Pfizer, Moderna Claim to be Studying Long-Term Risk of Myocarditis After COVID Shots but the Risks of their Deadly Injections are Already Clear

From [HERE] Pfizer and Moderna are launching clinical trials to track long-term health issues following a diagnosis of vaccine-associated myocarditis and pericarditis in teens and young adults.

Myocarditis and pericarditis are heart problems that multiple medical studies have shown to be associated with mRNA COVID-19 vaccination, particularly among young men.

Studies also show that the risk of myocarditis — which can cause permanent damage to heart muscle — increases with the number of boosters a person has taken and can in some cases cause death.

Health officials contacted by NBC News did not suggest that official guidance on COVID-19 vaccination will change while the studies of long-term health issues from vaccine-related heart problems are underway.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) declined to comment on Pfizer’s and Moderna’s studies, but an agency official told NBC News the chance of having myocarditis occur following vaccination is “very low.”

Too little, too late?

Commenting on the news, Dr. Peter McCullough — internist, epidemiologist, cardiologist and leading expert on COVID-19 treatment — said in a Nov. 16 Substack post:

“Now two years after public release and mounting cases of fatal myocarditis published in the peer-reviewed literature, both Pfizer and Moderna have announced they will begin studies of cardiac safety that the FDA required in their 2021 Biological Licensing Agreement letters from the FDA.”

“Why did the US government and the vaccine companies wait so long? Do they anticipate their own bad news will kill the failing product line?”

McCullough, who authored “The Courage to Face COVID-19” and developed the McCullough Protocol for early treatment of COVID-19, said only an internal document review from government agencies and vaccine developers will tell the public what was going on during this “biological product safety disaster.”

“As a cardiologist, I can tell you the entire discipline of cardiovascular disease is oriented to preserving heart tissue. Heart muscle is largely terminally differentiated with low rates of turnover; hence, we cannot afford to lose any cardiomyocytes to damage caused by vaccines.”

McCullough listed a number of studies on how the mRNA vaccines affect the heart:

“Aldana-Bitar et al., described the excursion of cardiac troponin as about four days with COVID-19 vaccine-induced myocarditis which is oddly about the same duration as an ischemic myocardial infarction due to blocked coronary arteries. …

“Hence the confusion with the terms ‘myocarditis’ ‘myopericarditis’ and ‘heart attack’ in the CDC [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] VAERS [Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System] and the media.

“The first two prospective cohort studies, where blood cardiac troponin level was measured before and after receiving mRNA injections, both demonstrated unacceptably high rates of troponin elevations indicating predictable heart damage.

“Mansanguan et al. found the rate of heart injury was 2.3% on the second injection of Pfizer in children 13-18 years old. … Two children were hospitalized with myocarditis in this 301-person study.

“Le Pessec et al., in a presentation at the European Society of Cardiology, revealed 2.8% of healthcare workers (n=777) had elevated troponin by day 3 after the third mRNA injection. …

“Given the known relationship of coronavirus spike protein and cardiac toxicity from the 1990’s, the vaccine companies should have been measuring troponin during their randomized trials in 2020.

“Baric et al. in 1999 reported: ‘We have shown that infection with RbCV [rabbit coronavirus] results in the development of myocarditis and congestive heart failure and that some survivors of RbCV infection go on to develop dilated cardiomyopathy in the chronic phase.’”

But this prior research was apparently overlooked by COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers and public health officials, McCullough suggested.

“Sadly and ineptly,” McCullough said, “BARDA [Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority], DARPA [Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency], vaccine consultants, and the manufacturers had no measures in place to identify expected cardiac damage in humans.”

‘Do we really need to wait years to be absolutely certain this condition is serious?’

According to ZeroHedge, existing data and the freshly-launched clinical trials blatantly contradict the “safe and effective” narrative that Pfizer and Moderna have defended since they launched their vaccines.

“Why is Big Pharma investigating their own COVID vaccines for myocarditis side effects if the vaccines were already supposedly tested and proven safe and effective?” ZeroHedge asked.

“In all likelihood, Pfizer and Moderna are trying to get out ahead of burgeoning side effects with their own studies as a means to spin or mitigate bad press in the future. The chances of these studies providing honest data-driven assessments are low,” they said.

Pfizer is currently embroiled in a whistleblower lawsuit alleging fraud during its initial COVID-19 vaccine trials.

Comedian and political commentator Russell Brand also took aim at the news, asking viewers, “What kind of reality are we living in now” where pharmaceutical companies … whose products were widely mandated by elected officials who later show up on reality TV, are only now, two years later, beginning to investigate heart problems associated with their products?

Brand was referring to a former U.K. British Health Minister who resigned in June 2021 after he was caught breaking COVID-19 lockdown rules and is now starring in a reality TV show.

Brand also called out the media coverage of Pfizer and Moderna’s announcement, reading NBC News’ byline that said, “Both Pfizer and Moderna are launching clinical trials to track health issues — if any — in the years following a diagnosis of vaccine-associated heart problems in teens and young adults.”

Brand accused NBC News of using the phrase “if any” to suggest there may be no adverse health issues following a diagnosis of vaccine-related myocarditis.

“There are certainly some interesting graphs and data available that seem to suggest that there could be significant findings in those areas,” he said, alluding to research mentioned in the rest of the NBC article.

NBC news also summarized a recent CDC-funded study in The Lancet that examined health outcomes in 519 teens and young adults who reported a diagnosis of myocarditis following an mRNA vaccination concluding, “Most got better at least three months after symptoms.”

“Yes. Most of them got better after three months,” said Dr. Madhava Setty, senior science editor for The Defender. “But 1 in 5 were still not cleared for physical activity. One in 4 required daily medication to treat their condition. Ninety-nine of them required intensive care as a result of their vaccine injury.”

Setty added:

“We are talking about young, healthy people that required ICU admissions, that now cannot exert themselves and may require heart medications indefinitely. Do we really need to wait years to be absolutely certain this condition is serious? It is as serious as a heart attack. Literally.

“If the CDC is admitting that it does not know what the long-term repercussions of vaccine-induced myocarditis are in young people, why are they continuing to recommend that they receive these products when they already know there is little to no benefit for this demographic?

“It is nonsensical for an agency of public health to promote these therapies while waiting years for proof that they are NOT dangerous.”

Moderna: ‘We don’t understand’ why vaccines cause heart damage

The FDA in January told Pfizer and Moderna they must conduct several post-marketing safety studies due to the “known serious risks of myocarditis and pericarditis” and the “unexpected serious risk of subclinical myocarditis.”

Moderna launched two trials, the most recent in September. Pfizer told NBC News it plans to start at least one of its trials, which will include up to 500 individuals age 20 and younger, over the next few months.

In collaboration with the Pediatric Heart Network, Pfizer will monitor participants for five years, according to Dr. Dongngan Truong, a pediatrician at the University of Utah Health and a co-lead on the Pfizer study.

Participants will include people who were previously hospitalized with vaccine-related myocarditis and those who were more recently diagnosed.

Dr. Paul Burton, Moderna’s chief medical officer, told NBC News scientists still don’t have a clear explanation yet for why the vaccines cause the condition.

He suspects the virus’s spike protein, once produced in the cell after vaccination, may generate a reaction in the body that can cause inflammation in the heart.

“We don’t understand yet and there’s no good mechanism to explain it,” he said.

Burton did not comment on whether or not he was privy to the cardiology studies McCullough cited in his Substack post that showed a clear association between mRNA vaccines and heart damage.

According to Burton, the two myocarditis studies Moderna has started — one of which is being conducted in collaboration with the American College of Cardiology — are examining public and private health data from tens of millions of people who received the company’s vaccine.

He said the study would answer basic questions including: “Did they get myocarditis? When did it occur? How was it treated? How severe was it?”

Moderna also is conducting two more studies with the European Medicines Agency that will span five different countries.

The drugmaker will assess outcomes for a year or more, Burton said, with results expected to be made public in the summer of 2023.

CDC downplays risk of myocarditis as vaccine makers protected from liability claims

According to some experts, when statistically significant levels of myocarditis reports began appearing in VAERS, government health officials were slow to warn the public of the possible risk — and the agency continues to downplay the risk as “rare.”

Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., and Brian Hooker, Ph.D., P.E, in October published research on data showing that although a statistically significant vaccine adverse event “signal” for myocarditis in males ages 8-21 was seen on the VAERS database as early as Feb. 19, 2021 — just two months after the release of the COVID-19 vaccine to the U.S. public — CDC officials buried the connectionbetween COVID-19 vaccination and myocarditis until May 27, 2021.

“By this date, over 50% of the eligible U.S. population had received at least one mRNA COVID-19 vaccine,” Hooker, chief scientific officer for Children’s Health Defense, told The Defender.

“Withholding this type of information is criminal,” he added.

According to Steve Kirsch, executive director of Vaccine Safety Research Foundation, the CDC continues to downplay and underestimate the likely number of vaccine-related myocarditis cases.

On Thursday, Kirsch wrote:

“Large Canadian hospital: before COVID, they’d see 2 cases per year.

“Now they see 27 in just 6 weeks. That’s a 117X increase.

“But the CDC says it’s only ‘slightly elevated.’”

“You would think this is a problem, but it isn’t,” Kirsch said. “When 2 car owners die, the car manufacturer tells people to stop using the car. The reason for this is simple: liability.”

Kirsch added:

“But with these vaccines, there is no liability, so there is no need to set a stopping condition.

“The US government will happily injure hundreds of thousands or millions of kids and it simply just doesn’t matter because there is no liability. That’s just the way it goes.”

As of Nov. 4, there have been 24,608 cases of myocarditis and pericarditis and 4,878 reports of myocardial infarction (i.e., heart attack) reported to VAERS since mid-December 2020.

VAERS is the primary government-funded system for reporting adverse vaccine reactions in the U.S.

A New Study Shows that Moderna's COVID Shot May Cause as Much as Triple the Rates of Pericarditis and Myocarditis

From [HERE] While public health agencies continue to downplay the seriousness of adverse events after the receipt of the experimental mRNA jabs for COVID, a new study shows that one drug maker’s shot may cause as much as triple the rates of pericarditis and myocarditis.

Researchers said the rates of Moderna’s shot were 35.6 and 22.9 per million doses, respectively, for Moderna compared to 12.6 and 9.4 per million for Pfizer. Men and younger recipients were found to be affected the most.

Still, the scientists insisted that the side effects are “extremely rare” and “self-limiting.” Despite what the officials say, MSN reports that many medical professionals are questioning the shots’ safety and have “pulled back on recommending the mRNA vaccines for young men in particular due to the less favorable risk-reward balance compared to other demographic groups.”

Ed Dowd: A Quick Overview Of The Devastating Impact COVID Injections Are Having On the US and World

I Can't Breathe: Thousands Of Breathing Impairments Caused by Dangerous COVID Injections Including Many Severe Issues

Judge Orders Liar Fauci, Other Top Authorities to Testify Under Oath in Case Brought by 2 State Attorney Generals

From [MERCOLA] In the summer of 2022, a lawsuit was filed by the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana against the federal government, including Dr. Anthony Fauci

• The lawsuit alleges that the U.S. government colluded with Big Tech giants Twitter, Meta (Facebook), YouTube, Instagram and LinkedIn to censor certain viewpoints by labeling them “misinformation” or “disinformation”

• In September 2022, a federal judge ordered Fauci and other officials to turn over emails with five social media firms

• Now, a federal court has taken it a step further, ruling that Fauci and other officials must testify under oath at depositions about whether they colluded with Big Tech to censor certain users

• The suit gives multiple examples of Fauci’s roles in the suppression of free speech, including that related to the lab leak theory of COVID-19’s origin, COVID-19 shots and the efficiency of masks and COVID-19 lockdowns

Restriction of free speech excelled during the COVID-19 pandemic, when efforts to shut down public discussions and information that countered the official narrative were in full force. In the summer of 2022, a lawsuit was filed by the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana against the federal government, including Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID).1

The lawsuit alleges that the U.S. government colluded with Big Tech giants Twitter, Meta (Facebook), YouTube, Instagram and LinkedIn to censor certain viewpoints by labeling them “misinformation” or “disinformation.” In September 2022, a federal judge ordered Fauci and other officials to turn over emails with five social media firms.2

Fauci initially refused, stating that the communications were protected by executive privilege. However, the judge ordered that the documents be turned over within 21 days nonetheless. Fauci was also ordered to answer questions posed by the plaintiffs in full. Mary Holland, president and general counsel of Children’s Health Defense, explained:3

“Up until now, Dr. Fauci has operated under this cloak of ‘untouchableness,’ thinking he has been above the law. He likely didn’t expect his emails to be made public. We can only imagine what this tranche of emails will likely reveal about Dr. Fauci’s bare-knuckled censorship — it won’t be pretty.”

Now, a federal court has taken it a step further, ruling that Fauci and other officials must testify under oath at depositions about whether they colluded with Big Tech to censor certain users.4

US Government Accused of Suppressing Free Speech

The original lawsuit was filed in May 2022 by Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt and Louisiana Attorney General Jeff Landry.5 A joint statement regarding witness depositions reads:6

“Plaintiffs allege Defendants have colluded with and/or coerced social media companies to suppress disfavored speakers, viewpoints, and content on social media platforms by labeling the content “dis-information,” “mis-information,” and “mal-information.”

Plaintiffs allege the suppression of disfavored speakers, viewpoints, and contents constitutes government action and violates Plaintiffs’ freedom of speech in violation of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.”

What Was the Government Trying to Hide?

Several examples are given of suppression of free speech. Among them:7

• The Hunter Biden laptop story prior to the 2020 presidential election —Evidence found on Hunter’s laptop suggests he helped secure “millions in funding” for Metabiota, a U.S. contractor in Ukraine “specializing in deadly pathogen research,” which is what the Russian government had claimed during a press conference March 24, 2022.8

  In addition, one of Metabiota’s investors is Rosemont Seneca,9 an investment fund co-managed by Hunter Biden.10

  Metabiota is also a core partner in the USAID PREDICT program, which funded laboratory equipment for the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in China through grants to the EcoHealth Alliance, and Shi Zhengli, a top coronavirus researcher at the WIV, also worked with PREDICT.11 The media, however, largely dismissed the story.12

  Daniel Schmidt, a freshman at the University of Chicago and writer for the university’s student-run newspaper The Chicago Thinker, even confronted Anne Applebaum, a staff writer for The Atlantic, about the media dismissal, stating:13

  “In 2020 you wrote, ‘Those who live outside the Fox News bubble do not, of course, need to learn any of the stuff about Hunter Biden,’ referring to his laptop, of course. A poll later found that if voters knew about the contents of the laptop, 16% of Joe Biden voters would have acted differently.

  Now, of course, we know ... that The New York Times confirmed that the content is real. Do you think the media acted inappropriately when they instantly dismissed Hunter Biden’s laptop as Russian disinformation and what can be learned from that in ensuring that what we label as disinformation is truly disinformation and not reality?”

• Speech about the lab leak theory of COVID-19’s origin — The plaintiffs allege that Fauci censored “speech backed by great scientific credibility and with enormous potential nationwide impact.”14 This includes information that COVID-19 was the result of a lab leak in Wuhan, China.

  One of the major pieces of propaganda is "The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2,"15 a paper published in Nature Medicine in March 2020 that became the preeminent "proof" that SARS-CoV-2 had a natural origin and couldn't possibly have come from a lab. It was later revealed that Fauci, Wellcome Trust head Jeremy Farrar and Dr. Francis Collins, NIH director, had a hand in the paper.16 As Children’s Health Defense reported:17

  “If the lab leak theory were true, in turn, it would mean that Fauci could be potentially implicated in funding the research on viruses that caused the COVID-19 pandemic that killed millions of people worldwide, the plaintiffs argued. This is because he funded risky “gain-of-function” research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology through intermediaries such as EcoHealth Alliance.

  In late January 2020 and early February 2020, Fauci was also in touch with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg in oral communications about the government’s COVID-19 response. Facebook then allegedly went on [to] censor the lab leak theory, according to the plaintiffs.”

• Speech about the efficiency of masks and COVID-19 lockdowns — Two plaintiffs in the case, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya and Dr. Martin Kulldorff, co-authored the Great Barrington Declaration, which scientifically critiqued the effects of prolonged lockdowns in response to COVID-19.

  Collins sent an email to Fauci stating, “There needs to be a quick and devastating published take-down of its premises.” In response, Fauci began to publicly criticize the Declaration, calling it “total nonsense” and “ridiculous.”18

  The New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA), which is part of the lawsuit, representing Bhattacharya and Kulldorff, stated:19

  “Social media platforms, acting at the federal government’s behest, repeatedly censored NCLA’s clients for articulating views on those platforms in opposition to government-approved views on Covid-19 restrictions. This insidious censorship was the direct result of the federal government’s ongoing campaign to silence those who voice perspectives that deviate from those of the Biden Administration.

  Government officials’ public threats to punish social media companies that did not do their bidding demonstrate this linkage, as do emails from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to social media companies that only recently were made public.”

Fauci Ordered to Testify Under Oath

The request for depositions was filed October 10, 2022. “After finding documentation of a collusive relationship between the Biden administration and social media companies to censor free speech, we immediately filed a motion to get these officials under oath,” Schmitt said in a news release.

“It is high time we shine a light on this censorship enterprise and force these officials to come clean to the American people, and this ruling will allow us to do just that. We’ll keep pressing for the truth.”20 In addition to Fauci, other officials ordered to testify include:21

• Former White House press secretary Jen Psaki

• Director of White House Digital Strategy Rob Flaherty

• Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy

• CISA director Jen Easterly

• FBI Supervisory special agent Elvis Chan

The depositions will cover many examples of a collusive relationship uncovered by the email exchanges. Another example includes former New York Times reporter Alex Berenson, who was also a victim of the censorship hysteria; his Twitter account was suspended when he posted this scientifically accurate information about COVID-19 shots:22

“It doesn’t stop infection. Or transmission. Don’t think of it as a vaccine. Think of it — at best — as a therapeutic with a limited window of efficacy and terrible side effect profile that must be dosed IN ADVANCE OF ILLNESS. And we want to mandate it? Insanity.”

Berenson filed a lawsuit against Twitter for labeling the tweet as misleading and canceling his account. The case has since been resolved, with Twitter acknowledging that the tweets should not have led to a suspension. When his account was reinstated, Berenson tweeted the exact same message, which this time escaped Twitter’s “misinformation” flag.

However, it’s now been revealed that Fauci was involved in Berenson’s suspension. According to the plaintiffs’ joint statement, “Dr. Fauci publicly described Berenson’s opinions on vaccines as ‘horrifying.’ President Biden followed Dr. Fauci’s steps and made a statement that ‘They’re killing people’ by not censoring vaccine ‘misinformation,’ to which Twitter subsequently permanently suspended Berenson from its platform.”23

Will the Truth Finally Be Heard?

The request for depositions gave three reasons why Fauci, specifically, should be questioned under oath:24

1. He refused to verify under oath his own interrogatory responses; instead, NIAID responses were verified by Dr Jill Harper, who was not named in the complaint. Fauci has made no statements under oath regarding his communications with social media platforms.

2. Even if Fauci can prove he didn’t communicate with social media platforms, “there are compelling reasons that suggest Dr. Fauci has acted through intermediaries, and acted on behalf of others, in procuring the social-media censorship of credible scientific opinions.”

3. Fauci’s credibility on matters related to COVID-19 “misinformation” has been in question since 2020. “Plaintiffs state that Dr. Fauci has made public statements on the efficacy of masks, the percentage of the population needed for herd immunity, NIAID’s funding of ‘gain-of-function’ virus research in Wuhan, the lab-leak theory, and more.

   Plaintiffs urge that his comments on these important issues are relevant to the matter at hand and are further reasons why Dr. Fauci should be deposed.”

August 22, 2022, Fauci announced he will resign from his roles as director of the NIAID — a position he’s held for 38 years — and chief medical adviser to the White House, come December.25 It’s interesting timing.

It appears Fauci is making sure to get out before new Republican Congressional members take their seats and is probably banking on being able to plead the Fifth Amendment as a private citizen, should Republicans decide to investigate his role in the pandemic. This deposition may change that, as well as bring much-needed protection to Americans’ right to free speech. As noted by NCLA:26

“Government-induced censorship is achieved through a wide variety of mechanisms, ranging from complete bans, temporary bans, “shadow bans” (where often neither the user nor his audience is notified of the suppression of speech), deboosting, de-platforming, de-monetizing, restricting access to content, requiring users to take down content, and imposing warning labels that require click-through to access content, among others.

These methods also include temporary and permanent suspensions of disfavored speakers.

This sort of censorship, which strikes at the heart of what the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was designed to protect — free speech, especially political speech — constitutes unlawful government action. The federal government is deciding whose voices and ideas may be heard, and whose voices and ideas must be silenced.

Moreover, this state action deprives Americans of their right to hear the views of those who are being silenced, a First Amendment corollary of the right to free speech. The government’s policy of coercing social-media companies to censor Plaintiffs’ viewpoints should be declared unlawful and halted immediately.”

Baseless COVID Shut Down Orders that Destroyed Businesses and Jobs Didn't Destroy Rights? Fed Judge says Sup Ct Should Consider Whether the Right to Earn a Living is a Fundamental Constitutional Right

From [HERE] A federal appeals judge suggested in a concurrence this week that the U.S. Supreme Court should consider whether the right to earn a living is a fundamental, unenumerated constitutional right.

Judge James Ho of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at New Orleans made his argument in a Nov. 8 COVID-19 shutdown case, report Reuters, Law360, Above the Law and the Volokh Conspiracy.

Ho joined the majority opinion, which “reluctantly” concluded that the city of Columbus, Mississippi, did not violate the constitutional rights of the Golden Glow Tanning Salon when it shut down businesses during the COVID-19 pandemic, according to Law360.

Ho’s concurrence, however, follows “a growing body of cases in which judges have argued that government restrictions on economic activity—often in business licensing cases—are given too much deference from the courts,” Law360 reports.

Ho began his concurrence this way: “The Supreme Court has recognized a number of fundamental rights that do not appear in the text of the Constitution. But the right to earn a living is not one of them—despite its deep roots in our nation’s history and tradition. Governing precedent thus requires us to rule against the countless small businesses, like plaintiff here, crippled by shutdown mandates imposed by public officials in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Cases like this nevertheless raise the question: If we’re going to recognize various unenumerated rights as fundamental, why not the right to earn a living?”

Ho said the Supreme Court could consider the right to earn a living by granting cert in Tiwari v. Friedlander. In that case, the 6th Circuit at Cincinnati upheld a requirement for home health care companies to obtain a certificate of need before providing services in the Louisville, Kentucky, area.

The 5th Circuit case is Golden Glow Tanning Salon Inc. v. City of Columbus, Mississippi.

Ho is an appointee of former President Donald Trump. He was previously in the news for pledging not to hire future Yale Law School grads as clerks because of what he sees as the school’s cancel culture.

Military Whistleblowers say Cancer, Miscarriages and Heart Disease All Up 300% following COVID Injection Mandates

From [HERE] Three doctors in the armed forces have decided to blow the lid on the United States military’s open deception concerning the negative outcome of Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “vaccination” on American troops.

According to the three whistleblowers, medical billing code data captured by the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED), which is run by the Department of Defense (DoD), shows that rates of miscarriage, myocarditis, cancer, Bell’s palsy, female infertility, and many other health conditions are up big time.

Cancer rates are particularly concerning, they say, as the normal average number of new cases per year is about 38,700, based on the time period from 2016-2020. In 2021 after Operation Warp Speed was launched, however, the number of new cancer cases that year rose to 114,645.

The Armed Forces Health Surveillance Branch (AFHSB) runs the DMED, which it describes as a “web-based tool to remotely query de-identified active component personnel and medical event data contained within the Defense Medical Surveillance System (DMSS).”

“The database contains every International Classification of Diseases (ICD) medical billing code for all medical diagnoses submitted by the military for medical insurance billing,” reports explain. (Related: Remember at the launch of Operation Warp Speed when Dr. Sara Beltrán Ponce, MD, suffered a horrific miscarriage right after getting jabbed for the Chinese Flu?)

Neurological issues up 1,000% in military following Operation Warp Speed

The three military whistleblowers in question are Samuel Sigoloff, Peter Chambers, and Theresa Long. Attorney Thomas Renz issued sworn statements from these three to the courts as part of a major lawsuit. [MORE]

10-Year-Old Boy Died of Cardiac Arrest 7 Days After Moderna Shot, VAERS Data Show. The Dependent Media Continues to Lie and Conceal Reality of Dangerous COVID Injections

From [HERE] The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) today released new data showing a total of 1,458,322 reports of adverse events following COVID-19 vaccines were submitted between Dec. 14, 2020, and Nov. 4, 2022, to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).

VAERS is the primary government-funded system for reporting adverse vaccine reactions in the U.S.

The data included a total of 31,961 reports of deaths and 265,274 serious injuries, including deaths, during the same time period.

There were a total of 7,783 reports of adverse events following the new COVID-19 bivalent booster as of Nov. 4, 2022, with 45% attributed to Moderna’s booster and 55% attributed to Pfizer/BioNTech’s booster. The data included a total of 61 deaths and 434 serious injuries.

As of Nov. 10, 31.4 million people have received the updated bivalent booster dose.

Of the 31,961 reported deaths, 20,381 cases are attributed to Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine, 8,696 cases to Moderna, 2,773 cases to Johnson & Johnson (J&J) and no cases yet reported for Novavax.

Excluding “foreign reports” to VAERS, 894,850 adverse events, including 15,096 deaths and 93,362 serious injuries, were reported in the U.S. between Dec. 14, 2020, and Nov. 4, 2022.

Foreign reports are reports foreign subsidiaries send to U.S. vaccine manufacturers. Under U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations, if a manufacturer is notified of a foreign case report that describes an event that is both serious and does not appear on the product’s labeling, the manufacturer is required to submit the report to VAERS.

Of the 15,096 deaths reported as of Nov. 4, 7% occurred within 24 hours of vaccination and 15% occurred within 48 hours of vaccination.

In the U.S., 640 million COVID-19 vaccine doses had been administered as of Nov. 2, including 381 million doses of Pfizer, 241 million doses of Moderna and 19 million doses of J&J.

Data Shows the More Shots You Get, the More Likely You Are to Die from COVID. While Only 34% of Canadians Got 3 or 4 COVID Shots, Triple and Quadruple Jabbed Made up 81% of all COVID deaths in 6/22

From [MERCOLA] Hospitals around the U.S. are suddenly struggling to keep up with surging rates of respiratory infections among children, such as respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), COVID, rhinoviruses and influenza

• Moderna is working on an mRNA jab for RSV, which is scheduled for release in 2023. They’re also working on a combination mRNA jab for COVID, RSV and the flu

• Censored scientists and doctors have long warned that the mRNA COVID jabs are destroying people’s immune systems, and that we’re going to see an avalanche of infections as immune system failure sets in

• The COVID jab causes innate immune suppression, which makes you more susceptible to all kinds of infections and chronic diseases. Suppression of Type 1 interferon signaling appears to be one of the primary mechanisms by which the shot destroys immune competence, and repeated booster shots can reliably be anticipated to amplify adverse effects

• The more shots you get, the more likely you are to die from COVID. While only 34% of Canadians have received three or four doses of the COVID jab, triple and quadruple jabbed made up 81% of all COVID deaths in June 2022. Excess mortality among young children, teens and young adults is also skyrocketing

Hospitals around the U.S. are suddenly struggling to keep up with surging rates of respiratory infections among children, such as respiratory syncytial virus (RSV),1 COVID, rhinoviruses and influenza.2 Hospital staff feign confusion, saying they have no idea what’s going on.

Meanwhile, censored scientists and doctors have long warned that the mRNA COVID jabs are destroying people’s immune systems, and that we’re going to see an avalanche of infections as immune system failure sets in.

Many Hospitals at or Near Capacity

As of the third week of October 2022, several children's hospitals in Washington, D.C., Maryland, Connecticut and Virginia reported being at or near capacity.3 To expand capacity, officials in Hartford, Connecticut, are seeking help from the National Guard and FEMA.

According to Dr. Margaret R. Moon, co-director of Johns Hopkins Children’s Center in Baltimore, the hospital “is experiencing a surge of patients due to an increase in cases of RSV, as well as other reasons, and many surrounding hospitals are facing the same.”4

RSV typically causes mild cold-like symptoms that last for a week or two. While harmless in adults, in infants the virus can cause more severe infections such as bronchiolitis (inflammation of the smaller branches of the bronchial airways) and pneumonia.

According to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data,5 58,000 children under age 5 are hospitalized for RSV each year, and the CDC’s RSV dashboard6 (screenshot below) does show that RSV is acting unseasonably. Could this out-of-season emergence of RSV have something to do with the fact that the Food and Drug Administration authorized the COVID shot for children under 5 in June 2022?7

Maybe, maybe not. It’s not a clear parallel, as RSV also rose out of season during the summer of 2021, when young children did not yet have access to the COVID shot. Parents and older siblings, however, were eligible, and there are still many open questions surrounding the issue of shedding. It’s possible that spike protein shedding from the shots were affecting younger children, suppressing their immune systems.

mRNA RSV Jab in the Works

Considering hospitalization rates for RSV are actually lower than historical seasonal highs, one also wonders whether the media’s attention on RSV might be related to the fact that Moderna is working on an mRNA jab for RSV, which is scheduled for release in 2023.8

They’re also working on a combination mRNA jab for COVID, RSV and the flu. Ultimately, Moderna wants to create an annual mRNA shot that covers all of the top 10 viruses that result in hospitalizations each year.9 If the COVID shot is any indication, such an injection could be catastrophic.

COVID Jab Causes Innate Immune Suppression

There’s now ample evidence showing the COVID jab causes innate immune suppression, which makes you more susceptible to all kinds of infection, not just COVID, as well as any number of chronic diseases.

In June 2022, Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D., Dr. Greg Nigh, Dr. Anthony Kyriakopoulos and Dr. Peter McCullough published a paper10 in Food and Chemical Toxicology, reviewing the mechanisms by which the shots suppress immune function and trigger disease. As noted in the abstract:11

“The utilization of mRNA vaccines in the context of infectious disease has no precedent. The many alterations in the vaccine mRNA hide the mRNA from cellular defenses and promote a longer biological half-life and high production of spike protein. However, the immune response to the vaccine is very different from that to a SARS-CoV-2 infection. 

In this paper, we present evidence that vaccination induces a profound impairment in type I interferon signaling, which has diverse adverse consequences to human health. 

Immune cells that have taken up the vaccine nanoparticles release into circulation large numbers of exosomes containing spike protein along with critical microRNAs that induce a signaling response in recipient cells at distant sites. 

We also identify potential profound disturbances in regulatory control of protein synthesis and cancer surveillance. These disturbances potentially have a causal link to neurodegenerative disease, myocarditis, immune thrombocytopenia, Bell's palsy, liver disease, impaired adaptive immunity, impaired DNA damage response and tumorigenesis.”

Suppression of Type 1 interferon signaling appears to be one of the primary mechanisms by which the shot suppresses and destroys immune competence, and repeated booster shots can reliably be anticipated to amplify any and all adverse effects.

Type 1 Interferon Suppression Is a Recipe for Ill Health

Type 1 interferon plays an important role in the immune response to viral infections, cancer and autoimmune diseases. So, the fact that we’re now seeing significant increases in all of these conditions is not surprising.

When a cell is invaded by a virus, it releases Type 1 interferon alpha and Type 1 interferon beta. They act as signaling molecules that tell the cell that it’s been infected. That, in turn, launches the immune response and gets it going early in the viral infection. It’s been shown that people who end up with severe SARS-CoV-2 infection have a compromised Type 1 interferon response. Those who get the jab have an even more suppressed response.

Importantly, the antibody response you get from the COVID shot is exponentially higher than what you get from natural infection, and the level of antibody response rises with disease severity. So, the shot basically mimics severe infection, and this is why boosters can spell disaster.

If your Type 1 interferon response is already deficient, your immune cells are not very capable at stopping the spread of a virus in your body. Hence, the more shots you get, and the more your Type 1 interferon response is impaired, the more likely you become to develop severe infections, be it COVID or any other infection. This also means that you’re more likely to die, and rising excess mortality statistics, which I’ll review in a moment, confirm this.

Type 1 interferon also keeps latent viruses like herpes and varicella (which causes shingles) viruses in check, and when your interferon pathway is suppressed, these latent viruses can also start to emerge. And, indeed, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database reveals many who have been jabbed do report these kinds of infections.

Don’t Be Fooled by ‘Reframing’ Efforts

Disturbingly, researchers and mainstream media are still pushing the idea that COVID shot side effects are a sign that the shot is working well. As reported by CNN October 24, 2022:12

“People who reported experiencing side effects to the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines such as fever, chills or muscle pain tended to have a greater antibody response following vaccination, according to new research.

Having such symptoms after vaccination is associated with greater antibody responses compared with having only pain or rash at the injection site or no symptoms at all, suggests the paper published Friday in the journal JAMA Network Open.13

‘In conclusion, these findings support reframing postvaccination symptoms as signals of vaccine effectiveness and reinforce guidelines for vaccine boosters in older adults,’ the researchers ... wrote in their paper.”

To be clear, feeling terrible after your COVID shot is not to be taken as evidence that the shot is providing you with protection. What you’re experiencing is akin to having severe COVID. The shot is suppressing your Type 1 interferon, and continuing with additional jabs is a recipe for ill health. It’s just that simple.

As suggested in that JAMA article, they really want to “reframe postvaccination symptoms” to stop people from reconsidering the wisdom of taking subsequent jabs, but don’t fall for it. You’re feeling terrible because your body is being harmed.

The More Shots You Get, the More Likely You’ll Die of COVID

As noted by Dr. Charles Hoffe in a September 15, 2022, interview with Laura-Lynn Tyler Thompson, “The more shots you get, the more likely you will die from COVID-19.” An excerpt from the interview is included above. You can find the full interview on Bitchute.14

While only 34% of Canadians had received three or four doses, the triple and quadruple jabbed made up 81% of all COVID deaths in the month of June.

According to the latest data from Canada, summarized by Hoffe, 85% of Canadians have received at least two COVID shots, and in June 2022, 92% of all COVID deaths were in fully jabbed individuals. And, while only 34% of Canadians had received three or four doses, they made up 81% of all COVID deaths in the month of June.

“This is the clearest evidence that the more shots you have, the more likely you will die of COVID,” Hoffe said. “These [shots] are severely damaging the immune system. And so, the discrimination against those who have chosen to be vaxx free is absolutely absurd because those are the people who are going to survive.”

Youths Are Dying at Frightening Rates

In the video above, nurse educator John Campbell, Ph.D., reviews the latest U.K. and U.S. data on excess deaths in the young. The U.K. is now seeing 20 to 30 excess deaths per week in the age group of birth to 24.

Excess deaths are also statistically higher in the U.S. than expected. For the age group of birth to 24, cumulative all-cause excess deaths was 16,747 as of week 35. The screenshot below, from USmortality.com,15 illustrates how the cumulative excess deaths among our children, teens and young adults have skyrocketed since June 2020.

Recall the FDA authorized the first COVID shot December 11, 2020, for individuals aged 16 years and older.16 If the excess deaths from June through December were related to COVID, the shots certainly have NOT improved the situation or made youths less likely to die. Quite the contrary.

Excess deaths among all age groups follows a similar but more step-like rise.

Medical Abuse of Women and Children Is Rampant

The medical system has mistreated and abused infants for decades, forcing a number of completely useless and harmful interventions on them. Antibiotic eye treatment17 and the hepatitis B vaccine,18 both administered on the day of birth, are but two examples. The fact that U.S. child mortality ranks19 worst among the 20 wealthiest nations speaks to the effects of all this medial mistreatment and overtreatment of infants.

The U.S. also has the highest maternal death rate in the developed world,20 and according to medial investigators, 84% of all these maternal deaths are preventable.21 Clearly, we’re doing a lot of things wrong.

CDC Takes Child Abuse to a Whole New Level

With its decision to add COVID shots to the U.S. childhood, adolescent and adult vaccine schedules,22 the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is taking the abuse of infants and pregnant women to a whole new level. As reported by The Defender:23

“Commenting on [the CDC’s unanimous] vote, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., chairman of the board and chief legal counsel for Children’s Health Defense (CHD), said: 

‘This reckless action is final proof of the cynicism, corruption and capture of a once exemplary public health agency. ACIP members have again demonstrated that fealty to their pharma overlords eclipses any residual concerns they may harbor for child welfare or public health. This is an act of child abuse on a massive scale’ ...

[A]dding the COVID-19 vaccines means 18 more shots — one per year between the ages of 6 months and 18 years — will be added to the schedule, according to Toby Rogers, Ph.D. 

‘So overnight the childhood schedule would go from 54 injections (72 antigens because of combined shots like MMR) to 72 injections (90 antigens),’ Rogers said. ‘This has absolutely nothing to do with health — it’s all about profit and power’ ... 

Brian Hooker, Ph.D., P.E., told The Defender, ‘Given the high risk of vaccine injury for a product that provides little or no benefit to children, this represents a criminal enterprise solely to ensure a revenue stream for COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers’ ...

As of Oct. 7 [2022], the VAERS data for 6-month-olds to 5-year-olds who received a COVID-19 vaccine showed reports of 4,279 adverse events, including 182 cases rated as serious and 7 reported deaths. For 5- to 11-year-olds, there were 14,622 reports of adverse events, including 692 rated as serious and 29 reported deaths.”

Can Children Survive This Many mRNA Shots?

The following COVID-19 jab recommendations will go into effect in 2023:

• Age 6 months to 4 years — a two-dose primary series for Moderna, or a three-dose primary series for Pfizer, plus an annual booster

• Age 5 to 11 years — a two-dose series of either Moderna or Pfizer plus an annual booster

• Age 12 to 18 years — a two-dose series for Moderna, Novavax or Pfizer plus an annual booster

For children with moderately or severely compromised immune systems, the recommended primary series is increased from a two-dose series to a three-dose series, which is madness heaped upon insanity. I really don’t see how young children will get through their primary education alive if they have to take annual boosters on top of a primary series.

Rules Upended for Vaccine Injury Compensation

Adding insult to injury, while the COVID jab makers get a permanent liability shield through the addition of the jabs to the childhood vaccination schedule, those injured by these mRNA shots will not get compensation through the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), which covers nearly every other vaccine on the schedule. The Defender explains:24

“Vaccine makers are not liable for injuries or deaths associated with EUA [emergency use authorized] vaccines but can be held liable for injuries caused by a fully licensed vaccine — unless that vaccine is added to the CDC’s childhood vaccination schedule.

Parents of children injured by vaccines listed on the childhood schedule typically can seek compensation through the taxpayer-funded National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), a no-fault alternative to the traditional legal system for resolving vaccine injury claims.

However, the revisions voted on today by the committee explicitly state25 (slide 24) that the newly added ... COVID-19 vaccines are not covered under the VICP.

Instead, the COVID-19 vaccines added to the childhood schedule will remain covered by the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP). To date, only six claims filed with the CICP have been approved for compensation.”

In closing, if you care about your children, do not allow them to be injected with these immune-destroying shots. If you’re still on the fence, please read the cited paper by Seneff, Nigh, Kyriakopoulos and McCullough,26 to get an understanding of how these shots can utterly decimate your child’s health.

- Sources and References

• 1 NPR October 24, 2022

• 2 Axios October 21, 2022

• 3, 4 DCist October 20, 2022

• 5 CDC RSV Trends

• 6 CDC RSV Interactive Dashboard, Screenshot grabbed October 26, 2022

• 7 CNN June 20, 2022

• 8 World Economic Forum, COVID-19: What’s Next? January 17, 2022, 6:25

• 9 CNBC January 10, 2022

• 10, 11, 26 Food and Chemical Toxicology June 2022; 164: 113008

• 12 CNN October 24, 2022

• 13 JAMA Network Open October 21, 2022; 5(10): e2237908

• 14 Bitchute Laura-Lynn Tyler Thompson September 15, 2022

• 15 US Mortality Weekly All-Cause Excess Deaths, Cumulative

• 16 Immunize.org Historical Vaccine Timeline

• 17 CBC March 20, 2015

• 18 Medical News Today March 28, 2022

• 19 CNN January 8, 2018

• 20 NPR May 12, 2017

• 21 NPR October 21, 2022

• 22 Rumble October 20, 2022

• 23, 24 The Defender October 20, 2022

• 25 CDC ACIP Meeting October 20, 2022

2 World-Renowned Cardiologists Independently Conclude that Sudden Deaths, especially in young people, are Caused by COVID Injections, Until Proven Otherwise

Embed Block

Add an embed URL or code. Learn more

“Until Proven Otherwise”

Two world-renowned cardiologists independently reach the same medical conclusions. American Peter McCullough, MD, MPH, and British Aseem Malhotra, MD state that their medical opinion is that the sudden deaths, especially in young people, are caused by the Covid-19 mRNA vaccines, until proven otherwise.

Fuck PayPal. [PayPal’s true function is as a politically biased extremist-activist platform run by elite whites]

From [HERE] PayPal’s true function is as a politically biased extremist-activist platform

• Natural health organizations, antiwar journalists, Christian organizations, anti-child-grooming organizations, nonprofits fighting vaccine mandates, organizations promoting early COVID treatments, alternative media and free speech unions are among those who have had their PayPal accounts canceled without warning

• PayPal is also seizing any money you might have in your account on the day of deplatforming. Funds may or may not be returned to you after a six-month review

• October 7, 2022, PayPal issued a new user agreement that included fining users $2,500 for “misinformation” or material “unfit for publication.” The determination of what could be deemed “misinformation” was to be at the sole discretion of PayPal, and the fine was to be “debited directly from your PayPal account”

• Amid a storm of backlash, PayPal backtracked the next day, saying the user agreement had been issued in error. It’s now been revealed the $2,500 fine has been in its user agreement for over a year. The primary change was the addition of “misinformation” as a fineable offense. PayPal will continue to seize funds, so get out of PayPal as soon as possible

While PayPal has acted as “moral police” for over a decade,1 in the last couple of years, its true purpose has crystallized. You probably thought PayPal was nothing more than an online payment service, but its true function is as a politically biased extremist-activist platform. PayPal’s chief executive Dan Schulman himself has publicly stated he was “born with social activism in my DNA.”2

Natural health organizations, antiwar journalists,3,4 Christian organizations,5 anti-child-grooming organizations,6 nonprofits fighting vaccine mandates, organizations promoting early COVID treatments, alternative media7 and free speech unions8 are just a sampling of the individuals and groups that have had their PayPal accounts cancelled without warning.

PayPal Is Stealing Funds

Adding insult to injury, PayPal is also seizing any money you might have in your account on the day of deplatforming. As reported by independent journalist Matt Taibbi in May 2022:9

“In the last week or so, the online payment platform PayPal without explanation suspended the accounts of a series of individual journalists and media outlets, including the well-known alt sites Consortium News and MintPress ...

Consortium editor Joe Lauria succeeded in reaching a human being at the company in search of details about the frozen or ‘held’ funds referenced in the note. The PayPal rep told him that if the company decided ‘there was a violation’ after a half-year review period, then ‘it is possible’ PayPal would keep the $9,348.14 remaining in Consortium’s account, as ‘damages.’

‘A secretive process in which they could award themselves damages, not by a judge or a jury,’ Lauria says. ‘Totally in secret’ ... This episode ups the ante again on the content moderation movement ... where having the wrong opinions can result in your money being frozen or seized. Going after cash is a big jump from simply deleting speech, with a much bigger chilling effect.”

PayPal’s Terms of Service: $2,500 Fine for Misinformation

On top of its deplatforming of political opponents and freezing their funds, PayPal recently threatened to fine users who express opinions that the company doesn’t agree with.10,11,12 In other words, they’ve devised yet another way of stealing your funds, even if they don’t seize your entire account and close it down. As reported by the DailyWire November 7, 2022:13

“A new policy update from PayPal will permit the firm to sanction users who advance purported ‘misinformation’ or present risks to user ‘wellbeing’ with fines of up to $2,500 per offense.

The financial services company, which has repeatedly deplatformed organizations and individual commentators for their political views, will expand its ‘existing list of prohibited activities’ on November 3.

Among the changes are prohibitions on ‘the sending, posting, or publication of any messages, content, or materials’ that ‘promote misinformation’ or ‘present a risk to user safety or wellbeing.’ Users are also barred from ‘the promotion of hate, violence, racial or other forms of intolerance that is discriminatory.’”

According to the notice, the determination of what could be deemed “misinformation” was to be at the sole discretion of PayPal, and the fine was to be “debited directly from your PayPal account.”

It’s worth noting that undefined “misinformation” wasn’t the only thing that could incur a fine; item (i) of the policy also included materials “otherwise unfit for publication.”14 Unfit? What could that be? Your guess is as good as mine.

Based on whom they’ve deplatformed and seized funds from so far, people who would see thousands of dollars swiped from their PayPal accounts as fines for wrongthink would include anyone who doesn’t care for global tyranny, censorship, government overreach, forced medical interventions, nuclear war, The Great Reset or pedophile grooming of children, just to name a few.

PayPal Temporarily Backtracked Amid Backlash

The updated terms of service resulted in thousands of users swiftly closing their accounts and taking their outrage to social media. PayPal’s former president, David Marcus, referred to the new terms as “Insanity,”15 and company stocks tanked nearly 12%.16

The backlash was so great, PayPal backtracked the very next day and apologized for causing “confusion,” claiming the new terms of service had been sent out “in error.” According to a PayPal spokesperson:17

“An [Accepted Use Policy] notice recently went out in error that included incorrect information. PayPal is not fining people for misinformation and this language was never intended to be inserted in our policy. We’re sorry for the confusion this has caused.”

Anyone who believes PayPal would send out new terms of service by mistake is truly gullible. A company like PayPal would have to go through multiple steps and levels of organization, including legal, in order to update its terms of service. No doubt it was approved and authorized at the highest levels.

It was not a mistake, and its sudden U-turn was merely for show (more on that in a moment). They realized they moved a bit too far, too fast, by tying the fine directly to “misinformation.” So, they backtracked.

The $2,500 fine has been part of PayPal’s terms of service since September 20, 2021, at the latest — and it still remains.

Surprise! Fines Have Been on the Books for a Year Already

Unbeknownst to many, the $2,500 fine has actually been part of PayPal’s terms of service since September 20, 2021, at the latest — and it still remains. What!? Yes.

Here’s the deal: PayPal is not removing the possibility of robbing you of $2,500. The supposed “mistake” in language was the addition of “misinformation” as a fineable offense to an already existing policy that says they can issue fines of up to $2,500 for noncompliance with its use policy. In other words, they merely delayed the implementation of fines for misinformation specifically. Tech Dirt explains:18

“... PayPal’s Acceptable Use Policy already includes a claim that if you violate its policy they can take $2,500 from your account. While PayPal walked back some of these newly announced changes (we’ll get to that in a second), the policy about the $2,500 has existed for at least a year.

Here’s the policy I just grabbed from their website, showing it was last updated on September 20, 2021, with the $2,500 ‘liquidated damages’ clause in there: [MORE]

Fakebook Hired Ex-CIA, FBI Agents to Censor Content that Deviates From the Official Narrative; Thereby Concealing Info on the Dangers of COVID Shots to Induce Consent or Destroy Informed Consent

From [HERE] Story at a glance:

• Many of the people in charge of moderating content at Facebook have been recruited from the government, including the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), FBI and the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD).

• So many ex-government workers are now employed by Facebook that it’s difficult to view Meta as a private company instead of a government partner, intent on silencing anyone who speaks out against the official narrative.

• In January 1977, Washington Post reporter Carl Bernstein’s 25,000-word article was published in Rolling Stone, detailing the close relationship between the CIA and the press.

• The program was known as Operation Mockingbird and involved the CIA paying hundreds of journalists to write fake stories and spread propaganda instead of real news.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has stated that Facebook’s values are based on the American tradition of free expression. Yet, censorship on social media has gone mainstream as part of the campaign to control what you see online, and therefore what you think and how you perceive reality.

In an official Facebook video, a Meta employee identified as “Aaron” states that he’s the manager of “the team that writes the rules for Facebook,” deciding “what is acceptable and what is not.” These gatekeepers effectively dictate what the platform’s 2.9 billion active users see when they’re scrolling their feeds.

In all, 40,000 individuals are part of Facebook’s content moderation staff, yielding incredible power over public information. Writing for MintPress News, journalist Alan Macleod explains:

“It is here where decisions about what content is allowed, what will be promoted and who or what will be suppressed are made. These decisions affect what news and information billions of people across the world see every day.

“Therefore, those in charge of the algorithms hold far more power and influence over the public sphere than even editors at the largest news outlets.”

But according to Macleod’s MintPress investigation, many of the people in charge of moderating content at Facebook have been recruited from the government, including the Central Intelligence Agency, FBI and DOD, to the extent that, he says, “some might feel it becomes difficult to see where the U.S. national security state ends and Facebook begins.”

‘Aaron is CIA’

Facebook employee Aaron, featured in their marketing video, formerly worked for the CIA, up until July 2019, though this isn’t disclosed by Facebook. According to Macleod:

“In his 15-year career, Aaron Berman rose to become a highly influential part of the CIA.

“For years, he prepared and edited the president of the United States’ daily brief, ‘wr[iting] and overs[eeing] intelligence analysis to enable the President and senior U.S. officials to make decisions on the most critical national security issues,’ especially on ‘the impact of influence operations on social movements, security, and democracy,’ his LinkedIn profile reads.

“None of this is mentioned in the Facebook video.”

Meta is teeming with ex-government agents

Berman is not the only ex-CIA agent working at Facebook — far from it. So many ex-government workers are now employed by Facebook that it’s difficult to view Meta as a private company instead of a government partner, intent on silencing anyone who speaks out against the official narrative.

Macleod’s investigation, for instance, uncovered the following ex-CIA agents at Facebook:

• Deborah Berman, a trust and safety project manager for Meta, was an intelligence analyst at the CIA for 10 years.

• Bryan Weisbard, now a director of trust and safety, security and data privacy for Meta, worked as a CIA intelligence officer from 2006 to 2010 before becoming a diplomat.

While at the CIA, his job involved leading “global teams to conduct counter-terrorism and digital cyber investigations” and “Identif[ying] online social media misinformation propaganda and covert influence campaigns.”

• Cameron Harris, a trust and safety project manager at Meta, was a CIA analyst until 2019.

Former members of other government agencies are also common at Meta. Macleod revealed:

• Emily Vacher, who Facebook/Meta recruited to be a director of trust and safety, worked at the FBI from 2001 to 2011, becoming a supervisory special agent.

• Mike Bradow, employed as a misinformation policy manager at Meta since 2020, worked for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) from 2010 to 2020.

“USAID is a U.S. government-funded influence organization which has bankrolled or stage managed multiple regime change operations abroad, including in Venezuela in 2002, Cuba in 2021, and ongoing attempts in Nicaragua,” Macleod noted.

• Neil Potts, Facebook’s vice president of trust and safety, is a former intelligence officer with the U.S. Marine Corps.

• Sherif Kamal, trust and safety program manager at Meta, worked as a program manager at the Pentagon until 2020.

• Joey Chan, trust and safety program manager at Meta, worked as a commanding officer for the U.S. Army until 2021, where he oversaw more than 100 troops in the Asia Pacific region.

Ex-intelligence officers in control of what you see

Meta is appearing increasingly like another branch of government put in place to mold the views of society, as with a workforce composed of ex-intelligence agents, it’s difficult, if not impossible, to remain impartial.

Macleod wrote:

“Hiring so many ex-U.S. state officials to run Facebook’s most politically sensitive operations raises troubling questions about the company’s impartiality and its proximity to government power.

“Meta is so full of national security state agents that at some point, it almost becomes more difficult to find individuals in trust and safety who were not formerly agents of the state.

“Despite its efforts to brand itself as a progressive, ‘woke’ organization, the Central Intelligence Agency remains deeply controversial.

“It has been charged with overthrowing or attempting to overthrow numerous foreign governments (some of them democratically elected), helping prominent Nazis escape punishment after World War Two, funnelling large quantities of drugs and weapons around the world, penetrating domestic media outlets, routinely spreading false information and operating a global network of ‘black sites’ where prisoners are repeatedly tortured.

“Therefore, critics argue that putting operatives from this organization in control of our news feeds is deeply inappropriate.”

CIA history of control and corruption

For instance, U.S. intelligence agencies kept watch on Ukrainian nationalist organizations as a source of counterintelligence against the Soviet Union. Declassified CIA documents show close ties between U.S. intelligence and Ukrainian nationalists since 1946.

After WWII, Stepan Bandera, the leader of the most radical section of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), which was founded in 1929 and had the ultimate goal of creating an ethnically pure, independent Ukraine, and other Ukrainian Nazi leaders fled to Europe, and the CIA helped protect them.

The CIA later informed the Immigration and Naturalization Service that it had concealed Bandera and other Ukrainians from the Soviets.

While the Nuremberg trials brought justice to the leaders of fascist Germany, “the Ukrainian Nazis were spared the same fate, and some were even granted indulgences by the CIA.”

According to the film “Ukraine on Fire,” “By 1951, the Agency [CIA] excused the illegal activities of OUN’s security branch in the name of Cold War necessity.”

In another disturbing example, one of the first scientists assigned to Fort Detrick’s secret biological warfare laboratory during WWII was bioweapons expert Frank Olson. In 1953, Olson died after plummeting to the ground from a high-rise hotel room window in Manhattan.

Days earlier, he had been secretly drugged by the CIA, which claimed Olson’s death was a suicide. Decades later, however, it was revealed that Olson didn’t jump from the window — he was deliberately murdered after the CIA became concerned that he might reveal disturbing top-secret operations.

This includes the CIA’s top-secret MK-Ultra project, which engaged in mind control experiments, human torture and other medical studies, including how much LSD it would take to “shatter the mind and blast away consciousness.” [MORE]

Suit Filed in NY Ct Alleges Ecohealth Alliance and Others Created COVID as a Bioweapon and Intentionally Released It On the Public. Asserts Wrongful Death, Gross Negligence and Assault/Battery Claims

A case filed on 5th October, 2022 in NY state court claims COVID-19 was created in a lab as a bioweapon to harm people and then intentionally released onto the public. The cause of action is negligence, gross negligence, assault and battery, wrongful death , strict liability and breach of warranty among others. The complaint [PDF] states:

1 This is a toxic tort personal injury action brought by the above-identified Plaintiffs, alleging inter alia, negligence, strict liability, breach of implied or expressed warranty, physical and emotional pain and suffering, wrongful death, and economic loss.

2. The Covid-19 pandemic could have been avoided.

3. Despite a moratorium on dangerous Gain of Function research – whereby, for example, a virus is genetically altered to become more transmissible in humans – Defendants engaged in such research, which ultimately exposed the entire world to a manipulated, highly transmissible and deadly lab-made virus and global pandemic, directly and proximately causing Plaintiffs’ injuries.

4. On March 13, 2020, Proclamation 9994 stated: “In December 2019, a novel (new) coronavirus known as SARS–CoV–2 (‘the virus’) was first detected in Wuhan, Hubei Province, People’s Republic of China, causing outbreaks of the coronavirus disease COVID–19 that has now spread globally.” 85 Fed. Reg. 15337 (March 18, 2020).1

5. In April 2020, President Trump proclaimed that SARS-CoV-2, also known as the Covid-19 virus, was released from a Level-4 Bio Safety laboratory (“BSL-4”) in Wuhan, China.

6. The aforementioned laboratory – the Wuhan Institute of Virology (“Wuhan Lab”) – was well-known to U.S. public health officials for its failed safety and lax security, as well as ties to the Chinese military.2 Exhibit “1” Photos of the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

7. Since then, both an investigation and cover-up have continued with respect to the origins of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, impeding effective countermeasures and strategies to control the release, mutation and spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that has directly and proximately caused Plaintiffs’ injuries prior to filing this action in this Supreme Court.

8. Plaintiffs allege the SARS-CoV-2 virus was designed and created at the Wuhan Lab in China, made possible through the research, development, and funding support provided by Defendants ECOHEALTH ALIANCE, PETER DASZAK, JANET D. 4. On March 13, 2020, Proclamation 9994 stated: “In December 2019, a novel (new) coronavirus known as SARS–CoV–2 (‘the virus’) was first detected in Wuhan, Hubei Province, People’s Republic of China, causing outbreaks of the coronavirus disease COVID–19 that has now spread globally.” 85 Fed. Reg. 15337 (March 18, 2020).1

9. Defendants named herein and those to be identified through discovery are liable to Plaintiffs under strict liability tort law, which is applicable to the release of any ultra- hazardous substance into the environment, including organic substances, i.e., a genetically manipulated, lab-made virus.

10. Each Plaintiff named herein was exposed to SARS-CoV-2, the abnormally dangerous genetically manipulated coronavirus that was created, financed, designed, and released into the environment by the Defendants through their intentional and/or reckless acts, that have directly and proximately caused Plaintiffs’ and Decedents’ injuries, and/or death as set forth in this Verified Complaint.

11. Upon information and belief, Defendants concealed from Congress their knowledge of the origins of SARS-COV-2, to conceal the grant funding they had received from the National Institute of Health (“NIH”) was being directed toward “Gain of Function” research, and to conceal their violation(s) of the terms of a 2014 “exemption” obtained by EcoHealth, (waiving restrictions of a federal moratorium placed on Gain of Function research by President Barack Obama in 2014), said exemption enabled Defendants to continue funding the Wuhan Lab’s creation of the SARS- COV-2, directly and proximately causing Plaintiffs’ injuries.3 Exhibit “2” National Institute of Health letter dated October 21, 2014.

12. The Gain of Function moratorium applied to NEW rather than existing funding. Research funded in part by The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases through EcoHealth which we have termed “The SARS-CoV-2 Creation Project” was already underway at the time the moratorium was declared. Ralph Baric, who was conducting Gain of Function research conducted at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, and in partnership with researchers from the Wuhan Institute of Virology petitioned the NIH biosecurity board for an exemption from the pause. It was subsequently granted.

Elite Psychopaths at Ontario College of Physicians Recommend Drugs and Psychotherapy to Combat “Vaccine Hesitancy” for Persons Unwilling to Get Injected w/Experimental, Deadly COVID Shot

From [HERE] Vaccine hesitancy was steadily increasing prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, and with the emergence of the new mRNA shots and vaccine mandates, it increased even more. 

The causes of this hesitancy is commonly attributed to “misinformation” and “fake news” according to government affiliated health agencies and legacy media. The science and evidence that has raised legitimate safety concerns with mRNA vaccines, for example, is unfortunately never appropriately addressed or acknowledged. 

Yet these factors are key in hesitancy because they speak for themselves.

A recent notice from the Ontario College of Physicians (CPSO) reads as followswith regards to vaccine hesitancy,

“It is also important that physicians work with their patients to manage anxieties related to the vaccine and not enable avoidance behaviour. For example, for extreme fear of needles (trypanophobia) or other cases of serious concern, responsible use of prescription medications and/or referral to psychotherapy may be available options. Overall, physicians have a responsibility to allow their patients to be properly informed about vaccines and not have those anxieties empowered by an exemption.”

This statement was updated from the original statement which looked like this.

The original statement on the CPSO website did not include the specific example of a patient with a “fear of needles,” but instead simply read that in “cases of serious concern, responsible use of prescription medications and/or referral to psychotherapy are available options.” [MORE]

Liberal NY Puppeticians Seek to Revive Forced Deadly COVID Shots for School Children. Proposed Law Destroys Rights to Refuse Medical Treatment and Refuse Emergency Use Vaccines and Informed Consent

COVID Shots Don't Prevent Infection or Transmission. As such, they are Treatments Not Vaccines; and People Have a Right to Refuse Medical Treatment. Mandates Violate Rights/Equal Protection.

At any rate COVID injections are not actually vaccines because they do not create immunity. The injections are treatments. As such, individuals have a right to refuse medical treatment.

Prosecute Now explains, The uncontroverted medical consensus is that existing Covid-19 injections do not prevent infection or transmission of the coronavirus; i.e., they do not create immunity in the recipients. This is admitted openly today, including by U.S. Health Agencies, which is why the CDC Director stated on CNN, "What the vaccines can't do anymore is prevent transmission.'

The CDC has acknowledged that the “vaccinated” and “unvaccinated” are equally likely to spread the virus.

The Injections do not confer immunity but are claimed to reduce the severity of symptoms experienced by those infected by SARS-CoV-2. They are, therefore, treatments and not vaccines as that term has always been defined in the law. [MORE]

From [HERE] New York lawmakers who introduced a bill last year to require the COVID-19 vaccine for school children weren't successful in advancing that proposal. But they're not giving up.

State Assemblyman Jeffrey Dinowitz sponsors legislation to require school students in New York be fully vaccinated against COVID-19. It died in the Health Committee this session. 

“Our job is to try to keep people healthy, safe and certainly to prevent them from dying," said Dinowitz, a Democrat from the Bronx. "And that, particularly, is important with respect to kids. ...I believe that parents should be able to make these kinds of decision for their kids if those decisions don't have an impact on other people, but because [this does] impact other people, that's when it changes."

The shot would only be mandated after full approval by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration and recommendation by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention advisory committees.

Reqiuring New York students to get vaccinated against COVID-19 is up to the state Legislature, meaning if a measure moves forward, its future hinges on who wins the race for governor in less than two weeks. 

The assemblyman plans to hold discussions with the state Health Department about the legislation in the coming months.

Dinowitz is hopeful Gov. Hochul would support a measure adding the COVID-19 vaccine to the list of other required inoculations, but it's unclear where she’d stand on signing such a measure into law. 

Mandating the COVID-19 vaccine in schools is a topic on the ballot this election cycle, and New Yorkers have two distinct choices. 

During a debate this week, Republican candidate Lee Zeldin, a congressman from Long Island, committed to being against requiring the COVID-19 vaccine for anyone, including for school children.

"Let me be clear to all the parents who are out there: I will not mandate COVID vaccines for your kids, ever," Zeldin said Tuesday. "I don't believe there should be COVID vaccine mandates right now for our kids at SUNY, CUNY, community colleges right now and elsewhere."

That night, Gov. Hochul said mandating the coronavirus vaccine in schools rests with the Legislature.

She has no plans to mandate the shot for school and university students without a bill coming across her desk. That couldn't happen for a year at the earliest. [MORE]

Michigan had the Worst COVID Lockdowns, Yet More Deaths than Other States

From [HERE] Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer claimed the extraordinary measures she took in shutting down businesses and schools and forcing people to stay home were worth it because of the lives saved. But an analysis of the data two and a half years after the COVID-19 pandemic hit Michigan calls that claim into question.

Compared to the rest of the country and its neighboring states, Michigan endured the most restrictions on private activity while also experiencing far more COVID deaths, worse job losses, a weaker recovery, and substantial learning losses for kids.

Deaths

Michigan has significantly more COVID deaths per capita than any other state in the Midwest.

The latest numbers from the CDC show that Michigan has 39,092 deaths as of Oct. 19, 2022, which is 9th-highest in the United Statesafter controlling for population differences.

Michigan’s rate of COVID deaths per 100,000 people (391) is higher than that of Indiana (369), Ohio (342) and Illinois (314). The difference between the Wolverine State and its neighbor across the lake is the starkest: People in Michigan died of COVID-19 at a 48% higher rate than people in Wisconsin (264).

Lockdowns

Using unilateral control afforded governors for extraordinary emergencies, Whitmer imposed the broadest shutdowns on businesses in the country.

Some 32% of Michigan businesses, a higher portion than those in any other state, were subject to a government-mandated closure, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The national average was 19%. Far more businesses were closed in Michigan than in neighboring states of Indiana (15%), Wisconsin (17%) and Ohio (19.5%).

If shuttering businesses saved lives, one would expect Michigan to have a lower COVID-19 death rate than most states. It didn’t.

Jobs

Michigan is still down 94,500 jobs since COVID-19 hit, a net loss of 2.1%. That’s the 7th-worst percentage among the state, and 23 states have fully recovered the jobs they lost during the pandemic.

Schools

Whitmer did not recommend that schools return to in-person instruction until March 2021. When she made that announcement, 23% of Michigan schools were fully in person, compared with 47% in Ohio, 54% in Wisconsin, and 76% in Indiana.

Some of the largest school districts in the state offered only virtual instruction for almost an entire academic year. According to the data service Burbio, which tracked school openings throughout the pandemic, Michigan was 33rd nationally when it came to offering in-person instruction for the 2020-2021 school year.

School closures during the pandemic are generally associated with more learning loss for students. Along with most of the rest of the nation, the state and national test scores of Michigan students dropped enormously during the pandemic. Catholic schools, which were almost entirely open throughout the pandemic, saw no change in math or reading scores compared to where they were pre-pandemic. 

As for Michigan’s state standardized tests, the M-STEP, every racial group at every grade in every age group tested saw a drop in achievement compared to where students were before the pandemic.

The public school districts in Flint and Detroit were among those closed for in-person instruction the longest. Minority students saw the largest drops in test scores, with the percentage of Black third-graders meeting or exceeding math proficiency standards falling by more than one-third.

On the national test known as the NAEP, the scores of Michigan students also dropped in every category. Fourth-grade reading fell to a 30-year low. And in Detroit, students in the public school district have long scored the worst in the nation in reading and math for 4th and 8th grade students. Their test scores still dropped sharply during COVID.

Michigan’s governor used extraordinary measures to control many aspects of people’s lives during the pandemic. She shutdown nearly one-third of Michigan businesses, prevented people from traveling or seeing friends and allowed schools to stay closed to in-person learning for more than a year.

Despite all these interventions, there is little real-world evidence these actions saved lives. Indeed, Michigan has one of the highest COVID-19 deaths rates in the country, and significantly more than was seen in surrounding states.

US Government Secretly Monitored Citizens Movements and Assigned them COVID “Decree Violation” Scores During Irrational and Deadly US Lockdowns

From [HERE] Voter analytics firm PredictWise harvested location data from tens of millions of US cellphones during the initial Covid lockdown months and used this data to assign a “Covid-19 decree violation” score to the people associated with the phones.

These Covid-19 decree violation scores were calculated by analyzing nearly two billion global positioning system (GPS) pings to get “real-time, ultra-granular locations patterns.” People who were “on the go more often than their neighbors” were given a high Covid-19 decree violation score while those who mostly or always stayed at home were given a low Covid-19 decree violation score.

Not only did PredictWise use this highly sensitive location data to monitor millions of Americans’ compliance with Covid lockdown decrees but it also combined this data with follow-up surveys to assign “Covid concern” scores to the people who were being surveilled. PredictWise then used this data to help Democrats in several swing states to target more than 350,000 “Covid concerned” Republicans with Covid-related campaign ads.

In its white paper, PredictWise claims that Democrats were able to “deploy this real-time location model to open up just over 40,000 persuasion targets that normally would have fallen off” for Mark Kelly who was running for Senate at the time and has now been elected.

“PredictWise understood that there were potential pockets of voters to target with Covid-19 messaging and turned high-dimensional data covering over 100 million Americans into measures of adherence to Covid-19 restrictions during deep lockdown,” the company states in the white paper.

PredictWise doesn’t provide the exact dates when this location data was collected but its white paper does note that the data was collected during Covid lockdowns and used during Senator Kelly’s 2020 election campaign. State-level US lockdowns began on March 15, 2020 and Kelly was elected on November 4, 2020 so the data appears to have been collected during the first few months of this 11 month period. [MORE]