VIDEO: The West’s Energy Policy Is the Greatest National Security Threat We Face

Watch my interview with Tucker Carlson on Ukraine, Russia and how Biden’s policies aided Russia: ‘The West’s Energy Policy Is the Greatest National Security Threat We Face

EXCERPT:

Tucker Carlson: “So we wanted to walk you some of the likely consequences of what they are now doing in Eastern Europe and Marc Morano seemed like a good man to start with. Thanks so much for joining us tonight. So, without even getting into whether or not Ukraine is a democracy – I’m embarrassed to even – I mean, who cares. But I want to know what the effect on the United States and on the purchasing power of the average person, is likely to be from what they’re doing right now over there.

MORANO: “We are already seeing – the first part of it is in California, $6 a gallon. Gas is already up a dollar. Estimates are seven, $8 a gallon possible with recession if Putin, who we’ve given all of this power to by literally shutting down U.S. domestic energy.

Just a little history lesson here. In 2020, the United States was back to 1952 with energy, not just independence, but energy dominance. We were the world’s largest oil and gas producer. More energy exports and imports, more energy production than consumption and we hadn’t done that since Harry Truman was president. Joe Biden came in at he said the first thing he wanted to do was jail fossil fuel executives. Biden’s energy secretary had done a video singing about no more gasoline, The is world aflame due to global warming.

Biden – by the way – Biden – I’m sorry, Obama’s energy secretary (Chu) said he wanted European-style gas prices. So what happened as he started shutting down the Keystone pipelinebanning drilling on federal lands and Anwar, and defunding energy projects through banks through environmental social governance (ESG). All sorts of things.

So a war on fossil fuels happens. We are now in a much, much weaker position one year into this administration to where now Vladimir Putin is the direct beneficiary of all this. And you can’t keep Europe out of this. Europe is many years ahead of their version of a disastrous Green New Deal. One professor in Europe actually said it’s typical Marxist garbage — what they’ve engaged in. Europe began shutting down their energy, so the whole world has been empowering basically three places. The Middle East for the OPECChina, and now of course Vladimir Putin’s Russia.

So the people that are screaming the loudest that we need to go in and save democracy in Ukraine have destroyed our energy independence and dominance and made us so much more vulnerable to whatever Vladimir Putin may or may not want to do.”

Tucker Carlson: If you’re making energy more important for your own people, you are these we hate your own people. I think it’s that simple. In one sentence just if you could answer this question, is the Chinese government, which clearly has no respect for human rights or even its own people, are they making energy more expensive for Chinese?

Morano: No, there are estimates they build about a coal plant a week, they are about 50% of the world’s coal production. They laugh at all of these restrictions, but they were supplying most of our solar panels.

Tucker Carlson: Exactly!

Morano: But here’s the thing. They are not going to learn. Academia has been calling these energy restrictions for decades. This energy policy, what have they done? “the Washington Post” a few months ago actually said that we – if Jimmy Carter had won a second term there would be no climate crisis. They lamented that Ronald Reagan won. To the academia and media elites, Jimmy Carter’s first term was a model, and that’s what they want to do and that’s what we’re facing here.

John Kerry wants to have an urgent climate summit. He announced on Monday. In the midst of all of this, he believes the climate is the greatest threat. Their energy policy is the greatest national security threat we face.

Tucker Carlson: Perfect. Marc, great to see you. Thank you.

Morano: Appreciate it.

©Marc Morano. All rights reserved.

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED ARTICLE: Is Biden’s energy policy trying to ‘make Russia Great Again?’ Watch: Morano on Fox & Friends on Biden’s energy policy & reflects on working for Rush Limbaugh

RNA Vaccine Inventor Dr. Robert Malone: ‘Time of choosing’ for CDC scientists after bombshell NYT report

Has there been a more cowardly and corrupt collective than the medical profession during this crackdown on our individual freedoms. The truckers have done the work the doctors should have done years ago.

Dr. Robert Malone: ‘Time of choosing’ for CDC scientists after bombshell NYT report

‘Do you want to be a witness? Or do you want to be on the defense?’

By: Art Moore, WND, February 23, 2022:

It’s a “time of choosing” for CDC scientists and physicians in the wake of the blockbuster New York Times story citing unnamed agency officials who acknowledge crucial COVID data has been withheld for fear that it would be misinterpreted by critics, said Dr. Robert Malone in an interview Wednesday with Steve Bannon’s “War Room.”

“There’s going to come a time soon where there are legal ramifications … and these physicians and scientists at the CDC have got a choice to make now,” said Malone, the original inventor of the mRNA technology platform on which the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna COVID vaccines are based.

“It’s a question of which side of the bar do you want to be on,” he said. “Do you want to be a witness? Or do you want to be on the defense? That’s where we’re at.”

The “War Room” segment opened with a clip from WND’s interview Monday with Malone and Idaho pathologist Dr. Ryan Cole in which they described the CDC’s withholding of data necessary for government leaders and health officials to make life-and-death decision as “scientific fraud.”

Malone told Bannon that if he were still an academic and published an epidemiological paper that came to a preconceived conclusion “by deleting data and not reporting the full picture,” he would lose his grants, be tossed out of the university and “be convicted of scientific fraud.”

Advertisement – story continues below

He said the CDC physicians and scientists “who are hiding are going to be outed at some point, and they might as well come clean now, because it’s going to bite them later.”

Amid alarm raised by the nearly 24,000 suspected vaccine-related deaths reported to the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System database, the Times reported that when the CDC “published the first significant data on the effectiveness of boosters in adults younger than 65 two weeks ago, it left out the numbers for a huge portion of that population: 18- to 49-year-olds, the group least likely to benefit from extra shots.”

See the “War Room” interview Wednesday with Dr. Robert Malone:

The CDC, the Times reported, “has been routinely collecting information since the Covid vaccines were first rolled out last year,” but the agency “has been reluctant to make those figures public, the official said, because they might be misinterpreted as the vaccines being ineffective.”

The report said that “[t]wo full years into the pandemic, the agency leading the country’s response to the public health emergency has published only a tiny fraction of the data it has collected,” citing “several people familiar” with the withheld data.

“Much of the withheld information could help state and local health officials better target their efforts to bring the virus under control,” the paper said.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Major Insurance Company Estimates 2.5-3 Million People in Germany ‘Under Treatment For Side Effects of Vaccination After Covid Shot’

“Broken Heart Syndrome”The Covid vaccine causes a spike in heart problems.

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

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there, click here. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

American Solar Factory to Close After Joe Biden Guts U.S. Tariffs on China

Biden continues to reward our mortal enemies while punishing the American people. #stolenelection

As one commenter pointedly exclaimed, “….in Jan. 2021 when the fraud Democrat regime shut down the Keystone pipeline, gutted US energy production, and put thousand of people out of work. John “F-n” Kerry swaggered to a microphone, sneered, and told the fired workers “You have better options now!”

They then told all the destitute energy workers that they should get jobs at the “Solar Panel Technician Factory” or some such nonsense. Well, Lefties – where are all those “Solar Panel Technician Jobs” now?

Alabama Solar Factory to Close After Joe Biden Guts U.S. Tariffs on China

By: John  Binder, Breitbart, February 23, 2022:

Huntsville, Alabama, solar panel factory will close after President Joe Biden exempted foreign-made bifacial solar panels from United States tariffs earlier this month.

LG Electronics, a South Korea-based company, announced that it will be closing its Huntsville solar panel manufacturing operation, resulting in the layoffs of about 160 American employees and another 60 Americans who are employed as contract workers.

Executives said they hope to retain as many employees as they can by transitioning them into the company’s other business and manufacturing sectors at its Huntsville campus. Laid-off employees will receive severance packages.

The announcement comes just weeks after Biden decided to exempt foreign-made bifacial solar panels — the overwhelming majority of which come from China — from Section 201 tariffs on solar imports to the United States that were first imposed by former President Trump in January 2018 at a 30 percent rate.

The Coalition for a Prosperous America (CPA) had warned that Biden’s gutting U.S. tariffs on China-made bifacial solar panels would have a devastating impact on America’s solar manufacturing sector.

“China sympathizers may believe that gutting the 201 solar tariffs would not affect the U.S. solar manufacturing industry as long as Congress supports domestic producers. This is flat-out wrong,” CPA Chairman Zach Mottl said in a statement:

Without trade remedies to level the playing field for U.S. solar manufacturers that are competing against heavily subsidized Chinese companies, it won’t matter if Congress passes a domestic tax credit for American producers. [Emphasis added]

Shortly after Trump imposed the U.S. tariffs on solar imports, LG Electronics announced that they would expand their Huntsville campus to include manufacturing solar panels — a boon for the city’s local economy as every one factory job supports an additional 7.4 jobs.

In November, as Breitbart News reported, Biden’s Commerce Department sided with Chinese solar manufacturers who produce their products in Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam by denying a request from American solar manufacturers to investigate U.S. tariff evasion.

Biden had been lobbied by 12 Senate Democrats who sent a letter asking the administration not to impose any tariffs on the products made in Malaysia, Thailand, and Vietnam by the Chinese solar manufacturers.

From 2001 to 2018, U.S. free trade with China has cost Alabama at least 50,700 jobs or about 2.5 percent of the state’s employment. A previous study found that permanent 25 percent tariffs on China-made products imported to the U.S. market would create a million American jobs in five years.

RELATED ARTICLES:

NY Climate Commies Protest Gov. Hochul: Ban Gas, Make NY Electric!

John Kerry: Ukraine conflict cannot be a distraction from climate change action

Dazed and deluded: as Putin launches invasion of Ukraine, Russian society reels

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

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there, click here. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

The Experts, Science, Medicine––All Amazing, All Fallible

“GOD HELP US ALL”


For thousands of years, going back to the Bible, women have wept and grieved and pleaded to God over their miscarriages. Indeed, it took all these millennia for modern-day pharmaceutical companies to develop solutions to this ongoing nightmare.

In the 1940s, they were happy to offer doctors the ability to prescribe diethylstilbestrol (DES) to prevent miscarriage. “You can tell them you would give it to your wife,” the marketing mavens from Big Pharma suggested to physicians.

And with good reason. This “miracle drug” worked! Women who had experienced no trouble conceiving but were plagued by constant miscarriages were now able to carry their babies to term and deliver quite “perfect” bundles of joy!

But then disaster hit with unspeakable horror. After one or two years of watching their beautiful babies smile and roll over and teethe and then walk and speak and thrive, the little girls began developing hideous vaginal cancers, and those who survived to adulthood experienced higher-than-normal premature births, miscarriages, and ectopic pregnancies.

The little boys, too, had horrible anomalies in their urogenital tracts and are still being watched for higher-than-average cases of testicular and prostate cancers.

In 1971, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) took DES off the market.

So much for the science!

SECOND TIME’S A CHARM

In 1957, another miracle medication, originally marketed as a sleeping pill but also found to prevent miscarriages, was developed in West Germany, and soon found its way to America, where women eagerly took the drug––approved by the FDA––and, again, were thrilled to carry their babies to term.

But unlike DES, where the monstrous effects took months to years to develop, the grotesque and tragic effects of the new drug––Thalidomide––were obvious from the moment of birth: children born with missing arms and legs, eye and urinary tract anomalies, heart problems, et al. The list of horrors went on and on.

So much for the science!

FEMINIST PROGRESS

In 1960, the FDA approved the medication developed by Dr. John Rock, a Harvard professor and obstetrician-gynecologist with five children––along with Drs. Gregory Pincus, C.M. Phang, and Selzo Garcia––that was perhaps the most world-changing medication in history––the Pill (aka the birth-control pill), where for the first time ever women could control reproduction.

But some women––either through negligence or forgetfulness––still got pregnant while on The Pill, and so it was not long before scientists developed intrauterine devices (IUDs) that could be implanted in the cervix and provide absolute sexual freedom with no anxiety about forgetting to take a pill or getting pregnant.

Among the most highly touted IUDs was the FDA-approved Copper 7. But because of the horrific incidences of sterility, pelvic inflammatory disease, ectopic pregnancies and perforations of the uterus, the much-vaunted Copper 7 was taken off the market in January of 1986.

So much for the science!

PLEASE, DOCTOR, STOP THOSE HOT FLASHES!

As the ‘60s progressed, newly empowered women did not politely request but quite assertively demanded help for the tortures they experienced during menopause, when estrogen slowly diminishes in the female body, resulting in hot flashes, mood swings, loss of interest in sex, depression, et al.

Pharmaceutical companies were more than happy to accommodate and promptly offered estrogen-rich Hormone Replacement Therapy, although even the National Institutes of Health acknowledges the controversial history of HRT.

It took decades, but sure enough––after almost 40 years––a Wall Street Journal article reported on the frighteningly high correlation between HRT and breast cancer. Within days, in 2002, one of the most popular medications in the world––Premarin––was taken off the market.

So much for the science!

NOT JUST A WOMAN THING

Indeed, dozens of FDA-approved medications––for both women and men––have been widely prescribed but ultimately taken off the market.  They include the antihistamine Seldane, the anti-inflammatory Vioxx, the anti-heartburn/acid reflux Zantac, et al.

In fact. dozens of drugs have been pulled from the market because of their horrific if not catastrophic side effects, including cancers, strokes, heart attacks, and death! Here is a partial list.

So much for the science!

WHAT WE HAVEN’T BEEN TOLD

Well, whaddaya know? Only three months into 2020, just when science and medicine were at the apogee of their evolution, when practically every body part––retina, heart, lung, knee, hip, skin, fingers, et al.–– can be replaced, when the fastest-growing segment of our population is between 90 and 100, and when there are more individuals over 100 in America than ever before, along comes a virus from China that in a matter of weeks shuts down the world!

But not to worry! We in America have “experts” to rely on, to guide us, to reassure us that it would only take a matter of weeks to “flatten the curve” on the frightening escalation of what, in no time, the same experts labeled a genuine pandemic.

As it turned out, every one of their models and projections and pronouncements and reassurances were wrong!

What they didn’t tell us about were the ineffectual-but-fanatically-enforced mask mandates and the non-FDA-approved “vaccines” that all “the experts” insisted every member of society––including infants––must be injected with, as well as the second vaccine, the booster, and the third and even fourth boosters––all of which did not flatten the curve or keep fully-vaccinated and boostered people out of the hospital with Covid!

What they also failed to tell us, as journalist and author Devvy Kidd reports, is that the FDA’s PCR test to determine the presence of Covid is not a diagnostic test and not reliable, as the CDC now admits.

It turned out that the Mt. Everest of information the “experts” withheld from the public, aided and abetted by their lapdogs in the media, were startling facts about the vaccines themselves––all scrupulously documented by writer Kelleigh Nelson––including the prediction that “because of the jabs, the immune system is dying. The result will be high incidences in various countries of tuberculosis where it is now dormant. Tumor cells are no longer under control causing increased numbers of cancers––as evidenced by pathologist Dr. Ryan Cole of Idaho––as well as viruses, herpes, Epstein-Barr, cytomegalovirus (CMV) which kills babies in the womb, toxoplasmosis, and a horrifying number of other illnesses.”

And is it true, as asserted by Sen. Scott Jensen (R-MN), who is a medical doctor, that hospitals get $13,000 per patient if they write that the diagnosis is Covid-19 on the patient’s chart, and $35,000 for each patient if they are on a ventilator? According to FactCheck.org, “The figures cited by Jensen generally square with estimated Medicare payments for COVID-19 hospitalizations, based on average Medicare payments for patients with similar diagnoses.”

And is this simply a coincidence? “Possibly as a reward for their efforts to conceal the true origin of SARS-CoV-2,” Janet Levy details in-depth, the scientists who went along with Dr. Fauci’s ‘natural origins’ narrative “received over $50 million in NIAID funding in 2020- 2021.”

Mmmm….isn’t it always about following the money?!

Then, to insult our intelligence even further, we have dictatorial, egomaniacal martinets like Dr. Anthony Fauci telling us: “The attacks on me are attacks on science.”

So much for the science!

THAT’S NOT ALL WE HAVEN’T BEEN TOLD

As journalist Tim Brown spells out, only two massive entities own all of the media we see and hear every minute of every day. These powerful and immensely wealthy forces believe in a globalist vision in which they––the Masters of the Universe––run the world, and we––mere grains of sand on the vast beaches of life––are expected to admire, believe, comply with and be grateful for whatever they’re doling out.

These moguls, including economic and big-tech powerhouses, hire media whores––I wrote about them here––to disseminate their messages, and, as we’ve all witnessed, to censor or often destroy the lives of all those who disagree with them.

Nevertheless, TRUTH has a way of insinuating its way or erupting its way into the public’s consciousness. This is what happened when contradictory or negative data from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), from the World Health Organization (WHO), and from “experts” like Dr. Fauci himself were published by courageous media outlets, and frightening information by the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) made its way to the larger public.

And what was that frightening information?

THIS IS THE VERY VERY VERY SHORT LIST

Airline and military pilots falling ill or dropping dead midflight after being vaccinated.

Last year, 400 athletes collapsing unexpectedly with heart problemsthe Covid vaccine being the greatest common denominator.

Attorney Tom Renz made worldwide headlines after disclosing explosive data from the Department of Defense DMED database at Senator Ron Johnson’s Second Opinion Hearing. DMED is the official database of the 1.4-million active-duty DoD servicemen and it showed shocking increases in medical conditions from the mRNA “vaccines” after the military demanded injections for all service members: Here are the data:

  • 279% SPIKE in Miscarriages
  • 487% SPIKE in Breast Cancer
  • 1048% SPIKE in the Nervous System
  • 155% SPIKE in Birth Defects
  • 350% SPIKE in Male Infertility
  • 369% SPIKE in Testicular Cancer
  • 2181% SPIKE in Hypertension
  • 664% SPIKE in Malignant Neoplasms
  • 680% SPIKE in Multiple Sclerosis
  • 551% SPIKE in Guillain-Barre Syndrome
  • 468% SPIKE in Pulmonary Embolism
  • 302% SPIKE in Tachycardia
  • 452% SPIKE in Migraines
  • 471% SPIKE in Female Infertility
  • 437% SPIKE in Ovarian Dysfunction
  • 269% SPIKE in Myocardial infarction
  • 291% SPIKE in Bell’s palsy
  • 467% SPIKE in Pulmonary Embolism

You are the science, Dr. Fauci? God help us all!

PERSONAL NOTE

I am a longtime Registered Nurse, with years of clinical experience and a lifetime of writing about science-and-medical issues; the author and co-author of 12 books (most of them about health-and-medical issues); and a longtime health-and-science writer for The New York Times (for over 20 years) as well as many other publications. There are no people on earth I respect and admire more than medical doctors and research scientists. I know the education and training they undergo before attaining their degrees and well-deserved status. But there are always bad apples in every profession, hence my contempt expressed in this article for the frauds––including in the media––and fraudulence inflicted on America during the Covid-19 pandemic.

©Joan Swirsky. All rights reserved.

Why Frackers Are Returning to Abandoned Oil Patches in Droves

For consumers, high oil prices are a headache; for drillers, they are an opportunity.


Less than two years after the price of oil briefly plummeted to roughly negative $37 a barrel, an oil boom is underway in America—even in places where drilling was all but abandoned two years ago.

“Private oil producers are leading an industry return to places like the Anadarko Basin of Oklahoma and the DJ Basin in Colorado, where drilling had almost completely stopped in mid-2020,” reports The Wall Street Journal.

The Anadarko Basin, for example, has surged from just seven active drilling rigs to 46, according to energy analytics firm Enverus, while the DJ Basin in Colorado saw its number of active rigs jump from four to 15. Meanwhile, Utah’s Uinta Basin and the Powder River Basin in Wyoming, which both saw active rigs fall to zero in 2020, have seen rigs increase to roughly a dozen.

What is driving frackers back to abandoned oil patches? It’s not newly discovered shale oil. Rather, it’s high oil prices.

The price of oil has surged in recent months, increasing from roughly $65 a barrel to the low-to-mid $90s in recent weeks. (The price of crude closed at just under $94 a barrel Monday.) The prices—which recently hit a seven-year high—are attracting drillers to shale patches that are more expensive to drill and thus require higher prices to be profitable.

For consumers, high oil prices can be a headache, because they result in higher gasoline prices. But for drillers, high oil prices mean more potential for profit.

Klee Watchous, president of the Kansas-based company Palomino Petroleum, says the higher prices have marked a turnaround for his small company and the surrounding communities where it operates.

“After many years of fighting this low oil-price situation, it feels great,” Watchous told the WSJ. “The cycles of boom and bust have been part of the oil-and-gas industry for decades, and no one knows how long it will last.”

Watchous is looking to seize on the higher prices to venture into Illinois in 2022, a state few companies have sought to tap in recent years.

Some might begrudge oil companies like Palomino profiting from high oil prices, but it’s precisely their desire for profits that can help tame surging oil prices. As oil companies expand their production, they increase the supply of oil, which inevitably puts a downward pressure on prices. It’s a perfect example of Adam Smith’s insight that free markets harness the self-interest of individuals to serve the whole.

“Every individual… neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it… he intends only his own security,” Smith explained in The Theory of Moral Sentiments; “and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention.”

High prices do two important things in an economy. First, they encourage people to conserve scarce resources. Many people love steak and lobster, but few of us eat it every week or every month because it’s quite expensive. In other words, the high price discourages us from demanding steak and lobster. But that’s not the only function of the high price. It also encourages lobster trappers and beef companies to bring more of these products to market in pursuit of profit. Together, these two mechanisms help make scarce resources more abundant.

Price is arguably the simplest and most vital principle in economics. It signals both scarcity (to consumers) and opportunity (to entrepreneurs). Yet the economist Thomas Sowell has noted the importance of prices is often misunderstood by activists and politicians.

“Prices play a crucial role in determining how much of each resource gets used where and how the resulting products get transferred to millions of people,” Sowell wrote in Basic Economics. “Yet this role is seldom understood by the public and it is often disregarded entirely by politicians.”

It’s worth noting that the word “price” never appeared in President Joe Biden’s 2020 executive order killing the Keystone XL Pipeline, an oil pipeline system between Canada and the US commissioned in 2010.

Nixing the 1,700-mile pipeline, which could have carried roughly 800k barrels of oil a day from Alberta to the Texas Gulf Coast, did nothing to reduce the pain at the pump consumers are feeling today, with gasoline currently at more than $3.50 a gallon. But that was expected.

What perhaps was unexpected was that higher prices would result in additional fracking—a process many contend is harder on the environment than regular drilling, and a practice Biden has said he wants to “move gradually away from.”

So while the role prices play in an economy is one of the most basic lessons in economics, politicians of every stripe would do well to remember one of the greatest fallacies: overlooking secondary consequences.

COLUMN BY

Jon Miltimore

Jonathan Miltimore is the Managing Editor of FEE.org. His writing/reporting has been the subject of articles in TIME magazine, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, Forbes, Fox News, and the Star Tribune. Bylines: Newsweek, The Washington Times, MSN.com, The Washington Examiner, The Daily Caller, The Federalist, the Epoch Times.

RELATED ARTICLE: Oil Soars Beyond $100 Per Barrel For The First Time Since 2014

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

Doctor fired for refusing the COVID shot says health network misled employees to get the experimental Covid jab

The left’s terrible horrible lies to pursue tyrannical control are killing us. Literally.

Doctor fired for refusing the COVID shot says health network misled employees to encourage vaccine uptake

A New Jersey doctor who was fired for refusing the COVID jab told LifeSite his former health network failed to look into data contradicting the mainstream narrative and instead relied on ‘propaganda and pseudo statistical hocus pocus.’

By: Lifesite News, Feb 16, 2022:

PHILLIPSBURG, New Jersey — A New Jersey medical doctor who was fired last year for refusing to take the experimental COVID-19 jab says his health network made “false and misleading statements” to encourage employees to get the shots, and “failed to consider compelling evidence that the mainstream COVID narrative was seriously flawed.”

The doctor now plans to sue his former employer for wrongful termination, and also intends to file a lawsuit against a telemedicine credentialing company he believes refused to credential him because of his stance on the increasingly mandated injections.

In a phone interview Monday, Dr. William Braun M.D., who graduated from Rutgers University in 1985 and has held a supervisory role overseeing family practice residents for roughly 30 years, said his career with St. Luke’s University Health Network (SLUHN) came to an abrupt end last summer.

In August 2021, SLUHN CEO Richard A. Anderson sent out a memo to all hospital employees advising them that they would need to become fully vaccinated by September 25 or lose their jobs.

In the email, which Dr. Braun forwarded to LifeSite, Anderson repeated the mainstream view that COVID-19 had become “a pandemic of the unvaccinated,” a claim challenged by studies and public data showing spiking hospitalizations and deaths among the “fully vaccinated,” along with the steadily nosediving real-world efficacy of the experimental COVID-19 drugs.

Months earlier, per another document obtained by LifeSite, Anderson had also asserted that “the vaccine prevents asymptomatic spread” of COVID, a claim walked back by public health experts including Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Rochelle Walensky and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) head Dr. Anthony Fauci.

Dr. Braun, who has extensively researched the COVID-19 drugs as well as studies contradicting the mainstream narrative surrounding them, told LifeSiteNews he decided to challenge his employer’s jab mandate.

According to Braun, in an effort to encourage vaccine uptake, SLUHN had made “false and misleading statements” in its “two missives to the employees.”

The email exchange obtained by LifeSite shows Braun responded to the August directive with a series of questions.

Among the doctor’s queries were whether St. Luke’s leadership was aware that public health experts have acknowledged the jabs don’t stop transmission, whether they knew that data from Israel strongly challenged the efficacy of the shots, and whether the health system was aware of the harmful effects of the spike proteins produced by the mRNA drugs.

In addition, Braun asked if the health network was “willing to take financial responsibility for any serious adverse reactions that may befall us” by getting the jab.

The doctor said he “never got a written, comprehensive answer to any of my questions.”

St. Luke’s did not immediately respond to LifeSite’s request for comment.

Anticipating his future termination from his role, Braun nevertheless bolstered his case against the jab mandate by creating and sending a heavily-sourced document providing summaries of studies showing the inefficacy and danger of the injections along with the ethical problems of coercing people to take drugs that are not licensed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and whose clinical trials are not set to wrap up until 2023 at the earliest.

“All the vaccines available in the U.S., that’s the key phrase: ‘available in U.S.’, are experimental, and therefore this is an experimental therapy,” Braun told LifeSite. “And by threatening to fire somebody, you’re trying to coerce them to take an experimental therapy.”

Braun also argued that being fired for refusing an “experimental therapy” violated his rights under the Nuremberg Code, a series of medical ethics crafted at the end of World War II to guard against future atrocities like those committed by the Nazis, which included conducting medical experiments on prisoners in concentration camps.

Meanwhile, Braun is not alone in arguing that the Pfizer jabs currently available in the U.S. are not the same as the drugs which were granted “full approval” by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) last year.

Earlier this month, The Epoch Times reported that “few, if any” of the FDA-approved COVID-19 Pfizer drugs labeled “Comirnaty” are available in the U.S. Instead, only an unbranded version of the Pfizer drug, which is still under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA), is being distributed.

The FDA has stated the Comirnaty and unbranded drugs “are legally distinct with certain differences,” which they say “do not impact safety or effectiveness.”

However the distinction has caused concern.

Matthew Staver, founder and chairman of the Liberty Counsel, a legal group, argued in a statement obtained by The Epoch Times that since “[t]here is currently no fully FDA-approved licensed COVID shot available to the population” and “[e]verything that is available remain[s] under the EUA law,” people should “have the option to accept or refuse the shots.”

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) has also made the point that Comirnaty is not available in the U.S.

Meanwhile, Dr. Braun told LifeSite that he believes the studies used to promote jab mandates rely on faulty science.

According to Braun, the CDC, FDA, and other agencies which have forwarded studies to justify universal vaccination “are essentially engaging in propaganda and pseudo statistical hocus pocus.”

“None of the studies that they present show things that real epidemiologists would be interested in, for example, an absolute risk reduction number for an important endpoint like death or ICU admissions whenever they present a study,” Braun argued.

Regardless of his efforts to prove the inefficacy of the COVID drugs, in September 2021 Braun was terminated from his position. He now plans to levy a legal challenge against St. Luke’s for wrongful termination.

According to the health network, Braun was among 155 employees who lost their jobs for refusing to get the experimental shots.

RELATED ARTICLE: FDNY Union Head Calls For Investigation Into Recent Department Deaths And COVID Jabs

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

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there, click here. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

If Lockdowns and Mandates Failed, Why Are They Still Pushed?

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

  • In a literature review and meta-analysis of the effects of lockdowns on COVID-19 mortality, researchers revealed lockdowns had little to no effect on COVID-19 mortality
  • The Brownstone Institute compiled more than 400 studies showing that lockdowns, restrictions and closures failed to do what was promised
  • A team of 12 researchers from Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, Harvard Medical School, the University of Oxford and other institutions outlined key reasons why COVID-19 shot mandates have been counterproductive and harmful
  • COVID-19 injection mandates could lead to reactance and entrenchment, cognitive dissonance, stigma and scapegoating, and distrust
  • If you don’t agree with COVID-19 restrictions and mandates in your area, now is the time to speak out in peaceful protest

Scientists the world over have done a deep dive into the unprecedented lockdowns and injection mandates that characterized the COVID-19 pandemic response. Over and over again, the results confirm what many instinctively knew all along — that these totalitarian schemes didn’t work and may have caused more harm than good.

Despite the writing on the wall, health officials and academics continue to defend the Draconian measures. It’s difficult to admit wrongdoing, especially of this magnitude, but sooner or later it will become widely known that, as Jeffrey Tucker, founder and president of the Brownstone Institute, put it, “these interventions turned a manageable pandemic into a catastrophe.”1

Hundreds of Studies Show Lockdowns Didn’t Work

Public health policies that restrict movement, ban international travel and close schools and businesses, commonly known as lockdowns, were implemented in virtually every country around the globe during the pandemic, beginning in China, then Italy and spreading like wildfire from there.

Simulated computer models conducted by Imperial College London researchers in 2020 suggested that lockdowns would reduce COVID-19 mortality by up to 98%2 — an estimate that had many scholars raising eyebrows, and which did not come to fruition, not even close.

In a literature review and meta-analysis of the effects of lockdowns on COVID-19 mortality, researchers from Johns Hopkins Institute for Applied Economics, Global Health, and the Study of Business Enterprise, Lund University and the Center for Political Studies in Copenhagen, Denmark, revealed lockdowns had little to no effect on COVID-19 mortality.

The meta-analysis included 24 studies separated into three groups: lockdown stringency index studies, shelter-in-place order (SIPO) studies and specific non-pharmaceutical intervention (NPI) studies. They found:3

“An analysis of each of these three groups support the conclusion that lockdowns have had little to no effect on COVID-19 mortality. More specifically, stringency index studies find that lockdowns in Europe and the United States only reduced COVID-19 mortality by 0.2% on average.

SIPOs were also ineffective, only reducing COVID-19 mortality by 2.9% on average. Specific NPI studies also find no broad-based evidence of noticeable effects on COVID-19 mortality.”

The Brownstone Institute actually compiled more than 400 studies showing that lockdowns, restrictions and closures failed to do what was promised.4 Among them is a study by Dr. Gilbert Berdine, an associate professor of medicine at Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center.

It used data on daily mortality rates for COVID-19 to track the course of the pandemic in Sweden, New York, Illinois and Texas, which each used different pandemic responses, and has suggested that lockdowns may turn out to be “the greatest policy error of this generation.”5 This isn’t to say that lockdowns had no noticeable effects, however. While they failed to meaningfully reduce COVID-19 deaths, they took a massive toll on other measures of public health:6

“While this meta-analysis concludes that lockdowns have had little to no public health effects, they have imposed enormous economic and social costs where they have been adopted. In consequence, lockdown policies are ill-founded and should be rejected as a pandemic policy instrument.”

‘Fact Checkers’ Try to Defend Lockdowns

When the Johns Hopkins meta-analysis received some media attention, bringing the dismal results of lockdowns mainstream, “fact checkers” sprung to action to rebut the study.

Among them was the Science Media Centre (SMC),7 variations of which exist in a number of countries, including the U.K., Canada, Australia and New Zealand, with a reported mission to provide “high-quality scientific information” to journalists. Their mission, as stated on their website, is:8

“To provide, for the benefit of the public and policymakers, accurate and evidence-based information about science and engineering through the media, particularly on controversial and headline news stories when most confusion and misinformation occurs.”

But SMC is not an independent news agency as it claims to be, as it counts among its biggest funders a number of high-level industry players with worldwide agendas, including the Wellcome Trust, GlaxoSmithKline, CropLife International, Sanofi and AstraZeneca.9

Tucker teased out a particularly arrogant commentary in the SMC piece — a comment by Seth Flaxman, an associate professor in the department of computer science at the University of Oxford, who said:10

“Smoking causes cancer, the earth is round, and ordering people to stay at home (the correct definition of lockdown) decreases disease transmission. None of this is controversial among scientists. A study purporting to prove the opposite is almost certain to be fundamentally flawed.”

But categorizing lockdowns as completely without controversy, like the fact that smoking causes cancer, is wrong. Yet, Flaxman’s work is continually cited in defense of lockdowns, even though he has no background in medicine. Tucker wrote:11

“See how this rhetoric works? If you question his claim, you are not a scientist; you are denying the science! … To say that this is not controversial is ridiculous, since such policies had never before been attempted on this scale. Such a policy is not at all like an established causal claim (smoking increases cancer risk) nor a mere empirical observation (the earth is round). It is subject to verification.

… That Flaxman would still claim otherwise after all experience 

Injection Mandates Counterproductive and Harmful

shows that he is not observing reality but inventing dogma from his own intuition. Flaxman might say that he is sure that transmission might have been higher had people not been ordered to stay home, and there might be settings in which that is true, but he is in no position to elevate this claim to the status of ‘the earth is round.’

… The dogma that ordering people to stay home – for how long? – always reduces the spread comes not from evidence but from Flaxman-style modeling plus a remarkable capacity to ignore reality.”

The rapid emergence of widespread COVID-19 injection mandates, vaccine passports and restrictions based on injection status is also unprecedented and led to controversy on ethical, scientific and political grounds.

A team of 12 researchers from Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, Harvard Medical School, the University of Oxford and other institutions outlined key reasons why these mandates have been counterproductive and harmful.12

“While vaccine policies have largely been framed as offering ‘benefits’ with freedoms for those who take up a full COVID-19 vaccination series, they include elements that are punitive, discriminatory and coercive, including conditioning access to health, work, travel and social life on vaccination status in many settings,” the preprint paper reads.13

Four domains are explored, with potential unintended consequences of injection mandates outlined as follows:

  1. Behavioral psychology — COVID-19 injection mandates could lead to reactance and entrenchment, cognitive dissonance, stigma and scapegoating, conspiracy theories and distrust
  2. Political and legal effects — Injection mandates could cause erosion of civil liberties, polarization and disunity in global health governance
  3. Socio-economics — Injection mandates could cause disparity and inequality, reduced health system capacity and exclusion from work and social life
  4. Integrity of science and public health — Consequences include erosion of informed consent, trust in public health policy and trust in regulatory oversight

The authors maintain that segregating society into those who have gotten the shots and those who have not, while restricting access to work and education based on injection status, is a violation of human rights that’s promoting social polarization and adversely affecting health and well-being. In light of this, they note:14

“The adoption of new vaccination status policies has provoked a multilayered global and local backlash, resistance and polarization that threaten to escalate if current policies continue. It is important to emphasize that these policies are not viewed as “incentives” or “nudges” by substantial proportions of populations, especially in marginalized, underserved, or low COVID-19-risk groups.

Denying individuals education, livelihoods, medical care, or social life unless they get vaccinated does not appear to coincide with constitutional and bioethical principles, especially in liberal democracies.

While public support appears to have consolidated behind these policies in many countries, we should acknowledge that human rights frameworks were designed to ensure that rights are respected and promoted even during public health emergencies.

… We argue that current COVID-19 vaccine policies should be reevaluated in light of negative consequences that may outweigh benefits. Leveraging empowering strategies based on trust and public consultation represent a more sustainable approach for protecting those at highest risk of COVID-19 morbidity and mortality and the health and wellbeing of the public.”

2006 Study: Lockdowns Don’t Work

In 2006, public health officials went through a list of mitigation actions that could be used in the event of pandemic influenza, along with their potential repercussions.15

Lockdowns, including quarantine and extended school closures, were not recommended, as this overriding principle was explained: “Experience has shown that communities faced with epidemics or other adverse events respond best and with the least anxiety when the normal social functioning of the community is least disrupted.”

In the case of quarantines, the researchers explained there is “no basis” for quarantining either groups or individuals, as it raises “formidable” problems. “Secondary effects of absenteeism and community disruption as well as possible adverse consequences, such as loss of public trust in government and stigmatization of quarantined people and groups, are likely to be considerable,” they noted.16

Closure of schools beyond 10 to 14 days was also not recommended, unless all other points of contact, such as restaurants and churches, were also closed. But, they noted, “Such widespread closures, sustained throughout the pandemic, would almost certainly have serious adverse social and economic effects.”17

They also advised against cancelling or postponing meetings or events involving large numbers of people, explaining that “cancelling or postponing large meetings would not be likely to have any significant effect on the development of the epidemic” and “… communitywide closure of public events seems inadvisable.”18 Still, Tucker wrote, “a decade and a half later, governments all over the world tried lockdowns anyway.”19

With increasing recognition that lockdowns were useless and COVID-19 injections don’t work as advertised, people are rebelling. COVID-19 shots were supposed to set you free and bring life back to what it looked like in 2019 — no masks, no lockdowns and freedom for everyone, regardless of vaccination status.

Lockdowns, too, were supposed to be a means to an end — an end to the pandemic that, two years later, is still going strong. If you don’t agree with COVID-19 restrictions and mandates in your area, now is the time to speak out in peaceful protest in order to compel positive changes in support of health and overall freedom.

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

VIDEO: Biden’s One-Pandemic-Fits-All Approach

The White House has extended the national emergency in response to the COVID pandemic “beyond March 1, 2022.” President Biden, who promised to “shut down the virus,” will celebrate the second birthday of “two weeks to slow the spread” by pretending most people haven’t resumed business as usual. Meanwhile, the disease is screeching to a halt, as every available metric — cases, hospitalizations, deaths — plummets. Washington, D.C. may also screech to a halt, as the U.S. Freedom Convoy piles in next week to protest ongoing, unwarranted restrictions. “I don’t understand why he’s doing it,” exclaimed Senator Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.) on “Washington Watch.”

Even some of the strictest Democratic governors have recognized the impending end of the pandemic and are rolling back restrictions and inching towards normalcy. But not the White House. “Two years [ago], there was so much we didn’t know about the coronavirus, but we’ve earned an awful lot,” Johnson noted. “One of the things we’ve learned is this isn’t going to go away.” We also know who is most at risk, how the illness progresses, and how to treat it — not to mention developing and widely distributing three vaccines in record time. Yet the Biden administration refuses to suggest a possible condition to end the emergency.

Two years is too long to struggle with remote or hybrid work, virtual “school,” perpetual masking, constant health screening, and rapidly evolving restrictions. America’s social fabric has unraveled before our eyes as we’ve experienced a breakdown in social trust, unruly airline passengers, fiery protests, a mob at the capitol, two partisan impeachments, and an unbearable regime of online censorship. “Does the president expect to keep America in a perpetual state of emergency?” Johnson asked. America needs a break.

America also needs to return healthcare to the hands of doctors. Johnson suggested “the biggest blunder” in America’s COVID response was how “the administration, the agencies, big pharma, the legacy media, big tech, social media giants — the COVID cartel — has prevented and sabotaged early treatment,” potentially costing “hundreds of thousands of… lives.”

Instead, the Biden administration seems to be pursuing the increasingly unrealistic and absurd objective of 100 percent vaccination. And it chose to pursue that strategy by deceiving the public, deriding reasonable objections, and punishing anyone who distrusted the brand-new drugs. Even the progressive opinion-setter New York Times reported that the CDC hid vaccination data, because, an official said, “they might be misinterpreted as the vaccines being ineffective.” In other words, a reasonable person would interpret the data as showing that vaccines are ineffective, but the prefix “mis-” dismisses that conclusion because it would violate their preferred (that is, the only permitted) narrative.

There may be cases where the vaccine does more harm than good, although by now we all know that suggesting such an obvious possibility would provoke instinctive outrage in many friends and relatives. A January study found unexpectedly high rates of the heart condition myocarditis reported in vaccinated teenage boys, who are at practically no risk of severe infection from COVID. And yet the COVID cartel is ramping up the pressure to force all children to be vaccinated, with one outlet insisting “vaccine refusal is child abuse.”

Johnson insists doctors, not bureaucrats, must have the final say. “I’m personally affected,” he said, “by doctors practicing medicine,” who saved his daughter’s life with an experimental procedure 38 years ago. That’s why he introduced the Right to Treat Act, which would provide doctors latitude in prescribing any fully FDA-approved drug, even off-label. “Twenty to 25 percent of all prescriptions are prescribed off-label…. The federal government should not interfere.”

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED VIDEO: Bill Gates Says We Can Stop The Next Pandemic If We All Act Like Authoritarian Australia

EDITORS NOTE: This FRC-Action column with video are republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Transgender Permanence Is A Myth

“The great enemy of truth is very often not the lie–deliberate, contrived and dishonest–but the myth–persistent, persuasive and unrealistic.” – John F. Kennedy, Commencement Address at Yale University, June 11 1962.


If you are new to the crazy world of gender, you’ve heard that trans is something you just know. So, if your kid comes out as “trans”, that’s who they are, who they’ve always been. You just somehow missed the obvious.

And now that you are aware you have a trans kid, your job is to help them “become” the sex that they are inside through social changes (pronouns, clothing choices), drugs (hormones) to halt their development and develop alternate secondary sex characteristics to the extent possible, restrictive garments that hide their secondary sex characteristics (binders), and cosmetic surgeries.

Coercion

This is the Myth of Permanence. Similar to the Suicide Myth (affirm your child’s trans identity or they will kill themselves), which says you must affirm a trans-identified person or they will kill themselves, with the Myth of Permanence, you must instantly medicalise people who proclaim they are trans because if one says they are trans, it’s because it’s an irrefutable, immutable fact about you that cannot change.

Along with the Suicide Myth, the Myth of Permanence is used to bully parents into actions they feel are against the best long-term interests of their children.

If you believe in this ideological dogma, it is wrong to do anything except enable social and medical transition immediately and fully because, to do otherwise, would cause certain, immediate and extreme harm to the trans-identified person.

Imagination vs reality

The Myth of Permanence has thrown a lot of good people into logical tailspins trying to do the correct thing, in the absence of physical/biological evidence that trans is an actual state of being, and not just a metaphysical or religious concept.

However, the Myth of Permanence has been clearly disproved both in long term studies, through parent experiences, and by detransitioners and desisters that felt certain they were “trans” and then later changed their minds.

If Trans-ness was permanent, none of this would be possible. But yet, it is.

Republished with permission from Parents with Inconvenient Truths about Trans (PITT).

COLUMN BY

Anonymous author

In exceptional circumstances, MercatorNet allows contributors to publish articles anonymously. Sometimes the author’s privacy or safety might be at risk. More by Anonymous author

RELATED ARTICLE: Binary [Science] or Non-Binary [Myth] – That is the Question!

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

How the Concept of ‘Misinformation’ has been Weaponised to Silence Dissenting Voices

It’s being used as a slur and means almost nothing.


The concept of “misinformation,” or “misleading, false and/or harmful information,” has been repeatedly invoked by Big Tech media companies and governments to justify the suppression and invalidation of information and perspectives they disapprove of.

It has been employed by Twitter, YouTube, Facebook, and national health authorities either to delegitimate or silence views they deem to be false or harmful to the public interest. But the concept of misinformation is very slippery indeed, and wide open to ruthless exploitation on behalf of political or ideological causes.

Consider the case of American podcaster Joe Rogan. He hosts the podcast with the largest listenership in the history of podcasts, leaving mainstream media like CNN far behind. Rogan asks tough questions and brings on controversial guests. He does not deal in cheap soundbites but extended, multi-hour interviews. There are now calls by a whole range of public figures, from the United States Surgeon General Vivek Murphy to music artists like Neil Young and Joni Mitchell, to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, for Spotify to censor Rogan on grounds of spreading anti-vaccine misinformation.

What sparked this campaign to silence Joe Rogan was a recent interview he conducted with Twitter-censored virologist Dr Robert Malone (here are some excerpts from the interview) to discuss a number of issues related to pandemic policy, most notably the rollout of the Covid vaccines.

Dr Malone is an outspoken critic of the pharmaceutical industry and of the vaccination campaign. He is himself vaccinated, but believes the administration of the vaccine on a massive scale to all age groups is a reckless experiment that unnecessarily puts people’s lives and health in danger, given that the long-term risks of the vaccine remain unknown and that many people being vaccinated are at very low risk from Covid-19.

Was Joe Rogan guilt of spreading “misinformation,” as alleged by people like Neil Young, Joni Mitchell, and Prince Harry, by allowing Dr Malone to voice his concerns about pandemic policies on his podcast?

One might think that this question could be settled by simply deciding whether or not one is in agreement with Dr Malone or finds his arguments persuasive. But this would be to naively assume that in every serious political or scientific disagreement, one party to the disagreement can be identified authoritatively, before the argument has even taken off, as a perpetrator of “misinformation” to be shut down, while the other, as the bearer of Truth, to be given a red carpet.

If that were so, public debate and disagreement about high stakes issues could be short-circuited in advance by a censor under the direction of an elite class of handpicked philosophers or scientists. But that starts to sound a lot like the death of science and the birth of totalitarianism.

The question at issue, then, is not whether we agree with Dr Malone’s assessment of the vaccination campaign, but whether the mere fact of interviewing this controversial individual makes Rogan complicit in the propagation of “misinformation.” I doubt it very much, even if Joni Mitchell and Prince Harry think otherwise.

Accusations of misinformation certainly carry some rhetorical “umph”. They have an air of scientific rigour and objectivity. The person who leads the charge immediately assumes a position of epistemic and possibly moral superiority with respect to the accused.

After all, if I accuse you of peddling “misinformation,” that means that I must be more “scientific,” more knowledgeable, and more in touch with the “facts” than you. In opposing “misinformation,” it may appear that my motives are above reproach.

If the motives of accusers of misinformation are as pure as the driven snow, and the content of misinformation is just determined by inconsistency with the plain facts of science, then why has the concept of “misinformation” become so politicised and contested?

Is it just because ignorant, misinformed people, don’t like to hear their falsehoods exposed? Or might it be that the term is being used dishonestly to arbitrarily silence people the censor happens to disagree with?

It seems fair to assume that some statements genuinely constitute “misinformation” — for example, the statement that drinking lots of tea will cure severe cases of Covid-19. Similarly, it is hard to deny that there are some types of information that are intrinsically dangerous or harmful — for example, a bomb-making YouTube video.

Fair enough. But scratch beneath the surface, and it quickly becomes clear that the category of “misinformation” is infinitely malleable and very easily weaponised for political and ideological purposes. In practice, “misinformation” is very much in the eye of the beholder and is rarely deployed in a politically or scientifically neutral manner.

This becomes clear as soon as we consider how charges of misinformation have been weaponised during the pandemic to selectively suppress certain opinions deemed politically unacceptable, until the “right people” started uttering them.

For example, for a long time, Facebook slammed virtually every statement connecting SARS-CoV-2 to a lab in Wuhan as erroneous or misleading — even though some high-level scientific experts viewed the lab leak hypothesis as plausible. When experts Facebook relied on, like Dr Anthony Fauci, admitted the lab leak hypothesis could not be ruled out, Facebook embarrassingly reversed themselves (here is a detailed account of those events). Suddenly, the lab leak hypothesis was no longer deemed to constitute a quack conspiracy theory, or “misinformation.”

Again, consider the fact that a corona roundtable of highly qualified scientists (Dr Kulldorff from Harvard, Dr Bhattacharya from Stanford, Dr Gupta from Oxford, and Dr Scott Atlas from Stanford) moderated on March 18, 2021 by the Governor of Florida, Ron DeSantis, was abruptly removed from YouTube, allegedly because at least one of the participants was critical of the practice of masking children.

Putting aside the fact that the “fact-checkers” of Google, Facebook and Twitter are hardly qualified to review the soundness of the opinions of highly qualified scientists on a matter as complex as disease control, how might we justify the decision of a media platform to censor a contested scientific opinion on community masking (or any other matter) as a piece of “misinformation”’?

Is it because a majority of scientists disagree with it? In that case, we would have to suppress every unpopular scientific opinion before it even got a chance to be publicly considered, and endorse a crude majoritarian view of scientific truth, which is completely contrary to the spirit of open scientific inquiry.

Or is it the fact that the claim in question is not accepted by some official scientific authority, such as the WHO or the CDC? But “official” opinion could only be a gold standard for scientific truth if two things were true: first, that all official experts will converge automatically on the same “truth”; and second, that some people, by virtue of their position as “official” experts, are so smart, or wise, or virtuous, that their pronouncements may be considered as infallible wisdom, and could never be corrected or proven wrong by being challenged in public.

However, there is absolutely no reason to assume that a medical expert nominated to the World Health Organisation is more likely to share true and safe information than a professor of medicine at Harvard or Stanford medical school. Science does not work like that, nor does any field of knowledge. To believe otherwise is to be in the grips of an extraordinarily naive and childish conception of expert knowledge.

Charges of misinformation are consistently levelled against those who threaten the censor’s cherished opinions, and almost never against those who reaffirm the views of the censor. For example, Twitter aggressively censors opinions that question Covid vaccination campaigns or support the development and use of cheap and safe pharmaceutical treatments for Covid-19, yet they happily turn a blind eye to false and misleading claims that support their own narrative.

Here are some examples of false and/or misleading claims that have been given a free pass by Twitter and Youtube:

  • gross exaggerations of the dangers Covid-19 poses for young and health individuals
  • the misleading and arguably fraudulent use of PCR “case” data in spite of repeated warnings by experts that it was a deficient diagnostic tool
  • false statements suggesting that the vaccines are all “perfectly safe” for anyone to take, in spite of clear evidence that some Covid vaccines are associated with worrying increases in the incidence of diseases like myocarditis, especially in young populations
  • the constant equation of “death from” and “death with” Covid-19
  • plenty of defamatory claims about critics of Covid vaccination policies, including the claim that they are all “anti-vaxxers.”
  • statements implying that Ivermectin is a drug intended exclusively for horses.

All of these claims are manifestly “false or misleading,” yet Big Tech giants turn a blind eye to them. Why? Because they swim in the same direction as the narrative they are determined to push through.

Do not be fooled: “misinformation” is not a politically neutral, scientific criterion of correctness, but a powerful tool of political propaganda and persuasion.

It is imperative that the advocates of heavy-handed political censorship, parading under the banner of “misinformation-detectors,” do not win the day, because if they do, then the public sphere will become a hall of mirrors, in which the lazy, self-serving mantras of a few powerful actors bounce, virtually unchallenged, from one platform to another, while dissenting voices, however intelligent or discerning, are consigned to the shadows and dismissed as the rantings of crazy people.

This article has been reposted from David Thunder’s The Freedom Blog.

Check out his video explanation of his aims.

COLUMN BY

David Thunder

David Thunder is a researcher and lecturer at the University of Navarra’s Institute for Culture and Society. More by David Thunder

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

CDC is Refusing to Publish Data it has Collected on the Vaccine

They’ve been lying to us all along.

CDC is refusing to publish data it has collected on booster effectiveness for those aged 18-49

  • CDC is refusing to publish data it has collected on booster effectiveness for 33 MILLION Americans aged 18-49 over fears it might show the vaccines as ineffective: FDA expert tells CDC to ‘tell the truth’
  • Two weeks ago the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published data about the effectiveness of boosters against COVID-19
  • The CDC failed to publish a tranche of their data, however – omitting the impact on those aged 18-49, who are least likely to benefit from boosters
  • The CDC are also being criticized for failing to publish their information about child hospitalization rates and comorbidities
  • A spokeswoman for the CDC said they were concerned that the data would be misinterpreted, pointing out that it was incomplete and not verified
    Critics said that it was always better to publish the information rather than withhold, and allow scientists to analyze and explain what they could

By Harriet Alexander For Dailymail.com, 22 February 2022

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has withheld vast swaths of the information it holds about the impact of COVID-19, leading to anger from the scientific community and speculation the agency is not releasing the data because it weakens the case for booster shots in certain demographics.

Two weeks ago, the CDC published the first significant data on the effectiveness of boosters in adults younger than 65.

But the agency, led by Dr Rochelle Walensky, did not share the information on those aged 18-49, who are considered to be the least likely to benefit from a booster.

It has also failed to provide information they held on child hospitalizations, scientists complained.

Kristen Nordlund, a spokeswoman for the CDC, said the agency has been slow to release the different streams of data ‘because basically, at the end of the day, it’s not yet ready for prime time.’

She said the agency’s ‘priority when gathering any data is to ensure that it’s accurate and actionable,’ and told The New York Times that they were concerned it might be misinterpreted to show the vaccines were ineffective.

She also said that they were reluctant to publish the data because it represents only 10 percent of the population of the United States – accounting for 33 million people – the same sample size the CDC has used to track influenza for years.

VIEW MAP ON PERCENT OF RESIDENTS FULLY VACCINATE

VIEW CHARE ON NUMBER OF U.S. INFECTIONS PER DAY IN JANUARY & FEBRUARY

VIEW CHART ON NUMBER OF U.S. DEATHS PER DAY IN JANUARY AND FEBRUARY

Rochelle Walensky, director of the CDC. The agency has been criticized for withholding some of its data

The 18-49 year old age group is considered least likely to benefit from the booster, given that death rates among the age group are already low. It is far more likely for the elderly and immunocompromised to get sick without their booster than healthy young and middle aged people.

Boosters became available for children aged 12 and upwards only last month, and so would not be covered by the dataset.

As of Monday, 65 percent of Americans are fully vaccinated. There were 103,150 new cases reported nationwide, on a seven day rolling average – a dramatic decrease from January, when there were regularly over 700,000 new cases a day.

Outraged scientists stressed that publishing the data went hand in hand with educating the public about vaccines – explaining that as more people are vaccinated, the percentage of vaccinated people who are infected or hospitalized would also rise.

They urged the CDC to publish the information.

Dr Paul Offit urged the CDC to ‘tell the truth, present the data’

‘Tell the truth, present the data,’ said Dr Paul Offit, a vaccine expert and adviser to the Food and Drug Administration.

‘I have to believe that there is a way to explain these things so people can understand it.’

He noted that, because the CDC had not published the information, American scientists were forced to rely on Israeli data.

‘There’s no reason that they should be better at collecting and putting forth data than we were,’ he said.

‘The CDC is the principal epidemiological agency in this country, and so you would like to think the data came from them.’

Another expressed shock that the CDC had the data at all.

‘We have been begging for that sort of granularity of data for two years,’ said Jessica Malaty Rivera, an epidemiologist and part of the team that ran the Covid Tracking Project, which brought together data on the pandemic for a website they ran until March 2021.

She denied that there was a risk of the data being misinterpreted, adding that it instead ‘builds public trust, and it paints a much clearer picture of what’s actually going on.’

She added: ‘It gets really exhausting when you see the private sector working faster than the premier public health agency of the world.’

Read the rest…..

RELATED ARTICLES:

EXCLUSIVE: NYC Stands With Trucker Convoy Against Canadian Tyranny (PHOTOS AND VIDEO)

Majority Of Democrats Back Trudeau’s Tyrannical Crackdown, Freezing Bank Accounts Of Truckers

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

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there, click here. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

Government Tyrants Losing the War on Parents [For Now]

The school board recall in San Francisco sent shockwaves through Progressive quarters throughout the country.  Three school board members were recalled for spending too much time renaming schools for Woke folk and putting progressive politics over the needs of children during COVID.  The recall effort was started by Democrats and passed by 78 percent of the voters in what is a very Progressive city.  Progressives around the country were shaken to the core, and deservedly so. Their policies stink and everybody knows it.  One petulant school board member who was thrown out said the vote was white supremacy.  This shows you just how bankrupt the Left’s propaganda on race is.  Everybody knows that, too.

San Francisco wasn’t the only recent battle in the war on parents.

A teacher admitted on video keeping a “transition closet” for students to change into clothing that “fits who they are”, inducing gender confusion into students without parental knowledge or consent.  A California public charter schools asks for and uses preferred gender pronouns, also without parental consent.  A California Democrat running for Congress helped bring a program run by the Chinese Communist Party into his community’s classrooms.  Parents were blocked from school board meetings and prevented from speaking in Virginia and Pennsylvania .  A county board chairman in Virginia scoffed at the elected legislature and Governor and said school boards and health officials should be the ones deciding mask mandates in schools.

Parents are fighting back.

A parent in Virginia confronted a school board member at a school board meeting with pictures of the member without a mask on in a crowd while advocating masks for children.  The member called security, pounded the gavel, yelled at the parent “you are done!”, and stormed out of the meeting.

California parents demanded answers after learning “nonbinary” male counselors slept in the same cabins as their daughters at school science camp.  The parents’ outrage made a difference.  The school district opened an investigation.

A biracial father in North Carolina attacked Critical Race Theory at a school board meeting, saying “I’m biracial, I’m bilingual, I’m multicultural. The fact is, in America, in North Carolina, I can do anything I want and I teach that to my children…. And the person who tells my pecan-color kids that they’re oppressed, based on the color of their skin, would be absolutely wrong and absolutely at war with me.”

Parents in two Virginia towns handed subpoenas to fleeing school board members who were illegally maintaining mask mandates.  A sportscaster resigned from NBC to be free to speak out against Critical Race Theory which she said separates kids and amounts to segregation.

Parents are winning, in some instances. The Virginia Senate passed a bill allowing parents to review sexually explicit materials schools want to give their kids.  A school board in Pennsylvania voted to shut off CNN in the classroom, recognizing that the network is biased.  A county commissioner in Wyoming compared parents to ignorant and hate-filled Nazis for objecting to obscene library books in schools.  The parents fought back, publicizing the remarks and continuing to show up at public meetings.  They kept the pressure on and the commissioner finally resigned.

But the war on parents is not over.  Progressives are calling in the heavy artillery.  The Biden Justice Department just established a new domestic terrorism office.  This comes after Attorney General Merrick Garland called parents domestic terrorists in a memo.  Critics worry the new office will be used to target parents who speak up at school board meetings.  Who knows, the feds might even try to arrest every parent who voted to throw the school board out in San Francisco.  I wouldn’t put anything past our government these days.  Stay tuned.

Visit The Daily Skirmish and Watch Eagle Headline News – 7:30am ET Weekdays

©Christopher Wright. All rights reserved.

From Corrupted to Trusted: Shifting Perceptions of the FDA

This article was written by John Roulac and originally published here.

Until recently, most Americans had little trust in the FDA. But when COVID arrived in early 2020, a scared nation deepened in tribal identity and then turned its faith and trust over to FDA and CDC. Interestingly, during COVID, medical professionals’ trust in the FDA and CDC plummeted. Let’s explore how American perceptions of the FDA have changed and what this faith has delivered to our nation.

In 2008 I obtained a letter written by an FDA official, which was sent to a competitor of Nutiva (the organic foods brand I founded in 1999). It warned firms to remove any reference to ‘non-GMO’ on food labels. Virtually every natural food brand quickly changed their labels. As CEO of Nutiva I determined that the warning was not based on any FDA regulation, but was an illegal abuse of power by an FDA official serving the interests of the GMO industry.

We chose to ignore the letter, and luckily I never heard from the agency. This is just one of many examples of the FDA’s suspect moves over the past decades.

The FDA has failed to regulate a toxic food system of dis-ease, inflammation, and the destruction of nature via harsh pesticides, leaving Americans with weakened immunity and vulnerability to pathogens. Tragically the U.S.A. has one of the highest COVID death rates in the world.

The FDA Has Been a Case Study of a Captured Agency

From the 1980’s thru 2019, the FDA was not considered trustworthy by the American people and was often described as “corrupt, filled with cronyism, or a captured agency”.

During the 1980s groundswell of the organic food movement, many Americans realized that Monsanto and the chemical industry’s cozy relationship with the FDA was a major issue. Most liberals were not happy with FDA policies that became the target of many legal campaigns over the safety and efficacy of GMO foods, pesticides and drugs.

In 1990, the FDA set out to make dietary supplements prescription only. The industry unified and rallied to pass the DSHE Act, legalizing supplements as foods.

There has been a revolving door of chemical and pharma executives between the FDA and industry, as was the case in 2009 when ex-Monsanto executive Michael R. Taylor was hired as the FDA’s food czar. Corn oil and corn syrup were given a pass, while eggs and beef were considered unhealthy.

Then came Scott Gottlieb MD, the former FDA Commissioner from 2017 to April 2019, where in June of 2019, he became a Director at Pfizer and Chair of their Regulatory and Compliance Committee.

In fact, as documented by the international news organization Quartz, “as of 2019, nine out of the last 10 FDA commissioners – representing nearly four decades of agency leadership – have gone on to work for pharmaceutical companies.

FDA approval of dangerous drugs such as Prozac and Vioxx has been standard operating procedure. Back in 2012, CBS’ 60 Minutes exposed collusion between the pharmaceutical industry and the FDA on anti-depressants. The majority of FDA’s drug budget is in fact funded by the pharmaceutical industry.

In 2013, a report published in the Journal of Law and Medicine summarized by Dr. Donald W. Light highlighted that ‘about 90 percent of all new FDA approved drugs over the previous 30 years were found to be little or no more effective for patients than existing drugs’, that ‘the bar for “safe” was equally low, even when properly prescribed’, and that ‘125K excess deaths occurred in the United States each year among people taking properly prescribed drugs to be healthier.’

A fall 2019 Gallup Poll ranked the pharmaceutical industry as the most poorly regarded industry in Americans’ eyes. Americans were more than twice as likely to rate the pharmaceutical industry negatively (58%) as positively (27%).

In 2020, as fears of COVID swept the land, the constant drumbeat of fear, isolation, and extreme polarization helped cultivate a “collective trauma” for the American people. Humans are social animals shaped by cultural context.

The deepening of tribal identities, Trump zig-zagging at the helm of the pandemic response, and the presence of the QAnon conspiracy movement caused an even deeper distrust of anything associated with Trump, including the FDA. By October 2020, trust in the FDA was at an all-time low.

Shifting Tides

Ironically, this all changed when Joe Biden assumed office. Liberals and democrats flipped rapidly from FDA skeptics to FDA cheerleaders in a matter of months, the perverse logic seeming to be “We hate Trump and now we are on Team FDA-Pharma”.

In May 2021, a Pew Research Poll found that the share of adults who are “basically content” with the federal government had risen to the highest point since 2004, driven by Democrats. In July 2021, an Annenberg Public Policy Center Poll found that 77% of Americans were confident that the FDA was providing trustworthy information about treating and preventing COVID-19.

Interestingly enough, at the exact same time that the general public’s trust in the FDA and CDC was soaring, healthcare professionals’ trust in the FDA and CDC was dramatically decreasing. A group of 20 + medical professionals spoke at a U.S. Senate Roundtable on January 24, 2022 (skip ahead to 51:28).

Perhaps the views of many of these healthcare professionals have not been able to reach the general public because MDs and nurses regularly face termination or threat of medical board decertification for publicly speaking of vaccine injuries, low cost effective treatment protocols, or on other matters that don’t fit the current approved narratives.

The FDA Now Is Trustworthy, Credible and Authoritative … Really?

It appears the majority of left-leaning Americans believe that the FDA has their best interests at heart regarding COVID policies and are obeying them without question. As leading clinical MDs remind me, much of what Americans base their opinion on is often simply pharma marketing claims disguised as medical science.

In a world of corruption, brainwashing, and dishonesty, it’s not easy to know whom to trust. It’s a classic example of mass formation psychosis, where people adhere to groupthink in order to find meaning and resolution in uncertain times, no matter how irrational.

It’s a stunning sociological study to see a mass population trusting leaders of companies with very low ethical standards. Just months ago, most would never agree to be injected with an experimental genetic drug therapy every six months based on FDA edicts. Upon shot five or six under threat of job loss or travel ban, and mounting vaccine injury reports, will more Americans resume asking good questions?

Repeat After Me …

Many Americans are repeating the FDA and the pharma sector’s slogan of “Vaccines are Safe and Effective”, almost like the pledge of allegiance to the flag, while ridiculing or ignoring other proven preventative and early treatment measures (as outlined in my recent article ‘Pharma’s Culture War’).’

Thousands of practicing MDs along with the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) agree that having more tools in the toolkit is wise and that “Early Treatment of COVID is Safe and VERY Effective”.

MDs and countries from around the world who focus on early treatment send very few patients to the hospitals, whereas countries with high vaccine rates such as the EU, UK, and the U.S.A. have some of the highest death rates in the world. Regions such as Africa and Northern India (until recently) had very low rates of vaccination and very low COVID cases and deaths.

Tokyo, Japan and Delhi, India’s COVID cases in the latter half of 2021 were 175 to 2000 times less than London or NYC (see graphic and data below) and their COVID hospital beds were virtually empty. These regions often used early treatment protocols to reduce the spread.

Oddly many Americans cheering on the FDA have little awareness of why other countries are doing much better than the USA. Why is that not in the news? What is the connection of early treatment, inflammation, diet, toxic pesticides, soil health, gut biome and industrial agriculture?

Suppression of Safe and Effective Treatments

The FDA, media, and the pharma sector have ignored the overwhelming benefits of Vitamin D and lifestyle choices. An Israeli study offers the strongest proof yet of Vitamin D’s power to fight COVID. “We found it striking, to see the difference in the chances of becoming a severe patient when you are lacking in Vitamin D compared to when you’re not,” said Dr. Amiel Dror, a Galilee Medical Center physician.

The U.S. media virtually never publishes positive articles on Vitamin D, which often appear in international media. Why has the FDA and the media not published statistical COVID hospitalization and death data on Vitamin D levels or on inflammation? Why have most Americans not bothered to pay attention to their Vitamin D levels?

Before COVID, the FDA never issued edicts preventing doctors from prescribing low cost and re-purposed medicines. 20% of all medicines prescribed in the U.S.A. today are generic repurposed, (e.g. a heart drug given to a cancer patient). Clinicians do this every day and no long term studies are required, since safety data is already established.

Fluvoxamine!vermect!n, Nitazoxanide and Hydroxychloroquine are safe, commonly prescribed medicines and are part of the FLCCC COVID treatment protocols. According to Pierre Kory, MD “Since the summer of 2020, U.S. public health agencies have continually shut down the use of generic treatments.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) funded 20 large research studies of patented pharmaceutical industry drugs before only recently agreeing to study repurposed generic medicines.”

Link to Dr. Pierre Kory’s SpeechThe fact that doctors at the bedside are being fired or prevented from providing life saving vitamins and medicines is truly a black mark in America and has likely contributed to a significant number of unnecessary deaths. Instead they are told to use the highly toxic Remdesivir which can cause renal failure and hospitals are paid bonuses for treating COVID patients with this drug.

Censorship Is Now a Liberal Value?

Many liberals now want to cancel, restrict or censor their perceived ‘tribal enemies’. Some scream about medical issues that they have little or no training in as if they are judge and jury, and maybe even represent science itself as Dr. Fauci has alluded to. Easily triggered, they often refuse to even listen to the world-renowned MDs and scientists that they are criticizing or read the published science themselves.

Recently, Joe Rogan’s podcast came under fire, accused of promoting ‘COVID misinformation’, for hosting Dr. Peter McCullough and Dr. Robert Malone. Dr. Peter McCullough is the former Vice Chief of Internal Medicine at Baylor University Medical Center and is one of the most published authors in his field with 600 citations in the National Library of Medicine.

Dr. Robert Malone is one of the principle inventors of mRNA vaccine technology. Both hold views on COVID treatment and COVID vaccines that fall outside the mainstream ‘FDA-and-CDC-approved’ narratives, though neither are anti-vaccine. Neil Young and Joni Mitchell jumped in (unsuccessfully) to help ‘cancel’ Joe’s podcast as other artists followed with support from the woke mob (see: Not Your Cuppa Joe? Here’s a Thought: Move ON).

It seems absurd, yet Americans and our media now tar and feather anyone who dare question the approved narratives. Wokeism is now becoming the tip of the spear for the pharma industrial complex to cancel those that fall out of line. Facebook is now even starting to ‘fact check’ regenerative agriculture posts that mention holistic grazing with climate benefits.

Dissent = Misinformation

Dissent, and even skepticism is now being dangerously characterized as “misinformation”, while pharma marketing claims are now often labeled as “science”. It’s almost as if Orwell’s ‘newspeak’ is coming to life in realtime.

And the latest news is even more Orwellian as the Biden Administration mentions ‘misleading COVID narratives’. Disagree With Government Policy? Homeland Security Says You’re a ‘Terrorist’ if You Speak Out.

To even question the “Vaccines are Safe and Effective” narrative means possible loss of work or family drama. The ‘take the vaccine not for your health but to protect your mother’ mantra was repeated ad nauseum, despite the fact that you can still get COVID, spread COVID, and die from COVID even if you are vaccinated.

What Does “Safe and Effective” Really Mean?

Mirriam Webster defines “safe” as: 1 : free from harm or risk: unhurt. Vaccine injuries are generally under-reported but the numbers related to the COVID vaccine are staggering and increasing rapidly. From altering menstrual cycles in women to heart disease in boys and men, and Guillain-Barre Syndrome, the expanding list goes on.

With the growing vaccine injury issues of the mRNA jabs, Israel (which currently has one of the highest COVID death rates in the world- despite 4 jab booster regime) recently ordered 5 million non-genetic, non mRNA ‘old school’ Novavax vaccines.

A report reviewing data in the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, co-authored by Dr. McCullough and Dr. Jessica Rose, a virologist and epidemiologist in Canada, found that the relative risk for myocarditis is increased by 19-fold in age 12 to 15-year-old males following the second mRNA vaccination compared to background myocarditis rates for this age group.

Interestingly, the report was pulled without a clear reason or explanation one week before the CDC deadline to review vaccine safety data in children.

recent preprint from Kaiser Permanente Northwest also concluded that ‘the true incidence of myopericarditis is markedly higher than the incidence reported to US advisory committees’ and that ‘the VSD should validate its search algorithm to improve its sensitivity for myopericarditis.’

“Vaccine effectiveness” is another interesting term. Early epidemiological data is showing reduced rates of hospitalization and death in groups that are at higher-risk for developing severe COVID. However, there is now overwhelming evidence that the vaccines are not effective in preventing you from getting or transmitting COVID. Thus is this term ‘safe and effective’ based on sound science or should it have a qualifying statement to go along with it?

Weaponization of Vaccination Status

Mandates and vaccine passports based on experimental genetic vaccines (many of which were never officially approved by the FDA) are violations of the Geneva Convention, and arguably violations of the Nuremberg Code and human rights in general. One’s right to a job or going to your favorite café is now dependent on draconian and ever-changing rules.

California governor Gavin Newsom’s announcement of the lifting of indoor mask mandates only for those vaccinated, besides not being based on science, is divisive and antagonistic. Two shots were not enough and shortly three will be required to be a “member of society”, and soon perhaps four, five or more. Do Americans still have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? 

Waking Up (From the Woke?)

It’s truly strange times when your close friends or family would unwittingly rather have untold numbers of Americans die of a treatable disease (which must all be “misinformation”). However, a growing number of people are beginning to question the failed COVID policies.

SwedenSwitzerlandDenmark, Norway, Finland, Ireland, Netherlands and the UK have all started to lift COVID restrictions. Remember when liberals used to suggest the U.S.A. should follow Scandinavian countries like Denmark?

Every day more people learn of the growing vaccine injuries or censorship of low cost repurposed medicines. Many are beginning to worry about the lack of transparency, misleading narratives, mandates and censorship, yet are afraid to say anything for fear of attacks on their reputation.

Regeneration 

It’s certainly fascinating to watch this unfold. Will public support fade for vaccine mandates, vaccine passports, school masking, and firing MDs for practicing medicine at the bedside? Will we gain the understanding of the linkage between soil health, pesticides, our gut biome health and regenerative agriculture (my 2021 article discusses this issue in more depth) as a key to boosting our personal and planet’s health?

As we shift from this pandemic to endemic phase, let’s make an extra effort to play more and nurture ourselves and our community. It’s time. Let’s regenerate.

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

Has Fiction Become Science and Science Become Fiction?

“A nation this is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people.” – John F. Kennedy


Science: The intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.

Fiction: Invention or fabrication as opposed to fact.


The first science fiction novel titled The Chymical Wedding was published in 1616 and written by Johannes Valentinus Andreae.

The Chymical Wedding was an allegoric romance story divided into Seven Days, or Seven Journeys, like Genesis, and recounts how Christian Rosenkreuz was invited to go to a wonderful castle full of miracles, in order to assist the Chymical Wedding of the king and the queen, that is, the husband and the bride. The Chymical Wedding is concerned with the inner transformation of the human soul.

A Trip to the Moon, a 1902 French film, is considered the first science fiction film ever made. It is about man travelling to the moon and returning to earth.

The first science fiction novel was about faith and a man’s soul. Today some still struggle with the idea of an all powerful and almighty God and their souls.

The first science fiction film became reality on July 20, 1969, when American astronauts Neil Armstrong and Edwin “Buzz” Aldrin became the first humans ever to land and walk on the surface of the moon. One small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.

What is interesting is that these two works allowed fiction to become science and science to become fiction.

Fast forward to 2022 and we have seen many films where man via science become superhuman. Two that come to mind are DC Comics Superman and Marvels Captain America. In the case of Superman, a.k.a. Clark Kent, came to earth via a space ship from Krypton. In the second case Captain America, a.k.a. Steve Rogers, was genetically enhanced soldier who had great strength, an enhanced intellect and longevity, being almost immortal.

Science or Science Fiction

Today we find that science isn’t what is was. Science has become fiction, even mythical. Science is being used to persuade people of its truthfulness in areas that are no longer rational or based on facts. It seems today that science has become more and more science fiction, not only in films like I Robot and Star Wars, but in government agencies like the Department of Energy, the Center for Disease Control and the Department of Health and Human Services.

Scientists, both those who work for the government and those who work in universities and funded by government grants, are producing science fiction.

The the new science fiction is about:

  • CLIMATE CHANGE: Scientists tell us that if we don’t stop changing the climate by using fossil fuels then we are all going to die, as will planet earth. They push the myth of carbon neutrality, the myth that mankind can change natures naturally occurring climate cycles, reduce the number of hurricanes, stop floods and the great myth that the sea levels are rising because of global warming. The truth is that it is the sun that has the greatest impact on the earth’s climate. Eliminating all green house gasses would take mankind back to the stone age. There are three absolutes, facts, about the climate: 1. the climate changes, 2. these changes are caused by naturally occurring cycles (i.e. summer, fall, winter, spring) and 3. there is nothing mankind can do to change these natural cycles.
  • GENDER AND SEXUAL DEVIANCY: Scientists want us to believe that there aren’t two genders, i.e. male (XX) and female (XY), but rather you can be and do what you want. This, the greatest science fictional myth, was begun by Alfred Charles Kinsey an American biologist, professor of entomology and zoology, and sexologist who, in 1947, founded the Institute for Sex Research at Indiana University, now known as the Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender, and Reproduction. During Kinsey’s research underaged boys were stimulated by adult pedophiles and pederasts. This led to the idea that sex wasn’t between one man and one woman but rather sex was solely for the sake of sexual stimulation and satisfaction. This lead to the growth of the LGBTQ+ movement. in an April 12th, 2014 column titled It’s Academic: Kinsey’s Love Affair with Pedophilia Three Generations Later wrote, “In fact, as long ago as 1948, the world’s future leaders were being taught that sex with children was intelligent adult behavior. Their teacher was that Rockefeller Foundation-funded biology professor at Indiana University, Alfred Kinsey. For 64 years—almost three generations—his Sexual Behavior in the Human Male has trained millions of young college students—like Berendzen, McGinnies, Sandusky, Spanier, and Fine—to believe that all sexual perversion is normal. Both hetero- and homosexual interactions with children are said to help children by replacing “sexually repressed” Judeo-Christian morality with a more “enlightened” sexual worldview. According to one Kinsey disciple, the late Dr. Loretta Haroian, “free sexual expression of children” requires “a sexually supportive society . . . in which every man, woman and child can say ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to sex.” Dr. Haroian was a member of the Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality, which has trained millions of “sexologists” in the Kinsey mode.” This even lead to scientists to search for a mythical “gay gene.” This is science fiction that promotes sexual deviancy.
  • THE PANDEMIC: Recently, the UVA Hospital denied Shamgar Connors a kidney because he refused to get a Covid vaccine and DJ Ferguson 31, father of two, was refused a heart transplant by Bostin Hospital because he too was unvaxxed. DJ’s dad says he’s on ‘the edge of death’! This is science fiction that causes doctors to refuse life saving treatments because the patient has decided not to be vaccinated for Covid. To fully understand how medical science has been coopted by the government and become science fiction read Federalizing the Science of Healthcare below.

New Laws for Scientists

It is time for renewed ethical laws for science and scientists.

The 2004 film I Robot  takes place in the year 2035 and is about how highly intelligent robots fill public service positions throughout the world. The problem occurs when robots no longer follow the three rules to keep humans safe. This theme is eerily familiar as today we are witnesses to scientists, acting like robots, harming humans.

Isaac Asimov in his 1950 science fiction book “I, Robot” formulated three laws governing a robots’ behavior. Asimov’s idea was to protect mankind from a robot’s superior ability to do harm. Asimov wrote,

“Because, if you stop to think of it, the three Rules of Robotics are the essential guiding principles of a good many of the world’s ethical systems.”

We decided to use Asimov’s laws and apply them to all scientists. Here are our Three Laws:

First Law

A scientist may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.

Second Law

A scientist must obey the orders given it by human beings who employ them except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.

Third Law

A scientist must protect his/her own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

Federalizing the Science of Healthcare

Today Dissent = ‘Misinformation’ and Disinformation = Science. Here are three memorable quotes about Covid:

  • Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., “You’re not going to get COVID if you have the vaccines.”
  • Director of the CDC Rochelle Paula Walensky, “Vaccinated people do not carry the virus, and they don’t get sick.”
  • Dr. Anthony Fauci, “When people are vaccinated, they can feel safe that they are not going to get infected.”

Now doctors and hospitals are not practicing medicine rather they’re just chasing profits and enforcing government mandates.

Hospitals and doctors used to focus solely on their patients, today they are focused primarily on profiting from government largess and sharing personal information with health plans and other heath care providers.

Project Veritas revealed a source who works for United Healthcare of Louisiana’s Inpatient Utilization Management Department is blowing the whistle on COVID cases possibly being inflated for financial incentive.

WATCH: The Chief Medical Officer for United Healthcare of Louisiana (Medicaid) opined in a recorded phone conversation that the Medicaid rate for reimbursement of COVID patients, which is faster and significantly higher, could be the motivation for the improper “primary diagnosis” codes.

QUESTION: How did this all begin?

It began when the government first digitized and then federalized healthcare and transferred power from doctors and hospitals to health insurance providers and government agencies like: OSHA, DHS, HHS and Congress.

What is most interesting is the Congress always exempts itself from following their own laws, e.g. Obamacare.

More recently this power increased under the idea that government must control all aspects of our lives in order to stop Covid from spreading. The idea of “two weeks to flatten the Covid curve” is now entering its second year. Draconian policies have been instituted by politicians at every level, further taking away the important doctor patient relationship and replacing it with a scientist-doctor-government relationship.

The Bottom Line

What we have seen over the decades is science being controlled by governments in order to push myths that increase their power and control over mankind on a global scale.

When government touches anything, it becomes tainted. When government forces scientists to tow their lines rather than test the hypotheses, then mankind suffers.

From climate change, to gender, to the current pandemic, its not science it’s fiction.

We are now in an era where fiction has become science and science has become fiction.

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Oh, So That’s Why the CDC Is Burying a Report on the Effectiveness of COVID Vaccine Boosters

Leading Scientists Determine Sun Plays Major Role in Climate

GOP Senator John Thune: Biden’s energy policy is designed to ‘push people out of fuel-based vehicles’

FDA Exec on Camera Reveals Future COVID Policy:  ‘Biden Wants to Inoculate as Many People as Possible’

Project Veritas Reveals Vaccine Moneymaking Agenda

Texas AG Formally Declares Child Sex-Changes ‘Child Abuse’

Nurse Who Was Fired Because She is Pro-Life Wins $374,000 in Court

VIDEO: FDA Exec Exposes Close Ties Between Agency and Big Pharma

*CLICK HERE TO TWEET OUT THE VIDEO*


Project Veritas released Part Two of its video series on the FDA today, which features FDA Executive Officer, Christopher Cole, speaking about the inner workings of the agency — including the FDA’s conflicts of interest, overspending, and why it’s hard for those within the agency to speak out on such abuses.

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

  • FDA Executive Officer, Christopher Cole: “The drug companies, the food companies, the vaccine companies. So, they pay us hundreds of millions of dollars a year to hire and keep the reviewers to approve their products.”
  • Cole on FDA fees: “Congress approved user fees for [the] FDA. Basically, we charge the industry millions of dollars in order to hire more drug reviewers and vaccine reviewers which will speed up the approval process. So, they [pharmaceutical companies] make more money.”
  • Cole: “They [FDA] tone down the impact of the user fees on their operations because they know they’re dependent on the drug companies, and the vaccine companies, and these other companies for their agency to operate.”
  • Cole on blowing the whistle: “There’s not an incentive to speak out in government, surprisingly. You would think there would be, but there’s not. It’s better just to just not say anything and just ignore it.”

You can watch the full video by HERE.

Cole’s LinkedIn page lists him as an Executive Officer within the agency’s Countermeasures Initiatives, which plays a critical role in ensuring that drugs, vaccines, and other measures to counter infectious diseases and viruses are safe. He made these revelations on a hidden camera to an undercover Project Veritas reporter.

A spokesperson for FDA issued a statement yesterday saying, “The person purportedly in the video does not work on vaccine matters and does not represent the views of the FDA.”

This statement appears to contradict a phone call released Wednesday afternoon by Project Veritas wherein Cole reiterated that he is “a manager in the office that helps oversee the approval of the COVID vaccines for emergency approval.”

Will the FDA clarify this situation? Only time will tell…


*CLICK HERE TO TWEET OUT THE VIDEO*


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