Data released today by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on the number of injuries and deaths reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) following COVID vaccines revealed steadily rising numbers, but no new trends. VAERS is the primary mechanism for reporting adverse vaccine reactions in the U.S. Reports submitted to VAERS require further investigation before a causal relationship can be confirmed.
Every Friday, VAERS makes public all vaccine injury reports received to the system as of Friday of the previous week. Today’s data show that between Dec. 14, 2020, and March 26, a total of 50,861 total adverse events were reported to VAERS, including 2,249 deaths — an increase of 199 over the previous seven days — and 7,726 serious injuries, up 631 over the same time period.
Of the 2,249 deaths reported as of March 26, 28% occurred within 48 hours of vaccination, 19% occurred within 24 hours and 43% occurred in people who became ill within 48 hours of being vaccinated.
In the U.S., 136.7 million COVID vaccine doses had been administered as of March 26.
This week’s VAERS data show:
19% of deaths were related to cardiac disorders.
45% of those who died were male, 43% were female and the remaining death reports did not include gender of the deceased.
The average age of those who died was 77.7 and the youngest death was an 18-year-old.
Of the 578 cases of Bell’s Palsy reported, 63% of cases were reported after Pfizer-BioNTech vaccinations — almost twice as many as reported (36%) following vaccination with the Moderna vaccine. Seven cases of Bell’s Palsy were reported with Johnson & Johnson (J&J) vaccine (1%).
Using a broadened search for any reference to anaphylaxis in chart notes resulted in 15,193 reports, with 52% of cases attributed to Pfizer’s COVID vaccine, 45% to Moderna and 3% to J&J. With each vaccine, nearly 42% of anaphylactic reports occurred in people aged 17-44.
According to the CDC’s website, “the CDC follows up on any report of death to request additional information and learn more about what occurred and to determine whether the death was a result of the vaccine or unrelated.”Ask Congress to Investigate COVID Origins – Take Action
To date, the only information the CDC has published related to the investigation of COVID vaccine-related deaths and how those investigations were conducted is a COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Update via the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, published Jan. 27.
An interview in MedPage Today highlighted the shortfalls of the post-marketing surveillance of the COVID vaccine. Aaron Kesselheim, professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, said we are seeing a lot of spontaneous reporting, a lack of formal post-approval studies because vaccines have only received Emergency Use Authorization and vaccines being given outside the healthcare systems — interfering with the ability to rigorously collect observational data.
Although the CDC and U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have various systems in place to monitor the safety of vaccines, they are not “up and running” and do not have adequate resources behind them, Kesselheim said.
According to Kesselheim, there’s essentially nobody keeping track of COVID adverse reactions in the U.S. and no long-term safety data, but emphasized that this new mRNA technology is “extremely effective and extremely safe.”
On March 8, The Defender contacted the CDC with questions about reported deaths and injuries related to COVID vaccines. We provided a written list of questions about how the CDC conducts investigations into reported deaths, the status of investigations on deaths reported in the media, if autopsies are being done and the standard for determining whether an injury is causally connected to a vaccine.
Megan Redshaw is a freelance reporter for The Defender. She has a background in political science, a law degree and extensive training in natural health.
“Vaccinated travelers no longer have to follow the CDC’s recommendations to get a COVID-19 test before and after travel unless required by the destination. They still need to wear masks and take other precautions.”
We are allowed to travel. But don’t do it. Isn’t that special.
The bottom line appears to be the gene therapy…err…”vaccine” doesn’t work all that well.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said Americans who are fully vaccinated against COVID-19 can resume travel in the United States at low risk, but the agency is still not recommending travel due to rising case counts.
CDC Director Rochelle Walensky, who earlier this week issued an urgent plea to limit travel due to fears of another COVID surge, said Friday that the new guidance is based on studies showing the “real-world” effectiveness of COVID- 19 vaccines.
Vaccinated travelers no longer have to follow the CDC’s recommendations to get a COVID-19 test before and after travel unless required by the destination. They still need to wear masks and take other precautions.
According to the CDC, nearly 100 million people in the U.S., about 30% of the population, have received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. A person is considered fully vaccinated two weeks after receiving the last recommended dose.
The CDC’s announcement does not change one high-profile COVID travel restriction, however.
Vaccinated travelers still must abide by a CDC order, issued in January, requiring a negative COVID test to board international flights to the U.S., and should get another test three to five days after returning.
Despite the new guidance, Walensky said during a White House briefing that the CDC is not reversing its advice to avoid nonessential travel during the pandemic, vaccinated or unvaccinated.
“CDC is not recommending travel at this time due to the number of rising cases,” she said.
Asked how that squares with the announcement that vaccinated Americans can safely travel, Walensky said: “Our guidance is silent on recommending or not recommending fully vaccinated people travel. Our guidance speaks to the safety of doing so. If you are vaccinated, it is lower risk.”
The CDC’s travel recommendations, which have evolved during the pandemic under the general banner of avoiding nonessential travel and still apply to those who aren’t vaccinated, call for getting tested one to three days before a trip and three to five days after a trip and staying home and self-quarantining for seven days after travel, even with a negative test.
If unvaccinated travelers don’t get tested, they should stay home and self-quarantine for 10 days after travel.
Those guidelines were still in place for vaccinated travelers when the CDC issued broad guidance for vaccinated Americans in early March.
They are only guidelines, though, and plenty of travelers have boarded planes or taken road trips without the CDC’s blessing.
In March, passenger counts at U.S. airports topped 1 million a day every day but five, according to the Transportation Security Administration, which hasn’t happened in over a year.
The U.S. began its vaccine rollout in mid-December. The first vaccines, from Pfizer and Moderna, require two doses taken a few weeks apart. A oneshot vaccine by Johnson & Johnson was given the green light by regulators at the end of February.
Contributing: Associated Press
Vaccinated domestic travelers no longer have to heed recommendations to get a COVID-19 test before and after travel.
Senator Rand Paul shared video Wednesday of CDC Director Rochelle Walensky announcing that new data suggests vaccinated and recovered people do not carry Covid-19.
Paul directed his comments at White House chief medical advisor Anthony Fauci, writing “paging Dr Fauci: please end the mask theater now that cdc admits evidence that the vaccinated do not carry the virus.”
paging Dr Fauci: please end the mask theater now that cdc admits evidence that the vaccinated do not carry the virus. https://t.co/ux2vcVHdnd — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 31, 2021
In a further post, Paul also shared a study examining T cell responses in people who have recovered from Covid-19.
“T cell immunity after natural infection shown to include variants,” Paul, who is also a physician, noted.
He again addressed Fauci, asking “Do we still need to wear multiple masks after we’ve recovered or been vaccinated?”
Dr. Fauci, great news! T cell immunity after natural infection shown to include variants. Do we still need to wear multiple masks after we’ve recovered or been vaccinated?https://t.co/sSsE66wJbs — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) March 31, 2021
The Senator clashed with Fauci a fortnight ago, telling him “You’ve been vaccinated and you parade around in two masks for show. You can’t get it again.”
“There’s virtually zero percent chance you’re going to get it and you’re telling people that have had the vaccine who have immunity — You’re defying everything we know about immunity by telling people to wear masks who have been vaccinated,” Paul charged during the hearing.
US: Dr. Fauci: “There’s no reason to be walking around with a mask.” “When you’re in the middle of an outbreak wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better, and it might even block a droplet, but it’s not providing the perfect protection people think that it is.” pic.twitter.com/9qNxoG7fZx — Apex World News (@apexworldnews) October 20, 2020
By referring to COVID-19 vaccines as “vaccines” rather than gene therapies, the U.S. government is violating its 15 U.S. Code Section 41, which regulates deceptive practices in medical claims
The mRNA injections are gene therapies that do not fulfill a single criteria or definition of a vaccine
COVID-19 “vaccines” do not impart immunity or inhibit transmissibility of the disease. They only are designed to lessen your infection symptoms if or when you get infected. As such, these products do not meet the legal or medical definition of a vaccine
Since a vast majority of people who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 have no symptoms at all, they’ve not even been able to establish a causal link between the virus and the clinical disease
By calling this experimental gene therapy technology a “vaccine,” they are circumventing liability for damages that would otherwise apply
Did you know that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines aren’t vaccines in the medical and legal definition of a vaccine? They do not prevent you from getting the infection, nor do they prevent its spread. They’re really experimental gene therapies.
I discussed this troubling fact in a recent interview with molecular biologist Judy Mikovits, Ph.D. While the Moderna and Pfizer mRNA shots are labeled as “vaccines,” and news agencies and health policy leaders call them that, the actual patents for Pfizer’s and Moderna’s injections more truthfully describe them as “gene therapy,” not vaccines.
Definition of ‘Vaccine’
According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,1 a vaccine is “a product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease.” Immunity, in turn, is defined as “Protection from an infectious disease,” meaning that “If you are immune to a disease, you can be exposed to it without becoming infected.”
Neither Moderna nor Pfizer claim this to be the case for their COVID-19 “vaccines.” In fact, in their clinical trials, they specify that they will not even test for immunity.
Unlike real vaccines, which use an antigen of the disease you’re trying to prevent, the COVID-19 injections contain synthetic RNA fragments encapsulated in a nanolipid carrier compound, the sole purpose of which is to lessen clinical symptoms associated with the S-1 spike protein, not the actual virus.
They do not actually impart immunity or inhibit transmissibility of the disease. In other words, they are not designed to keep you from getting sick with SARS-CoV-2; they only are supposed to lessen your infection symptoms if or when you do get infected.
As such, these products do not meet the legal or medical definition of a vaccine, and as noted by David Martin, Ph.D., in the video above, “The legal ramifications of this deception are immense.”
15 U.S. Code Section 41
As explained by Martin, 15 U.S. Code Section 41 of the Federal Trade Commission Act2 is the law that governs advertising of medical practices. This law, which dictates what you may and may not do in terms of promotion, has for many years been routinely used to shut down alternative health practitioners and companies.
“If this law can be used to shut down people of good will, who are trying to help others,” Martin says, “it certainly should be equally applied when we know deceptive medical practices are being done in the name of public health.”
Per this law, it is unlawful to advertise:
“… that a product or service can prevent, treat, or cure human disease unless you possess competent and reliable scientific evidence, including, when appropriate, well-controlled human clinical studies, substantiating that the claims are true at the time they are made.”3
What Constitutes ‘The Greater Good’?
Martin points to the 1905 Supreme Court ruling in Jacobson vs. Massachusetts,4 which essentially established that collective benefit supersedes individual benefit. To put it bluntly, it argued that it’s acceptable for individuals to be harmed by public health directives provided it benefits the collective.
Now, if vaccination is a public health measure that is supposed to protect and benefit the collective, then it would need to a) ensure that the individual who is vaccinated is rendered immune from the disease in question; and b) that the vaccine inhibits transmission of the disease.
Only if these two outcomes can be scientifically proven can you say that vaccination protects and benefits the collective — the population as a whole. This is where we run into problems with the mRNA “vaccines.”
Moderna’s SEC filings, which Martin claims to have carefully reviewed, specifies and stresses that its technology is a “gene therapy technology.” Originally, its technology was set up to be a cancer treatment, so more specifically, it’s a chemotherapy gene therapy technology.
As noted by Martin, who would raise their hand to receive prophylactic chemotherapy gene therapy for a cancer you do not have and may never be at risk for? In all likelihood, few would jump at such an offer, and for good reason.
Moreover, states and employers would not be able to mandate individuals to receive chemotherapy gene therapy for a cancer they do not have. It simply would not be legal. Yet, they’re proposing that all of humanity be forced to get gene therapy for COVID-19.
COVID-19 Vaccines — A Case of False Advertising
Now, if the COVID-19 vaccine really isn’t a vaccine, why are they calling it that? While the CDC provides a definition of “vaccine,” the CDC is not the actual law. It’s an agency empowered by the law, but it does not create law itself. Interestingly enough, it’s more difficult to find a legal definition of “vaccine,” but there have been a few cases. Martin provides the following examples:
• Iowa code — “Vaccine means a specially prepared antigen administered to a person for the purpose of providing immunity.” Again, the COVID-19 vaccines make no claim of providing immunity. They are only designed to lessen symptoms if and when you get infected.
• Washington state code — “Vaccine means a preparation of a killed or attenuated living microorganism, or fraction thereof …” Since Moderna and Pfizer are using synthetic RNA, they clearly do not meet this definition.
Being a manmade synthetic, the RNA used is not derived from anything that has at one point been alive, be it a whole microorganism or a fraction thereof. The statute continues to specify that a vaccine “upon immunization stimulates immunity that protects us against disease …”
So, in summary, “vaccine” and “immunity” are well-defined terms that do not match the end points specified in COVID-19 vaccine trials. The primary end point in these trials is: “Prevention of symptomatic COVID-19 disease.” Is that the same as “immunity”? No, it is not.
There Are More Problems Than One
But there’s another problem. Martin points out that “COVID-19 disease” has been defined as a series of clinical symptoms. Moreover, there’s no causal link between SARS-CoV-2, the virus, and the set of symptoms known as COVID-19.
How is that, you might ask? It’s simple, really. Since a vast majority of people who test positive for SARS-CoV-2 have no symptoms at all, they’ve not been able to establish a causal link between the virus and the clinical disease.
Here’s yet another problem: The primary end point in the COVID-19 vaccine trials is not an actual vaccine trial end point because, again, vaccine trial end points have to do with immunity and transmission reduction. Neither of those were measured.
What’s more, key secondary end points in Moderna’s trial include “Prevention of severe COVID-19 disease, and prevention of infection by SARS-CoV-2.” However, by its own admission, Moderna did not actually measure infection, stating that it was too “impractical” to do so.
That means there’s no evidence of this gene therapy having an impact on infection, for better or worse. And, if you have no evidence, you cannot fulfill the U.S. Code requirement that states you must have “competent and reliable scientific evidence … substantiating that the claims are true.”
Why Are They Calling Them Vaccines?
As noted by Martin, you cannot have a vaccine that does not meet a single definition of a vaccine. So, again, what would motivate these companies, U.S. health agencies and public health officials like Dr. Anthony Fauci to lie and claim that these gene therapies are in fact vaccines when, clearly, they are not?
If they actually called it what it is, namely “gene therapy chemotherapy,” most people would — wisely — refuse to take it. Perhaps that’s one reason for their false categorization as vaccines. But there may be other reasons as well.
Here, Martin strays into conjecture, as we have no proof of their intentions. He speculates that the reason they’re calling this experimental gene therapy technology a “vaccine” is because by doing so, they can circumvent liability for damages.
You’re being lied to. Your own government is violating its own laws. They have shut down practitioners around the country, time and time again, for violating what are called ‘deceptive practices in medical claims.’ Guess what? They’re doing exactly that thing. ~ David Martin, Ph.D.
As long as the U.S. is under a state of emergency, things like PCR tests and COVID-19 “vaccines” are allowed under emergency use authorization. And as long as the emergency use authorization is in effect, the makers of these experimental gene therapies are not financially liable for any harm that comes from their use.
That is, provided they’re “vaccines.” If these injections are NOT vaccines, then the liability shield falls away, because there is no liability shield for a medical emergency countermeasure that is gene therapy.
So, by maintaining the illusion that COVID-19 is a state of emergency, when in reality it is not, government leaders are providing cover for these gene therapy companies so that they can get immunity from liability.
Under the Cover of ‘Emergency’
As noted by Martin, if state governors were to lift the state of emergency, all of a sudden the use of RT PCR testing would be in violation of 15 U.S. Code FTC Act, as PCR tests are not an approved diagnostic test.
“You cannot diagnose a thing [with something] that cannot diagnose a thing,” Martin says. “That a misrepresentation. That is a deceptive practice under the Federal Trade Commission Act. And they’re liable for deceptive practices.”
Importantly, there’s no waiver of liability under deceptive practices — even under a state of emergency. This would also apply to experimental gene therapies. The only way for these gene therapies to enjoy liability shielding is if they are vaccines developed in response to a public health emergency. There is no such thing as immunity from liability for gene therapies.
Propaganda and Vaccine Rollout Run by Same Company
Martin brings up yet another curious point. The middleman in Operation Warp Speed is a North Carolina defense contractor called ATI. It controls the rollout of the vaccine. But ATI also has another type of contract with the Department of Defense, namely managing propaganda and combating misinformation.
So, the same company in charge of manipulating the media to propagate government propaganda and censor counterviews is the same company in charge of the rollout of “vaccines” that are being unlawfully promoted.
“Listen,” Martin says. “This is a pretty straight-forward situation. You’re being lied to. Your own government is violating its own laws … They have thrown this book [15 U.S. Code Section 41] on more people than we can count.
They have shut down practitioners around the country, time and time again, for violating what are called ‘deceptive practices in medical claims’ … Guess what? They’re doing exactly that thing.”
Martin urges listeners to forward his video to your state attorney, governor, representatives and anyone else that might be in a position to take affirmative action to address and correct this fraud.
Defense contractors are violating FTC law, and gene therapy companies — not vaccine manufacturers — are conducting experimental trials under deceptive medical practices. They’re making claims of being “vaccines” without clinical proof, and must be held accountable for their deceptive marketing and medical practices.
Stanford University Medical School professor Dr. Jay Bhattacharya is featured in Newsweek Magazine condemning the lockdowns across the United States to fight the virus, calling them the biggest mistake ever made by public health authorities. A new study released by none other than the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) ironically appears to bolster Dr. Bhattacharya’s claim. Is the truth starting to seep out from the Berlin Wall of lies? CDC report cited in this episode: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/w…
The agency’s guidance states those who have received a full course of COVID- 19 vaccine may get together with other fully vaccinated individuals in small groups inside their homes without masks or physical distancing. They can also visit with unvaccinated people from one (why not 2, 3, 7?) other household who are at low risk for severe disease.
Vaccinated individuals should still wear a mask and social distance in public settings and should avoid medium to large gatherings (you are safe but not safe). The agency has yet to release guidelines on travel (so no unfettered travel).
(Bold remarks) mine.
When the whole point of control is you can’t let things get out of hand.
Have you read the “vaccine as birth control analogy”? Not a confidence builder!
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has released guidelines designed to ease restrictions for Americans who are fully vaccinated against COVID-19.
The agency’s guidance states those who have received a full course of COVID- 19 vaccine may get together with other fully vaccinated individuals in small groups inside their homes without masks or physical distancing. They can also visit with unvaccinated people from one other household who are at low risk for severe disease.
The guidelines also say fully vaccinated people don’t need to quarantine or take a coronavirus test if they’ve been exposed, unless they’re symptomatic. However, they should still monitor for symptoms for 14 days even if they’re not in quarantine.
Vaccinated individuals should still wear a mask and social distance in public settings and should avoid medium to large gatherings. The agency has yet to release guidelines on travel.
“The new guidance from CDC on what people can do if they are fully vaccinated is welcome news to a nation that is understandably tired of the pandemic and longs to safely resume normal activities,” said Dr. Richard Besser, president and CEO of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
Experts say the announcement may be the agency’s attempt to clear up constrictions fusion created by some states rolling back their coronavirus safety measures despite public warnings from public health officials.
Whether the guidelines will clear things up is still up for debate, said Dr. Wafaa El-Sadr, professor of epidemiology and medicine at Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health.
The difference in tone from last week’s White House briefing, when CDC director Dr. Rochelle Walensky urged Americans to keep their guard up on the virus and “not give in to a sense of false security,” may only serve to further confuse Americans.
“It’s almost two different pathways here,” El-Sadr said. “Imploring people to stay with it, continue to be guarded and careful, while at the same time realizing that people are fatigued (and easing) re- for this subset of (vaccinated) individuals.”
While she recognizes the need for national guidance, El-Sadr said it may be a bit premature to allow people to gather inside without masks, as there is still no data on asymptomatic transmission, and only about 16% of the U.S. population has received a dose of vaccine, according to CDC data.
Other experts disagree.
“People are tired, and there’s a lot of pandemic fatigue, and it’s really important that we don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good,” said Dr. Carlos del Rio, executive associate dean of Emory University School of Medicine, who authored a viewpoint published in JAMA Network on Thursday that said it’s “likely safe” to gather with other vaccinated individuals.
Vaccinated people should still wear a mask, practice social distancing in public settings, and avoid medium to large gatherings, the CDC says. SETH WENIG/AP
Yet, we never saw Bill Gates calling for economic lockdowns, mask mandates and medical passports because of the flu or pneumonia. Why is that?
I have had numerous readers from all over the world write to me, saying that they believe in the face of the pandemic lockdowns it is now all up to Americans to turn the tide. I agree. A successful rebellion against globalism in America will lead to rebellions elsewhere, but the fact remains that if we lose, no one else will dare lift a finger. The future is in our hands.
Three months ago in December I published an article titled ‘Is The Globalist Reset Failing? The Elites May Have Overplayed Their Hand’. I was specifically interested in the development of the pandemic “crisis”, the lockdown mandates of governments worldwide, the bizarre vaccination campaign for the new and under-tested mRNA cocktail which was rushed out to the public in the span of six months, the World Economic Forum’s open statements that they hoped to exploit the pandemic as a springboard for their globalist agenda, and the public’s reaction to it all.
I have to say, I continue to see a divergence in what the elites clearly wanted to happen vs. what has actually happened. If the Event 201 pandemic war game on a coronavirus outbreak, held two months before the actual outbreak occurred in China, is any indication, then the globalists greatly overestimated the fear effect of Covid.
They predicted at least 65 million deaths from a coronavirus outbreak, but over a year has passed since the pandemic went international and the official death count stands at 2.5 million, with over 40% of deaths in the US attributed to nursing home patients that were ALREADY dying from preexisting conditions. Removing suspect nursing home deaths from the equation, the death count is probably closer to 1.5 million, again, if we adhere to official estimates.
To put this number in perspective, the CDC states that global deaths from the flu virus peak at around 649,000 depending on the year. Deaths from the flu and pneumonia reach as high as 1.4 million globally per year. Studies funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation find annual pneumonia death stats that are comparable to the CDC’s. Yet, we never saw Bill Gates calling for economic lockdowns, mask mandates and medical passports because of the flu or pneumonia. Why is that?
Today, the death rate of covid is 0.26%, FAR below initial predictions by globalist institutions and governments. It is now widely proven that the lockdowns did NOTHING to slow the infection spread of the virus, and now many areas of the US are starting to experience what the lab coat “professionals” affectionately call “herd immunity”. Infections and deaths are plunging, and the lockdowns and mask mandates were useless.
Like the vast majority of all viral illnesses, humans simply get sick, endure, build immunity and get healthy. Some of us die, as we always have, and government intervention is not needed nor is it welcome. This is why large portions of US and European populations are refusing to accept the lockdowns and the vaccines. Why destroy the economy and submit to a potentially dangerous genetic cocktail over a disease that 99.7% of the population is sure to survive?
The establishment elites really blew it this time.
My suspicion, my “conspiracy theory” if you will, is that the globalists announced their reset agenda under the assumption that the death rate for covid would be MUCH higher than it is. They were expecting something biblical, and instead they got something not much more dangerous than the flu and pneumonia.
There is now mass public resistance to the vaccinations and medical passports. This is probably why they rushed out the vaccines in the span of 6 months instead of a year to 18 months as they hinted at in early 2020. They are trying to get as many people as possible to take the experimental vaccines before the citizenry realizes that covid is a nothing-burger.
I can say that in my area the majority of people never wore the masks and the majority of local businesses never tried to enforce them. And though they initially went along with the first economic shutdown, they will not be complying with another. In my state of Montana, there are 1,300 deaths attributed to covid. In my county, the estimated infection rate is over 25% (which means almost everyone has probably already been infected), and there are only 13 deaths total.
No one is scared of this thing. Almost no conservative is going to wear a mask, and many people in Red states (and some in Blue states) are going to refuse to take the vaccines or accept medical passports.
This means that the globalists have a big problem. They obviously invested a lot into this pandemic. It is the key to their entire Reset agenda. Without a frightening pandemic killing tens of millions, the globalists will not be able to lock down the public and prevent them from traveling or organizing. They will not be able to institute the medical passports and contact tracing apps that would allow them to watch the public 24/7. They certainly won’t get most Americans to go along with the cashless society and the centralized global governance the elites are so obsessed with.
The fear of cronavirus is waning. The globalists have indeed failed in epic fashion. But, this doesn’t mean that they are going to give up. If my experience studying psychopathic people tells me anything, it is that when these lunatics are cornered they tend to double and triple down on their failures.
The question is, what will happen next? The establishment will need maximum instability and chaos in the near term if they hope to salvage their Reset project. If they wait too long awareness will spread and they might not get another chance for many decades to come, if ever. Here are the events I expect to see over the course of the next year…
Covid Mutation Hype
The globalists are doomed unless they can keep the pandemic panic rolling forward. For now, puppets like Biden and Fauci are going to pretend as if a full reopening of the economy is going to happen. This us a lie. Already we are seeing Biden waffling on when a reopening will take place. He has indicated that it will be at least a YEAR before the shutdowns will completely end, and this is predicated on the majority of Americans submitting to vaccinations and medical passports.
In other words, the establishment is telling us that they intend to hold the economy hostage until we take the jab and give up our freedoms.
Now, are these inbred totalitarians just out of their minds? Well, probably, but that doesn’t mean they don’t have a Plan B. Just look at all the hype surrounding “covid mutations” in places like South Africa and Brazil; the narrative will be that a “new covid variant” that is more dangerous and deadly than the first virus is spreading, and that the lockdowns must return for the greater good of the public.
“Existing vaccines should stop people getting severely ill and dying if they do get infected by the P.1 variant. However, because many people remain unvaccinated, plans to ease lockdown restrictions would have to be rethought if this variant causes a resurgence in case numbers. Plus, any variant that circulates widely will have more opportunities to evolve into a more dangerous form.”
The New Scientist does not seem to understand basic science. The overwhelming majority of viruses circulating in the world usually evolve into less deadly forms of their original iteration. Viruses need to survive too, and they don’t do this by mutating into more and more deadly monstrosities that kill their favorite hosts. There is still no evidence that the new covid mutations are any threat whatsoever, but the establishment is already staging the narrative that new lockdowns are coming.
Federal Lockdowns
If the mutation narrative continues on the path it seems to be following, then I expect the Biden Administration to attempt a national federalized lockdown similar to the Level 4 lockdowns used in Europe and Australia, and it will be announced sometime this year.
This program will trigger several reactions; most importantly, most conservative states and counties will refuse to follow federal mandates. I know that my county and probably most of Montana will defy any new shutdown.
There will be several economic consequences that will erupt from this conflict; some positive and some negative.
CBS investigative reporter, Sharyl Attkisson, discovered the CDC secret; and she found out why.
The routine lab testing of tissue samples from the most likely Swine Flu patients was coming back, in the overwhelming percentage of cases, with: NO SIGN OF SWINE FLU OR ANY OTHER KIND OF FLU.
Attkisson wrote an article about this scandal, and it was published on the CBS News website. However, the next, bigger step—putting out the story on CBS television news—was waylaid. No deal. And CBS shut down any future investigation on the subject. Attkisson’s article died on the vine. No other major news outlet in the world picked up her article and ran with it deeper into the rabbit hole.
In my current series of articles, I’ve taken apart the Ebola and Zika hoaxes.
Now I take you back to the summer of 2009, when the CDC and the World Health Organization were hyping the “deadly H1N1 Swine Flu pandemic.”
They were, of course, also urging people to take the new Swine Flu vaccine. On that subject, here is an excerpt from Robert Kennedy Jr.’s Children’s Health Defense (3/27/20):
“For example, [Dr. Anthony] Fauci once shilled for the fast-tracked H1N1 influenza (‘swine flu’) vaccine on YouTube, reassuring viewers in 2009 that serious adverse events were ‘very, very, very rare.’ Shortly thereafter, the vaccine went on to wreak havoc in multiple countries, increasing miscarriage risks in pregnant women in the U.S., provoking a spike in adolescent narcolepsy in Scandinavia and causing febrile convulsions in one in every 110 vaccinated children in Australia—prompting the latter to suspend its influenza vaccination program in under-fives.”
However, that is only half the Swine Flu story. The other half—which involves an astounding hoax—was surely something Fauci was aware of at the time.
Fauci was, in fact, recommending a highly dangerous vaccine for protection against AN EPIDEMIC THAT DIDN’T EXIST AT ALL.
His friends and professional colleagues at the CDC were creating the hoax.
Let me run it down for you.
In the summer of 2009, the CDC was claiming there were thousands of Swine Flu cases in the US. But behind these statistics lay an unnerving secret. A major crime, considering the CDC’s mandate to report the truth to the American people:
Secretly, the CDC had stopped counting cases of Swine Flu.
What? Why?
CBS investigative reporter, Sharyl Attkisson, discovered the CDC secret; and she found out why.
The routine lab testing of tissue samples from the most likely Swine Flu patients was coming back, in the overwhelming percentage of cases, with: NO SIGN OF SWINE FLU OR ANY OTHER KIND OF FLU.
Attkisson wrote an article about this scandal, and it was published on the CBS News website. However, the next, bigger step—putting out the story on CBS television news—was waylaid. No deal. And CBS shut down any future investigation on the subject. Attkisson’s article died on the vine. No other major news outlet in the world picked up her article and ran with it deeper into the rabbit hole.
Here is what Attkisson told me when I interviewed her:
Rappoport: In 2009, you spearheaded coverage of the so-called Swine Flu pandemic. You discovered that, in the summer of 2009, the Centers for Disease Control, ignoring their federal mandate, [secretly] stopped counting Swine Flu cases in America. Yet they continued to stir up fear about the “pandemic,” without having any real measure of its impact. Wasn’t that another investigation of yours that was shut down? Wasn’t there more to find out?
Attkisson: The implications of the story were even worse than that. We discovered through our FOI efforts that before the CDC mysteriously stopped counting Swine Flu cases, they had learned that almost none of the cases they had counted as Swine Flu was, in fact, Swine Flu or any sort of flu at all! The interest in the story from one [CBS] executive was very enthusiastic. He said it was “the most original story” he’d seen on the whole Swine Flu epidemic. But others pushed to stop it [after it was published on the CBS News website] and, in the end, no [CBS television news] broadcast wanted to touch it. We aired numerous stories pumping up the idea of an epidemic, but not the one that would shed original, new light on all the hype. It was fair, accurate, legally approved and a heck of a story. With the CDC keeping the true Swine Flu stats secret, it meant that many in the public took and gave their children an experimental vaccine that may not have been necessary.
—end of interview excerpt—
So…fake pandemic, CDC crimes, and a damaging vaccine.
But that wasn’t end of it. The CDC wanted to commit another crime. About three weeks after Attkisson’s findings were published on the CBS News website, the CDC, obviously in a panic, decided to double down. If one lie is exposed, tell an even bigger one. A much bigger one.
Here, from a November 12, 2009, WebMD article is the CDC’s response: “Shockingly, 14 million to 34 million U.S. residents — the CDC’s best guess is 22 million — came down with H1N1 swine flu by Oct. 17 [2009].” (“22 million cases of Swine Flu in US,” by Daniel J. DeNoon).
Are your eyeballs popping? They should be.
Fast forward to 2020. Who in his right mind, armed with a little history, would believe anything the CDC is saying about COVID-19?
The discovery of a new coronavirus. The case and death numbers, the accuracy of the diagnostic tests, the need for lockdowns and economic devastation, the safety and importance of a vaccine, the fear porn? Who would believe any of it?
And who would believe anything coming out of the mouth of Dr. Anthony Fauci?
The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.
“This should not be confused with a permissive stance on all gatherings, particularly protests against stay-home orders. Those actions not only oppose public health interventions, but are rooted in white nationalism and run contrary to respect for Black lives.” These “experts” have even labeled protests against stay-home orders as demonstrations of white nationalism. How is protesting stay-home orders racist? It is not, of course, but by labeling it that and by labeling white nationalism lethal, we can conclude that protesting stay-at-home orders must also be lethal. By definition, then, these cannot be truly peaceful protests. We’re left with the conclusion that these protests must be regarded as illegal.
Last summer, infectious disease experts at the University of Washington wrote what they called an “[o]pen letter advocating for an anti-racist public health response to demonstrations against systemic injustice occurring during the COVID-19 pandemic.” It is essentially a letter explaining that white supremacy is a public health issue, especially in light of covid-19. The letter was signed by 1,288 “public health professionals, infectious diseases professionals, and community stakeholders.”
Here are some passages from the letter (emphases added), followed by my analysis of each:
White supremacy is a lethal public health issue that predates and contributes to COVID-19.
As public health advocates, we do not condemn [demonstrations that call attention to the pervasive lethal force of white supremacy] as risky for COVID-19 transmission.
This should not be confused with a permissive stance on all gatherings, particularly protests against stay-home orders. Those actions not only oppose public health interventions, but are also rooted in white nationalism and run contrary to respect for Black lives. Protests against systemic racism, which fosters the disproportionate burden of COVID-19 on Black communities and also perpetuates police violence, must be supported.
Therefore, we propose the following guidance to support public health:
Do not disband protests under the guise of maintaining public health for COVID-19 restrictions.
Advocate that protesters not be arrested or held in confined spaces, including jails or police vans, which are some of the highest-risk areas for COVID-19 transmission.
Listen, and prioritize the needs of Black people as expressed by Black voices.
Dissecting the Letter
“White supremacy is a lethal public health issue.” The language used here is important. White supremacy is lethal. Racism kills people. What is not written is, “Sometimes white supremacists, acting out of hatred, kill black people,” or even, “All white supremacists are culpable in the murder of black people.” Instead, the agency is assigned to racism itself. It is racism, not racist people, that is the public health issue; it is white nationalism that kills people. This is the same tactic used by antigun lobbies in their slogan “Guns kill people.” If guns kill people, guns need to be illegal. People killing people with guns is already illegal, just as white supremacists killing black men is already illegal. To advance further legal change, you have to change the language. “White supremacy kills people” leads the same people who want guns outlawed to want white supremacy outlawed. While the letter does not draw out these ideas to their logical conclusions, the logic employed is well down the slippery slope of sacrificing free speech.
“We do not condemn [demonstrations that call attention to the pervasive lethal force of white supremacy] as risky for COVID-19 transmission.” That’s weird because every other kind of gathering is condemned by these people as risky.
“This should not be confused with a permissive stance on all gatherings, particularly protests against stay-home orders. Those actions not only oppose public health interventions, but are rooted in white nationalism and run contrary to respect for Black lives.” These “experts” have even labeled protests against stay-home orders as demonstrations of white nationalism. How is protesting stay-home orders racist? It is not, of course, but by labeling it that and by labeling white nationalism lethal, we can conclude that protesting stay-at-home orders must also be lethal. By definition, then, these cannot be truly peaceful protests. We’re left with the conclusion that these protests must be regarded as illegal.
The letter itself doesn’t take things quite this far, but as these ideas are accepted more and more by medical professionals and the public, they are more likely to be adopted by the US Public Health Service, and then how long until we see these kinds of results?
“Advocate that protesters not be arrested or held in confined spaces, including jails or police vans, which are some of the highest-risk areas for COVID-19 transmission.” It’s easy to point out the glaring contradiction here. Protesters should not be arrested because that puts them at a higher risk for covid-19. But earlier in the letter it is argued that protests are not risky for transmitting the virus and that authorities shouldn’t enforce social distancing and masking in public because they’re not risky. But that is just the tip of the iceberg. Health experts are telling the police who they can and cannot arrest not based on innocence or guilt, but on the basis of health.
This Is Why We Can’t Have Nice Things
Thankfully, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has not yet labeled white supremacy a public health emergency, yet leading medical schools have signed on to support the letter and are actively teaching their medical students that things like white supremacy can be dealt with in the realm of health.
Americans have made health and safety their gods—over freedom, over luxury, over progress and ingenuity, over God. And they have taken the words of their gods’ prophets as scripture. During the “age of covid,” we have seen Americans sacrifice everything (jobs, family, religion, social life) to health and safety, and in this letter we witness health experts speaking totally outside the realm of their expertise. In any case, Americans have apparently become well trained when it comes to so-called public health emergencies. Because both the public and the “experts” apparently worship health and safety above all else, it is not hard to believe that we can count on widespread obedience during the next declared emergency. What will be called a public health issue next? Gun violence (been there), transphobia (done that), religion, private schools and home schools? We would not be the first nation to lose its liberties on the installment plan. Author:
Kyla Hatcher is a freelance writer and editor who recently graduated from New Saint Andrews College in Moscow, ID. Her heroes include John Steinbeck, C.S. Lewis, and Thomas Sowell, and when she is not reading those three, she enjoys beating her husband at cards and listening to Chicago.
by Tyler DurdenFriday, Apr 02, 2021 – 05:45 AM
MCViewPoint 
