Feature Film ‘Lions And Lambs’ — Exposing Human Trafficking

/in , , , , , , , /by

Vets for Child Rescue is honored to align with Storyteller Film Co to make a full length, action-packed movie called Lions and Lambs! 

One of the biggest challenges we face in our efforts to expose and combat child trafficking is the suppression of information online. We hope this movie will provide a strategic work-around to bring massive awareness to the issue while creating an entertaining action/thriller film that everyone will want to watch.

Feature Film Trailer: A young girl is kidnapped to be sold to the highest bidder.

At its core, 𝐋𝐈𝐎𝐍𝐒 𝐀𝐍𝐃 𝐋𝐀𝐌𝐁𝐒 is a vigilante action film.

It will have exciting car and foot chases, fight sequences, and good-ole fashioned REVENGE!⁣ ⁣

In order to have a broad appeal to a variety of audiences, it’ll be a #PG13 rated #movie.

It’ll feel like a blockbuster of the late 90’s early 2000’s — but with a twist of true-to-life storytelling.⁣ ⁣ Co-producers @Travis Conover – The Creator’s Podcast and Matthew Wallace have nearly 30 years combined experience in the film industry as actors, writers, directors and producers.⁣

They’re now on a mission to #RaiseAwareness and bring this topic to the masses while 𝐬𝐮𝐩𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 our mission to 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐞 and 𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐝𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐞 it.⁣

Travis Conover and J. Matthew Wallace will be acting and producing this project and they have generously offered to:

  1. Promote Vets For Child Rescue and our mission in the project
  2. Donate a large amount of the proceeds of the fundraising and profits from the film to V4CR’s mission.

Here’s how you can help!

  1. Learn about the movie and support it here: igg.me/at/LIONSandLAMBS. No donation amount is too small. Even $5 or $10 donated will show publicly as another “backer” of the project. They need at least 12,000 backers.
  2. Share the project directly with your friends and family. We need to drive over 50k people to this site in the next 2 weeks.
  3. Pray for the project to be fully funded, for protection around all involved, and for it to create massive awareness.

Crowdfunding is Necessary For This Project Because Hollywood Won’t Support It

“LIONS and LAMBS” is the story of a man who’s 12 year old niece is kidnapped and sold into sex slavery, and the lengths he’ll go to, to get her back.

Actor and Film Makers Travis Conover and Matthew Wallace partner with “Vets for Child Rescue” to tackle the issue of sex slavery in the United States. This action thriller explores the underground world of sex trade in Atlanta, Georgia and the horrible reality behind one of the most lucrative business in the world.

“LIONS and LAMBS” is written as a modern day action blockbuster, with inspiration from the best action films of the late 90’s and early 2000’s. While LIONS and LAMBS is centered around an important cause, quality storytelling, character development, and set pieces will be its foundation. It’s sure to be a fast-paced, action packed and entertaining thrill ride that will keep you pinned to the screen.

The story is approached from three unique angles. Firstly, the point of the view of the girl who is taken from her home in North Atlanta. Secondly, from her family’s point of view (primarily, her uncle Leon who is former military) and also from the perspective of law enforcement, who are fighting to bring down the people responsible for this horrible crime.

At its core, LIONS AND LAMBS is a vigilante, buddy cop action film. It will have exciting car and foot chases, hard-hitting, action-packed fight sequences, and a strong dose of good-ole fashioned REVENGE! Studies show that movies that do not include gratuitous violence and sex actually have a much broader appeal to audiences, so we will be aiming for a PG-13 rating. It will feel like a blockbuster of the late 90’s early 2000’s but with a twist of true-to-life storytelling.

The Cause

Unlike most films, this project in particular has the potential to raise awareness around the very serious issue of human trafficking. This project has pledged to raise over $100,000 for our organization to help put a stop to child sex trafficking.

The impact of raising awareness is also something that we hope this movie will help achieve. There is an intentional effort to suppress information about child trafficking, and this movie has the opportunity to bring awareness to the masses.

Follow the Lions And Lambs movie project and it’s team

Indiegogo: Indiegogo.com/projects/lions-and-lambs

Twitter: @TravisConover

Instagram: @Travis_Conover

©Veterans For Child Rescue. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: FBI Warns About Child Abductions Through Rideshares

RELATED VIDEO: Biden Sanctioned Child Trafficking

The Lethal Fallout of Wokeness in Medicine

/in , , , , , , , /by

School standards have fallen for the sake of political correctness over effective and dependable education. That is dangerous.

In early October, my alma mater made headlines after it decided to fire chemistry professor Dr Maitland Jones Jr after 82 of his students signed a petition noting that his organic chemistry class was “too hard.” The students accused Jones of purposely making the class difficult, citing that their low scores negatively impacted their “well-being,” and their chances of getting into medical school.

Instead of evaluating the rigor and substance of Jones’ curriculum, NYU justified its hasty action by noting the class’s unfavourable student reviews. This type of judgment would never pass in the fields of architecture, aerial engineering, or even the food service industry; why is it permissible here?

In response to the disciplinary action, former medical humanities professor and bioethicist Dr Alice Dreger blasted the move in a tweet, saying it “made her skin crawl.”

“We aren’t going to end up with good doctors by letting undergrad pre-meds pass organic chem because universities want to protect their US News rankings,” she wrote.

The reaction is justified considering how standards for pre-med programmes and even medical schools have shifted in the direction of equity and social justice. It seems that even professors cannot hold the line on academic performance, when the institutions they teach at make it a secondary importance to accommodating students’ sensitivities on the basis of how faulted or victimised they feel while learning in the highly competitive and demanding field of medicine.

The rise in efforts to increase diversity in medical schools can be seen as coming from a place of good intentions: to create an academic environment which promotes minority doctors, especially those who come from under-served communities. Having a diversification of medical practitioners is beneficial, especially if said doctors use their skills and talents to give back to communities that drastically need medical attention, such as inner cities and remote rural communities.

Advocates for broader outreach cite studies such as the AAMC’s report titled, “Altering the Course: Black Males in Medicine” which notes how the number of black male applicants dropped from 1,410 in 1978 to 1,337 in 2014. They could also point to a Yale-led study that found minority students are less likely to get placed in residency programs than their white and Asian colleagues.

These seem to be pressing issues which must be addressed if medical schools wish to increase black and brown students’ success rates. However, instead of working towards expanding tutoring, learning programs, and outreach initiatives, it seems as if universities and medical schools want to focus strictly on the intersectional aspects of this research.

The leader of the aforementioned Yale study, Mytien Nguyen, MSc, stated,

“In previous studies, we’ve really only looked at one dimension of identity, but there’s intersectionality and the compounding of multiple marginalized identities… we wanted to see how these identities came into play in the application process… there is a clear compounding effect of being a student underrepresented in medicine and lower income… there is a double whammy in terms of how medicine is classist and racialized.”

Nguyen states that it is unclear what is contributing to lower placement rates among marginalised students, and yet failed to consider how a plethora of other factors, such as lack of mentors in medicine, limited financial resources, and differing cultural perceptions of working in medicine, may contribute to this phenomenon. Looking back at AAMC’s report, it is important to note that while the number of black male applicants did decrease over the decades, the report also shows how the overall number of black medical students actually rose from 933 in 1978 to 1,227 in 2014 — a 32 percent spike.

This is a welcoming statistic which can be improved if schools provide marginalised communities with greater access to high school and pre-med opportunities.

Unfortunately, institutions like NYU have taken it upon themselves to lower the bar of admission through intersectional incentives, rather than enforcing academic standards — which we all agree are needed in order to have dependable and safe future doctors.

The shift in a medicine-based education to an emphasis on race and social concern was highlighted by former University of Pennsylvania Medical School Dean Stanley Goldfarb, who stated:

“… Today a master’s degree in education is often what it takes to qualify for key administrative roles on medical-school faculties. The zeitgeist of sociology and social work have become the driving force in medical education. The goal of today’s educators is to produce legions of primary care physicians who engage in what is termed ‘population health.’”

Medical schools’ administrations seem to have become taken over by sociologists and critical race theorists — if not in title, then certainly in practice.

Most recently in the news, the University of Minnesota Medical School conducted a white coat ceremony for its Class of 2026, where each student had to recite a modified Hippocratic Oath which — on top of pledging to do no harm and to help the sick whenever possible — would “honor all Indigenous ways of healing that have been historically marginalized by Western medicine… white supremacy, colonialism, and the gender binary.”

The politicisation of medicine has greater effects than just this sort of political white-knighting. Instead of focusing on promoting preventative care and treatment based on actual medical effectiveness, the impetus behind these medical schools’ actions seems to be entirely race-based. For example, Georgetown University is funding the study and formation of courses to prevent ‘microaggressions’ in medicine.

Likewise, the Association of American Medical Colleges released a new standard for teaching medicine which requires students to achieve ‘competencies’ in ‘white privilege’ or risk failing. It also seeks to do away with the ideas of gender and race, the latter of which the AAMC describes as “… a social construct that is a cause of health and health care inequities, not a risk factor for disease.” If this is the case, then how will doctors address the pervasiveness of Sickle-Cell Anemia and Multiple Myeloma in African-American communities, the prevalence of diabetes in Asian groups, or the largely unknown effects of hormonal therapies in minors?

This dramatic shift from upholding course standards to molding medicine in a racial lens is concerning. Though proponents of such measures would argue this is critical to improving race-relations in medicine and to deconstructing students’ “implicit biases,” saving lives and providing exceptional preventative care supersedes that.

A 2016 BMJ analysis found that medical errors in healthcare facilities are actually incredibly common and may even be the third-leading cause of death in the US. Medical malpractice accounts for about 251,000 deaths every year — this is more than accidents, stroke, Alzheimer’s, and respiratory disease:

A doctor’s most important duty to his or her patient is to do no harm — this includes preventing negligence, refraining from superfluous procedures, and ensuring every avenue of care is addressed prior to conducting invasive surgery. From shoddy hospital conditions to inexperienced nurses to just bad doctors, healthcare resulting in patient harm is a much more pressing issue than the alleged microaggressions resident doctors give off during their rotations.

The race and gender of a practising physician should not matter as long as they are skilled, capable, and reasonable in their practice. It is therefore the universities and medical schools’ responsibility to uphold the rigorous standards they once had in order to ensure their students are prepared to work in high-stress, highly complicated medical scenarios — above all else. We need capable and skilled doctors, period.

This article was originally published on FEE.org. Read the original article.

AUTHOR

Connor Vasile is a first-generation American and writer who wishes to raise awareness about classical liberal ideas which empower every individual, no matter their background or experience, to live their… More by Connor Vasile

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Rise of Wokeness in the U.S. Military – Let me give some examples of what I mean by wokeness.

The “Messed Up World of White Wokeness”

Disney’s Embrace of Wokeness is a Mickey Mouse Move

Why the Rise of Intersectionality in Medicine Will Have Serious Consequences

What Is American Wokeness Really About?

EDITORS NOTE: This MercatorNet column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

COVID Amnesty? How About Unconditional Surrender?

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

Brown University professor Emily Oster has created quite a stir with her recent article asking for a “pandemic amnesty.” In it, she calls for “both sides” in the COVID debate to forgive each other so we can focus on solving current problems. If Oster wanted exposure, she certainly got it, with commentators far and wide responding to her plea. If she wanted to heal wounds and close chasms, however, she failed miserably. Many have told her to go pound sand.

Genuine calls for forgiveness are noble, but, Professor Oster, you (and your critics) miss a significant point here: Forgiveness does not obviate punishment. Were it otherwise, following Jesus’s “70×7” prescription would mean emptying the prisons and hurting our beloved children by never holding them accountable for misbehavior.

So I’ll do my best to forgive, Professor Oster, but forgetting? No! I speak for many in saying that your plea is rejected — and offensive. And for there to be even the beginning of a rapprochement, there are two requirements (I’ll speak in this piece of “two sides” even though, of course, there’s much variation within each):

  1. You must hand over your “leaders” for judgment and justice.
  2. You must issue a genuine mea culpa and demonstrate that you’ve learned from your mistakes.

This matters immensely. Many on my side are angry, but I’ll nonetheless do what I and others did during the pandemic — not what you did, professor. I’ll react based on reason and not emotion and say that I’m not seeking retribution, viscerally pleasurable though it may be. And reason’s application informs that, as Herbert Spencer put it, “The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly, is to fill the world with fools.” Thus must the foolish and often fiendish pandemic puppeteers be in the dock — and thus must their erstwhile puppets demonstrate that they’ve learned from the past.

Unfortunately, though, professor, you appear to have learned virtually nothing. You speak as if the COVID battles were some kind of mutual misunderstanding that degenerated into an ugly rift. This is yet another slap in the face. There was nothing mutual about it, not in terms of misunderstandings or malevolence or power or persecution.

Though many of us counseled against COVIDian madness, my side was content to let you and your fellow travelers wear a mask, or three masks; take a genetic-therapy agent (GTA) shot, or five; social distance by six feet, or 60; shut down your businesses and lock yourselves indoors for one month, or six; and generally behave like mysophobic Chicken Littles. But that wasn’t good enough.

Not only did you impose your mask empire and distancing fancies on us, but you shut down our businesses as part of a COVID regulation regime; destroyed livelihoods; impoverished people; caused untold numbers of lockdown-induced, secondary-effect deaths; and tried coercing us into taking the GTAs under pain of career destruction, firing tens of thousands of Americans who resisted your will. Why, CNN medical analyst Dr. Leana Wen, cheered on by millions of you and speaking for many more, actually said that people such as me, GTA realists, should be prohibited from participating in society and banished to our homes. You also censored us when we dared explain our dissent, said we were killing people and impugned our character and patriotism.

By the way, Wen more recently renounced much COVIDian theology and wrote an article about how she no longer believes in masking children because her young son suffered mask-induced developmental problems. Yet as with you, professor, she issues no apology for her ill-informed, life-rending prescriptions.

Speaking of which, Professor Oster, you wrote of our correct prescriptions that in “the face of so much uncertainty, getting something right had a hefty element of luck. And, similarly, getting something wrong wasn’t a moral failing.” “We didn’t know,” you protested. Well, speak for yourself, professor.

Of course, some did oppose COVID regulations based purely on a desire for liberty or relied on instinct. Yet a twist on a famous saying comes to mind here: The more I research, the “luckier” I get.

Was it luck, professor, when I cited Dr. Knut Wittkowski — former longtime head of the Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Research Design at the Rockefeller University in New York City — as warning in an April 1st and 2nd, 2020 interview that lockdowns were counterproductive? He also provided sage but unheeded prescriptions for managing the disease.

Was it luck, professor, when I cited experts as saying in February 2020 that the vast majority of us will contract the coronavirus, that most cases are mild and that “vaccines” wouldn’t save us? This information, by the by, was printed in the liberal Atlantic, the very magazine that published your piece! Did you miss it?

Was it luck, professor, when I cited early data out of Italy showing that the COVID mortality victims were aged 79.5 on average and more than 99 percent had comorbidities, again indicating that it wasn’t a disease imperiling the majority? Was it luck when I, presenting research, warned in 2020-’21 of masks’ lack of efficacy and the perils they pose, especially to the young? I could mention additional data, studies and experts I and others drew upon, but the point is this:

You could have known, professor. But you didn’t show due diligence. You had your head buried in establishment media and wouldn’t pay any mind to those who dared contradict it. Hey, only Ivy League input need apply, right, professor?

This matters because the problem isn’t that you fell victim to COVID propaganda; it’s that you’re the kind of person who could fall victim to COVID propaganda. And unless this changes — unless you learn from past mistakes — you’ll just make similar ones again during a future crisis. In fact, we see the same phenomena even now with climate change.

You also say, professor, that we should be willing to move on because most of those adopting bad policy had good intentions. Yet even if this were true, it’s irrelevant. A doctor can have the absolute best intentions but still be sued into oblivion for malpractice.

What of your claim, however? Does it reflect good intentions

  • when politicians, such as Governor Gavin Newsom (D-Calif.), imposed onerous COVID restrictions on us but then arrogantly violated those rules themselves?
  • when officials said we knew little about a “novel” virus but then made continual cocksure pronouncements and, colluding with Big Tech, censored anyone contradicting them (including the aforementioned Dr. Wittkowski)?
  • when an effort was launched to turn COVID “heretics” into second-class citizens?
  • when even today some schools have GTA mandates for young people, despite the well-known health risks?
  • when Dr. Anthony Fauci and other officials continually lied to America while accusing dissenters of peddling “misinformation”?

Of course, it’s true that man is complex and people rationalize — aka, lie to themselves — perhaps more than they lie to others. But if the above is the result of good intentions, professor, who needs bad ones?

The point, however, is that these COVIDian “leaders,” such as Fauci and Governor Gretchen Whitmer (D-Mich.), must be held to account and not survive, in power, to tyrannize another day. Yet our pseudo-elites instead continue to fail upwards, with your support, professor. But, then, you enjoy the same benefits, don’t you? Why, you say you’re now actually co-teaching a college class on COVID. Talk about an idiocracy!

In conclusion, Professor Oster, you opened your article mentioning that in “April 2020, with nothing else to do, my family took an enormous number of hikes.” This brings us to my response to your amnesty proposal: You can go take another one.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on MeWe, Gettr or Parler, or log on to SelwynDuke.com

©Selwyn Duke. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: No chance of pandemic amnesty for enforcers of false COVID narrative

Paxlovid Is a Fraud, When Will It Be Taken Off the Market?

/in , , , , , /by

Can Taking Paxlovid Lead to More Serious Illness?

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • Paxlovid, which was granted emergency use authorization to treat mild to moderate COVID-19 in December 2021, has become widely associated with rebound infection
  • While the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Pfizer have tried to suggest that COVID rebound is spontaneous and not necessarily linked to Paxlovid, recent research found no rebound cases among COVID-19 patients who did not take Paxlovid
  • People who take Paxlovid can also still transmit COVID-19 to others, even if they’re asymptomatic
  • A number of high-profile individuals have experienced COVID rebound after using Paxlovid, including “The Late Show” host Stephen Colbert, comedian Jimmy Dore, Dr. Anthony Fauci, President Joe Biden, First Lady Jill Biden and CDC director Dr. Rochelle Walensky. Most were double-jabbed and double-boosted. Walensky actually had three boosters
  • Emerging evidence also suggests SARS-CoV-2 can develop resistance to Paxlovid. Two separate studies cultured SARS-CoV-2 and exposed it to low levels of nirmatrelvir — the active antiviral ingredient in Paxlovid — which would kill some, but not all, of the virus. As a result, the virus became 20 times and 80 times less susceptible to the drug, respectively

So far, all of the drugs developed against COVID-19 have been disastrous in one way or another. Remdesivir, for example, which to this day is the primary COVID drug approved for use in U.S. hospitals,1 routinely causes severe organ damage2,3,4,5 and, often, death.

Another notable one is Paxlovid, which was granted emergency use authorization to treat mild to moderate COVID-19 in December 2021.6 While not showing signs of being deadly like remdesivir, Paxlovid has become so widely associated with rebound infection that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has even issued a warning about it. According to the CDC’s health advisory:7

“Recent case reports document that some patients with normal immune response who have completed a 5-day course of Paxlovid for laboratory-confirmed infection and have recovered can experience recurrent illness 2 to 8 days later, including patients who have been vaccinated and/or boosted.”

Asymptomatic Paxlovid Users Can Still Spread Infection

The CDC8 8 and Pfizer9 have suggested that sometimes COVID-19 naturally comes back after a person tests negative, implying that COVID-19 rebound is spontaneous and not necessarily linked to Paxlovid. However, research10 by Dr. Michael Charness of the Veterans Administration Medical Center in Boston refutes this notion.

When Charness and colleagues analyzed 1,000 cases of COVID-19 diagnosed among members of the National Basketball Association — none of whom took Paxlovid — no cases of COVID-19 rebound were found.11 They also found that people who take Paxlovid can still transmit COVID-19 to others, even if they’re asymptomatic. Charness told CNN:12

“People who experience rebound are at risk of transmitting to other people, even though they’re outside what people accept as the usual window for being able to transmit.”

Is Paxlovid-Induced Rebound Really Rare?

While Paxlovid-induced rebound of COVID is clearly widespread, health authorities insist the effect is “rare.” 13 Pfizer’s clinical trial had a 1% to 2% rebound rate. White House COVID response coordinator, Dr. Ashish Jha, put the rebound rate at 5% in real-life settings.

“If you look at Twitter, it feels like everybody has rebound,” Jha said during a White House press conference in July 2022. “But it turns out there’s actually clinical data.”
14

In one such study,15 5.87% of the 13,600 patients experienced rebound of symptoms within a month of the treatment. Dr. Aditya Shah, an infectious disease specialist at the Mayo Clinic, thinks the rebound rate may be as high as 10%.16

But if those rebound statistics were actually true, how does one explain the fact that so many high-profile celebrities and government officials who have used it have ended up rebounding? Statistically, that seems rather incredible.

High-Profile Rebound Cases

For example, in April 2022, the fully jabbed and boosted “Late Show” host Stephen Colbert got COVID, took Paxlovid and recovered, only to suffer a rebound a week later. Tweeting about his experience, Colbert referred to it as the “WORST. SEQUEL. EVER.”17 Comedian Jimmy Dore also experienced COVID-19 rebound after taking Paxlovid.18

Dr. Anthony Fauci got COVID in June 2022 — again despite being double-jabbed and double-boosted — and proudly shared that he took Paxlovid. Immediately after the five-day treatment, he tested negative for SARS-CoV-2. Alas, three days after that, he not only tested positive again but all the symptoms of infection also returned, and they were more severe than the first time around.19,20

Fauci described his rebound in an interview: “Over the next day or so I started to feel really poorly, much worse than in the first go around. I went back on Paxlovid, and right now I am on my fourth day of a five-day course of my second course of Paxlovid. Fortunately, I feel reasonably good. I mean, I’m not completely without symptoms, but I certainly don’t feel acutely ill.”21

At the end of July 2022, it was President Joe Biden’s turn to announce he had COVID, despite being double-jabbed and double-boosted — something Biden had previously insisted could not happen (see video above). He too took Paxlovid and, like Fauci, ended up rebounding around Day 3, just as I predicted on Twitter.22 Unlike Fauci, however, he reportedly didn’t have any symptoms.23

In mid-August 2022, the double-jabbed, double-boosted First Lady, Jill Biden, came down with COVID,24 took Paxlovid and, like clockwork, rebounded a few days after finishing the treatment and initially testing negative.25

Toward the end of October 2022, double-jabbed and TRIPLE-boosted Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director for the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, got COVID. She’d received her fifth shot — the latest bivalent booster that has only been tested on mice — on September 22.26

Exactly one month later, she tested positive and reported mild symptoms.27,28 I think that makes the “new and improved” bivalent booster the shortest-acting shot so far. Anyway, Paxlovid to the rescue once again. And once again, it caused rebound. After initially testing negative after the treatment, she tested positive a couple of days later as symptoms returned.29

Government Researchers Investigating Rebound Effect

At the end of April 2022, Bloomberg described the post-Paxlovid rebound of David Ho, a virologist at the Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center at Columbia University:30

“Ho said he came down with COVID on April 6 … His doctor prescribed Paxlovid, and within days of taking it, his symptoms dissipated and tests turned negative. But 10 days after first getting sick, the symptoms returned and his tests turned positive for another two days.

Ho said he sequenced his own virus and found that both infections were from the same strain, confirming that the virus had not mutated and become resistant to Paxlovid. A second family member who also got sick around the same time also had post-Paxlovid rebound in symptoms and virus, Ho says.

‘It surprised the heck out of me,’ he said. ‘Up until that point I had not heard of such cases elsewhere.’ While the reasons for the rebound are still unclear, Ho theorizes that it may occur when a small proportion of virus-infected cells may remain viable and resume pumping out viral progeny once treatment stops.”

Clinical Director of the Division of Infectious Diseases at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Dr. Paul Sax, told Bloomberg:31

“Providers who are going to be prescribing this should be aware that this phenomenon occurs, and if people have symptoms worsening after Paxlovid, it’s probably still COVID. The big problem is that when this drug was released, this information wasn’t included [on the label].”

Research published in Clinical Infectious Diseases32,33 looked into why Paxlovid may be leading to rebound symptoms and suggests it could be the result of insufficient exposure to the drug. Possibly, the drug is metabolized more rapidly in some individuals. Alternatively, perhaps the drug needs to be administered for a longer period of time.

Is SARS-CoV-2 Becoming Resistant to Paxlovid?

Emerging evidence also suggests SARS-CoV-2 can develop resistance to Paxlovid if the drug doesn’t eradicate all of the virus the first time around. Two separate studies cultured SARS-CoV-2 in a lab and exposed it to low levels of nirmatrelvir — the active antiviral ingredient in Paxlovid — which would kill some, but not all, of the virus.

“Such tests are meant to simulate what might happen in an infected person who doesn’t take the whole regimen of the drug or an immunocompromised patient who has trouble clearing the virus,” Science reported.34

One of the studies revealed that SARS-CoV-2 developed three mutations after 12 rounds of nirmatrelvir treatment — “at positions 50, 166 and 167 in the string of amino acids that make up MPRO.”35 The mutations amounted to a 20-fold reduction in the virus’ susceptibility to nirmatrelvir.36

The other study37 also found mutations at positions 50 and 166, revealing that when they occurred together, SARS-CoV-2 became 80 times less susceptible to nirmatrelvir. According to the authors:38

“Reverse genetic studies in a homologous infectious cell culture system revealed up to 80-fold resistance conferred by the combination of substitutions L50F and E166V. Resistant variants had high fitness increasing the likelihood of occurrence and spread of resistance.”

It’s still unknown what might happen when two courses of Paxlovid are taken in quick succession to treat COVID-19 rebound — as occurred with Fauci. It’s possible that ever-mutating COVID-19 variants could be created.

Other antivirals on the market to treat COVID-19 have also led to concerns about drug resistance. Molnupiravir (sold under the brand name Lagevrio), approved by the FDA for emergency use in high-risk patients with mild to moderate COVID symptoms, has been shown to supercharge the rate at which the virus mutates inside the patient, resulting in newer and more drug resistant variants.39

Pfizer Gets Rich on Fraudulent Drugs

Video Link

Pfizer’s revenue is expected to reach $101.3 billion in 2022,40 thanks to the COVID jab and Paxlovid ($10 billion from Paxlovid alone) — both of which are frauds. Neither of them actually work as advertised, and both can make matters worse. In the case of Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot, you can still get the disease once you’ve been injected and boosted, and may still transmit the disease to others as well.

Then, when the shots don’t work to prevent infection — and we’ve now seen even five doses won’t prevent infection — Pfizer makes even more money by selling Paxlovid, which in many cases causes rebound! There can be only one reason for why the FDA has not withdrawn both of these drugs, and that is because they’re actually working for Pfizer.

Pfizer itself doesn’t view COVID rebound after Paxlovid treatment as a failure; they see it as a successful venture because the more courses needed, the more money they make. As reported by the Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF) in early July 2022:41

“During a recent investor call, a Pfizer official could spin the recent reports that the virus can hide from Paxlovid into good news, predicting that, as with the vaccine, patients may need multiple courses.

Immunocompromised patients ‘may carry this virus for a very, very long time,’ Dr. Mikael Dolsten [chief scientist and President of Worldwide Research and Development at Pfizer42] said in the investor call. ‘And we see that area as a real new opportunity growth area for Paxlovid to do very well, where you may need to take multiple courses.’”

FDA and CDC Are Extensions of the Drug Industry

Pushing a drug that causes COVID rebound does not appear to be in the best interest of public health. Paxlovid is a fraud and should be taken off the market. The fact that the FDA and CDC have focused on Paxlovid, remdesivir and molnupiravir to the exclusion of all others, including older drugs with high rates of effectiveness and superior safety profiles, sends a very disturbing message.

They’ve basically become extensions of the drug industry and have abandoned their original purpose, which is to protect public health — by ensuring the safety and efficacy of drugs, in the case of the FDA,43 and by conducting critical science and data analysis in the case of the CDC.44

Instead, they seem to be doing everything they can to protect Big Pharma profits, even if it costs you your life. Remdesivir, for example, costs between $2,340 and $3,120 depending on your insurance.45 Ivermectin, meanwhile — which has been very effective against COVID and shown to outperform at least 10 other drugs, including Paxlovid46 — costs between $4847 and $9448 for 20 pills depending on your location. The average cost is said to be about $58 per treatment.49

Paxlovid costs $529 per five-day course of treatment,50 and molnupiravir is around $700.51 While not quite as expensive as remdesivir, both are still nearly 10 times costlier than ivermectin, which is more effective. Imagine the billions of dollars we could have saved were it not for our health agencies being so compromised by industry.

Since the FDA and CDC cannot be trusted, it’s imperative to take responsibility for your own health. Do your own research and follow your own conscience and conviction. Remember, when it comes to COVID-19, early treatment is crucial, and effective protocols are readily available — just not from the FDA, CDC or even most hospitals.

For a refresher, check out Dr. Pierre Kory’s interview with Chris Martenson. You can also find many other articles describing treatment protocols by searching through my Substack archive.

Analysis by

Dr. Joseph Mercola

Sources and References

EDITORS NOTE: This MERCOLA column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

More Vaccine Deaths Reported to VAERS in the Last 20 Months Than All Vaccines in the Last 30 Years Combined

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Add this to the ever growing list of blockbuster news stories the Democrat media axis censors and scrubs.

Dr. Meryl Nass: More Vaccine Deaths Reported to VAERS in the Last 20 Months Than All Vaccines in the Last 30 Years Combined

The Epoch Times

“The FDA was instructed by a federal judge to revoke the license … because it had never been shown to be safe or effective,” says Dr. Meryl Nass, referring to regulation of the anthrax vaccine in the late 1990s.

Nass, a physician of internal medicine, began her research into pandemics 30 years ago, with a focus on anthrax vaccines and biological warfare. From the Rhodesian Civil War to the 2009 swine flu, she says she saw a profit-driven push for mass vaccination. In many cases, the public health establishment bypassed adequate testing, and modified or attempted to bury data, she says.

“WHO had changed the pandemic definitions a couple of months before the 2009 swine flu pandemic showed up … so, you didn’t need deaths anymore to trigger these contracts, it could just be a new virus,” says Nass.

Today, Nass is one of many doctors whose medical license is threatened for deviating from official COVID-19 guidelines during the pandemic.

“If all you’re good for is to give patients the government narrative … there’s not going to be any practice of medicine anymore,” says Dr. Nass.

Watch here……

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

Children Suddenly Dying – ‘It’s Through The Roof’ – Dr. Peter McCullough

Colorado House Minority Leader Dies Suddenly Of A Heart Attack

Vaxxed Cardiologist Whose Father Died After Jab: Suspend mRNA Product NOW

50% Increase in Miscarriages; 50% Decrease in Fertility After COVID Vax

Army Penalizing Soldiers Seeking Religious Accommodation to Vax Mandate

Christians Protest Trinity Church Vax Policy: “Vax Proof or No Worship Policy”

Judge Orders NYPD Fired Over Unconstitutional Vax Mandate Reinstated

Vaccine Injured Pilots Meeting With Senior FAA Official/Whistleblower To Help Vax Injured and Unemployed

The Vaxxed Are Dropping Like Flies

Unvaxxed Coast Guard cadets given 24 hours to vacate campus, can’t go to class, change job

DC Mayor: All Students Must Get Dangerous Vax, Says Unvaccinated Students Won’t Get Virtual Instruction, Leaving Out 40% of Black Students

Un-Vaxed Christians Denied Entry to Historical Ground Zero Trinity Episcopal Church NYC

Democrat Regime BANS #1 Tennis Player Novak Djokovic From US Open But Allows Millions Of Unvaxxed To Cross US Border

Survey: More Than 750,000 Dead, 30 Million Injured Because of Covid Vax

FDA Pushes To Authorize Novavax’s Covid-19 Vaccine Despite Serious Cardiovascular Safety Issues

Vaxxed Young Adults are 92% More Likely to Die than Unvaccinated

Walgreens: Unvaxxed are testing positive for Covid-19 at the lowest rate, Triple Vaxxed at the highest

New York Couple Face Prison Time For Using False Vax Cards to Enter Bills Game

Vax-Injuries SKYROCKET: In 2022, Vaccine-Related Myocarditis Reports in VAERS Have Surged to Nearly Half the Total Reported in 2021

Florida Becomes First State To Recommend Against COVID Vax For Healthy Kids. Psaki Accuses Of ‘Conspiracy Theories.’

TRUCKERS REVOLT! ‘Freedom Rally’ truckers convoy hits Canada against vax mandates, WORLD RECORD CONVOY

Judge BLOCKS Biden Vax Mandate For Federal Workers

Poll Shows 45% Of Democrats Approve Sending Unvaccinated To ‘Designated Facilities’, One Third Support Taking Children Away From Unvaxxed

WATCH: UK Health Secretary Javid Challenged by Unvaccinated NHS Doctor About Mandated COVID-19 Vax

Registered Nurse in Ascension Health System: Stroke Victims Doubled Since Vax, Young People In Their 30’s, 40’s Who Have No Issues, Having Strokes

‘Tyranny Is Here On Our Doorstep’: Boston Unions Fight Mayor’s COVID-19 Vax Mandate

Democrat Chicago Mayor Bans Unvaxxed from Bars, Restaurants, Gyms: ‘‘Your Time Is Up’

The Lancet journal SKEWERS “Pandemic of the Unvaxxed” narrative as noxious propaganda garbage

DEATH TO THE UNVAXXED: Biden Threatens A Winter Of Illness and Death To The Unvaccinated

HERE WE GO AGAIN: Youngkin Won’t Ban Local Vax Coercion Like Real Conservative Governors

EXCLUSIVE! Another Anti-Vax Protest in NYC, “Art is our Birthright” Protest Admission Mandates at Metropolitan Museum

NAZI VACCINE MANDATE: Fraudulent Administration ‘Planned Inspections’, $136,532 Fines to Enforce Vax Mandate

EXCLUSIVE! WORLDWIDE 4 DAY ANTI-VACCINE MANDATE WALKOUT: NYC Freedom Rally – No Vax Mandates – NYC City Hall

MASSIVE ANTI-VAX MANDATE PROTEST: NYC Workers Pro-Choice, Anti-Mandate,”Hold The Line!”

Over two dozen FDNY firehouses shut down over vax mandate staff shortage

Another Whistleblower Reveals It Is VAXED Admitted To Emergency Rooms, 90% Of Hospital Admissions Are Vaccinated and Hospital Administration Refusing to Report Adverse Events

Maine Hospital Fired So Many Unvaxed Employees They Had to Close the ICU

Civil Strikes Against Democrat Vax Mandates: Southwest CEO Blames Joe Biden For Airline’s Vaccine Mandate

DEMOCRAT SENATOR FEINSTEIN INTRODUCES BILL TO REQUIRE VAX TO FLY ON DOMESTIC FLIGHTS

‘Post-Vax COVID’ Is a New Disease

Local Detroit TV Asks For Stories of Unvaxxed Dying from COVID – Gets over 182K Responses of Vaccine Injured and Dead Instead

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Jones: Dems Failed to See Voters Deal with Inflation Every Day, Not Abortion or Democracy

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

Monday on CNN Newsroom, political commentator Van Jones stated that Democrats failed to see how much inflation mattered for working-class voters and pointed out that people do have to deal with inflation every day, while they don’t have to deal with abortion or voting every single day.

Jones said, “I think there was this kind of fool’s gold, this idea that the threat to democracy is so severe in the wake of this insurrection and in the wake of these election deniers possibly grabbing control of the government, that that was something that you had to talk about. But you also have to talk about the economy. I think the tragedy here is that the Democrats have something to say on the economy in terms of what Biden has done when it comes to 10 million jobs, what Biden has done when it comes to prescription drug prices, standing up to China on the CHIPS Act, and also the fear of what Republicans will do.”

He added, “Dobbs versus jobs, most people are going to be focused on the jobs.”

Jones concluded, “You don’t get an abortion every week. But you do buy gas every week. You don’t vote — democracy’s on the line, you don’t vote every day. You do have to eat every day. So, the price of food and the price of gas matters for a lot of working-class voters in a way that I don’t think Democrats really factored in.”

He’s half-right about democracy being on the line — it is, but the Republican Party isn’t the threat. Democrats are.

Van Jones

128 Known Connections

In April 2008, Jones made clear his desire to incrementally socialize, by stealth, the U.S. economy: “Right now we say we want to move from suicidal gray capitalism to something eco-capitalism where at least we’re not fast-tracking the destruction of the whole planet. Will that be enough? No, it won’t be enough. We want to go beyond the systems of exploitation and oppression altogether … until [the green economy] becomes the engine for transforming the whole society.”

To learn more about Van Jones, click here.

EDITORS NOTE: This Discover the Networks column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

VIDEO: Plants Are Trying to Kill You

/in , , , , , /by

Here is a lecture you never thought you would hear from a doctor. It fits rather well with experience though. Watch fast, I cannot imagine Youtube leaving this up for long.

EDITORS NOTE: This Vlad Tepes Blog video posted by is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Colorado elementary school officials hid student gender transition from parents, emails show

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

There was a time, not too long ago, when the school nurse couldn’t give your child an aspirin or Tylenol without parental permission. This cannot stand. Whatever it takes to take back our children, regain our freedom must be done.

Colorado elementary school officials hid student gender transition from parents, emails show

By Jeremiah Poff, Washington Examiner, November 04, 2022:

Officials at an elementary school in Colorado discussed how to defy the wishes of parents who did not want the school to accommodate their child’s request to transition to a different gender socially.

According to internal emails obtained through a public-records request by the parent activist group Parents Defending Education, an official at Laurel Elementary School in Fort Collins, Colorado, asked administrators if they should disregard a parent’s request that their child be addressed by their legal name and pronouns corresponding to their biological sex.

“I’m wondering about what to do when an elementary school student has expressed their pronouns and chosen name but their parents directly tell school staff not to call the student by those pronouns,” the unnamed official said in an email dated April 4, 2022. “I feel very strongly about supporting the student but have heard that we legally have to follow the parents’ direction due to the age of the child (elementary school).”

The Laurel Elementary School administrator’s request for information was forwarded to a Poudre School District official, who directed the administrator to follow the student’s wishes for what name to be called but use the student’s legal name in conversations with the child’s parents.

“The school should use the student’s affirming name and pronouns at school and use their legal name and corresponding pronouns when talking with the family until they are supportive of the student’s new name and pronouns,” the email says.

Poudre School District did not respond to a request for comment.

Over the past year, school districts across the country have faced the ire of parents for facilitating so-called “social gender transitions” for students of all ages without the permission or knowledge of the child’s parent. The practice has led to several lawsuits and has prompted some elected officials to explore ways to ban the practice.

In a statement to the Washington Examiner, Parents Defending Education’s director of outreach, Erika Sanzi, blasted the school officials’ discussions as “unconscionable.”

Keep reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Left Destroyed Everything, and Now They Want A Free Pass

Watch these videos calling out Democrats as Racists, Pornographers, Groomers of Children and Unhinged

If You’re White and Fork Over $85,000, This Prestigious University Will Teach You to Hate Yourself

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Why the Rise of Intersectionality in Medicine Will Have Serious Consequences

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

School standards have fallen for the sake of political correctness over effective and dependable education. That is dangerous.

In early October, my alma mater made headlines after it decided to fire chemistry professor Dr. Maitland Jones Jr. after 82 of his students signed a petition noting that his organic chemistry class was “too hard.” The students accused Jones of purposely making the class difficult, citing that their low scores negatively impacted their “well-being,” and their chances of getting into medical school. Instead of evaluating the rigor and substance of Jones’ curriculum, NYU justified its hasty action by noting the class’s unfavorable student reviews. This type of judgment would never pass in the fields of architecture, aerial engineering, or even the food service industry; why is it permissible here?

In response to the disciplinary action, former medical humanities professor and bioethicist Dr. Alice Dreger blasted the move in a tweet, saying it “made her skin crawl.”

“We aren’t going to end up with good doctors by letting undergrad pre-meds pass organic chem because universities want to protect their US News rankings,” she wrote.

The reaction is justified considering how standards for pre-med programs and even medical schools have shifted in the direction of equity and social justice. It seems that even professors cannot hold the line on academic performance, when the institutions they teach at make it a secondary importance to accommodating students’ sensitivities on the basis of how faulted or victimized they feel while learning in the highly competitive and demanding field of medicine.

The rise in efforts to increase diversity in medical schools can be seen as coming from a place of good intentions: to create an academic environment which promotes minority doctors, especially those who come from underserved communities. Having a diversification of medical practitioners is beneficial, especially if said doctors use their skills and talents to give back to communities that drastically need medical attention, such as inner cities and remote rural communities.

Advocates for broader outreach cite studies such as the AAMC’s report titled, “Altering the Course: Black Males in Medicine” which notes how the number of black male applicants dropped from 1,410 in 1978 to 1,337 in 2014. They could also point to a Yale-led study that found minority students are less likely to get placed in residency programs than their white and Asian colleagues.

These seem to be pressing issues which must be addressed if medical schools wish to increase black and brown students’ success rates. However, instead of working towards expanding tutoring, learning programs, and outreach initiatives, it seems as if universities and medical schools want to focus strictly on the intersectional aspects of this research.

The leader of the aforementioned Yale study, Mytien Nguyen, MSc, stated,

“In previous studies, we’ve really only looked at one dimension of identity, but there’s intersectionality and the compounding of multiple marginalized identities…we wanted to see how these identities came into play in the application process…there is a clear compounding effect of being a student underrepresented in medicine and lower income…there is a double whammy in terms of how medicine is classist and racialized.”

Nguyen states that it is unclear what is contributing to lower placement rates among marginalized students, and yet failed to consider how a plethora of other factors, such as lack of mentors in medicine, limited financial resources, and differing cultural perceptions of working in medicine, may contribute to this phenomenon. Looking back at AAMC’s report, it is important to note that while the number of black male applicants did decrease over the decades, the report also shows how the overall number of black medical students actually rose from 933 in 1978 to 1,227 in 2014—a 32 percent spike.

This is a welcoming statistic which can be improved if schools provide marginalized communities with greater access to high school and pre-med opportunities.

Unfortunately, institutions like NYU have taken it upon themselves to lower the bar of admission through intersectional incentives, rather than enforcing academic standards—which we all agree are needed in order to have dependable and safe future doctors.

The shift in a medicine-based education to an emphasis on race and social concern was highlighted by former University of Pennsylvania Medical School Dean Stanley Goldfarb, who stated:

“…Today a master’s degree in education is often what it takes to qualify for key administrative roles on medical-school faculties. The zeitgeist of sociology and social work have become the driving force in medical education. The goal of today’s educators is to produce legions of primary care physicians who engage in what is termed ‘population health.’”

Medical schools’ administrations seem to have become taken over by sociologists and critical race theorists—if not in title, then certainly in practice.

Most recently in the news, the University of Minnesota Medical School conducted a white coat ceremony for its Class of 2026, where each student had to recite a modified Hippocratic Oath which—on top of pledging to do no harm and to help the sick whenever possible—would “honor all Indigenous ways of healing that have been historically marginalized by Western medicine…white supremacy, colonialism, and the gender binary.”

The politicization of medicine has greater effects than just this sort of political white-knighting. Instead of focusing on promoting preventative care and treatment based on actual medical effectiveness, the impetus behind these medical schools’ actions seems to be entirely race-based. For example, Georgetown University is funding the study and formation of courses to prevent ‘microaggressions’ in medicine.

Likewise, the Association of American Medical Colleges released a new standard for teaching medicine which requires students to achieve ‘competencies’ in ‘white privilege’ or risk failing. It also seeks to do away with the ideas of gender and race, the latter of which the AAMC describes as “… a social construct that is a cause of health and health care inequities, not a risk factor for disease.” If this is the case, then how will doctors address the pervasiveness of Sickle-Cell Anemia and Multiple Myeloma in African-American communities, the prevalence of diabetes in Asian groups, or the largely unknown effects of hormonal therapies in minors?

This dramatic shift from upholding course standards to molding medicine in a racial lens is concerning. Though proponents of such measures would argue this is critical to improving race-relations in medicine and to deconstructing students’ “implicit biases,” saving lives and providing exceptional preventative care supersedes that.

A 2016 BMJ analysis found that medical errors in health-care facilities are actually incredibly common and may even be the third-leading cause of death in the US. Medical malpractice accounts for about 251,000 deaths every year—this is more than accidents, stroke, Alzheimer’s, and respiratory disease:

CLICK HERE: To view the National Center for Health Statistics Death in the United States chart

A doctor’s most important duty to his or her patient is to do no harm—this includes preventing negligence, refraining from superfluous procedures, and ensuring every avenue of care is addressed prior to conducting invasive surgery. From shoddy hospital conditions to inexperienced nurses to just bad doctors, healthcare resulting in patient harm is a much more pressing issue than the alleged microaggressions resident doctors give off during their rotations.

The race and gender of a practicing physician should not matter as long as they are skilled, capable, and reasonable in their practice. It is therefore the universities and medical schools’ responsibility to uphold the rigorous standards they once had in order to ensure their students are prepared to work in high-stress, highly complicated medical scenarios—above all else. We need capable and skilled doctors, period.

AUTHOR

Connor Vasile

Connor Vasile is a first-generation American and writer who wishes to raise awareness about classical liberal ideas which empower every individual, no matter their background or experience, to live their best lives and fulfill their goals.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Do Drug Expiration Dates Mean Anything? The Harvard Medical School’s Answer Will Shock You!

/in , , , , , , , /by

Have you ever gone to the place where you keep your prescription and over-the-counter drugs to look at their expiration dates? Do you throw out any of your medications because they have “expired” according to the manufacturer?

Well the Harvard Medical School looked into to expiration dates and their findings were to say the least shocking.

On August 29, 2020 Harvard Medical School’s Harvard Health Publishing released an article titled Drug Expiration Dates — Do They Mean Anything? The Harvard Medical School reported,

The big question is, do pills expire?

[ … ]

This is a dilemma many people face in some way or another. A column published in Psychopharmacology Today offers some advice.

It turns out that the expiration date on a drug does stand for something, but probably not what you think it does. Since a law was passed in 1979, drug manufacturers are required to stamp an expiration date on their products. This is the date at which the manufacturer can still guarantee the full potency and safety of the drug.

Most of what is known about drug expiration dates comes from a study conducted by the Food and Drug Administration at the request of the military. With a large and expensive stockpile of drugs, the military faced tossing out and replacing its drugs every few years. What they found from the study is 90% of more than 100 drugs, both prescription and over-the-counter, were perfectly good to use even 15 years after the expiration date.

So, the expiration date doesn’t really indicate a point at which the medication is no longer effective or has become unsafe to use. Medical authorities state if expired medicine is safe to take, even those that expired years ago. A rare exception to this may be tetracycline, but the report on this is controversial among researchers. It’s true the effectiveness of a drug may decrease over time, but much of the original potency still remains even a decade after the expiration date. Excluding nitroglycerin, insulin, and liquid antibiotics, most medications are as long-lasting as the ones tested by the military. Placing a medication in a cool place, such as a refrigerator, will help a drug remain potent for many years.

[ … ]

The next time you face the drug expiration date dilemma, consider what you’ve learned here.

Read the full article.

QUESTION: Why would pharmaceutical companies underestimate the expiration of their drugs?

ANSWER: Make more $$$$$ by getting you to throw away perfectly good drugs!

Today many are questioning what our three letter health agencies, e.g. FDA, DHS, and pharmaceutical companies are saying about drugs, including the various Covid vaccines and their side effects.

Many are concerned about the effectiveness of prescription and over-the-counter drugs and their side effects.

We highly recommend that individuals consult with their doctors to determine if a drug has truly expired, is effective and what are side effects, if any.

We have tended to trust our government agencies, especially those who deal with healthcare and disease control. However, many today are skeptical and even against following the advise of our government agencies.

As Ronald Reagan said, “Trust but verify.”

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: Liberal California Judge Just Gave Drug Dealers Permission To Deal Drugs!

Biden and Democrats Are ALL-IN on Murdering Unborn Children—Watch!

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

Just after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Roe v Wade was unconstitutional and that the decision on abortions is a state issue Biden made the following statement.

Since then Biden and the Democrat Party have make the murder of the unborn their hallmark political issue for the 2022 midterm elections.

Here are a series of articles on how extreme Biden, the Democrat Party and their allies are on the issue of murdering unborn children. Biden lies about it, the media supports it and Democrats believe its a winning issue.

Please read the following articles from LifeNews.com to understand just how unhinged and deluded they all are.

Joe Biden Claims “No One Knows Precisely When Does Human Life Begin”

National  |  Micaiah Bilger  |   Nov 2, 2022   |   12:26PM   |  Washington, DC

Joe Biden brought up his Catholic faith Tuesday when he defended abortion on demand with the claim that “no one knows” when life begins.

Breitbart reports the president promoted the legalized killing of unborn babies in abortions during a campaign rally in Florida. Democrats have made abortion a key focus of the midterm election, and Biden promised to make abortion a top priority in 2023 if his party wins more seats in Congress.

“I’m a practicing Catholic. I’ve supported Roe vs. Wade,” Biden said. “And the reason I support Roe vs. Wade is the most rational basis upon which confessional faiths can agree: No one knows precisely when does human life begin.”

His statement was both troubling and wrong for multiple reasons in regard to the Christian faith, scientific knowledge and basic human rights.

Biden professes to be a devout Catholic, but his abortion advocacy directly defies his religion. The Catholic Church teaches that every human life is valuable from the moment of conception to natural death, and abortion is evil.

Last week, U.S. Catholic bishops condemned Biden’s “single-minded extremism” on abortion after he announced a radical pro-abortion bill as his top priority for 2023. One archbishop recently described the legislation as “child sacrifice,” saying it’s what “one would expect from a devout Satanist, not a devout Catholic.”

Actress Anne Hathaway: Killing a Baby in an Abortion is an Act of “Mercy”

National  |  Peter Pinedo  |   Nov 2, 2022   |   9:41AM   |  Washington, DC

Actress and Hollywood celebrity Anne Hathaway claimed during an interview on “The View” that “abortion can be another word for mercy.”

Let that sink in.

The actress famed for her roles in The Devil Wears Prada and Princess Diaries, believes that brutally murdering innocent children in their mothers’ wombs is somehow equivalent to mercy.

Though extremist support for abortion is the expected norm in Hollywood, Hathaway’s take still boggles the mind. Anyone with even the slightest knowledge of the undeniable, scientifically proven humanity of preborn children and the savage cruelty of abortion, has to wonder, “does Anne Hathaway not know what the word ‘mercy’ means?”

Commenting on the historic Dobbs v. Jackson Supreme Court case that resulted in the reversal of Roe v. Wade, Hathaway called for people to fight against Pro-Life laws and “radicalize” in support of killing unborn babies.

In voicing her support for abortion, Hathaway has never voiced support for any restrictions, which leaves open the door for especially cruel late-term partial birth abortions. In these outrageously barbaric “procedures” a well-developed baby is partially delivered, only to be ripped apart limb from limb.

Joe Biden Gives Planned Parenthood $17 Million to Kill Babies in Abortions

National  |  Micaiah Bilger  |   Nov 2, 2022   |   10:28AM   |  Washington, DC

Joe Biden’s administration awarded almost $17 million in taxpayer-funded grants this year to the billion-dollar abortion chain Planned Parenthood.

According to Live Action News, the nation’s largest abortion company received the money through the Title X family planning program under the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Another $25.5 million from the program went to other pro-abortion groups, the news outlet discovered.

Title X funds are not supposed to be used for abortions. The program provides family planning services to low-income individuals, and the law states that Title X grants may not be used “where abortion is a method of family planning.”

However, Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion business in the U.S., has been one of the biggest recipients of Title X for years. In 2019, the Trump administration issued a rule ensuring that funding would not be used to support abortions, and Planned Parenthood dropped out of the program.

In 2021, however, the Biden administration reversed the action with a rule that requires Title X recipients to refer for abortions and ended the requirement that abortion facilities separate their abortion practices from their Title X services. Now, 12 states are suing to challenge the pro-abortion rule.

Powerful Video Shows Abortion Staffer Quitting After Seeing the Reality of How Abortions Kill Babies

 

National  |  Micaiah Bilger  |   Nov 2, 2022   |   5:58PM   |  Washington, DC

A short but powerful new video from the perspective of a hospital ultrasound technician exposes the horrific way unborn babies are killed in abortions.

A true story, the animated 4-minute film comes from Loor.tv and CHOICE42, a Canadian pro-life organization known for both satirical and serious videos about abortion. Actor Kevin Sorbo (“Hercules,” “God’s Not Dead”) is the voice-over talent in the film.

“The Procedure” follows the harrowing experience of a hospital sonographer as he is called into the operating room to unknowingly help with a second-trimester abortion.

“I had no idea what I was walking into,” the man recalls.

After plugging in the ultrasound machine, he receives orders to place the probe on the woman’s stomach so that the surgeon will not perforate her uterus. Recognizing the patient is pregnant, the tech seems to assume at first that she is being treated for a miscarriage.

To his horror, however, he soon realizes her unborn baby is still alive. Looking at the ultrasound screen, he says the woman was in her second trimester and it was easy to see that the unborn baby was a girl.

“Stunned, I watched the doctor thrust a catheter into the amniotic sac,” he says. “The fetus dodged the catheter and tried to hide in the top of her mother’s uterus to get away.”

SUPPORT LIFENEWS! To help us stand against Joe Biden’s abortion agenda, please help LifeNews.com with a donation!

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Pro-Life Centers 22 Times More Likely to be Attacked Than Abortion Facilities: Study

Elderly Pro-Life Man Brutally Attacked Outside Planned Parenthood Abortion Biz

Raphael Warnock: It’s OK to Kill Babies in Abortions Just Because They’re Disabled

If Democrats Lose, It Will be a Massive Rejection of Abortion

She Was Pressured Into Having an Abortion, But Now She’s Passionately Pro-Life

I Was Conceived in Rape, But Thanks to My Birth Mom I Was Adopted in Love

NYPD Whistleblower Claims Mayor’s Office Ignoring Court Order that Reinstates Unvaccinated Officers

/in , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Project Veritas Action (PVA) released a new video today featuring a leaked email provided by a New York Police Department whistleblower.

An NYPD insider claimed City Hall was ignoring an order issued by the New York State Supreme Court which ruled that public sector employees who were fired for being unvaccinated be reinstated with back pay.

Here are some of the highlights from today’s video:

  • NYPD Insider: “So, they are continuing to send these emails out and deny people their religious accommodation request. Even after this judge’s order.”
  • NYPD Insider: “My department has — they can’t provide me with a number to even contact anybody to speak to them. So, it’s basically — it’s a secretive process. You have no idea who is reviewing your [religious] exemption…What standard did my letter not meet? You know? So, they’re basically telling you that your religious beliefs are not religious enough for them.”
  • NYPD Insider: “You know, the city is still going after officers, trying to fire us. So, that was something the [police] union brought forward and said, ‘Listen, you always said, “Follow the science.” And you’re not even doing that now, because the people in charge of it, the CDC, are telling you — you don’t need to fire us anymore and you’re still doing it.’”
  • NYPD Insider: “What I’m hearing from the Mayor’s Office is that they’ve already fired enough people. That if this gets reversed, they’re looking at a lot of lawsuits from those people who have been fired. So, they have to — they can’t go back on it, even if they want to…Then those people who were fired six, seven, eight months ago, turn around and say, ‘Hey you fired me and you’re not firing people now? Now I’m going to sue the city.’ So, the city is kind of — they put themselves in a rock and a hard place…They’ve already jumped in with both feet. They can’t come out now and change their mind or they are going to open themselves up to a tremendous amount of lawsuits.”

You can watch the video HERE.

PVA recently exposed one of Mayor Adams’ aides, Chris Baugh, who was terminated by the city after telling an undercover journalist that he had no sympathy for police officers who were fired for being unvaccinated.

Baugh had also stated there was not any real good reason for the city to keep a vaccine mandate in place for public sector employees.

Mayor Adams said he decided to terminate Baugh’s employment because of his comments about NYPD officers.

The question remains as to why the city appears to discriminate against its officers with a vaccine mandate after the judge’s order to reinstate those already fired.

EDITORS NOTE: This Project Veritas video exposé is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Anthony Fauci’s Sociopathic Murder of the Masses

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

“The mainstream media and social media giants are imposing a totalitarian censorship to prevent public health advocates, like myself, from voicing concerns and from engaging in civil informed debate in the public square.” —  Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Chairman, Children’s Health Defense

“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the convinced Communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction (i.e., the reality of experience) and the distinction between true and false (i.e., the standards of thought) no longer exist.” — Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism

“Censorship reflects a society’s lack of confidence in itself.  It is a hallmark of an authoritarian regime.” —  Potter Stewart, Dissenting to Ginsberg v. United States

“It happened. Therefore, it can happen again. It can happen everywhere.” —  Primo Levi, Italian Jewish survivor of Auschwitz

“Indifference and the silence of people led to the Holocaust. To remain silent and indifferent is the greatest sin of all.” — Elie Wiesel, Holocaust survivor

“Dr. Joseph Goebbels wrote that ‘A lie told once remains a lie, but a lie told a thousand times becomes the truth.’  Tragically for humanity, there are many, many untruths emanating from Fauci and his minions.  RFK Jr. exposes the decades of lies.” —  Luc Montagnier, Nobel Laureate

In Charlotte Iserbyt’s 1999 book, The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America, she exposed the truth of communism and the unelected powers who rule.

She states the following on page 134:

The Daily World of November 8, 1975 carried a very interesting article entitled “Planning is Socialism’s Trademark” by Morris Zeitlin.  The Daily World (newspaper of the Communist Party USA) was formerly known as The Daily Worker and was founded in 1924.  The importance of this article lies in its blatant admission that regionalism, which is gradually becoming the accepted method of unelected governance in the United States (unelected councils and task forces, participatory democracy, public-private partnerships, etc.) is the form of government used in democratic socialist and communist countries.

Throughout the country from federal agencies down to local city and county boards, all of the decisions regarding C-19 were made by unelected heads of agencies which affected every American.  Those choices were followed by state governors, city and county mayors, heads of police and fire departments, hospital administrators, etc.  They all loved their totalitarian control and then the mandates!  Get the clot shots!

Except of course for those Biden deemed exempt.

The Federal Drug Administration (FDA) is a drug regulatory, drug safety watchdog agency.  The FDA doesn’t tell doctors how to treat patients.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH), is a government funded research organization.  The NIH doesn’t tell doctors how to treat patients.

The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) is an infectious and chronic disease, epidemiologic and analytic organization.  The CDC doesn’t tell doctors how to treat patients.

A lot of these quasi-governmental agencies that people think are governmental are actually front groups of the pharmaceutical industry.

Not one of these federal agency leaders was elected, and not one of them ever treated a C-19 patient. Yet, every one of them told America what we could and could not do and then destroyed the ability of physicians to properly treat patients other than with their deadly protocols. Their goal was the money-making deadly inoculations for C-19.

When hospitals followed those protocols they collected beaucoup tax payer dollars from the federal government, with the highest payments for patients who died. The following chart shows the monies each state received for each C-19 patient.

Remember that the PCR tests were not valid tests for COVID and the Nobel Peace Prize inventor, Kary Mullis, told us it was improperly used and would give far too many false positives.  Mullis knew Dr. Anthony Fauci was dangerous and said he spent $22 billion and killed 100,000 people with his fraudulent AIDS drugs.

Nor should we look to other unelected parties to tell us what to do, and that includes our local health departments who advocated mandates that are destructive not only to children, but to all citizens.  And the latest is the euphemistically named Congressional bill H.R.550 (Immunization Infrastructure Modernization Act of 2021) which paves the way for state and local health departments, as well as public and private health care providers, to share personal health data with the federal government. The bill has hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars allocated to the tracking system’s success.

The Wentworth Report states, “In 2000, Dr. Fauci, who Dr. Joseph Mercola calls a sociopathic bureaucrat, met with Bill Gates, who asked to partner with the NIH in an agreement to vaccinate the entire population of the world with a battery of new vaccines. In 2009, this agreement was rebranded as “The Decade of Vaccines,” the objective of which was to implement mandatory vaccinations for every adult and child on the planet by the year 2020. Link

“Gates calls what he does philanthropy capitalism, the idea that, you can use philanthropy to make money. He had a foundation where he has sheltered $50 billion in tax-free money. He continues to have absolute control over it. He uses that money to gain control of public health agencies in our country and the World Health Organization.”

Portions of the following info come from The Real Anthony Fauci movies.  We’d all be wise to purchase a copy of these two films.

Willowbrook State School

In 1965, Robert F. Kennedy, Sr. visited Willowbrook State School in Staten Island, New York and was appalled at the situation and called it a snake pit, similar to the 1948 movie by the same name.  The institution’s medical personnel were conducting US Army funded experiments on the children.  These children had been abandoned by their parents in dilapidated institutions.

Children housed at Willowbrook were intentionally given hepatitis in an attempt to track the development of the viral infection. The study lasted for 14 years.  It wasn’t until 1987 that Willowbrook was shut down.

Just one of the horrid experiments was the deliberate injection of Hepatitis during 1964. From 1958-1964 feces was taken from children who had Hepatitis, put in milkshakes and fed to newly admitted children for experimentation purposes.

The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiments were conducted between 1932 and 1972.  The Willowbrook experiments started in 1956.

The Nuremberg Codes were formulated in August of 1947, yet these experiments on Americans were never prosecuted under the Codes.  The question remains, “Why not?”

Now there’s far worse.

Fauci and AIDS

In the late 1980s, foster children in seven states were enrolled in experiments of HIV and AIDS drug trials.  Fauci called them studies, but they were invasive experiments.  Fauci arranged for the drug companies to get access to these experiments.  Merck, Progenics Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer, Glaxo Wellcome and others were involved.

I wrote about Fauci’s experiments on children in October of 2020 in an article entitled, Is Dr. Anthony Fauci Guilty of Negligent Homicide?  I now believe he is guilty of murder in the first degree, but I highly doubt he’ll ever see justice here on earth.

The Wentworth Report states, “AZT was a chemotherapy formulation that was so toxic it killed all the rats when they gave it to them. The inventor of AZT felt that it was unsafe for any human use, so he didn’t even patent it …

“Very early on, the National Cancer Institute had found that when you put AZT in a culture of HIV, that killed the HIV, not surprisingly. It killed anything it touched. And so, Fauci partnered with the manufacturer of AZT.  He guided that formulation through the regulatory process and tried to fast track it. He cheated terribly on the clinical trials.”

Children who were considered to have AIDS via the PCR tests used during COVID, were as unreliable for AIDS prognosis as they were for COVID.  Thus, many of the children were not even HIV positive.

Fauci together with pharmaceutical companies sponsored these AZT experiments.  Many of the children died.  In Hawthorn, New York there is a cemetery where these children are buried.  Journalist Celia Farber, who is featured in The Real Anthony Fauci movies, tells of the burial site of at least 80 children, perhaps more, their bodies in metal caskets, many with more than one body per casket.

Farber commented that, “Fauci’s reign has elements to totalitarian societies and it also has the theme of mafioso velvetiness to it.”

“…Dr. Fauci copied the choreographed script for winning remdesivir’s Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) from the worn rabbit-eared playbook that he developed during his early AIDS years, and then used repeatedly across his career to win approvals for deadly and ineffective drugs,” writes Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. “Time and again, he has terminated clinical trials of his sweetheart drugs the moment they begin to reveal cataclysmic toxicity. He makes the absurd claim that his drug-du-jour had proven so miraculously effective that it would be unethical to deny it to the public, and then he strong-arms FDA to grant his approvals.”

Vera Sharav, Holocaust survivor and President of the Alliance for Human Research Protection (AHRP.org) stated, “Most people cannot imagine that there are people, especially medical doctors, which Dr. Fauci is, who would disregard the humanity of people including children.  There was horrific abuse and because it was government sponsored, together with pharmaceutical companies, they had kind of free rein.  New York State and New York City provided the children for the government experiments.  New York Administration for Services’ documents confirmed there were 80 deaths and many others suffered serious harm.”

Reagan’s Injury Compensation Act

In 1986, Reagan signed into law a bill that gave compensation to children for drug exports and vaccine injuries.  It was meant to make vaccines safer, but it gave virtual liability protection to vaccine manufacturers and health care providers who were providing vaccines.

Mary Holland, general counsel and President of the Children’s Health Defense states, “The 1986 Act was created and signed into law by Reagan.  It allegedly created a program for compensation of children who were injured by their vaccines or who died and they would get some level of compensation.”

Dr. Sherry Tenpenny said, “The 1986 Injury Compensation Act was a real game changer because all of the drug companies who were making vaccines were deciding that they were not going to do vaccines anymore unless they got liability protection because they were getting sued at every turn.”

Mary Holland said, “The blanket liability protection created a boon town, a gold rush. The sad reality is a whole new industry of recklessly developed vaccines that are highly profitable was created, and it did not lead to compensation to children who are injured and it absolutely did not lead to safer vaccines.”

Here is a 45-page report on The Horrible History of Big Pharma.

“That’s one of the tragedies that is across the board when it comes to public health.  Because you see, when doctors join forces with government, they no longer comply with medicine’s mission which is the sacred oath to do no harm to the individual patient. They become agents of government and they do what they’re told,” added Vera Sharav.

This is just like the physicians who work for a group.  They do what they’re told or they lose their jobs, and the groups invariably get their instructions from the CDC, NIH and FDA.

John D. Rockefeller

“In 1910, John D. Rockefeller really kind of took over medicine, particularly the medical schools. And they redirected medicine to be totally focused on pharmaceutical interventions and also, various surgical procedures, in other words, to make it a real business.  The Rockefellers are involved in everything, the World Health Organization, both Rockefeller and Gates.”

John D. Rockefeller was not just interested in oil, but in medicine, in education and in retaining his massive earnings via tax free foundations.

Britannica states, “He made possible the founding of the University of Chicago in 1892, and by the time of his death—from a heart attack in 1937, shortly before his 98th birthday—he had given it some $35 million. In association with his son, John D. Rockefeller, Jr., he created major philanthropic institutions, including the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research (renamed Rockefeller University) in New York City (1901), the General Education Board (1902), and the Rockefeller Foundation (1913).  Rockefeller’s benefactions during his lifetime totaled more than $500 million.”

Vera Sharav’s insight on foundations is spot on, “The very wealthy foundations were formed to eliminate their tax requirement.  Foundations don’t have to pay taxes.  So, they simply move their business under the flag of foundations and then they’re exempt from taxation and they gain huge control because they’re distributing money to all sorts of non-government agencies.  They get to decide exactly who to give money to, what kind of policies to support.  In the meantime, they’re shoveling in money for themselves.”

That is one of the tragedies that is across the board when it comes to public health.

NIH Payments

Robert Kennedy Jr. tells us, “One of the secrets that they’ve tried to keep hidden at NIH are these direct payments from the pharmaceutical company not only to the agency, but to hundreds if not thousands of scientists and officials within those agencies for royalty payments for the drugs that that agency has partnered with the pharmaceutical company to develop and market.

“The agency has become a big marketing arm for Big Pharma.  And they don’t want the American public to know that that is the ultimate object of this terrible devolution.  And one of the big emblems of that devolution are the payments that are being made to Tony Fauci, to his deputies, to his scientists.  We’ve made FOIA requests and inquiries and the NIH has stonewalled us.”

They’ve had hundreds of FOIA requests and are being sued over those requests, but as of yet, little has been forthcoming.  This is an important portion of the last 25 minutes of the second video.

Dr. Pierre Kory says, “To call Fauci ‘America’s doctor’ is such a misnomer.  He’s essential a mafia don who runs all three agencies.  He rules science and the practice of medicine.”

Vera Sharav calls Fauci, “a shyster, a man without scruples of any kind.”

Dr. Paul Marik says, “He should be charged with the crimes he’s responsible for which go back to the HIV era.  He did some terrible experiments in Africa.  He’s resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of patients.”

Global leaders have united in an urgent call for an international pandemic treaty to be headed by the World Health Organization (WHO).  The loss of American sovereignty has been nibbled away at for decades, but this kind of treaty would eliminate American citizens freedoms to choose their own health care and would be forced to abide by the dictates of the WHO.

There is no conclusion to this ongoing battle against tyranny, and I should end here.

However, I’m going to include Vera Sharav’s speech in its entirety rather than just linking to it.  She was to give the speech in Brussels but because of protestors, it was given in a restaurant. She outlines the parallels of today with the German Holocaust of European Jewry.

She states exactly what we’re facing because she’s been through it before.

A vital lesson from the Holocaust is that genocide was facilitated by global silence, indifference and the failure to intervene. The Holocaust was set in motion when personal freedom, legal rights and civil rights were swept aside.

The author Primo Levi, an Italian Jewish survivor of Auschwitz, warned: “It happened. Therefore, it can happen again. It can happen everywhere.”

As a Holocaust survivor, I am appalled by poseurs who control the Holocaust narrative. They deny the relevance of the Holocaust to current discrimination and increasingly aggressive and repressive edicts.

These vigilantes censor and silence those who speak out. By denying the relevance of the Holocaust to current repression, the vigilantes are Holocaust deniers.

Elie Wiesel, an Auschwitz survivor and Nobel laureate, was regarded as the victims’ voice. He stated: “Indifference and the silence of people led to the Holocaust. To remain silent and indifferent is the greatest sin of all.”

Today, survivors are shaken by the fear-mongering, and divisive, discriminatory measures against a minority. Horrifying scenes include police in black uniforms brutally attacking demonstrators in European cities, in Australia, and, yes, in Israel. These are painful reminders of the prelude to the Holocaust in which the Nazis:

  • Used the psychological weapons of fear and propaganda to impose a genocidal regime.
  • Demonized Jews as the spreaders of disease and the cause of their misery.
  • Systematically obliterated moral norms and values.
  • Destroyed their social conscience in the name of public health.

Today’s predators are also using fear and propaganda to maintain a state of anxiety and helplessness. The objective ­ then and now ­ is identical ­ to condition people to become obedient and to follow directives without question.

The global assault on our freedoms and our right to self-determination is facilitated by the weaponization of medicine. Then and now, the medical establishment has provided
a veneer of legitimacy to mass medical murder.

The Nazis declared disabled people ­ “unfit for life.” The 1,000 German infants and young children who were the world’s first medical murder victims were actually murdered in hospitals.

In 2020, global governments declared an emergency and issued deadly medical dictates:

  • Hospitals were ordered not to treat the elderly in nursing homes. The result was mass medical murder ­ which Sweden called “active euthanasia.”
  • UK hospitals used lethal doses of the drug Midazolam to medically murder the elderly ­ a drug they continue to stockpile.
  • S. hospital guidelines still call for the elderly to receive minimal treatment.
  • Doctors in Western Europe and the U.S. are forbidden to prescribe existing, licensed, safe and effective, life-saving treatments for COVID patients.

Today, humanity is threatened by the global heirs of the Nazis. The real virus that continues to infect these predators is Eugenics.

A report by the U.S. Commission on the Holocaust, chaired by Elie Wiesel, noted: “… the inclination to duplicate the Nazi option and once again exterminate millions of people remains a hideous threat.”

The modern-day Nazis’ objective is global population reduction. The global oligarchs are determined to gain absolute control of the world’s resources ­ natural, financial and human.

Bill Gates, a lifelong eugenicist and major stakeholder in the vaccine industry, declared the COVID vaccine the “final solution.”

COVID injections use an experimental, gene transfer technology. Its testing on the global population is in gross violation of the foremost human right to “voluntary, informed consent.”

Those who refuse to be injected are vilified as spreaders of a deadly virus. They are subjected to increasingly harsh penalties and discrimination. Germany, Austria and Italy are once again swept up by an orgy of fascist hate-mongering. This time the unvaccinated are being targeted.

The claimed rationale for vaccine mandates was to protect people from getting and transmitting infection. However, the incontrovertible evidence shows that COVID injections do not prevent infection or its transmission and they do not provide immunity.

Even the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s director, Rochelle Wallensky, has acknowledged that COVID jabs cannot prevent transmission.

Albert Bourla, Pfizer CEO, conceded that “two doses of the vaccine offer very limited protection ­ if any.”

If vaccinated people can get infected and spread COVID ­ why are they privileged? Why are the unvaccinated ­ who refuse to be injected with a clinically worthless product ­ maligned, discriminated against, threatened with job loss, and the withdrawal of their children’s schooling?

If COVID injections do not protect anyone’s health, what is the real objective of vaccine mandates and digital passports?

Many independent scientists are warning that these injections are biological weapons of mass destruction. Tens of thousands of doctors, scientists and nurses refuse the injections ­ even if it means losing their jobs and their licenses.

Government data from the UK, Israel, the U.S. and the EMA [European Medicines Agency] confirm that massive deaths and injuries have been reported. Close to 38,000 Europeans have died following the shots. And more than 3,390,000 have suffered injuries. Healthy, athletic, young adults have died. Children are suffering from myocarditis and blood clots. Neurodegenerative diseases are also emerging in the vaccinated.

We are at a catastrophic junction in human history. Today’s predators have unleashed an injectable biological weapon designed to deliver a poisonous spike protein, and stealth surveillance technology, into the body.

This weapon enables the predators to control the global population remotely 24 hours a day. We must choose ­ whether to disobey, and assert our freedom and our rights as human beings ­or to be enslaved.

Auschwitz survivor, Mariann Turski, a Polish journalist, was asked if a Holocaust could happen again. He replied: “It could happen. If civil rights are violated ­ if minority rights are not respected and are abolished.”

He urged everyone to “defend the constitution, defend your rights, defend your democracy. Minority rights must be protected… Thou shalt not be indifferent when any minority faces discrimination.”

Dietrich Bonhoeffer,­ an exceptional German Protestant minister during the Nazi regime stated, “Silence in the face of evil is itself evil. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.”

Rabbi Michoel Green just posted an urgent plea that it’s “time to atone for the Holocaust by not allowing it to be repeated.” Green admonishes everyone not to obey tyrants’ orders and not to marginalize and persecute minorities. And he tells the Jews: “Don’t repeat the fatal error of blindly heeding your capo betrayers and walking obsequiously like to the slaughter. Wake up NOW.”

Do not be deluded; the unvaccinated are not the enemy. The first step on the slippery slope to genocide is the stigmatization of a minority. Silence invites ever-increasing repressive restrictions. If we are to survive as free human beings, we must speak out against discrimination. We must not ever be silent again ­ not today, not tomorrow, not ever.

The vaccine program is betrayal.

©Kelleigh Nelson. All rights reserved.

Covid Vaccines Injure the Heart of ALL Vaccine Recipients and Cause Myocarditis in Up to 1 in 27, Study Finds

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

And still the Democrats are mandating this poison for our children.

mRNA Vaccines Injure the Heart of ALL Vaccine Recipients and Cause Myocarditis in Up to 1 in 27, Study Finds

By: Daily Sceptic, October 27, 2022:

New evidence has emerged that the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are routinely injuring the heart of all vaccine recipients, raising further questions about their safety and their role in the recent elevated levels of heart-related deaths.

The latest evidence comes in a study from Switzerland, which found elevated troponin levels – indicating heart injury – across all vaccinated people, with 2.8% showing levels associated with subclinical myocarditis.

The official line on elevated heart injuries and deaths, where they are acknowledged, is that they are most likely caused by the virus as a post-Covid condition rather than the vaccines.

However, expert group HART (Health Advisory and Recovery Team) has pointed to Australia as a “control group” on this question. HART notes that even though Australia had not had significant Covid (only 30,000 reported infections and 910 deaths) prior to mid-2021, it still saw a trend in excess non-Covid deaths beginning in June 2021 (see below). HART notes that Australia “did not have prior Covid as a reason for seeing this rise in mortality and hospital pressure from spring 2021”. Instead, “the results from this control group indicate that the cause of this rise in deaths, particularly in young people, must be something in common with Australia, Europe and the USA”.

Click here to view All deaths, COVID-19 infections, Australia, 31 May – 29 May 2022 vs baseline benchmarks.

In New Zealand, economist John Gibson found a temporal association between boosters and excess deaths, estimating “16 excess deaths per 100,000 booster doses” (see below). He noted that the age distribution of the deaths corroborated the hypothesis: “The age groups most likely to use boosters show large rises in excess mortality after boosters are rolled out.”

Click here to view B) Cumulative Excess Deaths and COVID-19 Vaccine Rollout: April 2021 to March 2022

Keep reading.

 

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

VIDEO: COVID Jab Deadlier Than COVID for Anyone Under 80

Fourth Country Stops All Covid Vaccinations

Science Tests Positive For COVID

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Economic Disaster of the Pandemic Response

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

The following is adapted from a talk delivered at Hillsdale College on October 20, 2022, sponsored by the student group Praxis.

On April 15, 2020—a full month after President Trump’s fateful news conference that greenlighted lockdowns to be enacted by the states for “15 Days to Flatten the Curve”—the President had a revealing White House conversation with Anthony Fauci, the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. 

“I’m not going to preside over the funeral of the greatest country in the world,” Trump wisely said, as reported in Jared Kushner’s book Breaking History. The promised Easter reopening of the economy had not happened, and Trump was angry. He also suspected that he had been misled and was no longer speaking to coronavirus coordinator Deborah Birx. 

“I understand,” Fauci responded meekly. “I just do medical advice. I don’t think about things like the economy and the secondary impacts. I’m just an infectious diseases doctor. Your job as president is to take everything else into consideration.”

That conversation reflected the tone of the debate, then and later, over the lockdowns and vaccine mandates. The economy—viewed as mechanistic, money-centered, mostly about the stock market, and detached from anything truly important—was pitted against public health and the preservation of life. The assumption seemed to be that you had to choose one or the other—that you could not have both.

It also seemed to be widely believed in 2020 that the best approach to pandemics was to institute massive human coercion—a belief based on the novel theory that if you make humans behave like non-player characters in computer models, you can keep them from infecting one another until a vaccine arrives to wipe out the pathogen. 

The lockdown approach in 2020 stood in stark contrast to a century of public health experience in dealing with pandemics. During the great influenza crisis of 1918, only a few cities tried coercion and quarantine—mostly San Francisco, also the home at the time of the first Anti-Mask League—whereas most locations took a person-by-person therapeutic approach. Given the failure of quarantines in 1918, they were not employed again during the disease scares—some real, some exaggerated—of 1929, 1940-44, 1957-58, 1967-68, 2003, 2005, and 2009. In all of those years, even the national media acted responsibly in urging calm. 

But not in 2020, when policymakers—whether due to intellectual error, political calculations, or some combination of the two—launched an experiment without precedent. The sick and well alike were quarantined through the use of stay-at-home orders, domestic capacity limits, and business, school, and church shutdowns. This occurred not only in the U.S., but worldwide—with the notable exception of perhaps five nations and the state of South Dakota. 

Needless to say, the consequences were profound. Coercion can be used to turn off an economy. But given the resulting trauma, turning an economy back on is not so easy. That is why, 30 months later, we are experiencing the longest period of declining real income since the end of World War II, a health crisis, an education crisis, an exploding national debt, 40-year high inflation, continued and seemingly random shortages, dysfunction in labor markets, a breakdown of international trade, a dramatic collapse in consumer confidence, and a dangerous level of political division. 

Meanwhile, what happened to COVID? It came anyway, just as the best epidemiologists predicted it would. It had a highly stratified impact, consistent with the information we had from the very early days: the at-risk population was largely the elderly and infirm. To be sure, almost everyone eventually came down with COVID with varying degrees of severity: some people shook it off in a couple of days, others suffered for weeks, and many died—although, even now, there is grave uncertainty about the true number of COVID deaths, due both to faulty PCR testing and to financial incentives given to hospitals to attribute non-COVID deaths to COVID. 

Tradeoffs

Even if the lockdowns had saved lives over the long term—and the literature on this overwhelmingly suggests they did not—it would be proper to ask the question: at what cost? What are the tradeoffs? 

Because economic considerations were shelved for the emergency, policymakers failed to consider tradeoffs. Thus did the White House on March 16, 2020, send out the most dreaded imaginable directive from an economic point of view: “bars, restaurants, food courts, gyms, and other indoor and outdoor venues where groups of people congregate should be closed.” And the results were legion. 

For one thing, the lockdowns kicked off an epic bout of government spending. COVID-response spending amounted to at least $6 trillion above normal operations, running the national debt up to 121 percent of GDP. For comparison, our national debt in 1981 amounted to 35 percent of GDP—and Ronald Reagan correctly declared that a crisis.

The Federal Reserve purchased this new debt with newly created money nearly dollar for dollar. From February to May 2020, the total money supply (what economists call M2) increased by an average of $814.3 billion per month. The peak came early the following year: on February 22, 2021, the annual rate of increase of M2 reached a staggering 27.5 percent. 

At the same time, as one would expect in a crisis of this sort, spending plummeted. Since a severe decrease in spending puts deflationary pressure on prices regardless of what happens with the money supply, the bad effects of printing all this new money were pushed off into the future. 

That future is now. The explosion in M2 has resulted in the highest inflation in 40 years. And this inflation is accelerating, at least according to the October 12, 2022, Producer Price Index, which is more volatile than it has been in months and is running ahead of the Consumer Price Index—a reversal from earlier in the lockdown period. This new pressure on producers has heavily impacted the business environment and created recessionary conditions. 

Moreover, this has not just been a U.S. problem. Most nations in the world followed the same lockdown strategy while attempting to substitute government spending and printing money for real economic activity. The Federal Reserve is being called on daily to step up its lending to foreign central banks through the discount window for emergency loans. It is now at the highest level since spring 2020. The Fed lent $6.5 billion to two foreign central banks in just one week this October. The numbers are scary and foreshadow a possible international financial crisis. 

The Great Head Fake 

Back in the spring and summer of 2020, we seemed to be experiencing a miracle. State governments around the country had crushed social activity and free enterprise, and yet real income was soaring. Between February 2020 and March 2021, a time of low inflation, real personal income was up by $4.2 trillion. It felt like magic. But it was actually the result of government stimulus checks.

Initially, people used their new-found riches to pay off credit card debt and boost savings. In the month after the first stimulus, the personal savings rate went from 9.6 to 33 percent. Also, since people were being coerced into living an all-digital existence, there was lots of spare time and a need for new equipment. So companies like Netflix and Amazon benefited enormously.

After the summer of 2020, people started to get the hang of having “free money” dropped into their bank accounts. So by November, the savings rate had dropped back down to 13.3 percent. When the Biden administration unleashed another round of stimulus in 2021, the savings rate at first nearly doubled. But fast forward to the present and people are saving only 3.5 percent—half the historical norm dating back to 1960—and credit card debt is soaring, even though interest rates are 17 percent and higher. 

In other words, all the curves inverted once inflation came along to eat out the value of the stimulus. In reality, all that “free money” turned out to be very expensive. The dollar of January 2020 is now worth only $0.87, which is to say that the stimulus spending covered by the Federal Reserve printing money stole $0.13 of every American dollar in the course of only 2.5 years. 

This was one of the biggest head fakes in the history of modern economics. The pandemic planners created paper prosperity to cover up the grim reality they had brought about. But paper prosperity is false prosperity. It could not and did not last. Between January 2021 and September 2022, prices increased 13.5 percent across the board, costing the average American family $728 in September alone. 

Even if inflation were to stop today, the inflation already in the bag will cost the average American family $8,739 over the next twelve months. 

Lingering Carnage

While Big Tech moguls and urban information workers thrived during the pandemic lockdowns, Main Street suffered. The look of most of America in those days was post-apocalyptic, with vast numbers of people huddled at home either alone or with immediate families, fully convinced that a universally deadly virus was lurking outdoors. Meanwhile, the CDC was recommending that “essential businesses” install countless Plexiglass barriers and place social distancing stickers everywhere people would walk.

This sounds ridiculous now, but for many it wasn’t then. I recall being yelled at for walking only a few feet into a grocery aisle that had been designated by stickers to be one-way in the other direction. There were reports of people using drones to identify and report neighbors who were holding prohibited parties, weddings, or funerals. Parents masked up their kids even though kids were at near-zero risk, and nearly all schools were closed. A friend of mine arrived home from a visit out of town and his mother demanded that he leave his “COVID-infested” bags on the porch for three days. 

Those were the days when people believed the virus was outdoors and we should stay in. Oddly, this changed over time to where people believed that the virus was indoors and we should go out. It eventually became clear that we had moved from government-mandated mania to a popular delusion for the ages. 

The resulting damage to small business has yet to be thoroughly documented. At least 100,000 restaurants and stores closed in Manhattan alone. Commercial real estate prices crashed, and big business moved in to scoop up bargains. Hotels, bars, restaurants, malls, theaters, and anyone without home delivery suffered terribly. The arts were devastated. During the deadly Hong Kong flu of 1968-69, we had Woodstock. This time around we had to settle for YouTube. 

It may seem odd, but the health care industry suffered as well. The CDC strongly urged the closing of hospitals to anyone not facing a non-elective surgery or suffering with COVID. This turned out to exclude nearly everyone who would routinely show up for diagnostics or other normal treatments. As a result, health care sector employment fell 1.6 million in early 2020. Even stranger is the fact that total health care spending fell off a cliff. From March to May 2020, health care spending collapsed by $500 billion or 16.5 percent. This created an enormous financial problem for hospitals in general.

This is not to mention dentistry. I know from personal experience that in Massachusetts, you couldn’t get a much-needed root canal. Why? Because a root canal required a preliminary cleaning and examination, and those were prohibited as “nonessential.” I looked into traveling to Texas for a root canal, but the dentists there were required by law to force out-of-state patients to quarantine in the state for two weeks. 

This virtual abolition of dentistry for a time was in keeping with the injunction of a headline in The New York Times on February 28, 2020: “To Take on the Coronavirus, Go Medieval on It.” What better way to describe the institution of a feudal system of dividing work and workers across the nation in terms of “essential” and “nonessential”? 

The New York Times wasn’t affected by the lockdowns, of course, because media centers were deemed essential. Thus for two years, it was able to keep its presses running and instruct its Manhattan readers to stay home and have their groceries delivered. Delivered by whom, The New York Times neither said nor cared. It was apparently unimportant if the working classes were exposed to COVID in service to the elites. And then afterwards, when the working classes had natural immunity that was superior to the immunity offered by the so-called COVID vaccines, they were subjected to vaccine mandates. 

Millions across the nation eventually quit or were fired due to those vaccine mandates. Highly qualified members of the U.S. military are still being discharged for noncompliance. 

We are told that unemployment today is very low and that many new jobs are being filled, but most of those are existing workers getting second and third jobs. Because families are struggling to pay the bills, moonlighting and side-gigging are now a way of life. The full truth about labor markets requires that we look at the labor-participation and worker-population rates, both of which are low. Millions have gone missing. Most are working women who still cannot find child care because that industry has yet to recover from the lockdowns. Labor participation among women is back at 1988 levels. There are also large numbers of 20-somethings who moved home and went on unemployment benefits. Many more have simply lost the will to achieve and build a future. 

The supply chain breakages we are seeing today are also a lingering result of the stoppage of economic activity in early 2020. By the time the lockdown regime was relaxed and manufacturers started reordering parts, they found that many factories overseas had already retooled for other kinds of demand. This particularly affected the semiconductor industry for automotive manufacturing. Overseas chip makers had turned their attention to personal computers, cellphones, and other devices. This was the beginning of the car shortage that sent prices through the roof. It also created a political demand for U.S.-based chip production, which has in turn resulted in another round of export and import controls. 

These sorts of problems have affected every industry without exception. Why, for example, do we have a paper shortage? Because so many of the paper factories shifted to plywood and cardboard after prices sky-rocketed in response to the housing and mail delivery demand created by the lockdowns and stimulus checks. 

Conclusion

We could write books listing all the economic calamities directly caused by the disastrous pandemic response. We will be suffering the results for years. Yet even today, too few people grasp the relationship between our current economic hardships—extending even to growing international tensions and the breakdown of trade and travel—and the brutality of the pandemic response.

Anthony Fauci said at the outset: “I don’t think about things like the economy and the secondary impacts.” Melinda Gates admitted in a December 4, 2020, interview with The New York Times: “What did surprise us is we hadn’t really thought through the economic impacts.”

There is no wall of separation between economics and public health. A healthy economy is indispensable for healthy people. Shutting down economic life was a singularly bad idea for taking on a pandemic. 

Economics is about people making choices and institutions enabling them to thrive. Public health is about the same thing. Driving a wedge between the two, as happened in 2020, ranks among the most catastrophic public policy decisions of our lifetimes. 

Health and economics both require the nonnegotiable called freedom. May we never again experiment with the near abolition of freedom in the cause of mitigating disease. 

AUTHOR

Jeffrey A. Tucker

Jeffrey A. Tucker is founder and president of the Brownstone Institute and a daily columnist on economics for The Epoch Times. From 2017-2021, he served as editorial director of the American Institute for Economic Research. He has written for several publications, including The Wall Street Journal, National Review, The Freeman, and Chronicles. He is the author of 20 books, including Liberty or Lockdown.

EDITORS NOTE: This Imprimis Digest column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.