to death for their role in the program (among other offenses), including Dr. Brandt.
Dr. Pfannmüller was ultimately convicted for his role in 440 murders in 1951 and was sentenced to five whole years in prison. Later, he successfully appealed to reduce that to four years. He was released in 1955 and died quietly as a free man at his home in Munich in 1961.
Today, a memorial stands near the former site of the Aktion T4 program’s headquarters in Berlin where Nazi officials organized a mass killing like few the world has ever seen.
After this look at the Nazi’s horrific Aktion T4 program, discover how dangerous drugs like Pervitin fueled the Nazis’ rise and fall. Then, read the horrifying tales of infamous Nazi doctor Josef Mengele.
Giancarlo Livraghi – December 2010
Also as pdf
(better for printing)
There is no end to learning. I am fifteen years late in discovering that in September, 1995 Zbigniew Brzezinski had coined a new word: tittytainment. I also didn’t know, until today, that in 2007 a Spanish author, Gabriel Sala, had developed the concept (calling it entetanimiento) in his Panfleto contra la estupidez contemporánea.
This isn’t a new subject for the readers of this website – or my books. Here as well, it has been discussed, in different ways, for fifteen years. Anyhow, it isn’t only a matter of “contemporary” stupidity. Information and communication systems have always been used to distract, confuse and deceive. Tough now the disease is developing on a new scale, with new tools, often disguised as “fun”. There is no harm in laughing about it, as long as we understand that the problem is quite serious.
Of course this isn’t just a matter of “tits”. Or other display of parts of a human body. There is nothing wrong with people dressing or undressing as they wish. Enticement, per se, isn’t reproachable. It becomes a problem when it’s overused in entertainment, not only blurring all other content but also diverting attention.
And it’s not he only tool. The distractive devices can be pleasant or unpleasant, funny or scaring, attractive or repulsive. There are many ways to lull or fuss, delude or worry, cuddle or threat, amuse or distress, with the same purpose: to deceive us into ignorance and obedience.
There is a website called tittytainment. Actually it’s only one page, placed online in August, 1999 and never developed any further. This is how it explains the meaning.
The inventor of the word “tittytainment” is Zbigniew Brzezinski, who was Jimmy Carter’s national security advisor for four years, from 1977 to 1981. [He was also co-founder with David Rockefeller, in 1973,of the Trilateral Commission, “a private organization established to foster closer cooperation among the United States, Europe and Japan”. He is now a senior advisor in President Barack Obama’s staff.]
He first used the word at a discussion with several world leaders who gathered at the Fairmont Hotel in San Fancisco at the invitation of the Father of Glasnost and Perestroika, Mikhael Gorbachev, late September 1995.
The discussion concerned “the future of work”. They sketched out a new social order and everybody there seemed to agree that in the society of the 21st century, 20 % of the people will have work and 80 % will be kept docile, as if in a state of semi-hypnosis, by means of what Zbigniew Brzezinski called “tittytainment”: a mixture of deadeningly predictable, lowest common denominator entertainment for the soul, and nourishment for the body.
The word “tittytainment” is built up from “tits” and “entertainment”, akin to mothers nursing and conditioning children with a plug-in drug.
Fifteen years later, there is no memory of that meeting – as of other meaningless forecasting for the 21st century. We are having quite different problems with the economy and work (and also with “glasnost” and “perestroika”). But tittytainment is, indeed, with us – and getting worse.
The easiest way to enforce the will of power is violence, combined with no freedom of information. It’s still used with remorseless cruelty in many parts of the world. But, when and where such brutal control isn’t possible, “tittytainment” becomes a prevailing tool. It’s interesting to note that, when the word was coined, the implied meaning wasn’t only cleavage – but also the breast-feeding of acquiescence (and therefore stupidity). The metaphor is perversely clear. Cuddle into obedience. Lull to deceive.
Good parents, as well as good teachers, know that their role is not only to educate and protect children, but also to help them in growing up and becoming independent. This is not the intention of those who wish to keep us “childish” for all our life.
Is there something basically wrong with entertainment, fun, play, relaxing, amusement? Of course not. But they become a disease when they are used to disguise information and to replace knowledge, thought, freedom, culture – and responsibility. Before we try to reach a conclusion, let’s see how Gabriel Sala defines entetanimiento in his “pamphlet”.
«“Entetanimiento” is a mixture of mediocre and trivial entertainment, intellectual garbage, propaganda, psychological and physically nourishing elements, with the purpose of satisfying human beings and keeping them conveniently tranquillized, perennially anxious, submitted and servile to the will of the oligarchy that decides their destiny without allowing them any opinion on the subject.»
«“Entetanimiento” is the best alibi provider that has ever existed, the prism through which we can observe the world without feeling guilty or obliged to take responsibility for our actions.»
I that comfortable? So the tittytainers would like us to believe. But if we allow them to lock us into a mental prison, we can’t choose the environment. And our nourishment is whatever muck someone decides to feed us.
Is it done deliberately? Obviously. But not only. The pushers are intoxicated by their own poison. By spreading foolishness, they become foolish. I had explained this syndrome in 2002 as The Vicious Circle of Stupidity – that later became chapter 18 of The Power of Stupidity (with more diagnoses of the contagion in other parts of the book).
There are relevant reasons why some observations on this subject are also in The contradictions of “meritocracy” (April 2011) – and, fifty years ago, something quite similar to “tittytainment” was suggested by Michael Young, as the repressive tool of a new oligarchy, in The Rise of the Meritocracy (the book in which the word “meritocracy” was used for the first time.)
This isn’t a new problem. We can trace it back to the origin of humanity. But now it has reached a different size and perspective, with the “abundance paradox”. The quantity of information is enormous – and growing. If we aren’t prevented by prohibition or censorship, we can all find access to “almost everything”. But seeking and finding isn’t easy. And, in addition to the limitations and warping of our environment, there is more misinformation being constantly generated around the world. Nonsense and silliness, deceit and manipulation, can reach us by means of someone who isn’t trying to confuse us, but didn’t have the time, or the ability, to check the source or understand the meaning.
Should we fall into a state of anxiety and fear, mistrust everything and everybody, suspect mischief and trickery even where they aren’t? No. The remedy could be worse than the illness.
There is a simpler, and less uncomfortable, solution. Insatiable curiosity. An unceasing desire to learn and understand, seizing every opportunity to think with our own mind. Is it challenging? Yes – but pleasantly. With a bit of practice it becomes instinctive, spontaneous, intuitive. When we succeed, it’s always stimulating. Often interesting – and also quite amusing.
Gates told CBS News we might need a third shot of a currently available vaccine, or a “modified” vaccine as the virus mutates, but CHD’s RFK, Jr. asks why we haven’t focused instead on non-vaccine strategies, including therapeutic drugs.
With more than 40 million Americans having received at least the first dose of the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine, a third dose may be needed to prevent the spread of new variants of the disease, Bill Gates told CBS News Tuesday.
Pfizer and Moderna have stated that their vaccines are 95% and 99% effective, respectively, against the initial strain of COVID. However, some scientists have questioned those statements. Additionally, the World Health Organization and vaccine companies have conceded that the vaccines do not prevent people from being infected with COVID or from transmitting it, but are only effective at reducing symptoms.
Gates told CBS Evening News:
“The discussion now is do we just need to get a super high coverage of the current vaccine, or do we need a third dose that’s just the same, or do we need a modified vaccine?”
U.S. vaccine companies are looking at making modifications, which Gates refers to as “tuning.”
People who have had two shots may need to get a third shot and people who have not yet been vaccinated would need the modified vaccine, explained Gates. When asked whether the coronavirus vaccine would be similar to the flu vaccine, which requires yearly boosters, Gates couldn’t rule that out. Until the virus is eradicated from all humans, Gates said, additional shots may be needed in the future.
“AstraZeneca in particular has a challenge with the variant,” Gates explained. “And the other two, Johnson & Johnson and Novavax, are slightly less effective, but still effective enough that we absolutely should get them out as fast as we can while we study this idea of tuning the vaccine.”
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is funding the studies being conducted in Brazil and South Africa, CBS News said. The foundation has also invested in the AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson and the Novavax vaccines, which are being tested against new variants. Once the AstraZeneca vaccine is approved, the Global Alliance for Vaccine Initiative or GAVI, founded by Gates, will distribute it globally.
“Gates continues to move the goalposts,” said Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., chairman and chief legal counsel of Children’s Health Defense. “Meanwhile the strategies he and others have promoted are obliterating the global economy, demolishing the middle class, making the rich richer and censoring vaccine safety advocates, like me.”
Kennedy said that the exclusive focus on vaccines has prevented the kind of progress required to actually address and recover from the pandemic:
“From the pandemic’s outset, clear-headed people familiar with the challenges inherent in the vaccine model have understood that the path out of crisis would require multiple steps. Those steps would need to include the development and/or identification of therapeutic drugs, the sharing of information among doctors to hone improved treatment models that reduce infection mortality rates below those for flu, and the kind of broad-spectrum long-term herd immunity that protects against mutant strains and that only derives from natural infection.”
Instead, Gates and vaccine makers are proposing a lifetime of boosters, supporting insufficient testing to determine safety and failing to address the inadequate monitoring of vaccine injuries, Kennedy said.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Children’s Health Defense.
The Misconception: If you are in a bad situation, you will do whatever you can do to escape it.
The Truth: If you feel like you aren’t in control of your destiny, you will give up and accept whatever situation you are in.
In 1965, a scientist named Martin Seligman started shocking dogs.
He was trying to expand on the research of Pavlov – the guy who could make dogs salivate when they heard a bell ring. Seligman wanted to head in the other direction, and when he rang his bell instead of providing food he zapped them with electricity. To keep them still, he restrained them in a harness during the experiment.
After they were conditioned, he put these dogs in a big box with a little fence dividing it into two halves. They figured if they rang the bell, the dog would hop over the fence to escape, but it didn’t. It just sat there and braced itself. They decided to try shocking them after the bell. The dog still just sat there and took it. When they put a dog in the box which had never been shocked before and tried to zap it – it jumped the fence.
You are just like these dogs.
If, over the course of your life, you have experienced crushing defeat or pummeling abuse or loss of control, you learn over time there is no escape, and if escape is offered, you will not act – you become a nihilist who trusts futility above optimism.
Studies of the clinically depressed show that when they fail they often just give in to defeat and stop trying. The average person will look for external forces to blame when they fail the mid-term. They will say the professor is an asshole, or they didn’t get enough sleep. Depressed people will blame themselves and assume they are stupid.
Do you vote? If not, is it because you think it doesn’t matter because things never change, or politicians are evil on both sides, or one vote in several million doesn’t count? Yeah, that’s learned helplessness.
When battered women, or hostages, or abused children, or long-time prisoners refuse to escape, they do so because they have accepted the futility of the attempt. What does it matter? If those people do get out of their situation, they often have a hard time committing to anything which may lead to failure.
Any extended period of negative emotions can lead to you giving in to despair and accepting your fate. If you remain alone for a long time, you will decide loneliness is a fact of life and pass up opportunities to hang out with people. The loss of control in any situation will lead to this state. A study in 1976 by Langer and Rodin showed in nursing homes where conformity and passivity is encouraged and every whim is attended to, the health and well-being of the patients declines rapidly. If, instead, the people in these homes are given responsibilities and choices, they remain healthy and active. This research was repeated in prisons. Sure enough, just letting prisoners move furniture and control the television kept them from developing health problems and staging revolts. In homeless shelters where people can’t pick out their own beds or choose what to eat, the residents are less likely to try and get a job or find an apartment.
When you are able to succeed at easy tasks, hard tasks feel possible to accomplish. When you are unable to succeed at small tasks, everything seems harder.
Rats given the opportunity to escape electric shocks are half as likely to develop tumors than those who are forced to bear them. Rats already suffering from cancer will die faster if placed into the inescapable shock experiment.
Every day – your job, the government, your addiction, your depression, your money – you feel like you can’t control the forces affecting your fate. So, you stage microrevolts. You customize your ringtone, you paint your room, you collect stamps. You choose.
Choices, even small ones, can hold back the crushing weight of helplessness, but you can’t stop there. You must fight back your behavior and learn to fail with pride. Failing often is the only way to ever get the things you want out of life. Besides death, your destiny is not inescapable.
You are not so smart, but you are smarter than dogs and rats. Don’t give in yet.
David McRaney wrote a whole book full of articles like this one: You Are Now Less Dumb – Get it now!
Go deeper into understanding just how deluded you really are and learn how you can use that knowledge to be more humble, better connected, and less dumb in the sequel to the internationally bestselling You Are Not So Smart. Watch the beautiful new trailer here.
How DJT Lost the White House, Introduction: Why I Was Involved Before November 3 & What I Learned Because I Was (1.1)
Patrick Byrne A concerned citizen who has been hunting the oligarchy and Deep State since 2004.
January 24, 2021
(Warning to reader: this introduction is choppy. I am just trying to accommodate the public by getting blocks of my narrative up quickly. When I finally weave them all into one story I will improve the writing, add more links etc. last edited 1/25 9:25 PM Eastern).
On the last day of July, 2020 a dear friend of mine from Montana, a stolid, Native American fellow some several years my junior, visited me at my home in Utah. A few days earlier I had had surgery on my spinal chord, and he was checking in. He told me that there was a group of people, some ex-federal some not, some cyber-experts and some of various other expertise, who were organizing on the subject of election fraud. My friend was adamant that I get involved and help them. My friend was quite a squared-away individual, and I took his advice and requests seriously. The next day, August 1, my friend died in a plane crash: though the coincidence is troubling, I looked into it personally (I am a multi-engine instrument land and seaplane pilot), and it does seem to me to have been the error of his instructor (who flew the plane into a box canyon without the power to climb out).
At my friend’s funeral I met some of the people he had described. A sober, quiet man with a FEMA background and a deep knowledge of biowarfare; a retired Army Colonel with a background in Military Intelligence including psyops; other men and women with backgrounds in everything from law enforcement to cyberwarfare in military context and in support of law enforcement, to (most recently) operating against human trafficking in the Southwest to…. the reverse-engineering of mass scale election fraud. An industrial scale election fraud. It turned out that there had been some irregularities in the Dallas 2018 election that had spawned a network of enthusiasts on election fraud, and that had spawned this broader network. Soon some key players were dropping through and seeing me in Utah, and I, recovering from surgery, was moving around to meet them elsewhere.
I am now going to write of, “white hat hackers”. I should make clear that I am referring to people who not only follow the law, they generally operate under authority and direction of law enforcement, or under contract with law enforcement at state and federal levels. There is a certification for working in the field of cyber-forensics, a certification that means you maintain proper chain of title and image hard drives and swear out affidavits and produce work that is admissible in court. Sometimes they are used by law enforcement in offensive cybermissions: taking down a child trafficking/porn ring, for example. The “white hat hackers” of whom I now speak are those kind of hackers.
Over the next couple months I sat through lectures by these “white hat hackers” on the security vulnerabilities of the technology used in election equipment. Vulnerabilities such as slots in the motherboard that should be soldered shut but which are open (meaning anyone who can slip a chip into that slot for a few seconds has compromised the machine forever). R232 ports giving any technician who plugs in) root level access without a password (thus again compromising the machine forever). Strange violations of good computer science practice, such as a oddly architected triple databases within the machine, without integrity among the layers. Audit logs that were editable by users (making them not”audit logs” at all), and lacking in fixed numbering systems that could reveal tapering. I asked the white hat hackers involved who were walking me through these points of porous security to me to rate the security, on a scale of 1-10, of these systems. Their considered answer: “2, maybe a 1”.
Let me point out that a year ago, this was not considered a partisan issue. We all wanted elections that were fair, free, and transparent. Here is a story from NBC News, from January 2020: “Online and vulnerable’: Experts find nearly three dozen U.S. voting systems connected to internet“.
“Princeton Professor Hacks Dominion Voting Machine in Seven Minutes”https://rumble.com/embed/v8jp7l/?pub=4#?secret=R8sjXEJhOa
Beyond those kinds of hacks, they began to introduce me to other “hacks” understood in a broader sense. The extraordinary privileges enjoyed by precinct administrators, for example, to drag-and-drop a queue of hundreds of ballots waiting for adjudication (a point confirmed within the machine’s operating handbook). Discussion was had of spikes in offshore packet traffic to certain locations during elections, though the full reasons for that were not yet fully understood. One technique that was explained to me before the election, ended up being the subject of a Gateway Pundit video after the election:https://rumble.com/embed/v8melz/?pub=4#?secret=k2WOe4SMFG
As the weeks ticked by I became increasingly conversant with characters who were convinced we were on the edge of a massive election steal. They had meetings arranged with DHS in their state, and their briefings were taken at least twice in September by DHS and propelled up the chain of command…. only to be killed from Washington. In particular, a portion of DHS called CISA (“Cybsecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency”) put the kibosh on further meetings. This was odd because election security is within their mandate: one might have thought they might be interested. And let me remind the reader, these were not just a ragtag bunch of misfits: these were people with extensive federal backgrounds, with all kinds of experiences and certifications in matters cyber.
Then November 3, the night of the election, everything they had been predicting to me would happen, happened. I am not going to make this essay a full account of the steal: I want to get on with the history. So for fuller research one should go read Sidney Powell’s four briefs to SCOTUS, which come with all sorts of appended material and affadavits. For now, let me confine myself to a brief gloss of the oddities that stacked up.
Ask your local political science professor to explain why it is the case that to steal the national election one does not need, “widespread election fraud”. If the professor is honest, you will hear, “Because instead of widespread election fraud, it only takes deep election fraud in five cities to flip the swing states they are in, to thereby flip the electoral college, and to thereby steal the election nationally. Those cities are Atlanta, Philadelphia, Detroit, Milwaukee, and Phoenix.”
And what do you, know, on November 3, election night, vote counting in precisely those cities took unprecedented turns. As James Woods put it elegantly, “Since when do they just stop counting votes on election day in America?” Yet that happened in various ways across those cities named (it is hard to remember now, but in early November it seemed strange to everyone that they stopped counting votes on election day, though it has been normalized since). In Atlanta’s State Farm Arena, a “water-main break” forced the evacuation of the vote counting area of the arena: it later turned out to be fake (“BUSTED: Evidence Proves ‘Burst Water Pipe’ In Georgia Was Used As Cover For Secret Vote-Counting“) / arena, and in the few hours when the courting was “closed”, hundreds of thousands of votes were pushed through the system, often showing 99.4% and even 100% runs for Biden, thousands of ballots in a row. The water-main break” turned out to be a toilet that had overflowed (“Reported Burst Pipe in Atlanta Ballot-Count Area Was Overflowing Urinal: Investigator“).
Some of these cities saw goons muscle observers away from vote counting centers on gobbledygook reasons, while others taped pizza boxes across windows to block poll observers from being able to observe.
Within days, the cyber teams I was with were coming up with data that showed what had happened in those windows where counting had been “stopped”: hundreds of thousands of ballots had been introduced running 99.4% and even 100% Biden.
Within a matter of a couple weeks, there were math faculty weighing in on the statistical improbabilities bubbling up through the data from that night. A Williams math professor laid it on the line (“Yale Trained Mathematician Flags 100,000 Pennsylvania Ballots As Likely Fraudulent“) leading to official reaction (“Federal Elections Commission Chairman Trey Trainor says new analysis by professor Steven Miller ‘adds to the conclusions that some level of voter fraud took place in this year’s election’”). Benford’s law, a statistical law use din courts when establishing voter fraud, was applied to the election results in Michigan: “Biden’s vote numbers in Michigan do not match Benford’s law at a 99.999% significance level.“
Beofre the end of the year noted economist John Lott would come out with a paper (“A Simple Test for the Extent of Vote Fraud with Absentee Ballots in the 2020 Presidential Election: Georgia and Pennsylvania Data“) summarized in the popular press “Expert: Biden win ‘suspicious,’ 289,000 election-changing ‘excess’ votes“.
And so on and so forth.
My purpose is not at this point to convince you, the reader, that election fraud had occurred. My purpose is to convey to you that there is really a lot about this election that smells like skunk. the days Nothing decisive, nothing that I’d be ready to convict anyone on… but a lot that smelled like skunk. enough that it could not just all slide. What is it I thought should be done? Clearly we are dancing among a lot of Constitutional live wires, I thought, but by the middle of November the following was seeming to me like a reasonable, neutral, unobjectionable course of action:
Let’s look at those five counties where such oddities occured. These machines were sold to the public with the promise that “there is always a paper ballot as a failsafe”. OK, let’s hold them to it. Open up the boxes with all the paper ballots and count them , on livestream TV. Use the US Marshalls, or use the National Guard (“Our sons and daughters and co-workers…. Our Citizen Soldiers”). If there are not big discrepancies, then Trump steps down. But if there are big discrepancies, we don’t ask the Courts to give one candidate, but instead, we rerun the election in those five states. Again, use the National Guard and the US Marshall service. Yes it would be a bad precedent, but so would trying to force down the public’s throat an election that was rumbled by goons in five key cities, and about which somewhere between 33% – 47% of the population has significant doubts. That’s not healthy for democracy, either.
The whole thing could have been done in 30 days, easy. Which is why in early-mid November, I was hoping that brisk action could result in either results that President Trump would see and say, “No big discrepancies, fine I concede” or say, “See, there were discrepancies in the hundreds of thousands of votes in each of these locations. We are re-rerunning the election in those five states using the National Guard.”
That’s it. That was the plan. It went through various elaborations, various nice-to-haves, but that is all that was sought. That is all that was needed. The alternative being a national election that could divide our nation for years. That is why I say, “This was a 3-foot putt. Maybe easier.”
Now I know from experience there are those who will say coyly, “But how do you know that cheating occurred?” Five cities play a special role in US political science because of their ability to flip five key swing states; those five cities saw bizarre and unprecedented activity on voting night, up to and including the shutting down of vote counting; the water pipes knew just which cities to break in; in each case a huge spike of Biden votes were injected where counting had ceased and observers had been cut out…. Personally, I think it is brazen enough it is an insult to our intelligence to believe it, but in my view the test is not, “Is there enough sketchy information to convict someone for a crime?” The test is, “Does this smell enough like skunk that we should just open up the boxes with all the paper ballot backups, and recount the whole thing on livestreamed tv?” After all, there is a reason the machines were sold to us as always having the paper ballots as a fail-safe: it seems to me that if there were ever a time to use it, now would have been that time. Say it’s a judgement call, but in my view any reasonable person who looks at that preceding constellation of facts will say, “That looks enough like mischief that we need to dig deeper.” And any who look at the preceding constellation of facts and says, “Nope, I don’t spot anything there guaranteeing further examination” is gas-lighting.
But I get ahead of myself. Let us go back to November 4, the day after the election, when the whole world begins grappling with a question that our little team of Bad News Bears has been working on for months.
Within days a self-organized digital army sprung into existence. Networks of volunteers. People willing to research any question we needed answered, people willing to track down others and record their experiences; precinct voters who had experienced some of the techniques of the fraud first-hand, at a retail level; precinct workers describing extraordinarily lax enforcement of standards; freight drivers who had realized they were moving hundreds of thousands of fake ballots from one state to another. Lawyers who were able to mobilize and gather sworn statements. It became clear that the problem was not going to be turning up facts of the crime, it was going to be in managing the firehouse of facts that were pouring in, so many hundreds and then thousands of Americans were stepping forward with details of things they had experienced or witnessed on Election Day. These networks began finding each other and then finding me, as I structured a team of people who could handle the volume. The cyber team collecting and processing data, the affidavits coming in by the dozens, and then hundreds, and then thousands (ultimately I heard that 50,000 Americans signed affidavits concerning their experiences).
Because of our preparation we had much more than a rough idea of how the various election frauds that had occurred, in various permutations, on retail, wholesale, and industrial scale. We knew that nailing things down for the benefit of a court of law would require examining hard drives and doing other computer forensics, but the rough outline of the steal was child’s play to see (as I walked through above), and the mountains of new statements and affidavits that surfaced daily just filled in as confirmation of that greater theory.
By a week after the election I was in Washington, DC. The cyber-sleuths and investigators with me already had things perhaps 50% sorted out. They had the strategy behind the theft: pick those five cities to cheat like hell, flip their states, thus flip the electoral college and the nation (though more refined versions of the strategy evolved over subsequent weeks: we found, for example, that whoever was doing the stealing would also target heavily red counties and shave a few percentage points in each). Reams of data showing machines processing vote statistical outliers showing up that were of astronomical impossibilities, rivers of affidavits gushing in where people reported experiences precisely consistent with what our team had predicted was happening under the table. Mathematicians started showing up with their analyses that confirmed what we were putting together empirically (“MIT statistician shows certainty of massive computer vote fraud in 2020 Presidential election: Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai (Dr. Shiva) provides an MIT PhD analysis of Michigan voting patterns….“)
Approximately one week after the election I walked into an office building in suburban Virginia, just outside DC. That is to say, a week after this election, my colleagues and cyberexperts walked in with a still-fragmentary but still highly compelling reconstruction of what had happened on November 3 and the days immediately following it. We had the crime more half-solved, and what was remaining was almost a mechanical matter: dig here, compare this with that, the answers will spit out. We can see they were doing this this and this, but we also need to look at that.
I and my cybersleuth colleagues walked into that building to take a meeting with America’s Mayor Rudy Giuliani, and Sidney Powell, Esq. (esteemed lawyer for Michael Flynn, the “Peoples’ General”).
And that, dear reader, is where our story really begins.
The prevailing Corona Narrative: A Stillborn eternal Undead
It is nonsense to test symptomatic people for one and only one respiratory virus. It is madness to do this with a hypersensitive RT-PCR test with Ct threshold >35 only without, in case of positivity, complementing highly specific confirmatory test because the detection of theoretically one SARS-CoV-2 RNA fragment does not prove an infection and certainly not a disease caused by SARS-CoV-2 or a death caused by COVID-19. Moreover, anyone who dies within 28 days of a positive RT-PCR test of whatever cause is designated as “deceased WITH Corona”, ostensibly for “international comparability”. These are not medical malpractices, but criminal acts. And it is the coronation of this already unbelievable insanity to (mass) test even asymptomatic people in this bad habit. By the way, the same utter madness can be created with any respiratory virus.
The current human family Homo sapiens has been cohabiting successfully with respiratory viruses of the influenza, beta-corona and other families for about 300,000 years, our ancestors for much longer. If intellectual absurdities like (mass) testing, antisocial distancing, quarantine, isolation, contact tracing, masks in the public sphere, school closured and curfews aka lockdowns for asymptomatic people, formerly called healthy people, were necessary, we would have extinct millions of years ago. Instead, we call our amazing defence weapon against viruses that become too dangerous for us the immune system. It has been perfected over millions of years. In mid-northern latitudes the “flu season” caused by these respiratory viruses starts in November. Although they mutate permanently – because of their specially organised genome, influenza viruses do this much more strongly than beta-corona viruses – only about 10% of the population fall ill at them each year because of innate / cross-immunity. The seasonal “flu wave” ends in April because of immunity, be it through infection or vaccination, of these approximately 10% susceptible people aka “herd immunity”. Finally, we learn in medical school that, for a respiratory virus to be spreaded relevantly by an infected person, there needs to be a relevant replication of that virus, thus the infection of many of our body cells, which causes inflammation thus symptoms. The invention of the asymptomatic (super) spreader was another coronation of the already totally insane prevailing corona narrative.
Anyone who is blathering about things like a “second wave” of a respiratory virus, which is a biological impossibility, and “herd immunity can only be achieved through vaccination”, a factually false claim that lacks of any scientific evidence and also of any common sense, and / or even wants to wage war against a respiratory virus, instantly self-exposes publicly as to be either (multimedially) total deluded, a village idiot, a notoriously lying psychopath, or a combination hereof.
The prevailing corona narrative was stillborn. Anyone who had called this out already in March was hushed up or defamed at best, brutally arrested by the anti-terrorist unit Argus apparently for unveiling the Corona crime, which was perceived by some as a threat, at worst. As no legal offence could be proven – an application for arrest had never been filed with good reason, and my gun, that every former first lieutenant of the Swiss army has, was found stored at home without ammunition for many years – I was psychiatrically detained because of “COVID madness” by a COVID-mad emergency internist via involuntary commitment. Only after six days was this erroneous decision overturned by the administrative court of Aargau. According to the press release on the result of the report of the administrative investigation against Aargau’s government, which I had demanded and not received yet despite two requests to hand it out, the latter is nothing but a herd of innocent lambs.
Since then many, including myself, have confronted, always decently but firmly, the infantile, absurd myths with the reality. Over and over again we have unveiled the unscientific, inhumane suicidal death cult “Coronas Witnesses”, which has snatched the therapy of the “flu wave” from us doctors and has taken over power almost globally in 2020. Because their belief system hovers in a fact-free vacuum, their cult leaders never dare to encounter us in a scientific discourse, but censor and / or libel us themselves or by their puppet mouthpiece media and social media trolls as “crazed conspiracy theorists”, Nazis and the like at best, attack us violently at worst. In the following, I will only mention a few recent realities which would have finished the eternal undead in a universe committed to scientificity aka reality and humanity already long time ago.
On November 11, the “Tumori Journal” published the study Unexpected detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in the prepandemic period in Italy. It demonstrates the circulation of SARS-CoV-2 in asymptomatic persons in Italy as early as in September 2019. SARS-CoV-2 has thus been endemic in Switzerland since the beginning of last year’s “flu wave”, at least, which is caused by several influenza and corona viruses and lasts from November to April in mid-northern latitudes. The increase in the “case numbers” of the “first wave” of COVID-19 was artificial due to an exponential increase in the number of (falsely) positively tested persons. Their decrease corresponded to the natural end of the last “flu season” due to immunity of the approximately 10% susceptible persons aka herd immunity because of lack of innate / cross immunity against respiratory viruses of the influenza and beta-corona families respectively. The prevailing corona narrative, including the totally overblown TV-PRopaganda shows from Wuhan and northern Italy, was finished for the second time. This is being hushed up.
On November 18, “Annals of Internal Medicine” published the study Effectiveness of Adding a Mask Recommendation to Other Public Health Measures to Prevent SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Danish Mask Wearers, A Randomised Controlled Trial, also known as the “Danish RCT Mask Study”. It shows no significant effect of wearing masks in the public sphere on the rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The prevailing corona narrative was finished for the third time. This is being hushed up. Even worse, the public is not only being humiliated, now proven deliberately, by continuing to be ordered to wear masks, but also, now proven deliberately, being put at risk of contracting bacterial and fungal pneumonia or even dying because of masks contaminated with bacteria and fungi. In particular, pulmonary aspergillosis, which is already massively common in COVID-19, is a life-threatening disease. Incidentally, the masks supplied by the federal government to us doctors in Aargau from the pre-pandemic stockpiles created in 2007 had already been recalled, due to infestation with aspergillus fumigatus already before they were even used, two months after delivery in June.
On November 27, 22 international scientists and physicians (I am a co-author), including PCR geniuses, submitted the External peer review of the RT-PCR test to detect SARS-CoV-2 reveals 10 major scientific flaws at the molecular and methodological level: consequences for false positive results of the Corman-Drosten paper Detection of 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) by real-time RT-PCR to the journal “Eurosurveillance”. We list ten serious methodological errors: Vaguely flawed test design, inadequate primer design, excessive differences in annealing temperatures (gene sequences other than SARS-CoV-2 could also be detected), problematic inadequate RT-qPCR protocol, lack of standardisation, no definition of positive and negative test result, omission of a Ct threshold, failure to validate at the molecular level, lack of a positive control to assess sensitivity, and lack of a negative control to exclude detection of other (corona) viruses. In addition, two authors are on the editorial board of “Eurosurveillance”, which published the paper on 23 January after less than 24 hours of peer review (absolute world record). Finally, there are other conflicts of interest. With our request for retraction of the Corman-Drosten paper, which does not meet the minimum standards of scientificity by far, the basis of about 70% of the RT-PCR tests for SARS-CoV-2 carried out worldwide was exposed as useless – rolling a dice would be cheaper. The prevailing corona narrative based on this test, in addition to the completely wrong indication to test, namely not only when there is need for specific antiviral therapy in hospitalised severely ill patients and in surveillance systems, was finished for the fourth time. This is being hushed up.
On December 14, “JAMA” published Household Transmission of SARS-CoV-2: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis, a systematic review and meta-analysis of 54 studies on household transmission of SARS-CoV-2. The rate of asymptomatic transmission is 0.7% (95% CI: 0%-4.9%). Measures such as (mass) testing, antisocial distancing, quarantine, isolation, contact tracing, masks in the public sphere, school closures and curfews aka lockdowns for asymptomatic persons, formerly called healthy people, are therefore preposterous and merely cause incredible harm. This was the fifth time the prevailing corona narrative was finished. This is being hushed up.
Already a glance at Near-real time monitoring of intensive care occupancy (IES-Sytem) or Hospital capacities Switzerland immediately blows the lid off the current “second wave” of the global corona crime – a “second wave” of a respiratory virus is a biological impossibility. The prevailing corona narrative is finished for the sixth time. For this time of year, there are even an exceptional number of free hospital and ICU beds available. If there really are / were too few hospital and / or ICU beds locally or in Switzerland as a whole, this is not / would not be the result of a respiratory virus, but of antisocial neoliberalism, which meanwhile has also completely economised the health care system and thus made it inhumane, anyway. In the IES system one can also click on National Trends and then see the basis of the whole corona crime cristal clearly:
The nonsense Drosten “test” – we have been waiting in vain for the review of our request for retraction of the nonsense Corman-Drosten paper that was “peer reviewed” in late January, when six out of about 1 400 000 000 people in China had died WITH SARS-CoV-2, in less than 24 hours since 27 November until today, when every additional minute of this corona insanity destroys countless lives worldwide – is fabricated so miserably that each country and almost every laboratory perform it differently and with far too high Ct threshold. In addition, the rate of false positive test results, which is already too high when no virus is present, increases massively during the “flu season” due to cross-reaction with other (corona) viruses. In the graphic on the right (see also the cover of this blog), you can see very clearly how a positive RT-PCR test – rolling a dice would be as accurate – simply mislabels green “non-COVID-ICU patients” the “diagnosis” COVID-19 or, in this case, changes their colour to “yellow COVID-ICU patients”. This swindle does not change the total number of ICU patients. Those responsible must have known this, otherwise they would not have reduced ICU capacities in Switzerland and worldwide since April, but would have increased them.
In summary: “Corona” mostly is Influenza 2.0: Rebranding.
An incredible number of self-interested people jump on this bandwagon into their supposed happiness, in reality always into the doom of almost all of us, offered to them by a handful of conspirators, in order to enhance their reputation and / or to make it ring in their coffers. This is exactly how every “banality of evil” is generated.
Every “banality of evil* is terminated when more and more small but important empathetic gear wheels in the wheelwork of the wonderful good become brave, interlock and eventually sweep away the “banality of evil”, that works in the same manner but in the opposite direction, like a tsunami.
Almost everybody fell for the myth of a pandemic of a new corona killer virus. We have to apologise only if, once enlightened, we do not correct the course towards doom.
Don’t be afraid of mutations of influenza and beta-corona cold viruses. They mutate for ages and humanity does still exist. Be afraid of the mutations of your academicians, journalists, politicians, and celebrities that made those village idiots lackeys of multi-billionaire psychopaths!
I guess it is high time to finally stock up the federal and cantonal governments mainly responsible for the global corona crime in Switzerland, the Federal Office of Public Health, the Swiss National COVID-19 Science Task Force, and the SRG, which notoriously violates the Radio-Television statute through disinformation and PRopaganda, who allegedly do not have a clue about all this, but also many other self-serving collaborators, with lawsuits for scaring the population, etc. The evidence needed in court can be found in this blog.
If the leading mass media’s spiral of silence is not broken very soon by a sufficient number of journalists, these obviously irresponsible people and life-threatening mRNA transfections aka “corona vaccinations”, which have not even been adequately tested in animal experiments – all corona vaccine developments have failed for about 20 years in “animal challenge studies” that apparently have never been carried out properly here – will lead us into our collective suicide before lawsuits will even be processed.
No one shall ever blame me for not having warned him (too) about himself over and over again since March, first whispering, then talking quietly, then talking louder and louder and finally, on Easter Saturday, shouting loudly.
by Jon Rappoport
December 22, 2020
(To join our email list, click here.)
This article is a summary. I’ve written extensively on each of the five key events.
ONE: The false claim that a new virus was discovered and isolated.
No true isolation has been performed. The so-called genetic sequencing of the virus was actually a concoction, a cobbling together of pieces of data referencing segments of RNA. These segments were PRESUMED to be parts of the new virus—but researchers didn’t have the virus, so their presumptions amounted to fraud.
TWO: The erecting of a diagnostic test (PCR) for the virus they didn’t have. Obviously, no such test has meaning. It is built on the same sorts of absurd assumptions that led to the fictional discovery of the virus. However, strategically speaking, the test has produced millions of “positive results,” which are taken to mean “infected by the virus.” On this foundation of sand, the lockdowns were declared.
THREE: The Chinese lockdown of 50 million citizens, for no medical reason. This unprecedented event provided the model for other governments, and for the CDC and the World Health Organization. Now it was “acceptable” to imprison the global population and wreak economic devastation across the planet.
FOUR: The absurd computer prediction of 500,000 deaths in the UK and two million in the US, made by historically failed modeler, Neil Ferguson. His institute at the Imperial College of London is bankrolled by Bill Gates. Ferguson’s predictions were used to convince Trump and Boris Johnson that states of emergency and lockdowns were necessary.
FIVE: The forced premature deaths of millions of elderly people across the world—which were falsely called “COVID-19 deaths.”
These people were and are suffering from multiple long-term health conditions, made far worse by decades of medical treatment with toxic drugs. Terrified by a COVID diagnosis, then isolated from family and friends, they give up and die.
There are other important events, to be sure, but these are the key five.
The underlying fact that needs to be understood: what is called COVID-19 is not one condition. It is a variety of illnesses and effects stemming from different traditional causes RE-PACKAGED under the label, “COVID.”
Where authentic new conditions and causes may be involved, independent investigators need to look closely at such clusters of people, where they live. For example, the investigators should find out whether toxic vaccine campaigns were initiated in a community or region prior to declaration of the “COVID outbreak.”
Here is a short piece of fiction I wrote early on during the “pandemic.” It paints a far different picture of COVID events. At that time, I hoped “white hats” would squash the insane lockdowns and economic devastation. That never happened. Instead, high-powered business leaders gladly caved in and took their turn at the bailout trough.
Coronavirus and Island X-24
There was a small island.
Amazingly, it had never been claimed by any country. It just sat there. It was inconsequential. Geographers were irritated that it had no name. In 1998, they named it X-24.
123 families lived there. They emigrated from 14 countries.
During the 2019 onset of the trouble in China, 19 citizens had escaped the lockdown in Wuhan and found their way to the island in a small makeshift boat, which broke into pieces near shore. The resident families welcomed them without fanfare, and offered them housing in huts on the north side of the island.
People on the island practiced agriculture on their tiny farms, and they raised chickens and ate eggs. There was no government. The families met once a month to discuss any issues that might have arisen since their last meeting. They did not vote. They used common sense. They were sensible people. They had no ideology. They had no phones, no computers, no electricity.
One of the newly arrived Chinese women explained, at a meeting, the coronavirus, the epidemic, the lockdown, the testing. She asked whether anyone was concerned that her people might have brought the virus with them. The people of the island looked around at each other and shrugged. They didn’t seem interested.
Three weeks later, an article appeared in the mainland Chinese press about X-24 and the 19 escaped Wuhan residents. It was picked up by a wire service and then republished by a number of outlets around the world. It did not become a big story.
However, a boat soon arrived at the island. A Chinese official and an American public health officer from the CDC stepped off. Several conversations ensued. The two bureaucrats were concerned that the virus might have come to X-24. The residents said they didn’t travel, and they didn’t even fish. Why not? No one had an answer. The bureaucrats took samples of rainwater from a backyard container. They took a look at all the X-24 residents and saw they were healthy. They took throat swabs from the new 19 Chinese residents. There was a bit of tension when the Chinese official told these Wuhan escapees they were living illegally on the island and should return home. The Chinese residents said they wouldn’t, but they had no intention of causing trouble. The visitors left.
A week later, at a meeting in government offices in Wuhan, CDC and Chinese scientists told a deputy mayor of the city that nine immigrants on X-24 had tested positive for the coronavirus. A call was immediately made to the public health and safety office of the national government, and the news was reported. Two hours later, a message came back: leave the people on X-24 alone for now.
The government in Beijing took up the X-24 issue in several committees. A decision was made. Drones would do high flyovers and surveil the island. No one would be permitted to leave it.
Three months later, with the world in lockdown, a small elite government committee met in Beijing. The news: all the residents of X-24 were going about their daily business. No sick people were observed, even among the elderly. No one had tried to leave the island. No one was practicing social distancing. People met and mingled as usual. A CDC/WHO message was read: It expressed concern about X-24. People who were positive for the virus couldn’t be allowed to live outside the limits of control. Something needed to be done.
Three weeks later, X-24 residents observed a group of armed boats approaching. Maneuvers were executed, and the craft made a ring around the island. They sat about 20 miles offshore. They stayed there.
This operation was noticed by the press. The X-24 story made a brief limited comeback. INFECTED PEOPLE LIVING ON AN ISLAND. QUARANTINE FORCED. A few reporters tried to get information on the condition of the X-24 residents. They couldn’t.
CDC meetings took place. The gist was: These people remain healthy. There is no sign of trouble. No disease. No illness. “What happens if THIS becomes a story?”
The issue was kicked up to the Chinese and American military. Very private meetings took place. “We could launch a drone missile attack and wipe them out.” “We could send in a kill-team.” “How about a massive fire? Drop a few incendiaries.” “Spray them with nasty chemicals. They’ll have a hell of time trying to breathe, they’ll foam at the mouth and die.”
But in the end, the military held back. A message from a carefully guarded private source came down the line: “Leave them alone. Remove the stupid ships. Observe from drones. Do not attack. They rate as experimental subjects. They constitute a control group. By CDC projections, at least a few of them should become ill. So far, that’s not the case.”
…A year later, on X-24, the Chinese woman, who had originally told the island residents about the coronavirus, wrote in the diary she had been keeping, “The mainland madness is just a faint memory. My mother here is 93. She is reasonably healthy. A few people get sick, as a matter of course, and then they get well. Nothing unusual. There were two deaths last year. A French woman and an American man. They were both in their 80s. I helped their families make them comfortable. I saw no sudden illness of the lungs. I liked all these island people from the start. I feel close to them now.”
Old habits die hard. She looked around her small cabin, as if some government authority might be present. She walked to the pile of stones arranged in the corner, where a low fire was burning. It occurred to her there was no reason to continue her diary. She bent down and placed it in the flames and watched it for a minute. The past was past.
Nothing untoward had happened on the island.
Back at the CDC, a private analysis was carried out. Nine mitigating factors were listed to explain why no one on the island had fallen ill from the virus. The conclusion was the island was not a proper representation of the real world. The analysis was sent up the line to the guarded source who had ordered the ring of ships to back off. He read the CDC analysis.
He sent back a message. “I wasn’t asking you to cover your ass or justify your role in this fiasco. Your so-called mitigating factors are a crock. Apparently, you’re unable to be honest. So let me send you my analysis. The people on X-24 didn’t get sick because they didn’t get sick. Remove promoted fear, diagnostic tests, treatment with toxic drugs, and other damage falsely labeled as COVID, and you have nothing. I see why you were disturbed about the story of X-24. But then, accounting for healthy people who stay healthy has never been your strong suit, has it? You’ve gone too far. I should set my hounds loose on you.”
A colleague of his walked into the steam room, picked up a pitcher of cold water and poured it on the rocks. Steam rose and the rocks hissed. Wrapped in white sheets, the two men sat side by side.
“Did you tear them a new one?”
“I gave them something to think about. These people are incorrigible. They really are.”
“When our friends arrive tonight, we’ll discuss the situation.”
“Yes. Recess is over. The bureaucrats interrupted business. Products must flow. Money must flow. They don’t understand we’re the engine of the world, for better or worse.”
“We’ll school these little bureaucrats. They parade around thinking they’re princes. They’re going to pay.”
The steam spread. The men were invisible.
(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)
STRAP IN GETS HEATED!! Alan Dershowitz Returns to Discuss Constitutional Questions About Mandatory Covid-19 Vaccination
Harvard Law Professor Emeritus Alan Dershowitz joins me once again in the ongoing debate surrounding calls for nationwide mandatory Covid-19 vaccination.
Please sponsor the of Crowdsource the Truth Counterlawfare Fund at http://www.crowdsourcethetruth.com. Become a sponsor & enjoy exclusive content on SubscribeStar & Patreon
- by MATTEHRET
From the obvious role of Sir Richard Dearlove and his former MI6 underling Christopher Steele who together played a driving role in shaping the dodgy dossier, to their involvement with Oxford Rhodes Scholar Strobe Talbott in composing, promoting and marketing the fraudulent dossier to targeted members of Congress and media, to British Ambassador Sir Darroch caught “flooding the zone” with British intelligence assets to shape Trump’s perception of the world, to the array of British entrapment operations that targeted Michael Flynn as early as 2014 in London… wherever one looks, the hand of British intelligence seems to be everywhere.
While vast effort is made to downplay the British roots of the deep state by the media which tends to portray this problem from a partisan narrative of “democratic party corruption”, this sleight of hand misses the causal nexus and demands we believe that the tail truly wags the dog.
The uncomfortable truth which many are either too afraid, lazy or corrupt to admit is that since the moment John F Kennedy died on November 22, 1963, both the Democratic and Republican Parties have undergone a slow take-over by this foreign parasite. The thing that has come to be known as the “deep state” was never based on one party or another, and never emanated from anything native to the Constitutional traditions of the US government itself as I outlined in my previous article “Understanding the Trifold Nature of the Deep State”.
While the Republican party of George Bush was in power, this deep state had used its controls of computerized vote counting to rig elections in 2000 and 2004 in its favor as showcased brilliantly in the 2006 documentary Hacking Democracy. Later, when it was time for a controlled opposition to take power in 2008, it did the same thing under a different cast of characters.
While one side of the unipolar world government agenda was driven by a view that the USA should forever be the primary global police force governing a zero sum system of perpetual war, with an unelected elite managing the system from above, the other side believed that the USA should surrender its claims to sovereignty to an international global body with unelected technocrats and financiers at the top managing the zero sum system of perpetual war from above.
Notice the common denominator?
Election Theft as Russiagate 5.0
Now that it has become increasingly clear that mass election fraud has swept across the USA in an effort to accomplish what four years of Russiagate failed to achieve, yet another light has fallen upon the British hand behind Biden which aims to dissolve any nationalist spirit remaining in the embattled republic.
As I outlined in my last report, the largest private computer voting system in the USA which services 30 states and 70 million voters was shown to be at the heart of the current election theft. In that article, it was made clear that Dominion Voting Systems is a Canadian company which dominates the USA’s private computerized voting systems and is closely tied to another larger company called Smartmatic.
For those still out of the loop, Smartmatic furnishes voting machines and its software (backdoor codes and all) to governments all around the world and is highly enmeshed with the Clinton Foundation, Soros’ Open Society and Nancy Pelosi’s very own Chief of Staff.
Not only that, but the key figure controlling Smartmatic is none other than Lord Mark Malloch Brown, a former vice chairman of George Soros’ Investment Funds (2007), as well as Soros’ Open Society Institute and World Economic Forum, former Vice President at the World Bank (1995-1999), UN Administrator for Development (1999-2005), UN Deputy Secretary General and UK Minister of State for Africa, Asia and the UN (2007-2009). These are just a few hats he has worn in recent years which we will explore in greater detail.
Lord Malloch Brown: Not Your Typical British Agent
Through his lifelong affiliation with Soros, Lord Malloch Brown (Knight of the Order of St George and St Michael) played the role of color revolutionary godfather and key controller of such “technocrat friendly puppet leaders” as Corazon Aquino as well as her son Benigno Aquino III of the Philippines, Georgia’s George Saakashvili and even the hapless talking ego Barack Obama.
After working through an extended “apprenticeship” under the cover of UN aid worker, and marauding journalist for the London Economist, Malloch Brown found himself working for a Washington consulting firm named Sawyer Miller in 1985. It was at this time Malloch Brown was deployed to become the advisor and speech writer to Philippine opposition leader Corazon (Cory) Aquino under the supervision of then Secretary of State George Shultz. Corazon was a darling of the western establishment but had the nearly impossible task of challenging the popular nationalist President Ferdinand Marcos who had steered his country into economic sovereignty in opposition to international financiers since his inauguration in 1965.
Applying all of the arts of perception management and marketing, Malloch Brown took control of Aquino’s campaign transforming it into the “People Power Revolution” that was in many ways the first successful color revolution of our modern times. Knowing that votes would likely favor the incumbent Marcos, Malloch Brown wrote that he drafted Aquino’s victory speech before the elections and had her deliver it before votes were even finalized- and which accomplices in the media were all too happy to project publicly fueling the mythology that Corazon had won.
Describing these events years later, Malloch Brown said: “An outstanding accomplishment during the Cory campaign was to produce an exit poll that indicated that she had won. It landed on the front page of the Inquirer and had a profound impact as it planted the idea that Aquino had won over Marcos… Marcos did not really recover after that. It was a very exciting experience to watch.”
Malloch Brown failed to mention that the “polling station results” which produced the false perception that Corazon had won were manipulated by George Shultz’s local agents survey firms Social Weather Station, and Pulse Asia which have never been held accountable for their role in the anti-Marcos coup.
Soon after this “accomplishment”, Malloch Brown began working closely with George Soros on a number of projects that radically altered the world during the intense period of transition from a bi-polar to unipolar age.
In 1993, Soros had only recently carried out a speculative attack on the British pound sterling which resulted in $1 billion profit to the Hungarian speculator while providing the UK with a convenient excuse to avoid walking into the Euro trap which it had set for other European targets entering into the “post-nation state epoch”. In 1994, Soros announced a $50 million grant for “democracy building” operations in Macedonia and Bosnia which Malloch Brown was hired to administer as part of the Shatalin Shock therapy agenda.
From 1993-1994, Malloch Brown was part of the Soros Advisory Committee on Bosnia where advanced the Balkanization projects of the 1990s. In 1998, Malloch Brown also co-founded Soros’s International Criminal Court (ICC) after the duo had created the International Crisis Group (ICG) in 1994. These institutions served to 1) shape “international perception” of the causes and solutions to “crises”, real or fabricated and 2) advocate solutions that removed sovereignty in military and judicial affairs from sovereign nation states where they had been enshrined in the UN Charter, Nuremburg laws and UN Declaration of Human Rights, to supranational unelected organizations under the control of “experts”.
As Vice President of the World Bank from 1995-1999 he took credit for transforming its image to a more democratic organization, and from 1999-2005 led in the creation of the Millennium Development Goals which increasingly tied UN funding to George Soros’ Open Society operations internationally (during his time in New York, Malloch Brown lived on an estate owned by Soros).
R2P and More Color Revolution
During this period, Malloch Brown was among the earliest advocates of Responsibility to Protect (R2P) and did more than anyone else to incorporate the doctrine into United Nations “post-Westphalian” governance outlook in 2005 as UN Deputy Secretary General (2005-2006).
Demonstrating his imperial outlook on March 2011, the self-proclaimed “pacifist” grew impatient of nations who were reticent to blow up Libya and wrote in the Financial Times: “declare victory and get on with ousting Gadhafi”.
As co-chair of the International Crisis Group (which was born of seed money from Soros and on whose board of trustees sit Larry Summers, Joe Biden’s advisor Jake Sullivan and both George and Alexander Soros) Malloch Brown supported the narco-terrorist linked Kosovo Liberation Army which was also propped up by both the CIA and NATO during the Bosnia crisis coordinating closely with his Rhodes Scholar colleague Strobe Talbott who referred to Soros in 1995 as “a national resource—indeed, a national treasure.”
Describing Talbott, Malloch Brown recently wrote: “Strobe Talbott, is a very old friend of mine and in some ways a similar sort of practitioner and theoretician of globalisation… As such he really understood the hidden back-story of modern politics, which always gets shoved out of view by the more familiar story of nation-states.”
After bankrolling Georgia’s Rose Revolution in 2003 that put Soros’ Saakashvili in power, the Georgian state was rendered ungovernable due to a mix of vast incompetence and corruption. Here, Soros and Malloch Brown again came to the rescue by organizing a January 2004 event in New York that garnered $1.5 million for Georgian government reform programs (75% from Soros’ Open Society and 25% from the UN Development Program headed by Brown). The UNDP report justified the expense that was to pay Saakashvili’s salary as well as top government officials, and security forces when it said: “Georgia lacked the skilled professionals needed to design and execute sweeping reforms”.
The fact that these actions led to the murder of 1,600 in South Ossetia (mostly Russians) in 2008 and nearly triggered WWIII should not be forgotten, nor should Saakashvili’s nefarious role as Governor of Odessa (2015-16) where the convicted felon protected neo Nazis of the Azov Battalion. Similarly, the strange rise in popularity of Saakashvili underway in Georgia should make anyone with half a brain more than a little concerned.
Handler of Team Obama
On February 24, 2008, Samantha Power, wiffe to Harvard behaviorist Cass Sunstein and soon-to-be Ambassador to the UN under Obama gave an interview to the London Times describing the Malloch Brown-Obama connection in glaring detail. In this interview, Power said: “The principal conduit between Britain and the Candidate [Obama] has been Lord Malloch Brown, the Junior Foreign Minister, whom Obama came to admire when he [Malloch Brown] was Deputy Secretary General of the United Nations, Obama was really taken with him. It’s a relationship that has persisted and they have talked a number of times since.”
Indeed, Obama’s political career, like Saakashvili’s and Aquino’s, was always a creation of higher powers with Soros even providing the first $60,000 for Obama’s 2004 Senate run and then organizing the earliest fundraising parties for Obama’s Presidential run in 2007.
Samantha Power herself attributed her career to Soros and Lord Brown saying in 2004: “My book and my research was utterly unsustainable on the free market. If I hadn’t been able to get a grant from George Soros and the Open Society Institute, there is no way I could have done the kind of investigative reporting I needed to do”.
The Case of Cass Sunstein
While Power spent her time in the UN fighting viciously to push a pre-emptive P2P humanitarian regime change on Libya and later Syria, her husband Cass Sunstein worked as an advisor to Obama from 2009-2012 and authored a paper addressing the dangerous rise of “conspiracy theories” which threaten his idea of good government. Sunstein wrote “the existence of both domestic and foreign conspiracy theories, we suggest, is no trivial matter, posing real risks” and recommended “a series of possible responses” which include cognitive infiltration of conspiracy groups by government agents.
Additionally five options are developed by Sunstein:
“(1) Government might ban conspiracy theorizing. (2) Government might impose some kind of tax, financial or otherwise, on those who disseminate such theories. (3) Government might itself engage in counter speech, marshaling arguments to discredit conspiracy theories. (4) Government might formally hire credible private parties to engage in counter speech. (5) Government might engage in informal communication with such parties, encouraging them to help”
On August 24, 2020 Sunstein was tapped to chair the World Health Organization’s Technical Advisory Group mandated with modifying global behaviour in compliance with the new norms of the pandemic world order. The WHO chief stated “In the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, countries are using a range of tools to influence behavior: Information campaigns are one tool, but so are laws, regulations, guidelines and even fines…That’s why behavioral science is so important.”
Lord Brown in the Obama Era
In 2007, Malloch Brown left the UN to head up Soros’ Quantum Hedge Fund- a lucrative post which he soon left to join the British Foreign Office as Minister of State for Africa, Asia and the UN from 2007-2009.
After leaving his position in the UK government in 2009, Lord Malloch Brown went on to consult oil companies and steer his International Crisis Group. By this time, the ICG had a near monopoly on drafting anonymously published reports of international crisis hotspots priding itself on maintaining armies of “on the ground” specialists who could profile all disputing parties and release their assessments on the international market. These reports have been used by governments, NGOs, corporations, and international bodies like the UN and have played a major role in shaping global policy and perceptions of the causes and remedies to conflict.
Utilizing his expertise in vote fraud and perception management, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that Malloch Brown soon found himself at the helm of SGO Corporation Ltd in 2014 which serves as a holding company whose main asset is Smartmatic voting technologies. Smartmatic sells itself as having “handled more than 3.7 billion votes over the past 14 years in election projects on five continents” and while it denies having activities directly on US soil, a screenshot from the Way Back Machine demonstrates a very different story.
Since 2010 Smartmatic has been found to have been at the heart of election fraud in Mexico, Venezuela, the USA, and the Philippines where the first Presidential election using this system resulted in the victory of Corazon Aquino’s son Benigno Aquino. After mountains of evidence have come to light of Smartmatic’s role in systemic fraud, the IBON Foundation called out Lord Brown as “a foreigner who has made a career out of influencing elections”.
It is an irony of history that not only did Lord Malloch Brown install a second generation cardboard cutout into power in the Philippines, but deployed his voting system to undermine the popular Ferdinand Marco Jr in favor of the Liberal Party’s Leni Robredo during the 2016 elections. Luckily in the same year that Trump was to beat the system via his landslide popular victory in the USA, a similar victory occurred in opposition to all odds when nationalist President Duterte took office and later demanded the Philippines rid itself of Smartmatic tech.
Lord Malloch Brown’s Ultimate Obsession
Speaking to the World Government Summit of June 2020 alongside Cass Sunstein and an array of other Davos-creatures, Lord Malloch Brown expressed his disdain for the rise of the multipolar alliance led by Russia, China and Trump’s USA which has obviously endangered his life’s work. Malloch Brown hypocritically attacks China for being a regime which has no respect for individual rights and only a concern for “the many”, and then calls out the rise of authoritarian governments “Russia, China, India, Turkey, Hungary and the USA” which he believes must be stopped at all costs saying:
“In the wider world a more authoritarian form of government is the new majority. It is not China alone. This “new majority” embraces leaders who come to power by the ballot box and those who didn’t, but who all share a preference for a nationalist foreign policy, the weakening of domestic institutions and the rule of law”
Malloch Brown obviously felt very comfortable with his audience and assumed no one would think about the obvious hypocrisy of his admitting that these “new majority” nationalists often come to power “by the ballot box” and thus emblemize democratic principles, while his social engineering defense of individual liberties and freedom of choice always occurs outside of the democratic volition of the plebs who are obviously considered to dumb to know what is good for them and also at the expense of the many who must be sacrificed in wars, regime change and anarchy “for the greater good”.
These hypocrisies were made even more obvious in a more recent October 26, 2020 keynote speech on the topic of the UN at 75: Slow Death or New Direction? In this speech, Lord Brown calls for the creation of reformed United Nation to avoid its obsolescence by getting rid of the Security Council which has prevented necessary humanitarian actions due to the insufferable veto held by Russia and China. When asked how the veto may be abolished, Lord Brown admits that nations will never aquiesce and so “the only way you’re going to get these entrenched members to embark on this is to make them largely irrelevant… we have to work around the security council.”
How would anyone be expected to “work around the Security Council” you may ask?
Here Lord Brown answers by calling for the empowerment of “civil society clusters” and “civil society mosaic” that can harness energy coalition of non-state actors. Brown states: “Building variegated coalitions of state and non-state actors willing to be first movers on different parts of this agenda is not a new path to action in the UN. Now it needs to be turbo charged. The world won’t wait for the most plodding and resistant nations to sign up to action”.
Calling the UN Human Rights Council “not fit for purpose” due to its “steady capture” by Russia, China and Cuba who won seats on the body this year, Lord Brown lamented the greatest threat to his vision for a post-national world: “the failures we all individually made pale compared to just the fact that nation states have ultimately- particularly the bigger and more powerful ones- resisted conceding power and sovereignty and decision making to this multilateral body.”
This is the British hand behind the current phase of Russiagate 5.0 which has come closer to its objectives of running an American coup than at any other moment during the past four years. This is the vision of a dystopic post-nation state world order managed by mis-anthropic technocrats who wish to lord over a technetronic feudal dark age in the 21st century and beyond. As much as it might disappoint you to hear this, but at this moment, the most important thing standing in the way of this anti-human world order and your future is the embattled President Trump who requires the serious support of an awakened, informed and active citizenry.
In a future segment we will look more closely at the figure of the late Maurice Strong and the self-induced destruction of western civilization over the past 50 years, and also the battle to resist a bankers’ coup in Britain over 300 years ago which holds peculiar lessons for our current age.
Matthew Ehret is the Editor-in-Chief of the Canadian Patriot Review , Senior Fellow at the American University in Moscow, BRI Expert on Tactical talk, and has authored 3 volumes of ‘Untold History of Canada’ book series. In 2019 he co-founded the Montreal-based Rising Tide Foundation. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org
Science is revered in modern society, almost like a religion. And as with religion, many people have blind faith in the power of science. When we read about studies or research in the media, many of us simply believe that what we’re reading is true. It’s based on science, after all. Unfortunately, the science it’s based on might be bought science.
In general, our confidence in science is good. It’s a step toward a future where people hold beliefs that are supported by facts. And when people hold beliefs supported by facts, the world should become a better place. Less discrimination, less hatred, fewer ineffective products and no more big pharma selling snake oil instead of effective drugs.
Why There’s So Much Corruption
So, why is there so much corruption in the scientific world? As is so often the case, it all comes down to money. All the stakeholders in the industry want to earn more money. Even parties with no genuine interest in research can earn money by exploiting the world’s veneration of science. Research institutes, researchers, journals, major corporations and even government all stand to benefit from bought science. Almost anyone who wants increase their sales can do so by paying to have a study yield the results they want.
Research Institutes and Researchers
The most important stakeholders in research are probably research institutes such as universities. Most of these institutes rely heavily on their reputations to obtain funding from large corporations and the government. And the best ways to earn a good reputation in this arena are to employ respected researchers and to publish as many studies as possible. Regrettably, this means that these institutes are not always interested in the quality of their researchers or research.
Similarly, researchers also want to earn more money. The best ways for them to do so are to work for prestigious research institutes and write as many books as possible. In order to be hired by one of these prestigious institutes and to have their books published, researchers need to have excellent reputations. And the best way for a researcher to create an excellent reputation is to publish as much of their research as they can. Publish or perish, remember? Again, this means that they are often not concerned with the quality of the research they publish. It also means that many of them can be bought with offers of funding.
Of course, while we’re discussing money we can’t ignore all the major corporations trying to sell their lousy products to the unsuspecting public. As always, they also want to make money by selling more of their products. In order to increase sales, they fund research into their products. This industry funded research is a controversial issue, because most of the time this type of research yields data to support the use of the industry’s product.
Another issue here is the suppression of research results, especially clinical trials for drugs. Basically, if the trial doesn’t give the result the corporation is looking for, they make sure that information never sees the light of day. This funding isn’t always obvious, as it doesn’t have to be made in cash. How often is a new wing of a university named after a major corporation or billionaire because they paid for it?
All this corruption has resulted in the birth of a morally bankrupt new industry: fake academic journals. Some clever “businessmen” saw the potential to earn lots of money by exploiting researchers’ need to publish as many papers as they can. So they created journals that will publish almost anything for a fee.
These fake journals look like peer reviewed academic publications, but they are most certainly not. Researchers simply pay the fee and their work is published. Computer scientists David Mazieres and Eddie Kohler created a paper that just repeats the same ten words (one of which is an expletive) to send as a response to unwanted emails from journals. They were shocked when one of the journals responded with an email accepting the paper and calling the paper “excellent.” The journal even offered to publish it for $150!
Given all this corruption and bought science, we can’t always believe what science tells us. Fortunately, there are efforts being made to remedy the situation by organizations such as The World Health Organization and The Center for Accountability in Science. Maybe we can even look forward to a future where we can be certain science really is science.
Health Impact News
The 1918-19 bacterial vaccine experiment may have killed 50-100 million people
by Kevin Barry, President
First Freedoms, Inc.
The “Spanish Flu” killed an estimated 50-100 million people during a pandemic 1918-19. What if the story we have been told about this pandemic isn’t true?
What if, instead, the killer infection was neither the flu nor Spanish in origin?
Newly analyzed documents reveal that the “Spanish Flu” may have been a military vaccine experiment gone awry.
In looking back on the 100th anniversary of the end of World War I, we need to delve deeper to solve this mystery.
- The reason modern technology has not been able to pinpoint the killer influenza strain from this pandemic is because influenza was not the killer.
- More soldiers died during WWI from disease than from bullets.
- The pandemic was not flu. An estimated 95% (or higher) of the deaths were caused by bacterial pneumonia, not influenza/a virus.
- The pandemic was not Spanish. The first cases of bacterial pneumonia in 1918 trace back to a military base in Fort Riley, Kansas.
- From January 21 – June 4, 1918, an experimental bacterial meningitis vaccine cultured in horses by the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research in New York was injected into soldiers at Fort Riley.
- During the remainder of 1918 as those soldiers – often living and traveling under poor sanitary conditions – were sent to Europe to fight, they spread bacteria at every stop between Kansas and the frontline trenches in France.
- One study describes soldiers “with active infections (who) were aerosolizing the bacteria that colonized their noses and throats, while others—often, in the same “breathing spaces”—were profoundly susceptible to invasion of and rapid spread through their lungs by their own or others’ colonizing bacteria.” (1)
- The “Spanish Flu” attacked healthy people in their prime. Bacterial pneumonia attacks people in their prime. Flu attacks the young, old and immunocompromised.
- When WW1 ended on November 11, 1918, soldiers returned to their home countries and colonial outposts, spreading the killer bacterial pneumonia worldwide.
- During WW1, the Rockefeller Institute also sent the antimeningococcic serum to England, France, Belgium, Italy and other countries, helping spread the epidemic worldwide.
During the pandemic of 1918-19, the so-called “Spanish Flu” killed 50-100 million people, including many soldiers.
Many people do not realize that disease killed far more soldiers on all sides than machine guns or mustard gas or anything else typically associated with WWI.
I have a personal connection to the Spanish Flu. Among those killed by disease in 1918-19 are members of both of my parents’ families.
On my father’s side, his grandmother Sadie Hoyt died from pneumonia in 1918. Sadie was a Chief Yeoman in the Navy. Her death left my grandmother Rosemary and her sister Anita to be raised by their aunt. Sadie’s sister Marian also joined the Navy. She died from “the influenza” in 1919.
On my mother’s side, two of her father’s sisters died in childhood. All of the family members who died lived in New York City.
I suspect many American families, and many families worldwide, were impacted in similar ways by the mysterious Spanish Flu.
In 1918, “influenza” or flu was a catchall term for disease of unknown origin. It didn’t carry the specific meaning it does today.
It meant some mystery disease which dropped out of the sky. In fact, influenza is from the Medieval Latin “influential” in an astrological sense, meaning a visitation under the influence of the stars.
WHY IS WHAT HAPPENED 100 YEARS AGO IMPORTANT NOW?
Between 1900-1920, there were enormous efforts underway in the industrialized world to build a better society. I will use New York as an example to discuss three major changes to society which occurred in NY during that time and their impact on mortality from infectious diseases.
1. Clean Water and Sanitation
In the late 19th century through the early 20th century, New York built an extraordinary system to bring clean water to the city from the Catskills, a system still in use today. New York City also built over 6000 miles of sewer to take away and treat waste, which protects the drinking water. The World Health Organization acknowledges the importance of clean water and sanitation in combating infectious diseases. (2)
In the late 19th century through the early 20th century, New York built a power grid and wired the city so power was available in every home. Electricity allows for refrigeration. Refrigeration is an unsung hero as a public health benefit. When food is refrigerated from farm to table, the public is protected from potential infectious diseases. Cheap renewable energy is important for many reasons, including combating infectious diseases.
In the late 19th century through the early 20th century, New York became the home of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research (now Rockefeller University). The Institute is where the modern pharmaceutical industry was born. The Institute pioneered many of the approaches the pharmaceutical industry uses today, including the preparation of vaccine serums, for better or worse. The vaccine used in the Fort Riley experiment on soldiers was made in horses.
US Mortality Rates data from the turn of the 20th century to 1965 clearly indicates that clean water, flushing toilets, effective sewer systems and refrigerated foods all combined to effectively reduce mortality from infectious diseases BEFORE vaccines for those diseases became available.
Have doctors and the pharmaceutical manufacturers taken credit for reducing mortality from infectious disease which rightfully belongs to sandhogs, plumbers, electricians and engineers?
If hubris at the Rockefeller Institute in 1918 led to a pandemic disease which killed millions of people, what lessons can we learn and apply to 2018?
THE DISEASE WAS NOT SPANISH
While watching an episode of American Experience on PBS a few months ago, I was surprised to hear that the first cases of “Spanish Flu” occurred at Fort Riley, Kansas in 1918. I thought, how is it possible this historically important event could be so badly misnamed 100 years ago and never corrected?
Spain was one of a few countries not involved in World War I. Most of the countries involved in the war censored their press.
Free from censorship concerns, the earliest press reports of people dying from disease in large numbers came from Spain. The warring countries did not want to additionally frighten the troops, so they were content to scapegoat Spain. Soldiers on all sides would be asked to cross no man’s land into machine gun fire, which was frightening enough without knowing that the trenches were a disease breeding ground.
One hundred years later, it’s long past time to drop “Spanish” from all discussion of this pandemic. If the flu started at a United States military base in Kansas, then the disease could and should be more aptly named.
In order to prevent future disasters, the US (and the rest of the world) must take a hard look at what really caused the pandemic.
It is possible that one of the reasons the Spanish Flu has never been corrected is that it helps disguise the origin of the pandemic.
If the origin of the pandemic involved a vaccine experiment on US soldiers, then the US may prefer calling it Spanish Flu instead of The Fort Riley Bacteria of 1918, or something similar. The Spanish Flu started at the location this experimental bacterial vaccine was given making it the prime suspect as the source of the bacterial infections which killed so many.
It would be much more difficult to maintain the marketing mantra of “vaccines save lives” if a vaccine experiment originating in the United States during the years of primitive manufacturing caused the deaths of 50-100 million people.
“Vaccines save lives … except we may have killed 50-100 million people in 1918-19” is a far less effective sales slogan than the overly simplistic “vaccines save lives.”
THE DISEASE WHICH KILLED SO MANY WAS NOT FLU OR A VIRUS. IT WAS BACTERIAL.
During the mid-2000’s there was much talk about “pandemic preparedness.” Influenza vaccine manufacturers in the United States received billions of taxpayer dollars to develop vaccines to make sure that we don’t have another lethal pandemic “flu,” like the one in 1918-19.
Capitalizing on the “flu” part of Spanish flu helped vaccine manufacturers procure billion dollar checks from governments, even though scientists knew at the time that bacterial pneumonia was the real killer.
It is not my opinion that bacterial pneumonia was the real killer – thousands of autopsies confirm this fact.
According to a 2008 National Institute of Health paper, bacterial pneumonia was the killer in a minimum of 92.7% of the 1918-19 autopsies reviewed. It is likely higher than 92.7%.
The researchers looked at more than 9000 autopsies, and “there were no negative (bacterial) lung culture results.”
“… In the 68 higher-quality autopsy series, in which the possibility of unreported negative cultures could be excluded, 92.7% of autopsy lung cultures were positive for ≥1 bacterium. … in one study of approximately 9000 subjects who were followed from clinical presentation with influenza to resolution or autopsy, researchers obtained, with sterile technique, cultures of either pneumococci or streptococci from 164 of 167 lung tissue samples.
There were 89 pure cultures of pneumococci; 19 cultures from which only streptococci were recovered; 34 that yielded mixtures of pneumococci and/or streptococci; 22 that yielded a mixture of pneumococci, streptococci, and other organisms (prominently pneumococci and nonhemolytic streptococci); and 3 that yielded nonhemolytic streptococci alone. There were no negative lung culture results.” (3)
Pneumococci or streptococci were found in “164 of (the) 167 lung tissue samples” autopsied. That is 98.2%. Bacteria was the killer.
WHERE DID THE SPANISH FLU BACTERIAL PNEUMONIA OF 1918-19 ORIGINATE?
When the United States declared war in April 1917, the fledgling Pharmaceutical industry had something they had never had before – a large supply of human test subjects in the form of the US military’s first draft.
Pre-war in 1917, the US Army was 286,000 men. Post-war in 1920, the US army disbanded, and had 296,000 men.
During the war years 1918-19, the US Army ballooned to 6,000,000 men, with 2,000,000 men being sent overseas. The Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research took advantage of this new pool of human guinea pigs to conduct vaccine experiments.
A REPORT ON ANTIMENINGITIS VACCINATION AND OBSERVATIONS ON AGGLUTININS IN THE BLOOD OF CHRONIC MENINGOCOCCUS CARRIERS
by Frederick L. Gates
From the Base Hospital, Fort Riley, Kansas, and The Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York.
Received 1918 Jul 20
(Author note: Please read the Fort Riley paper in its entirety so you can appreciate the carelessness of the experiments conducted on these troops.)
Between January 21st and June 4th of 1918, Dr. Gates reports on an experiment where soldiers were given 3 doses of a bacterial meningitis vaccine. Those conducting the experiment on the soldiers were just spitballing dosages of a vaccine serum made in horses.
The vaccination regime was designed to be 3 doses. 4,792 men received the first dose, but only 4,257 got the 2nd dose (down 11%), and only 3702 received all three doses (down 22.7%).
A total of 1,090 men were not there for the 3rd dose. What happened to these soldiers? Were they shipped East by train from Kansas to board a ship to Europe? Were they in the Fort Riley hospital? Dr. Gates’ report doesn’t tell us.
An article accompanying the American Experience broadcast I watched sheds some light on where these 1,090 men might be. Gates began his experiments in January 1918.
By March of that year, “100 men a day” were entering the infirmary at Fort Riley.
Are some of these the men missing from Dr. Gates’ report – the ones who did not get the 2nd or 3rd dose?
“… Shortly before breakfast on Monday, March 11, the first domino would fall signaling the commencement of the first wave of the 1918 influenza.
Company cook Albert Gitchell reported to the camp infirmary with complaints of a “bad cold.”
Right behind him came Corporal Lee W. Drake voicing similar complaints.
By noon, camp surgeon Edward R. Schreiner had over 100 sick men on his hands, all apparently suffering from the same malady…” (5)
Gates does report that several of the men in the experiment had flu-like symptoms: coughs, vomiting and diarrhea after receiving the vaccine.
These symptoms are a disaster for men living in barracks, travelling on trains to the Atlantic coast, sailing to Europe, and living and fighting in trenches.
The unsanitary conditions at each step of the journey are an ideal environment for a contagious disease like bacterial pneumonia to spread.
From Dr. Gates’ report:
“Reactions.– … Several cases of looseness of the bowels or transient diarrhea were noted. This symptom had not been encountered before. Careful inquiry in individual cases often elicited the information that men who complained of the effects of vaccination were suffering from mild coryza, bronchitis, etc., at the time of injection.”
“Sometimes the reaction was initiated by a chill or chilly sensation, and a number of men complained of fever or feverish sensations during the following night.
Next in frequency came nausea (occasionally vomiting), dizziness, and general “aches and pains” in the joints and muscles, which in a few instances were especially localized in the neck or lumbar region, causing stiff neck or stiff back. A few injections were followed by diarrhea.
The reactions, therefore, occasionally simulated the onset of epidemic meningitis and several vaccinated men were sent as suspects to the Base Hospital for diagnosis.”(4)
According to Gates, they injected random dosages of an experimental bacterial meningitis vaccine into soldiers. Afterwards, some of the soldiers had symptoms which “simulated” meningitis, but Dr. Gates advances the fantastical claim that it wasn’t actual meningitis.
The soldiers developed flu-like symptoms. Bacterial meningitis, then and now, is known to mimic flu-like symptoms. (6)
Perhaps the similarity of early symptoms of bacterial meningitis and bacterial pneumonia to symptoms of flu is why the vaccine experiments at Fort Riley have been able to escape scrutiny as a potential cause of the Spanish Flu for 100 years and counting.
HOW DID THE “SPANISH FLU” SPREAD SO WIDELY SO QUICKLY?
There is an element of a perfect storm in how the Gates bacteria spread. WWI ended only 10 months after the first injections. Unfortunately for the 50-100 million who died, those soldiers injected with horse-infused bacteria moved quickly during those 10 months.
An article from 2008 on the CDC’s website describes how sick WWI soldiers could pass along the bacteria to others by becoming “cloud adults.”
“Finally, for brief periods and to varying degrees, affected hosts became “cloud adults” who increased the aerosolization of colonizing strains of bacteria, particularly pneumococci, hemolytic streptococci, H. influenzae, and S. aureus.
For several days during local epidemics—particularly in crowded settings such as hospital wards, military camps, troop ships, and mines (and trenches)—some persons were immunologically susceptible to, infected with, or recovering from infections with influenza virus.
Persons with active infections were aerosolizing the bacteria that colonized their noses and throats, while others—often, in the same “breathing spaces”—were profoundly susceptible to invasion of and rapid spread through their lungs by their own or others’ colonizing bacteria.” (1)
Three times in his report on the Fort Riley vaccine experiment, Dr. Gates states that some soldiers had a “severe reaction” indicating “an unusual individual susceptibility to the vaccine”.
While the vaccine made many sick, it only killed those who were susceptible to it. Those who became sick and survived became “cloud adults” who spread the bacteria to others, which created more cloud adults, spreading to others where it killed the susceptible, repeating the cycle until there were no longer wartime unsanitary conditions, and there were no longer millions of soldiers to experiment on.
The toll on US troops was enormous and it is well documented. Dr. Carol Byerly describes how the “influenza” traveled like wildfire through the US military. (substitute “bacteria” for Dr. Byerly’s “influenza” or “virus”):
“… Fourteen of the largest training camps had reported influenza outbreaks in March, April, or May, and some of the infected troops carried the virus with them aboard ships to France …
As soldiers in the trenches became sick, the military evacuated them from the front lines and replaced them with healthy men.
This process continuously brought the virus into contact with new hosts—young, healthy soldiers in which it could adapt, reproduce, and become extremely virulent without danger of burning out.
… Before any travel ban could be imposed, a contingent of replacement troops departed Camp Devens (outside of Boston) for Camp Upton, Long Island, the Army’s debarkation point for France, and took influenza with them.
Medical officers at Upton said it arrived “abruptly” on September 13, 1918, with 38 hospital admissions, followed by 86 the next day, and 193 the next.
Hospital admissions peaked on October 4 with 483, and within 40 days, Camp Upton sent 6,131 men to the hospital for influenza. Some developed pneumonia so quickly that physicians diagnosed it simply by observing the patient rather than listening to the lungs…” (7)
The United States was not the only country in possession of the Rockefeller Institute’s experimental bacterial vaccine.
A 1919 report from the Institute states: “Reference should be made that before the United States entered the war (in April 1917) the Institute had resumed the preparation of antimeningococcic serum, in order to meet the requests of England, France, Belgium Italy and other countries.”
The same report states: “In order to meet the suddenly increased demand for the curative serums worked out at the Institute, a special stable for horses was quickly erected …” (8)
An experimental antimeningoccic serum made in horses and injected into soldiers who would be entering the cramped and unsanitary living conditions of war … what could possibly go wrong?
Is the bacterial serum made in horses at the Rockefeller Institute which was injected into US soldiers and distributed to numerous other countries responsible for the 50-100 million people killed by bacterial lung infections in 1918-19?
The Institute says it distributed the bacterial serum to England, France, Belgium, Italy and other countries during WWI. Not enough is known about how these countries experimented on their soldiers.
I hope independent researchers will take an honest look at these questions.
THE ROAD TO HELL IS PAVED WITH GOOD INTENTIONS
I do not believe that anyone involved in these vaccine experiments was trying to harm anyone.
Some will see the name Rockefeller and yell. “Illuminati!” or “culling the herd!”
I do not believe that’s what happened.
I believe standard medical hubris is responsible – doctors “playing God”, thinking they can tame nature without creating unanticipated problems.
With medical hubris, I do not think the situation has changed materially over the past 100 years.
The vaccine industry is always looking for human test subjects. They have the most success when they are able to find populations who not in a position to refuse.
Soldiers (9), infants, the disabled, prisoners, those in developing nations – anyone not in a position to refuse.
Vaccine experimentation on vulnerable populations is not an issue of the past. Watch this video clip of Dr. Stanley Plotkin where he describes using experimental vaccines on orphans, the mentally retarded, prisoners, and those under colonial rule.
The deposition was in January 2018. The hubris of the medical community is the same or worse now than it was 100 years ago.
Watch as Dr. Plotkin admits to writing:
“The question is whether we are to have experiments performed on fully functioning adults and on children who are potentially contributors to society or to perform initial studies in children and adults who are human in form but not in social potential.”
Please watch the horrifying video clip. (10)https://www.youtube.com/embed/yevV_slu7Dw?feature=oembed&enablejsapi=1
In part because the global community is well aware of medical hubris and well aware of the poor record of medical ethics, the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights developed international standards regarding the right to informed consent to preventative medical procedures like vaccination.
The international community is well aware that the pharmaceutical industry makes mistakes and is always on the lookout for human test subjects. The Declaration states that individuals have the human right to consent to any preventative medical intervention like vaccination.
Article 3 – Human dignity and human rights
1. Human dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms are to be fully respected.
2. The interests and welfare of the individual should have priority over the sole interest of science or society.
Article 6 – Consent
1. Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information. T
he consent should, where appropriate, be express and may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without disadvantage or prejudice. (11)
Clean water, sanitation, flushing toilets, refrigerated foods and healthy diets have done and still do far more to protect humanity from infectious diseases than any vaccine program.
Doctor and the vaccine industry have usurped credit which rightfully belongs to plumbers, electricians, sandhogs, engineers and city planners.
For these reasons, policy makers at all levels of government should protect the human rights and individual liberties of individuals to opt out of vaccine programs via exemptions.
The hubris of the medical community will never go away. Policy makers need to know that vaccines like all medical interventions are not infallible.
Vaccines are not magic. We all have different susceptibility to disease. Human beings are not one size fits all.
In 1918-19, the vaccine industry experimented on soldiers, likely with disastrous results.
In 2018, the vaccine industry experiments on infants every day. The vaccine schedule has never been tested as it is given. The results of the experiment are in: 1 in 7 American children is in some form of special education and over 50% have some form of chronic illness. (12)
In 1918-19, there was no safety follow up after vaccines were delivered.
In 2018, there is virtually no safety follow up after a vaccine is delivered.
Who exactly gave you that flu shot at Rite Aid? Do you have their cell number of the store employee if something goes wrong?
In 1918-19, there was no liability to the manufacturer for injuries or death caused by vaccines.
In 2018, there is no liability for vaccine manufacturers for injuries or death caused by vaccines, which was formalized in 1986. (13)
In 1918-19, there was no independent investigative follow up challenging the official story that “Spanish Flu” was some mystery illness which dropped from the sky. I suspect that many of those at the Rockefeller Institute knew what happened, and that many of the doctors who administered the vaccines to the troops knew what happened, but those people are long dead.
In 2018, the Pharmaceutical industry is the largest campaign donor to politicians and the largest advertiser in all forms of media, so not much has changed over 100 years.
This story will likely be ignored by mainstream media because their salaries are paid by pharmaceutical advertising.
The next time you hear someone say “vaccines save lives” please remember that the true story of the cost/benefit of vaccines is much more complicated than their three word slogan. Also remember that vaccines may have killed 50-100 million people in 1918-19. If true, those costs greatly outweighed any benefit, especially considering that plumbers, electricians, sandhogs and engineers did, and continue to do, the real work which reduces mortality from disease.
Vaccines are not magic. Human rights and bioethics are critically important. Policy makers should understand the history of medical hubris and protect individual and parental human rights as described in the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights.
Kevin Barry is the President of First Freedoms, Inc. a 501.c.3. He is a former federal attorney, a rep at the UN HQ in New York and the author of Vaccine Whistleblower: Exposing Autism Research Fraud at the CDC. Please support our work at http://www.firstfreedoms.org
Please direct media inquiries to email@example.com.
Originally published at FirstFreedoms.org. Reprinted with permission.
Comment on this article at VaccineImpact.com.
1. Deaths from Bacterial Pneumonia during 1918–19 Influenza Pandemic
John F. Brundage* and G. Dennis Shanks†
Author affiliations: *Armed Forces Health Surveillance Center, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA; †Australian Army Malaria Institute, Enoggera, Queensland, Australia
2. World Health Organization: Unsafe drinking water, sanitation and waste management
3. J Infect Dis. 2008 Oct 1; 198(7): 962–970.
Predominant Role of Bacterial Pneumonia as a Cause of Death in Pandemic Influenza: Implications for Pandemic Influenza Preparedness
David M. Morens, Jeffery K. Taubenberger, and Anthony S. Fauci
4. PDF of Fort Riley Study (1918)
5. American Experience, “The First Wave”, PBS
6. Mayo Clinic: Meningitis
7. Public Health Rep. 2010; 125(Suppl 3): 82–91.
The U.S. Military and the Influenza Pandemic of 1918–1919
Carol R. Byerly, PhD
8. Rockefeller Institute pamphlet PDF (1919)
9. Is Military Research Hazardous to Veterans’ Health? Lessons Spanning Half a Century, A Staff Report Prepared for the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, United States Senate, December 1994
10. Dr. Stanley Plotkin: vaccine experiments on orphans, the mentally retarded, and others (January 2018)
11. Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights (19 October 2005)
12. CDC Offers New Stats On Disability Prevalence
13. 1986 Vaccine Injury Compensation Act
Last week, the United Kingdom jumped in front of all other Western nations when it was the first to give emergency approval to Pfizer’s experimental Covid vaccine.
As Pfizer’s novel injectable product got the green light from Britain’s Medicines & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), The New York Times wrote:
“European regulators on Wednesday cast doubt on the rigor of Britain’s review and said that the authorization was limited to specific batches of the vaccine, a claim that Pfizer denied and British officials did not address.”
Echoing the doubt in part was Switzerland’s medical regulator Swissmedic publicly declared necessary information was lacking, and it would not sign off on three different coronavirus vaccines [Pfizer, Moderna and AstraZeneca’s] ordered by the Swiss government.
Swissinfo.ch noted: “The regulator said important data on safety, efficacy and quality are still missing. It has reached out to the manufacturers, who provided data from their studies.”
At a press briefing last Tuesday organized by the Federal Office of Public Health., Swissmedic’s Claus Bolte threw down the gauntlet: “We lack data on the effectiveness of the clinical trials and on the important subgroups that participated in these large studies,” Bolte, head of the authorization division, explained as Swissmedic demurred from endorsing the unproven jabs.
Nevertheless the UK marched forward with their strategy, echoed by most nations around the world, to target frontline health workers and everyone who lives or works in long term care facilities, for the first round of experimental vaccines.
Swaths of the medical community are increasingly hesitant at being… steamrolled? Socially pressured? Coerced? Given an offer they can’t refuse?…into becoming Phase 4 Post-Marketing data points for Pfizer’s experimental vaccine – and for good reason!
Until recently, the bulk of scientific data known publicly about Pfizer’s shot came via the company’s carefully worded press releases. This inconvenient truth has dawned on the medical community who are first in line for the shot.
Doctors and nurses are not convinced about the vaccine data. To those ends, large health systems, medical societies and the federal government are launching an effort to persuade front-line health-care providers to take experimental shots.
A rushed propaganda arm is kicking into gear behind the scenes in an attempt to quell widespread vaccine hesitancy erupting within the medical community. Unanswered questions, lack of transparency, questionable safety profiles, absent liability and the limited trial endpoints of the experimental vaccines deserve further public debate before premature assumptions of widespread uptake are made by health officials and national leaders.
In the US, vaccine-makers are given legal protection from any injuries or death caused by their injectable products. Outside America, this concept is foreign and scoffed at (as it should be!), by citizens of other countries. After the rushed approval of Pfizer’s shot, the UK population received a sobering lesson in Big Pharma’s modus operandi.
Mere days after the UK gave Pfizer’s Covid vaccine the green light, Pfizer’s Department of Health and Social Care confirmed the company had also been given indemnity protecting it from legal action as a result of any problems with the vaccine.
Simultaneously, in the true spirit of transparency, Pfizer’s UK management spoke to journalists at a press conference but refused to explain why the company needed an indemnity, according to The Independent: “We’re not actually disclosing any of the details around any of the aspects of that agreement and specifically around the liability clauses.”
Ministers have also changed the law in recent weeks to give new protections to companies such as Pfizer, giving them immunity from being sued by patients in the event of any complications, according to reports.
The UK government has published information regarding Pfizer’s COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 for UK health professionals. Comprised of the latest, most up-to-date data and science, from the company itself, the information leaflet notes the following points:
“It is unknown whether COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 has an impact on fertility.”
“Animal studies into potential toxicity to reproduction and development have not been completed.”
“The most frequent adverse reactions in participants 16 years of age and older were pain at the injection site (> 80%), fatigue (> 60%), headache (> 50%), myalgia (> 30%), chills (> 30%), arthralgia (> 20%) and pyrexia (> 10%) and were usually mild or moderate in intensity and resolved within a few days after vaccination.”
“In the absence of compatibility studies, this medicinal product must not be mixed with other medicinal products.”
Major bombshell’s were delivered last week. The first one was from doctors Wolfgang Wodarg and Michael Yeadon, in the form of a legal petition to the European Medicines Agency. They have demanded a “stay,” or halt, to Phase III trials of Pfizer’s BNT162 in Germany, and in all other EU protocol countries until study design is amended.
The doctors deemed the current study designs for the Phase II/III trials of Pfizer/BioNTech to be inadequate for several reasons.
One such reason are that the clinical trials for new experimental Covid vaccines candidates, which use polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests as the primary evidence of infection, are inadequate to accurately assess efficacy, say the doctors.
Along the lines of understanding safety, or a lack thereof, the doctors also raised the very real issue of Antibody Dependent Enhancement (ADE). This is a common problem with the family of coronaviruses and a major, well-documented reason why many previous vaccine trials for other coronaviruses failed.
The doctors write: “Major safety concerns were observed in animal models. If ADE occurs in an individual, their response to the virus can be worse than their response if they had never developed an antibody in the first place.”
Once thought to be a baseless theory, the admittedly untested effects on fertility from Pfizer’s shot has scientific standing to be questioned. The petition reads:
Syncytin-1…is derived from human endogenous retroviruses (HERV) and is responsible for the development of a placenta in mammals and humans and is therefore an essential prerequisite for a successful pregnancy, is also found in homologous form in the spike proteins of SARS viruses. There is no indication whether antibodies against spike proteins of SARS viruses would also act like anti-Syncytin-1 antibodies. However, if this were to be the case this would then also prevent the formation of a placenta which would result in vaccinated women essentially becoming infertile. To my knowledge, Pfizer/BioNTech has yet to release any samples of written materials provided to patients, so it is unclear what, if any, information regarding (potential) fertility-specific risks caused by antibodies is included.
Here’s EMA co-petitioner Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg speaking about his action in a recent interview with Del Bigtree on The HighWire:https://thehighwire.com/videos/health-expert-stop-covid-vax-experiments/embed/#?secret=N5eqNKgx3U
Threaded throughout the paper was information discovered from the second major bombshell: The paper purporting to validate the primary RT-PCR test to detect SARS-CoV-2 used since January for the detection of coronavirus has been deemed “useless” by an external peer-review.
This is the same test used to determine if the new Covid vaccines are effective! Starting to see the house of cards yet? Listen to this guy:
World renowned German epidemiologist, Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, recently submitted a petition to the European Medicines Agency requesting that all #Covid19 vaccine distribution and trials be halted until serious safety concerns are addressed, including the ability to alter human fertility.
#InTheWeeds #VaccinePetition #PfizerVaccine #Vaccines #CovidVaccine
Dr. Michael Yeadon, co-petitioner on the EMA legal document and one of the 22 medical professionals who has signed onto the external peer-review of the PCR test. This interview is with talkRADIO’s Julia Hartley-Brewer: