New Documents Seem to Detail Fauci Agency Funding of Gain of Function Research in China thumbnail

New Documents Seem to Detail Fauci Agency Funding of Gain of Function Research in China

/in , , , /by

By Judicial Watch

“Gain-of-function research refers to the serial passaging of microorganisms to increase their transmissibility, virulence, immunogenicity, and host tropism by applying selective pressure to a culture.” – Michael Greenwood, M.Sc., News Medical Life Sciences

We now have proof that our tax dollars were dishonestly used by Dr. Anthony Fauci’s agency to fund “gain of function” coronavirus research.

We learned this in 221 pages of records we received from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) that include a 2018 grant application for research involving the coronavirus.

The grant application appears to describe “gain of function” research involving RNA extractions from bats, experiments on viruses, attempts to develop a chimeric virus, and efforts to genetically manipulate the full-length bat SARSr-CoV WIV1 strain molecular clone.

Judicial Watch obtained the documents through a lawsuit for records of communications, contracts and agreements with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Our lawsuit specifically requests records about National Institute of Health (NIH) grants that benefitted the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Here are some of the details.

On January 27, 2020, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) official David Morens emailed Chief of Staff Greg Folkers in a heavily redacted thread, writing:

[S]ome background on our support of the Ecohealth group (Peter Daszak et al), which has for years been among the biggest players in coronavirus work, also in collaboration with Ralph Baric, Ian Lipkin and others. [Redacted].

NIAID has been funding Peter’s group for coronavirus work in China for the past 5 years through [grant] R011R01A|110964: “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence.” That’s now been renewed, with a specific focus to identify cohorts of people highly exposed to bats in China, and work out if they’re getting sick from CoVs.… Collaborators include Wuhan Institute of Virology (currently working on the nCoV) and Ralph Baric. The results of the work to date include:

  • [Redacted]
  • Discovered Swine Acute Diarrheal Syndrome Virus (SADS-CoV) killing >25,000 pigs in Guangdong Province (Published in Nature)
  • Found SARS-related CoVs that can bind to human cells (Published in Nature), and that cause SARS-like disease in humanized mouse models.
  • [Redacted]

Also, prior to the above R01, Peter’s folks worked under an R01 with Eun-Park as Program Officer on viral discovery in bats, and originally identified SARS-CoV as having a likely origin in bats (published in Science).

Folkers forwards the message to Anthony Fauci and others.

In a “Notice of Award” dated July 13, 2020, the NIH increased the amount of NIH money going to Peter Daszak’s firm, EcoHealth Alliance, by $369,819 with a project period that runs from June 1, 2014, through June 30, 2025, for Daszak’s project “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence.

EcoHealth was to receive $637,980 in each of the years 2019 through 2024 under the grant.

The award’s writers specifically direct funds “for activity with Wuhan Institute of Virology in the amount of $76,301” and “for activity with Institute of Pathogen Biology [located in China] in the amount of $75,301.” Funds also went to the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill. The award’s writers also indicate that research associated with the award was also being conducted at East China Normal University in China and to Duke-NUS Medical School in Singapore.

The specialists overseeing the award note that, “This award may include collaborations with and/or between foreign organizations.” The specialists also note that award grantees using “Highly Pathogenic Agents” “may warrant a biocontainment safety facility of BSL3 or higher.” The grantee is also required to report “Any changes in the use of the Agent(s) or Toxin(s) including its restricted experiments that have resulted in a change in the required biocontainment level, and any resultant change in location.” The NIH Grants Management Specialist overseeing the award was Shaun W. Gratton and the NIH Program Official was Erik J. Stemmy. Of the 17 “Senior/Key Personnel” assigned as researchers on the project, seven worked at Chinese institutions.

The site locations in an EcoHealth grant application submitted November 5, 2018, for coronavirus research included EcoHealth Alliance in New York City, the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill, the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and the Institute of Pathogen Biology in Beijing, China. Among the “aims” listed, the applicants write, “We will sequence receptor binding domains (spike proteins) to identify viruses with the highest potential for spillover which we will include in our experimental investigations.” In the third “aim”, they continue “We will use S protein sequence data, infectious clone technology, in vitro and in vivo infection experiments and analysis of receptor binding to test the hypothesis that % divergence thresholds in S protein sequences predict spillover potential.”

In a description of the Wuhan lab, the writers of the application note that, “The Wuhan Institute of Virology is a World Health Organization collaborating center” and had a “long-time (>15 years) partnership with EcoHealth Alliance.”

In his “personal statement” in the grant application, Dr. Peter Daszak writes about his “20+ years of NIH-funded research.” Among his awards, Daszak notes he was a 1999 recipient of the CDC’s “Meritoriouos service award,” had a species of centipedes named after him (“Crytops daszaki”), as well as having a “new parasite species” named after himself (“Isospora daszaki”), and is an elected member of the Kosmos Club in Washington, DC. He also says he’s a member of the U.S. “National Institute of Medicine” which he abbreviates as “NAM.” In his “Contributions to Science,” Daszak notes, “Collaborating with virologists in China, we have isolated and characterized SARS-like CoVs from bats that use the same host cell receptor (AACE-2) as SARS-CoV.”

In a personal biography section of the above grant application, Dr. Shi Zhengli, head of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, notes that one of her ongoing research projects, with a duration of January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2021, and sponsored by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, involves, “Evolution mechanism of the adation [sic] of bat SARS-related coronaviruses to host receptor molecules and the risk of interspecies infection.”

Prof. Ralph Baric of UNC-Chapel Hill also has his biographical information listed in the grant application, and this includes his participation in a 2015 workshop relating to “Trends in Synthetic Biology and Gain of Function and Regulatory Implications”, a 2015 China-US workshop involving “Challenges of Emerging Infections, Laboratory Safety, and Global Health Security,” and participation in a 2014 working group on “Risks and Benefits of Gain of Function Research.” Among Baric’s “major accomplishments” cited was a study involving “reconstruction of civet and bat CoV from in silico sequence, the first reported recovery of recombinant bat viruses, and characterization of host range phenotypes in vitro and in vivo.” Baric writes that “Several CoV infectious cDNA clones are available in the lab, including SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, conventional human and model CoVs, and several bat CoVs with pandemic potential.”

In the “Application for Federal Assistance,” for the project “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence,” the costs for the first year (2019-2020) of the EcoHealth Alliance project application totaled $736,996.

The second year (2020-2021) costs total $712,441.

The third year (2021-2022) costs total $712,441.

The fourth year (2022-2023) costs total $712,441.

The fifth year (2023-2024) costs total $712,441.

However, in July 2020, HHS wrote a letter to EcoHealth Alliance regarding funding:

[T]he NIH has received reports that the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), a subrecipient of EcoHealth Alliance under R01AI110964, has been conducting research at its facilities in China that pose serious bio-safety concerns and, as a result, create health and welfare threats to the public in China and other countries, including the United States.

[ … ]

We have concerns that WIV has not satisfied safety requirements under the award, and that EcoHealth Alliance has not satisfied its obligations to monitor the activities of its subrecipient to ensure compliance.

[ … ]

Therefore, effective the date of this letter, July 8, 2020, NIH is suspending all activities … until such time as these concerns have been addressed to NIH’s satisfaction.

Among the budget items in the EcoHealth grant application, was one for supplies for “bats trapping” and “viral transport media.” The total salary, wages and fringe benefits to be paid to the “Senior/Key Person” over the 5-year project totaled $1,118,565.00.

The NIAID funds to be allocated to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for this project for each of the years 2019-2020, 2020-2021, 2021-2022, 2022-2023, and 2023-2024 was $76,301, or a total over five years of $381,505.

The Wuhan Institute of Virology’s role in the project, overseen by Dr. Shi Zhengli would include “running RNA extractions for 1,000 bats per year (two samples per bat: rectal and blood) in each year of the project,” costing $6,214 per year. The Wuhan Institute of Virology also requested “support for in vitro experiments using pseudoviruses carrying the spike proteins … or live viruses in cell lines of different origins, binding affinity assays between the spike proteins … and different cellular receptor molecules, and humanized mice experiments.”

In a discussion of their research to date, the grant applicants wrote, “In collaboration with Ralph Baric (UNC), we used the SARS-CoV reverse genetics system … to generate a chimeric virus with a mouse-adapted SARS-CoV backbone expressing SHC014 S protein with 10% sequence divergence from SARS-DoV S. This chimera replicated in human airway epithelium, using the human ACE2 receptor to enter cells … Thus, SARS-CoVs with diverse variants of SL-CoV S protein without deletions in the RBD can use human ACE2 as receptor for cell entry.” [Emphasis in original]

In a discussion of the rationale of one of the aims of the project, the applicants write, “we aim to expand the known diversity of SARSr-CoVs by over 125 strains, targeting 10-25% S protein divergence that we predict infers high spillover risk and evasion of immune therapeutic and vaccine efficacy.” They continue, “We will … construct chimeric SARSr-CoVs using the WIV1 backbone and these S genes as done previously.” They go on, “Construction of chimeric SARSr-CoV viruses: infectious clones with the S gene of novel SARSr-CoVs and the SARSr-Cov WIV1 genome backbone using the reverse genetic system developed in our previous R01.”

In a section titled “P3CO Research”, the applicants write: “Recognizing the implementation of new gain of function research guidelines under P3CO [Potential Pandemic Pathogen Care and Oversight], SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV are subject to these guidelines, and as such, reverse genetic studies are subject to review … Importantly, we are not proposing to genetically manipulate SARS-CoV over the course of this proposal. However, we are proposing to genetically manipulate the full-length bat SARSr-CoV WIV1 strain molecular clone during the course of the proposal, which is not a select agent, has not been shown to cause human infections, and has not been shown to be transmissible between humans.” [Emphasis in original]

In an October 31, 2018, letter from the director of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, Dr. Yangyi Wang, to Peter Daszak, president of EcoHealth Alliance, requesting permission to take part in the NIAID funded project, he tells Daszak:

Understanding and preventing exposure and transmission of zoonotic diseases from wildlife to humans remains a high priority for prevention of pandemics. In our discussion with EcoHealth Alliance, we have agreed to participate in activities that will strengthen the ability of China and other countries in the region to respond to epidemic disease outbreaks – particularly those of animal origin. To assist in this study, we will provide participating laboratories in China with human samples both new and archived and support research in bat coronaviruses.

We at Wuhan Institute of Virology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, look forward to our continued collaborations with the EcoHealth Alliance team and working further on this worthwhile study.

In my view, these new disclosures detail not only a cover-up but potential fraud and deserve a criminal investigation.

This is the latest discovery in our investigation of our government and the Wuhan lab.

In August, we obtained records from HHS that include an “urgent for Dr. Fauci” email chain citing ties between the Wuhan lab and the taxpayer-funded EcoHealth Alliance. The government emails also report that the foundation of U.S. billionaire Bill Gates worked closely with the Chinese government to pave the way for Chinese-produced medications to be sold outside China and help “raise China’s voice of governance by placing representatives from China on important international counsels as high-level commitment from China.”

In July, we obtained records from NIAID officials in connection with the Wuhan Institute of Virology revealing significant collaborations and funding that began in 2014. The records revealed that NIAID gave nine China-related grants to EcoHealth Alliance to research coronavirus emergence in bats and was the NIH’s top issuer of grants to the Wuhan lab itself.

In June, we announced FOIA lawsuits against the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and the State Department for information on the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the origins of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Also in June, we obtained records from HHS revealing that from 2014 to 2019, $826,277 was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research by the NIAID.

In March, we publicly released emails and other records of Fauci and Dr. H. Clifford Lane from HHS showing that NIH officials tailored confidentiality forms to China’s terms and that the WHO conducted an unreleased, “strictly confidential” COVID-19 epidemiological analysis in January 2020. Additionally, the emails reveal an independent journalist in China pointing out the inconsistent COVID numbers in China to NIH’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases’ Deputy Director for Clinical Research and Special Projects Lane.

In October 2020, we uncovered emails showing a WHO entity pushing for a press release, approved by Fauci, “especially” supporting China’s COVID-19 response.

Medical research rapidly adopts ‘systemic racism’ as truth, risking its scientific credibility thumbnail

Medical research rapidly adopts ‘systemic racism’ as truth, risking its scientific credibility

/in , , , /by

By MercatorNet – Navigating Modern Complexities

Rejection used to be common for medical sociologist Thomas LaVeist when he tried to get his research published on the effects of racism on the health of black people. “Now,” said the 60-year-old dean of Tulane University’s School of Public Health & Tropical Medicine, “I have those same journals asking me to write articles for them.”

LaVeist’s experience illustrates the dramatic transformation in medical research, accelerating in the past few years. While few would dispute that black Americans are more prone to chronic health problems and have shorter life expectancies than whites, the medical community generally sought answers in biology, genetics and lifestyle. Research, like LaVeist’s, that focused on racism was frowned upon as lacking rigor or relevance, an amateurish detour from serious intellectual inquiry.

Today medical journal editors are clamoring for a racial lens and apologizing for what they call their past moral blindness. In recent years, and especially since Black Lives Matter protests erupted last year, systemic racism has been transformed from a fringe theory to a canonical truth.

Medical researchers are now able to offer a sweeping socio-political explanation for racial health disparities by citing the hundreds of peer-reviewed articles authored by LaVeist and a host of others, thus conferring upon the study of systemic racism the imprimatur of scholarly authority and even settled science.

Systemic racism used to be a hypothesis. Now it’s a dogma

This year, top officials at the National Institutes of Health issued an apology to all who have suffered from structural racism in biomedical research. The NIH, the nation’s largest funder of biomedical research, announced that it is dedicating US$90 million to the study of health disparities and structural racism, engaging in more than 60 diversity and inclusion initiatives, and committing “every tool at our disposal to remediate the chronic problem of structural racism.”

In an August special issue dedicated to racial health disparities, the prestigious Journal of the American Medical Association stated that systemic racism is a scientific fact beyond dispute, and disagreeing on this point is “wrong,” “misguided” and “uninformed.” Systemic racism is a reality to be assumed in medical research rather than a sociological hypothesis to be tested by skeptical researchers.

Deemed incontestable, systemic racism provides the political rationale for “dismantling” — in the words of no less an authority than the National Institutes of Health — the social institutions and cultural standards that, according to the framework’s advocates, were constructed and are maintained to uphold white supremacy.

The consequences of ignoring this new prime directive for racially focused research were made abundantly clear this year when the top two editors of JAMA were pressured to resign after the organization ran a podcast that questioned whether systemic racism explains health disparities between blacks and other Americans.

“When JAMA sends a call for paper on structural racism, when the NIH director sends out an apology letter for racism in the NIH and when the CDC for the first time uses the term ‘racism,’ these are highest-level determinants of what research will be done in coming years in this country,” said Shervin Assari, an associate professor of family medicine and urban public health at Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science in Los Angeles, one of four historically black medical schools in the nation.

“This is the first time the NIH has issued a call for research on structural racism. This is the first time JAMA fires an editor who said something wrong about racism,” said Assari, who has published more than 350 papers on race, social determinants and health equity. “Now NIH is paying good money to the best researchers in this country who are competing to understand how structural racism works, rather than if it exists.”

Systemic racism, generally unseen but known by its perceived effects, doesn’t directly cause diabetes, hypertension or depression, but it purportedly creates the living conditions in which chronic conditions opportunistically thrive, advocates say. Such living conditions include unsafe neighborhoods, aggressive policing, substandard schools, discriminatory workplaces, inferior medical care and the resulting stress, despair and self-destructive behavior, the theory states.

Advancing health care equity

To institutionalize its new policy, JAMA is revising its peer review standards and diversifying its ranks to advance health care equity, a term that refers to narrowing or even eliminating racial health disparities in chronic conditions and life expectancies. Similar steps are being adopted throughout the medical profession — by the cluster-hiring of minority applicants, hiring of diversity and equity officers, and training staff on “white privilege,” implicit bias, microaggressions, and allyship.

A lead editorial in the August special issue, co-signed by 15 people, including JAMA’s newly installed executive editor and executive managing editor, along with other JAMA leaders, said all medical journals are morally obligated to assume systemic racism as a fact and document this fact in their research.

“At this point in the arc of medicine and scientific publication,” JAMA stated, “it is crucial for all journals to fulfill renewed editorial and journal missions that include a heightened and appropriate emphasis on equity and publication of information that addresses structural racism with the goal of overcoming its effects in medicine and health care.”

A moral panic sweeps through medicine

This rapid turn of events has blindsided traditional doctors, who are put off by the intense focus on race and the strong rhetoric.

“The spectacle of the gatekeepers of medical publications announcing a political blueprint that medical authors must follow — or else — is pretty breathtaking,” Thomas Huddle, who retired this year as professor at the medical school at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, said by email.

“The medical gatekeepers are in the grip of a moral panic,” said Huddle, who has published on medical ethics and edited several medical journals. “The JAMA convulsion over the podcast was positively Maoist in its fervor for achieving moral correctness and purging the impure.”

It’s an open secret that some find the systemic explanation to be nothing more than leftist polemic, while others are skeptical it convincingly explains everything it claims to explain. These skeptics worry about the career implications of publicly dissenting from the new orthodoxy, but it’s not inconceivable that blaming an entire national culture for racial disparities will prompt independent scholars and conservative think tanks to produce opposing research that explores black-on-black murder, racial disparities in IQ testing and other taboo subjects.

The dramatic transformation sweeping through the health care profession is not happening in a vacuum. It mirrors social justice movements committed to exposing structural racism that allegedly pervades education, criminal justice, the arts, hard sciences and other domains of U.S. society. Activists in those fields, as well as medicine, talk of dismantling white supremacy and other “structures” that operate by means of race-neutral laws and colorblind norms that cause racial and gender power imbalances and harm non-white groups.

Displacing the scientific method

Skeptical physicians say that medical journal editors are essentially replacing the scientific method with a political ideology, namely critical race theory, and leaving little room for alternative explanations — such as personal agency or cultural differences.

“There’s a tremendous amount of groupthink,” said Stanley Goldfarb, a former dean for curriculum who taught about kidney disease at the University of Pennsylvania medical school before retiring this summer. “If you don’t agree with all that, you’re a bad person.”

“This is an argument that you’re not allowed to have — that’s the problem here,” said Goldfarb, who has served on the editorial boards of three medical journals and was editor-in-chief of a nephrology journal.

Racial health disparities underlie the four-year gap in black-white life expectancy in the United States. The factors that contribute to this disparity include chronic conditions, unintentional injuries, suicide and homicide, which is the leading cause of death for black males aged 44 and younger. Scholars committed to the systemic racism explanation blame the disproportionately high crime rates in poor black neighborhoods on discrimination, substandard schools and other manifestations of systemic racism.

Is there overwhelming evidence?

The body of research into racial health disparities has broken into the mainstream after establishing credibility through the time-honored system of academic citations and referrals. Since LaVeist began his work in the 1990s, a small stream of articles has swelled into a critical mass that now allows medical researchers to assume systemic racism as a proven fact and cite the evidence in footnotes, as established knowledge, instead of arguing the case each time.

“When the weight of the evidence becomes so overwhelming that we reach consensus, we no longer continue to question whether or not [it is true],” LaVeist said. “We don’t question gravity anymore because the consensus is that gravity is a thing.”

One of the JAMA articles in the August special issue found that the major health care spending disparity is that whites spend more on dental, pharmaceutical, and outpatient care, while blacks spend more on emergency room and inpatient hospital care, suggesting that black people are more likely to be uninsured and otherwise lack access to routine medical care.

Instead of detailing the precise reasons that may explain this gap, the authors invoke previous articles: “There are many mechanisms that have already been identified that explain how structural racism shapes health and healthcare.”

In a phone interview, the lead author, Joseph Dieleman, associate professor of health metric sciences at the University of Washington in Seattle, said: “These are taken as a given by us. These are not to be debated, or being tested, in our analysis.”

Health Affairs, dubbed by a Washington Post columnist as “the bible of health policy,” is redoubling its focus on systemic racism, anti-racism, and equity, not only in its published content but also in attending to the racial makeup of its published authors and reviewers.

“We acknowledge that the dominant voices in our work are those with power and privilege,” Editor-in-Chief Alan Weil wrote in January. “Even as we have dramatically increased the volume of our content focused on equity, the narrative has primarily been written by those in power. We vow to change this.”

Weil, who was trained in critical legal theory, a precursor to critical race theory, as a Harvard law student in the 1980s, said in a phone interview that the concepts of merit and quality are often used to maintain power and privilege, and these structures must be examined for bias.

“We’re just talking about — forgive the language that is used by the believers — interrogating ourselves,” Weil said.

Systemic racism, a core tenet of critical race theory, doesn’t have a settled definition but it has broad applicability. One of the peculiar features of systemic racism is that the mechanism is not evident to those who are not initiated into the theory, but ubiquitous to its acolytes.

Are disparities always a result of racism?

For best-selling and award-winning author Ibram X. Kendi, whose writings are considered essential reading at some medical schools, any disparity can signify racism. The concept can refer to all manner of disparate outcomes —  in murder rates, arrest rates, life expectancies, education levels, school discipline, household income, standardized tests scores and grades — even in the fact that black people are nowhere to be seen in the corridor portraits of medical school dignitaries and are under represented in symphony orchestras.

“There is no ‘official’ definition of structural racism,” states a recent article in The New England Journal of Medicine.  “All definitions make clear that racism is not simply the result of private prejudices held by individuals, but is also produced and reproduced by laws, rules, and practices, sanctioned and even implemented by various levels of government, and embedded in the economic system as well as in cultural and societal norms.”

One line of attack against the status quo is the movement to eliminate long-accepted practices to promote merit and excellence that, according to activists, operate as colorblind mechanisms to produce unequal outcomes: gifted and talented programs, gifted schools, and admissions tests for elite high schools, as well as standardized test scores for university admission. In medicine, the U.S. Medical Licensing Examination test is changing from a graded score to pass/fail to help minority students, while Northwestern University and its Feinberg School of Medicine are promoting diversity by eliminating a six-decade-old Honors Program in Medical Education.

Still, the concept provides special challenges for medicine. Unlike bacteria, for instance, systemic racism is an invisible force that can only be measured indirectly, by its perceived effects. Nevertheless, LaVeist is convinced that systemic racism is the best explanation for racial health disparities because the correlation of race and health is consistent across numerous studies for multiple chronic conditions.

“We cannot make direct causal inferences. The best we can do is look at plausible causality,” LaVeist said. “What we have is a case where once you’ve ruled out all of the plausible explanations, the only thing left is systemic racism.”

LaVeist and Weil agree that health and other disparities can have other causes than systemic racism, and good scholarship should be cognizant of other potential variables. LaVeist said that without allowing for other factors, people of color would have no free will, but it is important to note that African American culture is also shaped by white racism.

One of LaVeist’s early co-authored papers that was rejected by several journals before finding a publisher concluded that black people who experience rudeness at the hands of white people have longer life expectancies if they blame systemic racism, or some other external factor, for being treated disrespectfully.

An implication of the study: Even if the rude behavior by the white person isn’t caused by racism or an external factor, it’s strategically beneficial for black people to attribute the rudeness to someone else’s racism, boorishness or insensitivity, rather than blaming themselves.

“Yes — racism, or some other external attribution,” LaVeist said. “If you make an external attribution, that is going to be healthier than you thinking, ‘Oh they’re right, I am a bad person, I deserve to be mistreated.’”

Assari specializes in the study of “diminished returns” in quality of life and health that black people and other marginalized groups experience as they gain education and income in U.S. society. His research contends that black people reap fewer benefits — such as income and health — as they rise in education, compared to white people, which he attributes to structural racism. He has written half of the 300-some academic papers on that subject cited by the National Library of Medicine.

He makes connections that would not be self-evident to someone who lacks training in his specialty. One of his recent papers, published in the Journal of Health Economics, says that Americans are less likely to smoke as their income level rises. But that rule doesn’t hold for high-income Chinese Americans, who are more likely to smoke as they generate more income.  So Assari postulates that upwardly mobile Chinese Americans resort to nicotine as a means of coping with the anti-Asian bias they encounter in this country’s elite institutions.

Yet, he also said that even though the anti-racist movement seems invincible now, overweening claims about systemic racism will eventually invite scholarly criticism, especially if equity policies and interventions now being implemented fail to deliver results.

“I think there will be a very strong backlash against critical race theory very soon,” Assari said. “I don’t think it is sustainable. And it is falsifiable. So there would be an anti-CRT movement among other group of social scientists.”

Nevertheless, Assari said systemic racism is a reliable theoretical framework because it parsimoniously explains the marginalization of many racial groups.

“This is one model which explains many of our observations,” Assari said.

“A theory is [reliable] when an observation or assumption holds regardless of the context, setting, place, population, design, sample. It is replicated many times across a diverse group of settings, age groups, resources, and outcomes.”

LaVeist said segregation, much of it rooted in historical practices such as redlining and Jim Crow, is the primary driver of disparities. Poor neighborhoods are generally more polluted, closer to highways and industrial zones, and have less access to quality restaurants, grocery stores, public schools, and green spaces. Such environments tend to breed despair, which leads to crime and an overly aggressive police response.

The constant stress of dealing with these hassles and micro-aggressions wears on the body, research into health disparities says, echoing arguments made by critical race theorists in the 1980s. One medical paper, published in The Lancet in 2017 and cited more than 1,500 times as of November, says that residential segregation is the foundation of structural racism, and notes that “growing research is linking interpersonal racism to various biomarkers of disease and well-being, including allostatic load, inflammatory markers, and hormonal dysregulation.”

There are those who say the medical establishment is not going far enough in this research direction.

“Opportunistic scientific carpetbaggers”

The STAT News health information website reported in September that anti-racism and equity have become so trendy that “white scholars are colonizing research on health disparities.” According to the STAT investigation, white researchers are caught up in “a gold rush mentality” and “rushing to scoop up grants and publish papers.” The white scholars are replicating work done by black researchers without giving sufficient credit, a new form of exploitation practiced by “health equity tourists” and “opportunistic scientific carpetbaggers.”

One of the worst offenders: JAMA’s August special issue on health disparities. “Not one of the five research papers published in the issue included a Black lead or corresponding author, and just one lead author was Hispanic,” STAT reported.

Weil sympathizes with these concerns and said Health Affairs is creating a mentorship program to help scholars of color get their papers published in the journal. Weil, who said about 5% of submitted papers are accepted for publication at Health Affairs, is confident that dismantling power and privilege won’t necessitate compromising standards of excellence, and he considers such criticisms to be “generally false and intentionally inflammatory.”

“Equitable representation should be the outcome of an equitable process, not the jerry-rigged result of a change of standards for one group — that is not where we want to be,” Weil said. “So if the fix here is an equitable outcome by lowering standards for a certain group, our readers will notice, and that’s not the end point I’m looking for.”

Weil’s biggest concern is not that the anti-racist movement in medical research will go too far, but that the momentum and resolve will fizzle out.

“I think it’s very hard to tell where you are on a swinging pendulum when you’re in the middle of it,” he said. “I am much more concerned that this will become a rote exercise where everyone genuflects to anti-racism but does nothing about it, than I am that this is an overcorrection.”

This has been republished from RealClearInvestigations with permission.

COLUMN BY

John Murawski

Award-winning journalist and versatile writer who has covered complex, highly-regulated industries, including health care, energy and artificial intelligence. My articles have appeared in such national… More by John Murawski

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

Millions of Children Targeted by the FDA thumbnail

Millions of Children Targeted by the FDA

/in , , , , /by

By J.W. Bryan

When the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) okayed the current Pfizer “vaccine,” it is not a vaccine, rather a bioweapon, according to overwhelming and mounting evidence backed up by testimony from many physicians, scientists, and virologists. It signed a potential death warrant for millions of children across the globe.

Dr. Richard L. Fleming, PhD, M.D., J.D., contacted the Federal Drug Administration concerning the safety and efficacy of the Covid “vaccine” and was assured by them, in words to the effect, “that it was everything a vaccine should be – very pristine.” However, it appears that Dr. Fleming was somewhat dubious of the FDA claims. So, he and his team went into action with tests to either confirm or reject its claim.

The results: Surprise! Surprise!

I’ll let him tell you about that. If he is correct in the findings, which I have no doubt of, it bodes very ill for the children of the world. One report stated that it could amount to as many as 28 million affected. Click here.

Let me just give you a few highlights of what Dr. Fleming stated.

According to Dr. Fleming, he and his team tested the vaccine that the FDA said was, in words to the effect, “everything a vaccine should be – very pristine” What they found was totally different.

Beginning with dropping a saline solution on a blood sample – the blood didn’t change, but after adding the Pfizer vaccine the blood became pale which meant that the oxygen and or the hemoglobin had been removed/extracted from the red blood cell. This would indicate (which he explains) that this “vaccine” would destroy the red blood cells, therefore preventing the blood from delivering enough oxygen throughout the body.

I have listened to this video several times and each time I learn more about the importance of the blood. But it shouldn’t be any surprise for God’s Word tells us that “Life is in the blood.”

Additionally, Dr. D.C. Jarvis, in one of his books on arthritis tells us that there are three ways that acid enters the blood.  After naming the ways, he names what monitors this and if and when excess acid enters which would change the PH balance from 7.2 to the lower or acid side.  Then the excess is kicked out and distributed throughout the body to form a bed of immunity that no virus or other various organisms can live in.

The ill which this jab bodes for the millions of children is only a miniscule tip of the iceberg compared to the heartbreak of the millions of families throughout the world. We cannot imagine more than a smidgen of their total suffering in the years to come, especially when it dawns them, that it was all a big lie. And as a result of being uninformed or misinformed, or maybe in some cases, just being completely ignorant of what was happening, they failed in their greatest responsibility to protect their children.

Children of our Past

This is absolutely heartbreaking for me. There are many children across this land which we haven’t seen for many years that my wife, Polly, and I have a connection with. For about 20 years, after I retired from International Paper Company, we were employed as house parents in Children’s Homes.

This resulted in our entering into a new life, for we looked not only as a new life but as an extra life given to us by God. We were entering into something that prior to this we had no idea or cognizance of the fact that there were many children, through circumstances not of their making, who were now having to adjust to a mode of living in which they were removed from family.  Other than occasional visits, their daily lives had dramatically changed.

We went into this new venture having successfully reared three grown children of our own who were now creating their own lives. As such, we believed that we had the experience and qualifications to become house parents to ten to twelve children in a children’s home.  The reality was…we weren’t…we only thought we were. We now know that it is very doubtful that anyone is really qualified for the position of house parents in a children’s home.

We were into this for over three years before becoming comfortable and in, what we considered, complete command of what we were responsible for. We now know that “what we considered’ was not correct. We were never in complete command; there were so many things we didn’t teach them.

Nevertheless, we were blessed with what agape love is all about, love that continues even when it is not returned. I had never considered that at some time I would love children who were not my own as much as if they were mine. These children, especially a group of girls we spent six years with, tunneled their way into our hearts so that it was almost unbearable when we decided to leave.

I believe this was the saddest day of my life. When I walked out the back of Phillips Cottage, AT Palmer Home for Children, after the gathering of Polly and I in the living room for prayer and the bidding of goodbye to the girls. I looked back over my shoulder and saw that they had followed me, I suppose to maybe say goodbye once more before I drove off.

As I watched them, I realized that they were all weeping. So, I had to return to them to try and give them some comfort, but I needed comfort myself. I spent a few minutes hugging and talking to them while, at the same time, I was weeping along with them. Finally, I said, “Well, girls, I need to leave, momma Polly has already left, and I don’t need to let her get too far ahead of me.”

Thinking back on this time, I remember Dr. Waldron, the CEO of Palmer Home for Children, was waiting for me by my truck.  I was heartbroken and continued weeping when he said to me, “When you get about 15 or 20 miles down the road, you’ll began to feel a lot better.”

Our love for those children never diminished, and we still think about them today.

In the following weeks and years, I continued to be very concerned for our girls. I wrote a little booklet about the time we spent with them entitled, “Precious Journey.” At the end I voiced my concern and dread for their future. I think I stated it something like this, “We are very concerned about the future of our girls. I think of Krystal, she was the oldest, she will soon cross the threshold into adulthood what will she do, where will she go? I envision her vaulting upon the back of a wild steed and grasping a handful of the horse’s mane and charging into God’s thunderstorm of life.”

This was about 22 years ago, and the concern we had for them at that time can’t be compared to the concern we have now, with all the murdering of people under the pretense of fighting a virus that according to mounting, overwhelming evidence doesn’t even exist.

Boosters

But what chills me to the bone is what they are doing and planning for today’s children. I pray for them, but I know by the testimony of many doctors and scientists that these bioweapons called ‘vaccines” are engineered and designed to either kill or seriously injure. My prayer is that they know that faith in God is their only refuge.

Now the White House is urging Americans to undergo booster shots to help prevent the spread of new strains when they originally told us the vaccine would protect us from all strains. This reveals how urgent and determined the forces behind the Plandemic have become. They are aware that time is of an essence – they need to proceed with their depopulation goal and most people are unaware of their plans.

Implicit in this “urging of Americans by the White House to undergo COVID booster doses to help prevent the spread of new strains,” actually means “the booster will bring forth new strains of the virus.” This third jab is one of the biggest lies coming from the very depths of Hell by the stakeholders. Foolish Americans and most of our medical personnel will agree to once again be government guinea pigs.

For us to understand the true meaning of it we must perceive it 180 degrees from how they intend for us to see it.  For us to see the truth of it, we must read it like this, “The White House is urging Americans to undergo COVID booster doses to aid in the spreading of death throughout the world.”

By interpreting this esoterically, we can see that the injection of the current jab, the bioweapon called a “vaccine,” isn’t killing people fast enough.  In order to speed up the operation, i.e., the global objective, for decreasing the earth’s population by 91.7%, a bioweapon booster shot is designed to accomplish what the former two-jab bioweapon, failed to bring to fruition.  These are the expectations of the stakeholders behind the Great Reset, represented by Dr. Fauci, Bill Gates, Klaus Schwab and others too numerous to list.

Listen to Mike Adams as he excoriates the FDA for their endorsement of murderous vaccine atrocities against children.

According to Brian Shilhavy, Editor of Health Impact news, the flames of “COVID fear” are being stoked again, as the Big Pharma Globalists unleash their new plan to increase profits, and exert more tyrannical control over populations by using corporate media and puppet politicians in an attempt to extend the false “COVID pandemic.”

Within just a couple of days after announcing that a “new variant” had been discovered in Africa, Big Pharma has now promised the world that they are rushing to rescue everyone with new drugs and new vaccines to fight this “deadly new variant.”

But Big Pharma is not rushing to rescue anyone.  Reality is that it is rushing to implement provisions which will kill millions of people across the globe.

Listen to Mike Adams as he explains how the cover story of the “Nu” (Omicron) variant plays into accelerating a wave of “vaccine” deaths. Link  According to Adams, the omicron “variant” media hysteria is pure fiction. It’s nothing but a 1984-style Orwellian psychological terrorism operation that has been engineered to keep the populations of the world enslaved and obedient while terrorist governments carry out their global depopulation/genocide programs.

I agree with him on most everything he presents. There is one part of his presentation, however, that I disagree with, and that is where he speaks of the danger from the variant and what we can do in defense against it, when it only exists in the minds of the people that are targeted.

To my mind, based on the evidence thus far, the only way there is any danger from it is when one takes the vaccine in defense of it. That is the purpose and strategy behind the omicron “variant” media hysteria – to develop a climate of fear.  And fear does not come from God, it is a weapon of the devil.

Conclusion

Please share this article in as many ways as possible. There are millions of people who continue to believe that the COVID-19 jabs, as well as the boosters, are a defense against the “COVID” virus and variants. According to all evidence submitted by multiple physicians and scientists, the virus has a 99.8% recovery rate which is lower than the seasonal flu.  If we fall for their lies and consider them to be the truth, the result will be the same as if their lies are the truth – and the “pandemic” will exist, but it will be foisted upon us via their spike protein clot shots.

©J.W. Bryan. All rights reserved.

Covid Lies: Mainstream Media Are The Enemy thumbnail

Covid Lies: Mainstream Media Are The Enemy

/in , , /by

By Graham Ledger

If the media were doing their jobs as so-called journalists, then the government attack on Liberty in the name of COVID would never have happened. Thus, a high school student in California is treated like a pariah by the media as she fights for her religious rights while retaining her ability to simply go to class.

In this edition of The Ledger Report, Graham Ledger speaks with constitutional attorney Paul Jonna about his young client and her struggle to say “no” to the vax and still go to school.

Please subscribe free to The Ledger Report by clicking here: www.GrahamLedger.com

EDITORS NOTE: This The Ledger Report video is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Judicial Watch: New Fauci Agency COVID Records Reveal Information about NIH Research into the Coronavirus thumbnail

Judicial Watch: New Fauci Agency COVID Records Reveal Information about NIH Research into the Coronavirus

/in , , , /by

By Judicial Watch

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it received 221 pages of records from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) which include a grant application for research involving the coronavirus that was submitted in 2018. The grant application appears to describe “gain of function” research involving RNA extractions from bats, experiments on viruses, attempts to develop a chimeric virus and efforts to genetically manipulate the full-length bat SARSr-CoV WIV1 strain molecular clone. 

The documents were obtained by Judicial Watch through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for records of communications, contracts and agreements with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The lawsuit specifically requests records about National Institute of Health (NIH) grants that benefitted the Wuhan Institute of Virology. 

On January 27, 2020, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) official David Morens emailed Chief of Staff Greg Folkers in a heavily redacted thread, writing:

[S]ome background on our support of the Ecohealth group (Peter Daszak et al), which has for years been among the biggest players in coronavirus work, also in collaboration with Ralph Baric, Ian Lipkin and others. [Redacted].

NIAID has been funding Peter’s group for coronavirus work in China for the past 5 years through [grant] R011R01A|110964: “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence.” That’s now been renewed, with a specific focus to identify cohorts of people highly exposed to bats in China, and work out if they’re getting sick from CoVs.… Collaborators include Wuhan Institute of Virology (currently working on the nCoV) and Ralph Baric. The results of the work to date

include:

  • [Redacted]
  • Discovered Swine Acute Diarrheal Syndrome Virus (SADS-CoV) killing >25,000 pigs in Guangdong Province (Published in Nature)
  • Found SARS-related CoVs that can bind to human cells (Published in Nature), and that cause SARS-like disease in humanized mouse models.
  • [Redacted]

Also, prior to the above R01, Peter’s folks worked under an R01 with Eun-Park as Program Officer on viral discovery in bats, and originally identified SARS-CoV as having a likely origin in bats (published in Science).

Folkers forwards the message to Anthony Fauci and others.

In a “Notice of Award” dated July 13, 2020, the NIH increased the amount of NIH money going to Peter Daszak’s firm, EcoHealth Alliance, by $369,819 with a project period that runs from June 1, 2014, through June 30, 2025, for Daszak’s project “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence.”

EcoHealth was to receive $637,980 in each of the years 2019 through 2024 under the grant.

The award’s writers specifically direct funds “for activity with Wuhan Institute of Virology in the amount of $76,301” and “for activity with Institute of Pathogen Biology [located in China] in the amount of $75,301.” Funds also went to the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill. The award’s writers also indicate that research associated with the award was also being conducted at East China Normal University in China and to Duke-NUS Medical School in Singapore. The specialists overseeing the award note that, “This award may include collaborations with and/or between foreign organizations.” The specialists also note that award grantees using “Highly Pathogenic Agents” “may warrant a biocontainment safety facility of BSL3 or higher.” The grantee is also required to report “Any changes in the use of the Agent(s) or Toxin(s) including its restricted experiments that have resulted in a change in the required biocontainment level, and any resultant change in location.” The NIH Grants Management Specialist overseeing the award was Shaun W. Gratton and the NIH Program Official was Erik J. Stemmy. Of the 17 “Senior/Key Personnel” assigned as researchers on the project, seven worked at Chinese institutions.

The site locations in an EcoHealth grant application submitted November 5, 2018, for coronavirus research included EcoHealth Alliance in New York City, the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill, the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and the Institute of Pathogen Biology in Beijing, China. Among the “aims” listed, the applicants write, “We will sequence receptor binding domains (spike proteins) to identify viruses with the highest potential for spillover which we will include in our experimental investigations.” In the third “aim”, they continue “We will use S protein sequence data, infectious clone technology, in vitro and in vivo infection experiments and analysis of receptor binding to test the hypothesis that % divergence thresholds in S protein sequences predict spillover potential.”

In a description of the Wuhan lab, the writers of the application note that, “The Wuhan Institute of Virology is a World Health Organization collaborating center” and had a “long-time (>15 years) partnership with EcoHealth Alliance.”

In his “personal statement” in the grant application, Dr. Peter Daszak writes about his “20+ years of NIH-funded research.” Among his awards, Daszak notes he was a 1999 recipient of the CDC’s “Meritoriouos service award,” had a species of centipedes named after him (“Crytops daszaki”), as well as having a “new parasite species” named after himself (“Isospora daszaki”), and is an elected member of the Kosmos Club in Washington, DC. He also says he’s a member of the U.S. “National Institute of Medicine” which he abbreviates as “NAM.” In his “Contributions to Science,” Daszak notes, “Collaborating with virologists in China, we have isolated and characterized SARS-like CoVs from bats that use the same host cell receptor (AACE-2) as SARS-CoV.”

In a personal biography section of the above grant application, Dr. Shi Zhengli, head of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, notes that one of her ongoing research projects, with a duration of January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2021, and sponsored by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, involves, “Evolution mechanism of the adation [sic] of bat SARS-related coronaviruses to host receptor molecules and the risk of interspecies infection.”

Prof. Ralph Baric of UNC-Chapel Hill also has his biographical information listed in the grant application, and this includes his participation in a 2015 workshop relating to “Trends in Synthetic Biology and Gain of Function and Regulatory Implications”, a 2015 China-US workshop involving “Challenges of Emerging Infections, Laboratory Safety, and Global Health Security,” and participation in a 2014 working group on “Risks and Benefits of Gain of Function Research.” Among Baric’s “major accomplishments” cited was a study involving “reconstruction of civet and bat CoV from in silico sequence, the first reported recovery of recombinant bat viruses, and characterization of host range phenotypes in vitro and in vivo.” Baric writes that “Several CoV infectious cDNA clones are available in the lab, including SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, conventional human and model CoVs, and several bat CoVs with pandemic potential.”

In the “Application for Federal Assistance,” for the project “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence,” the costs for the first year (2019-2020) of the EcoHealth Alliance project application totaled $736,996.

The second year (2020-2021) costs total $712,441.

The third year (2021-2022) costs total $712,441.

The fourth year (2022-2023) costs total $712,441.

The fifth year (2023-2024) costs total $712,441.

However, in July 2020, HHS wrote a letter to EcoHealth Allince regarding funding:

[T]he NIH has received reports that the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), a subrecipient of EcoHealth Alliance under R01AI110964, has been conducting research at its facilities in China that pose serious bio-safety concerns and, as a result, create health and welfare threats to the public in China and other countries, including the United States.

We have concerns that WIV has not satisfied safety requirements under the award, and that EcoHealth Alliance has not satisfied its obligations to monitor the activities of its subrecipient to ensure compliance.

Therefore, effective the date of this letter, July 8, 2020, NIH is suspending all activities … until such time as these concerns have been addressed to NIH’s satisfaction.

[ … ]

Among the budget items in the EcoHealth grant application, was one for supplies for “bats trapping” and “viral transport media.” The total salary, wages and fringe benefits to be paid to the “Senior/Key Person” over the 5-year project totaled $1,118,565.00.

[ … ]

The NIAID funds to be allocated to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for this project for each of the years 2019-2020, 2020-2021, 2021-2022, 2022-2023, and 2023-2024 was $76,301, or a total over five years of $381,505.

The Wuhan Institute of Virology’s role in the project, overseen by Dr. Shi Zhengli would include “running RNA extractions for 1,000 bats per year (two samples per bat: rectal and blood) in each year of the project,” costing $6,214 per year. The Wuhan Institute of Virology also requested “support for in vitro experiments using pseudoviruses carrying the spike proteins … or live viruses in cell lines of different origins, binding affinity assays between the spike proteins … and different cellular receptor molecules, and humanized mice experiments.”

In a discussion of their research to date, the grant applicants wrote, “In collaboration with Ralph Baric (UNC), we used the SARS-CoV reverse genetics system … to generate a chimeric virus with a mouse-adapted SARS-CoV backbone expressing SHC014 S protein with 10% sequence divergence from SARS-DoV S. This chimera replicated in human airway epithelium, using the human ACE2 receptor to enter cells … Thus, SARS-CoVs with diverse variants of SL-CoV S protein without deletions in the RBD can use human ACE2 as receptor for cell entry.” [Emphasis in original]

In a discussion of the rationale of one of the aims of the project, the applicants write, “we aim to expand the known diversity of SARSr-CoVs by over 125 strains, targeting 10-25% S protein divergence that we predict infers high spillover risk and evasion of immune therapeutic and vaccine efficacy.” They continue, “We will … construct chimeric SARSr-CoVs using the WIV1 backbone and these S genes as done previously.” They go on, “Construction of chimeric SARSr-CoV viruses: infectious clones with the S gene of novel SARSr-CoVs and the SARSr-Cov WIV1 genome backbone using the reverse genetic system developed in our previous R01.”

In a section titled “P3CO Research”, the applicants write: “Recognizing the implementation of new gain of function research guidelines under P3CO [Potential Pandemic Pathogen Care and Oversight], SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV are subject to these guidelines, and as such, reverse genetic studies are subject to review … Importantly, we are not proposing to genetically manipulate SARS-CoV over the course of this proposal. However, we are proposing to genetically manipulate the full length bat SARSr-CoV WIV1 strain molecular clone during the course of the proposal, which is not a select agent, has not been shown to cause human infections, and has not been shown to be transmissible between humans.” [Emphasis in original]

In an October 31, 2018, letter from the director of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, Dr. Yangyi Wang, to Peter Daszak, president of EcoHealth Alliance, requesting permission to take part in the NIAID funded project, he tells Daszak:

Understanding and preventing exposure and transmission of zoonotic diseases from wildlife to humans remains a high priority for prevention of pandemics. In our discussion with EcoHealth Alliance, we have agreed to participate in activities that will strengthen the ability of China and other countries in the region to respond to epidemic disease outbreaks – particularly those of animal origin. To assist in this study, we will provide participating laboratories in China with human samples both new and archived and support research in bat coronaviruses.

We at Wuhan Institute of Virology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, look forward to our continued collaborations with the EcoHealth Alliance team and working further on this worthwhile study.

“These records are proof positive that US tax dollars were dishonestly used by Fauci’s agency to fund ‘gain of function’ coronavirus research,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

In August, Judicial Watch obtained records from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) which include an “urgent for Dr. Fauci” email chain which cites ties between the Wuhan lab and the taxpayer-funded EcoHealth Alliance. The government emails also report that the foundation of U.S. billionaire Bill Gates worked closely with the Chinese government to pave the way for Chinese-produced medications to be sold outside China and help “raise China’s voice of governance by placing representatives from China on important international counsels as high level commitment from China.”

In July, Judicial Watch obtained records from NIAID officials in connection with the Wuhan Institute of Virology revealing significant collaborations and funding that began in 2014. The records revealed that NIAID gave nine China-related grants to EcoHealth Alliance to research coronavirus emergence in bats and was the NIH’s top issuer of grants to the Wuhan lab itself.

In June, Judicial Watch announced that it filed Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits against the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and the State Department for information on the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the origins of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Also in June, Judicial Watch obtained records from HHS revealing that from 2014 to 2019, $826,277 was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research by the NIAID. 

In March, Judicial Watch publicly released emails and other records of Fauci and Dr. H. Clifford Lane from HHS showing that NIH officials tailored confidentiality forms to China’s terms and that the WHO conducted an unreleased, “strictly confidential” COVID-19 epidemiological analysis in January 2020. Additionally, the emails reveal an independent journalist in China pointing out the inconsistent COVID numbers in China to NIH’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases’ Deputy Director for Clinical Research and Special Projects Lane.

In October 2020, Judicial Watch uncovered emails showing a WHO entity pushing for a press release, approved by Fauci, “especially” supporting China’s COVID-19 response.

RELATED ARTICLE: Los Angeles Unified School District Fires 400+ Employees Who Haven’t Been Vaccinated

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

Teacher’s Union Official’s Facebook Post Says People With Religious Vaccine Exemptions Deserve To Die thumbnail

Teacher’s Union Official’s Facebook Post Says People With Religious Vaccine Exemptions Deserve To Die

/in , , , , /by

By The Daily Caller

Suggests GOP Commit Mass Murder

A National Education Association (NEA) Board of Directors member and English teacher at a Pennsylvania high school posted to Facebook that she thought unvaccinated individuals with religious exemptions deserved to die, according to a screenshot of the post obtained by the social media account Libs of Tik Tok.

Mollie Paige Mumau took to Facebook to condemn all individuals who have not been vaccinated due to religious exemptions, accusing this group of “hiding behind religious exemptions because they don’t want anybody to tell them what to do,” according to a screenshot of her post. Mumau said religious exemptions to the COVID-19 vaccine are “such BS” because “people tell you what to do all the time and you do it.”

Mumau appeared to refer to a specific person in her comment, writing “he and his ilk deserve whatever comes their way, including losing jobs, getting sick, and perhaps dying from this virus. But in the meantime, he’s going to put all the people around him in danger.”

Pennsylvania teacher writes on FB that people who have religious exemptions should die from the virus or be shot pic.twitter.com/vF28M2QcP4

— Libs of Tik Tok (@libsoftiktok) December 6, 2021

“I don’t know why the GOP doesn’t just take those guns they profess to love so much and just start shooting all of their constituents who think this way,” Mumau wrote. “It would be quicker and ultimately safer than putting me and my friends and family at risk.”

General McLane School District (GMSD) confirmed to the Daily Caller News Foundation that it does employ a woman named Mollie Mumau at General McLane High School, according to Sarah Grabski, director of communications and administrative services for GMSD. Grabski said the district could not legally discuss any personnel actions right now but that Mumau is not currently in its buildings.

“The district is aware of a potentially inappropriate social media comment by a staff member,” GMSD said. “The district will investigate the matter and act accordingly. In all situations, the district’s utmost concern is the safety of our students and staff.”

The NEA did not respond to the DCNF’s request for comment.

COLUMN BY

KENDALL TIETZ

Education reporter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Teachers, Parents In Fairfax County Devise Plan To Combat ‘Phantom Problem’ Of Critical Race Theory

Parent Claims Someone At Obama Global Prep Academy Vaccinated Her 13-Year-Old Without Permission

EXCLUSIVE: Child Tax Credit Is Driving Americans Toward Entrepreneurship, Has Little Effect On Workforce

REPORT: 113 Firefighters Taken Off Duty Without Pay Over Vaccine Mandate

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller News column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Where Are the Government COVID Vaccine Safety Studies? thumbnail

Where Are the Government COVID Vaccine Safety Studies?

/in , , , , /by

By Save America Foundation

Yesterday I reported to you the number of adverse reaction reports filed about COVID vaccines in the U.S. has topped 900,000 and the number of deaths shortly following COVID vaccinations now exceeds 19,000, according to official government numbers.  Today, we look at what happened in the first 90 days after the government approved the Pfizer vaccine and at additional evidence that’s come in regarding the withholding of information by Pfizer before its vaccine was approved.  Both of these add urgency to the question: Has the government conducted follow-up COVID vaccine safety studies and, if not, why not?

We start with the fact the FDA wanted to hide its records about adverse reactions which occurred in the early days after the COVID vaccines were approved.  A court disagreed, and the first batch of records has been released, with more to come.  One record already released is a smoking gun.  It’s entitled “Cumulative Analysis of Post-Authorization Adverse Event Reports”.  [available here]  This document shows Pfizer received 42,000 adverse reaction reports, including 1,223 deaths in the first 90 days of vaccine use, originating from several countries.  The most frequently reported adverse reaction was nervous system disorders.  Adverse reaction “(r)eports are submitted voluntarily, and the magnitude of underreporting is unknown,” the document notes (p. 5).  This puts the nail in the coffin of the argument made by my critics that adverse reactions are being over-reported.  The document goes on to discuss additional findings that three times as many women as men were injured, the Pfizer vaccine can make COVID symptoms worse, and there were a number of miscarriages and premature births which occurred in the period under consideration.

Despite all this, the Pfizer vaccine remains in use today and the government keeps pushing the phony narrative the vaccines are ‘safe and effective’ without ever discussing the undeniable risks.  The government, as far as I can tell, has not performed follow-up safety studies as it is supposed to do when a problem with a vaccine becomes apparent.

Let’s turn, now, to the period before the vaccines were approved.   Pfizer originally said publicly 15 people died during its COVID vaccine trials out of 22,000 who were vaccinated.  But it submitted a report to the FDA showing the number was actually 21, not 15.  Even though most died from other causes, the discrepancy means deaths linked to Pfizer’s vaccine were 24 percent higher among those vaccinated during the trial than Pfizer was publicly letting on.

That’s significant given the fact more than 19,000 deaths associated with COVID vaccines have occurred since in the U.S. alone.

As you may recall, a whistleblower made even more serious allegations about Pfizer’s trial data last month.  The British medical journal BMJ published a whistleblower account claiming, “the company falsified data, unblinded patients, employed inadequately trained vaccinators, and was slow to follow up on adverse events reported in Pfizer’s pivotal phase III trial.”

Others have accused government officials of engaging in conspiracy and criminal cover-up.  My point is that the astoundingly high number of adverse reaction reports and deaths – completely unprecedented in 30 years of vaccine injury reporting – should have prompted government officials to conduct follow-up safety studies on these vaccines, as indicated in the second half of the VAERS disclaimer.  To the best of my knowledge, no such studies have been conducted.  I have filed a Freedom of Information Act request to find out for sure.  I also want to know if the government has ever reached a decision whether to conduct such studies and I want to know the reasons for the decision, if any was made.  The government has essentially asked for the rest of December to respond to my request and I will start pressing for answers after the first of the year.

The government rushed into COVID vaccines at “warp speed”. Normal approval processes and safety protocols were not followed. It should come as no surprise there are big problems with these vaccines. We the People should know just how big these problems are before we’re tempted to support politicians who want to rush into vaccines in future pandemics.

Visit The Daily Skirmish

©Fred Brownbill. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

People Who Get Johnson & Johnson Vaccine at Elevated Risk of Guillain-Barré Syndrome: Study

Report: Thousands of Canadians Died Due to Delayed Care during COVID-19

RELATED VIDEO: NEW NYC Vaccine Mandate: 2 Insane Facts (EXPOSED)

Real Policy or Political Theatre? thumbnail

Real Policy or Political Theatre?

/in , , , , , , /by

By Neland Nobel

Many people on the political Left don’t seem to understand the deep skepticism with which many Conservatives view government health policy. They believe Conservatives are anti-science.

In the last few days, we have been provided a very good example of what is wrong with government policy and it is worthwhile reviewing while many of these details are fresh in our minds.

You might recall just a little more than a week ago, a new Covid variant was identified in South Africa. People on the ground suggested while infectious, it was relatively mild.

Just the news of the new discovery caused markets around the world to gyrate? Why? Was it fear of the new variant or fear of another governmental panic that would damage commerce?

Evidence suggests the latter and rather quickly the Biden Administration stoked those fears by banning travel from a half dozen countries in Southern Africa, including some countries that have not identified any cases within their borders.

Previously the Biden Administration had accused similar bans by President Trump as racist, but apparently, Democrats cannot be held to the same standard.

Moreover, if it is true that travelers can spread the new variant, what about the uncontrolled flow of “migrants” that pour into the U.S. daily, and then are transported all over the country by our own government? Can we take seriously at all their policy on banning travel when our own government actually imports and then distributes, unvetted and unexamined people from Afghanistan and all over the world that come through our Southern border?

This is the kind of contradiction that leaves the head spinning. And one need not be a doctor to see it. It just makes no logical sense.

The World Health Organization has now identified that the Omicron variant has been found in 38 countries and so far, not one death has been reported from those infected.

The CDC has identified the variant now in 15 states.

If the virus is already so widespread, what use is the ban on just six countries, some of which are very lightly populated like Namibia and Botswana?

Why such a severe reaction when no deaths have been reported?

Again, the reaction of the Biden Administration just makes no logical sense.

Adding further insult to logic, on December 3, 2021, Mexican officials announced Omicron was found in Mexico.

Where do you think more “travelers” will likely come from, our long open border with a highly populated contiguous neighbor, Mexico, or the massive influx of Namibians?

There appears no justification for travel bans on these six countries in Africa, given the evidence. But like so many instances, the policy is not grounded in logic or facts but is made for reasons of political theatre. And as in the past, once the government makes a bad decision, they are reticent to reverse course even when the evidence shows they are clearly wrong. To admit error is to admit confusion and political expediency. The show must go on.

The Biden Administration is sagging in the polls on almost all fronts but has maintained some popularity because of the perception they were taking on Covid in a more effective way than did Mr. Trump. Therefore, Biden tends to act first and think later, a sure-fire way to destroy credibility.

There are countless examples of stupid policies. One of my other favorites was the one where you had to wear a mask when entering a restaurant. For the 20 seconds necessary to get to your table, the mask provided “protection.” You then removed your mask and talk loudly to several people close by for about an hour. Then after this hour of viral transmission, you put the mask back on to “protect” the public for the 20 seconds you need to get out the door.

That masking policy made no sense and neither does the travel ban against Africans.

Every time the government behaves this way, its credibility with the public sinks. No, it is not because Conservatives don’t believe in science. Rather it is that government policy often makes no sense, is stupid and contradictory, and we have all figured out it is political theatre.

These repeated ventures into nonsense are not without a cost. When the time comes, that we might need to believe the government, it may be impossible to mobilize the American people because of deep and deserved cynicism.

After all, men can get pregnant, Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, Trump was a tool of the Russians, Jeffrey Epstein hung himself, and banning travel from six African countries can stop the spread of Omicron.

If you believe any of that, there is a bridge in Brooklyn that is for sale. Interested?

VIDEO: War Declared Against New Yorkers! How To Fight Back! thumbnail

VIDEO: War Declared Against New Yorkers! How To Fight Back!

/in , , , /by

By Graham Ledger

VIDEO: War Declared Against New Yorkers! How To Fight Back! – Dr. Rich Swier

Copyright © 2021 DrRichSwier.com LLC. A Florida Cooperation. All rights reserved. The DrRichSwier.com is a not-for-profit news forum for intelligent Conservative commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own. Republishing of columns on this website requires the permission of both the author and editor. For more information contact: drswier@gmail.com.

Vaccines are NOT safe and effective! thumbnail

Vaccines are NOT safe and effective!

/in , , , /by

By Save America Foundation

It’s only been two weeks since I last reported to you on COVID vaccine injuries and deaths, but there’s a lot going on.

Since my last report, the number of adverse reaction reports filed about COVID vaccines in the U.S. has topped 900,000 and the number of deaths shortly following COVID vaccination now exceeds 19,000, according to official government numbers.  The adverse reactions and deaths associated with COVID vaccines dwarf all other vaccines combined since the vaccine injury reporting system began 30 years ago.  The numbers for prion brain diseases and unborn baby deaths follow the same pattern.  But the COVID vaccines are ‘safe and effective’, right?  That’s what your government wants you to believe.  What do you think, after hearing these numbers?  Think there might be a problem here?

If numbers don’t grab you, real stories about what happened to real people might.  A Texas man died from heart problems shortly after being forced to take the Moderna vaccine to stay eligible for a lung transplant.  A 13-year-old Canadian girl’s heart stopped after getting the vaccine, leaving her in critical condition.  A former Australian pro basketball player suffered pericarditis heart problems after getting the second dose of the Pfizer vaccine.

The government, apparently, refuses to do the indicated safety studies, but other research is starting to come in.  Research scientists found a possible explanation for why the Astra Zeneca COVID vaccine may cause blood clots.  They published their findings in a scientific journal.

Twitter labeled the American Heart Association website unsafe after the Association published a report linking COVID vaccines to heart inflammation.  Watch out, or the government’s narrative enforcers like Twitter will break your kneecaps if you dare go against the narrative.   At least the American Heart Association’s research got published.  Similar research findings have been completely suppressed.

Meanwhile in Europe, where the vaccine injury numbers are just as bad, hundreds attended a ‘March of the Dead’ in Parma, Italy to mourn the loss of loved ones they believe were killed by COVID vaccines.  A similar vigil was held in South Korea.

But don’t worry, the vaccines are ‘safe and effective’.  I know because my government told me so.

If you believe that, ask yourself why the government has established a compensation fund for injuries and death resulting from COVID vaccines.  Kind of blows up the narrative, doesn’t it?  There haven’t been any payouts yet, but liability is continuing to mount as the adverse reaction and death numbers grow by the day.  It looks like 40,000 Americans are already permanently disabled by COVID vaccines.  How much is that gonna cost and who’s gonna pay?  You can be a sheep and not question your government, but you can’t do it for free, there’s a price to pay.

Visit The Daily Skirmish

©Fred Brownbill. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: COVID-19 and the Ghosts of Europe’s Past

RELATED TWEET:

Mandating Covid Vaccines for Children is Insane.https://t.co/HgvDeiexyn

— Buck Sexton (@BuckSexton) December 7, 2021

Tyranny with a Needle thumbnail

Tyranny with a Needle

/in , , , , , , /by

By Kelleigh Nelson

“A strict observance of the written laws is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of a higher obligation…To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to written law would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus, absurdly sacrificing the ends to the means.” – Thomas Jefferson, Letter to J.B. Colvin, September 20, 1780

“If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent, we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.” – George Washington

“The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure, when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them.” – Patrick Henry

“Tyranny is tyranny, no matter what its form; the free man will resist it if his courage serves.” – Judge Learned Hand

Our only weapon is the truth and, in the end, the truth must always defeat the lie. Ten years ago, we would have been shocked and outraged by the very idea of censorship, but I’m afraid we’ve all become acclimated to cruelty and injustice by being exposed to it in steadily increasing doses throughout the years.

Intolerable wrongs we accept now as a matter of course, would have provoked marches in the streets and calls for new elections only a few years ago.  I cannot accept injustice any more now than I did as a teenager with my mother constantly educating me on the evils that could befall America. Fear laden propaganda has become steadily more oppressive where citizens are tempted to believe whatever our Pravda media and medical hierarchy tell them.

How quickly medical staff bowed to the “protocols for Covid patients,” when so many of the tests were false positives, many died unnecessarily and early treatment was ignored. That didn’t stop hospitals, corporations and schools from genuflecting to the Covid jab mandates.  It was never about life saving treatment, it was about the jab.

America’s Health Care Decline

If you haven’t purchased a copy of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s book, The Real Anthony Fauci, you are missing a great and informative read on a vile and odious man who has done nothing to improve America’s health care and is an unelected autocratic leader.  Fauci is a combination of Hitler, Mengele and Goebbels, the evil leader, doctor and propagandist.

Robert Kennedy states, “When Dr. Fauci took office, America was still ranked among the world’s healthiest populations. An August 2021 study by the Commonwealth Fund ranked America’s health care system dead last among industrialized nations, with the highest infant mortality and the lowest life expectancy.  ‘If health care were an Olympic sport, the US might not qualify in a competition with other high-income nations,’ laments the study’s lead author, Eric Schneider, who serves as Senior Vice President for Policy and Research at the Commonwealth Fund.”

“Following WWII, life expectancy in the US climbed for five decades, making Americans among the longest-lived people in the developed world.  IQ also grew steadily by three points each decade since 1900.  But as Tony Fauci spent the 1990s expanding the pharmaceutical and chemical paradigm, instead of public health, the pace of both longevity and intelligence slowed.  The life expectancy decrease widened the gap between the US and its peers to nearly five years, and American children have lost seven IQ points since 2000.”

Congress had specifically charged Dr. Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) to investigate and prevent certain illnesses within the American public.  Instead, allergies, autoimmune and chronic illnesses have mushroomed to afflict 54 percent of children, up from 12.8 percent when Fauci took over NIAID in 1984.

People from every nation would journey to America to receive the finest in health care worldwide.  That is no longer true.

Drs. Fauci, Birx and Redfield were chosen by VP Michael Pence, the Trojan Horse within the Trump administration. Trump chose Pence to head the Covid Task Force, so the buck stops with our 45th President.  It took Pence’s January 6th failure to save the Trump presidency and the Republic before our favorite 21st century president realized the deep state neo-con he had chosen stabbed him in the back, and the Republic in the heart.

Coverup to Catastrophe

People are being damaged every day via Covid inoculations and Covid doesn’t even exist anymore.  Many of the vaxxed who carry 251 to 1000 of the viral loads in their nasal and oral pathways are spreading the enhanced variants.

The lie is that the uninoculated are spreading the virus!  No, it’s the twice or thrice jabbed who are spreading illness and death. Look at the highly inoculated states compared to the lower jabbed states…it’s obvious.  There are more people sick and dying who have been vaxxed than those who have abstained.  (Michael Yon calls us “pure bloods.”)  According to the New York Times, the least vaccinated states of West Virginia, Idaho, Wyoming, Mississippi and Alabama are seeing a fall in case numbers.

Attorney Aaron Siri has published an initial report addressing information he demanded and received via civil lawsuit from the Federal Drug Administration (FDA). Those subpoenaed FDA files prove they knew the Pfizer vax has dangerous side effects.

That hasn’t stopped our Pravda media from making demands of their illegitimate leader.  CNBC host Jim Cramer called on President Joe Biden to not only require forced vaccination of all Americans, but he also wants the military to enforce it!  Cramer adds that in order to put an end to this “pandemic,” the federal government needs to require vaccines, including booster shots, for everyone in America by, say, January 1st.”

On Steve Bannon’s November 26th show, Peter Navarro said, “There has to be an end immediately to the universal vax policy.  It’s very clear and Dr. Malone can talk about the science of this, and that we are running the risk of creating vaccine resistant mutations. They are proliferating. That could wind up doing great harm to people around the world who, ironically, are vaccinated.  That policy is not working.  The Malone/Navarro doctrine is to vaccinate only the most vulnerable targets. Always remember that we are not really vaccinating people, that is not a vaccination.”

Peter Navarro and Dr. Robert Malone are still pushing this vax for the “most vulnerable.”  Who are they?  The elderly, often referred to as “useless eaters” by the proponents of depopulation and genocide, are most likely to have deleterious side effects from the jab.

Bill Gates believes we must reduce the population of the world by at least a billion people and this will be done by abortion and vaccine euthanasia, whereas United Nations Agenda 21/30 believes the world population must be reduced by 85 percent.  Most of their vaccination program had disastrous results, causing the very illness, polio for example in India, and sterilizing young women in Kenya with modified tetanus vaccines. Many of the children died. Many of the programs were carried out with the backing of the World Health Organization (WHO) and, yes, the UN Agency responsible for the Protection of Children, UNICEF.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. is calling for “Investigations into the ‘Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation’ for Medical Malpractice and Crimes Against Humanity.” Also see, Coronavirus – No Vaccine Is Needed to Cure It.

All Roads Lead to the Vaccine

There are places in Southeast Asia and Europe where the groundwork is being laid for compulsory vaccination, where you’ll be forcibly jabbed.  That is how bad the stakeholders want vaccination.  The stakeholders are Pfizer, Moderna, J&J, AstraZeneca, the CDC, NIH, FDA, AMA, the White House, Gates Foundation and WHO.  We’ve never had this before, this massive propaganda program.

It’s a “needle in every arm,” as Dr. Peter McCullough has explained in many interviews.  As for Covid recovered patients, why would these stakeholders want a needle in every arm when recovered have God’s natural immunity?

Only two months of investigations were done for these jabs that could give you everything from a sore arm to death.  They take your information, get you to sign a release and you are now in a database.

Recent visits to two new hand surgeons, since my previous surgeon retired early, have let me know that they are all about the protocols to save their sorry backsides, and they refuse to believe in God’s natural immunity. They tell me I should get the vax despite recovery from C-19 and verified antibodies.  I have been in the home of a friend who is 48 and has Delta and was very sick.  I am not worried that I will catch anything.

North Carolina just passed a law that 12-year-old youngsters can make their own decisions on the vax, and it could be their fatal decision. In America and in Europe, thousands die on days one, two, and three after the vaccine.  This is despotic tyranny.

Why are we pushing this in a way where people’s jobs, education and livelihood decide on a position that is potentially fatal?  So many parents want their children to go to college this year, but they don’t want them forced into taking an experimental jab that could kill or cripple them.  The internet is full of these cases; blood clots, strokes, immediate death, pericarditis and myocarditis to name just a few.  Dr. Peter McCullough says that he cannot recommend this injection because it has passed all thresholds to being a safe product.  It’s not just Johnson and Johnson, in fact, more of the safety events have occurred with Pfizer and Moderna.

There are now papers by prominent worldwide scientists calling for a halt in the program. There are prominent virologists, including Nobel Prize winners who have said, “If we vax to the long-gone Wuhan Covid spike protein, it’s going to grow super bugs that will really wipe out populations.” Dr. Michael Yeadon, former top scientist and VP at Pfizer has said, “You are 50 times more likely to die of the vax than of Covid.”

I believe this is what is wanted by the stakeholders…depopulation via genocide and vaccine euthanasia.

Dr. Peter McCullough believes indiscriminate vaccination is a horrendous bioweapon that has been thrust onto the public and will cause great personal harm which it already has accomplished.

VAERS

Only one percent of the vaccine death and adverse events are reported on the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) in America.  Why?  It takes a half hour to fill out the report and at the end of every page it says, “Warning, federal offense and severe fines and penalties if falsified reports.”

People are talking to each other; they know the vaccines are not safe and now they want children without parental oversight to have these jabs! And get this…now they want to be in the church!  If your church promotes this, run to the nearest exit!

Whitney Webb, a professional writer, researcher and journalist said that this is what globalists have been waiting for.  Whitney believes they’re waiting for a way of marking people.  When you get a vaccine, you’re marked in the database and this can be used for trade, commerce, behavior modification. Dr. McCullough says you can see it in Dallas where they’ve announced that you can’t go to a Dallas Mavericks game unless you’re vaccinated.

Colleges today are announcing they’re not giving any credits even to natural God given immunity.  And it goes against all previous science.  Have you had chicken pox, measles, mumps, whooping cough?  You’re immune for life!  Every scientist in the world knows that natural immunity is way better than the vax immunity.  Why is faulty vax immunity the priority and natural immunity doesn’t count?

Dr. McCullough agrees with Whitney Webb and believes the vax is a way of marking people, similar to communist China’s social credit system.  The vax is just the starter, they’re already prepping people for numerous boosters.  McCullough asks, “What product is there that is indemnified, where if something goes wrong, you have no recourse?”  When a pregnant woman gets vaccinated, she has no maternal fetal rights.   Something happens to her baby and she’s out of luck?  This is extraordinary what Americans are doing and accepting.

As of December 4th, 2021, 2,809 dead babies were reported in VAERS following Covid shots.  New documents prove Pfizer, the FDA, and the CDC knew the shots were not safe for pregnant women.

The Nuremberg Code was enacted to stop sadistic human medical experimentation from ever happening again, but individual European states and now the entire E.U. are ready to scrap the code.

A Nuremberg 2.0 trial against world leaders for crimes against humanity has kicked off in Poland.  Attorneys, doctors and researchers are joining together and are willing to go into an international court and testify about the genocidal efforts of those who launched the viral bioweapon and the death shots.  Let us hope and pray that this proves successful for the survival of humanity.

Vaccine Safety Data

Not just our older vaccines, but newer vaccines like shingles, Hepatitis B, Meningococcal vaccines demand a minimum of two years of safety data codified into regulatory rules for the manufacturers.  That was all thrown out for the Covid vax and it was two-month “warp speed.”  The idea that we could vaccinate people who were not even tested in the trials has never been done before.  The very first pregnant woman vaxxed in the US was done without any knowledge of safety or efficacy.

The argument was that Covid was a very bad illness and 600K people died so everyone needs the jab and they need it now.  But as Dr. McCullough and other outspoken and honest physicians and scientists have stated, 85% of those people could have been saved with early home treatments which were actively suppressed and quashed by the stakeholders and Pravda media.  Let’s see the “safety” of these vaccines, because there is none being shown!  Americans never received weekly updates on vaccine safety from federal officials.  The lack of these two things are the largest examples of medical malfeasance, wrongdoing by those in authority, in all medical regulatory history.

There were no updates on treatment, no promotion of early treatment to reduce hospitalization and death, and now when we release the vaccine, why are there no safety updates, why are there no attempts for risk mitigation in terms of making the vaccine program safer?

Dr. McCullough stated, “Never, out of the box, is a brand-new technology tried on a pregnant woman.  We know this vax technology produces the dangerous spike protein. The Wuhan spike protein, the spicule on the ball of the virus itself which damages blood vessels and causes blood clotting, and all of them do, we would never unleash that into a pregnant woman’s body.  Something is very wrong with what’s going on.  What’s going on now in the world, these are examples, clear cut examples, of wrong doing, that is at such a high level.  The group think is in the wrong direction in such a consistent and overwhelming way that people are being harmed in an extraordinary fashion.”

Conclusion

The stakeholders have continually promoted Sars-coV-2 as something far worse than it is to push everyone into accepting the Covid inoculations. Loneliness and lockdowns actually did more damage, but was the impetus to “a needle in every arm.”  Early treatment was the key, but an early treatment meant there was no need for a “vaccine.” Treatment was quashed while thousands needlessly died, and Americans were told normalcy would only return with the “warp speed” vax. The fear propaganda worked and Pravda media promoted mass “vaccination.”

Vaxxing the elderly and infirm came first, then pregnant women, and the unborn died in record numbers.  Next were injections for the Covid recovered.  Now they’re on to our children and soon to our babies.  How many have to die before this evil is stopped?  The limit to shut down a vax program is 25 to 50 deaths as we saw with the swine flu in 1976.  We have lost thousands in America alone.  Scroll through the VAERS summary for Covid jabs, remembering this is only one percent of reported deaths or adverse effects.

In America, with about 100 million receiving the Covid jab, this is far and away the most lethal, toxic, biologic agent ever injected into a human body in American history and it’s going strong.  There is no mention of safety by our officials, with wild enthusiasm by our hospitals and hospital administrators, with doctors supporting it, many of whom are saying they won’t see patients in offices if they’re not jabbed.

It has never been about the virus; it has always been about the vaccine.

©Kelleigh Nelson. All rights reserved.

RELATED TWEET:

Mandating Covid Vaccines for Children is Insane.https://t.co/HgvDeiexyn

— Buck Sexton (@BuckSexton) December 7, 2021

Rabbi Weissman: ‘How I Was Saved From the COVID Cult.’ thumbnail

Rabbi Weissman: ‘How I Was Saved From the COVID Cult.’

/in , , , /by

By Jamie Glazov

Rabbi Weissman: ‘How I Was Saved From the COVID Cult.’ – Dr. Rich Swier

Copyright © 2021 DrRichSwier.com LLC. A Florida Cooperation. All rights reserved. The DrRichSwier.com is a not-for-profit news forum for intelligent Conservative commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own. Republishing of columns on this website requires the permission of both the author and editor. For more information contact: drswier@gmail.com.

Dobbs V. Jackson: An Easy Opinion thumbnail

Dobbs V. Jackson: An Easy Opinion

/in , , , , , /by

By George Liebmann

The rejection of a “compelling state interest” test will remove abortion from national politics.

A simple Baltimore lawyer here tenders a short opinion to dispose of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the abortion case from Mississippi in oral arguments before the Supreme Court today.

This case presents the question: “Whether all pre-viability prohibitions on elective abortions are unconstitutional.” It involves a limitation of abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy. Similar limitations are found rational in many nations including France and Germany with their 12-week cutoff point. In Roe v. Wade, we said that states could limit second-trimester abortions if there was a rational basis to do so, but in the companion case of Doe v. Bolton, decided on the same day, we effectively applied a “compelling state interest” test.

We can dispose of this case by overruling Doe v. Bolton and Casey, but the avoidance of further controversy and confusion makes it desirable that we dispose of Roe also, thus withdrawing the Court from an area of public policy that we should not have entered in the first place and allowing further discussion to be divorced from claims of absolute right not inducing tolerance.

Five tests are conventionally used to justify overrulings: quality of reasoning (ever-shifting in this case); workability (belied by the constant flow of litigation over the “undue burden” test); inconsistency with prior law (patent in light of state legislation as of 1973); reliance (scarcely present, despite Casey, in view of Casey’s concession that “reproductive planning could take almost immediate account of any sudden restoration of state authority to ban abortions,” a conclusion reinforced by the two-thirds drop in births to teenagers following the withdrawal of 18 years of guaranteed AFDC payments by the Welfare Reform Act of 1996); and finally, and most importantly, as stated in Casey, “whether Roe’s premises of fact have so far changed to render its central holding irrelevant or unjustifiable” and whether an overruling decision would provide “a response to facts that the country would understand but which the court of an earlier day as its own declarations disclosed had not been able to perceive.”

These standards for overruling are now more than fully met. The Roe court did not even consider the potential effect of abortion-on-demand on sexual mores, unwanted pregnancies, and births out of wedlock. It recognized that anti-abortion statute might be the “product of a Victorian social concern to discourage illicit sexual conduct” but declared “Texas does not advance this justification in the present cases and it appears that no court or commentator has taken the argument seriously. The appellants and amici contend moreover that this is not a proper state purpose at all.” So much for the mostly religious lawgivers memorialized in the frieze at the top of the Supreme Court building and Justice Holmes’ observation that “the law is the external deposit of our moral life.”

It is nonetheless the duty of the Court to consider not only the state’s actual arguments but those it might have made, lest the inadequacies of a single lawyer deform the Constitution. As stated in Flemming v. Nestor, 363 U.S.603 (1960): “we cannot with confidence reject all those alternatives which imaginativeness might bring to mind save that one which might require invalidation of the statute.”

Instead, the Roe court, excluding the possible effect of its decision on promiscuous sexual behavior and increased pregnancies and births out of wedlock, made opposite assumptions. It alluded to “concerns about population growth, pollution, poverty, and racial overtones.” The Second Circuit, invalidating a Connecticut statute, postulated that “population growth must be restricted not enhanced and thus the state interest in a pro-natalist statute such as this is limited,” citing the Rockefeller Commission report on “Population Growth and the American Future” (1971).

Subsequent research by the present secretary of the Treasury, Janet Yellen, and her Nobel-prize-winning economist husband, George Akerlof, which appeared in the Quarterly Journal of Economics and the Brookings Review in 1996, made clear that Roe had dynamic effects on American society, legitimating free love and the hookup culture by providing what looked like an assured back-up to birth control pills.

Thus the percentage of births to unwed mothers increased from 5.7 percent in 1970, when birth control pills were already in wide use, to 29 percent in 2018. Among black Americans, whose out of wedlock births were of great concern to “birth controllers,” the percentage of births out of wedlock increased from 38 percent in 1970 to 71 percent in 2018. Similarly, the “deal with it” syndrome that abortion-on-demand produced among consorts caused the percentages of marriages to those pregnant out of wedlock (“shotgun weddings”) to fall from 43 percent in 1970 to 9 percent in 2018.

“Inability to provide for the nurture and care of the infant is a cruelty to the child and an anguish to the parent,” the well-intentioned Justice Harlan stated in concurring in Roe. But after 50 years, there is much more such cruelty and anguish.

This Court, like the president and Congress, is subject to checks and balances. The confirmation process is one of these and can be given effect after 48 years. Several decisions have been overruled after long periods, including Lochner v. New York (work hours) after 50 years; Adkins v. Children’s Hospital (minimum wage) after 14 years; Plessy v. Ferguson (segregation) after 58 years; Bowers v. Hardwick (sodomy) after 18 years; Baker v. Nelson (homosexual marriage) after 43 years; and Korematsu v. United States (racial distinctions) after 74 years.

The public will now understand what the Court did not in Casey when it, echoing Justice Wayne’s concurring opinion in Dred Scott, called “the contending sides to end their division by accepting a common mandate rooted in the Constitution.” Dred Scott failed because the fugitive slave provisions of the Constitution and the Compromise of 1850 rendered Northern states complicit in the permissiveness of the South. Casey failed for the same reason, by imposing coastal rules on “flyover” country.

Our decision reversing the Fifth Circuit judgment is of little direct consequence. Some four percent of abortions per year are performed after the 15th week, many in states that will continue to have liberal abortion laws. But our decision will send a powerful message to young women and their consorts that abortion is no longer a sure thing and that they should choose sexual partners more carefully than at present. The rejection of a “compelling state interest” test will remove abortion from national politics as in Western Europe and will restore the American judiciary to what Aristotle and Aquinas regarded as judges’ proper function: “corrective justice” vindicating agreed settlements, not “distributive justice” changing agreed rules, which is the prerogative of the ruler in authoritarian states and the legislatures in democratic ones.

In Ferguson v. Skrupa, 372 U.S. 726 (1963), Mr. Justice Black stated for a unanimous court: “We emphatically refuse to go back to the time when courts used the Due Process clause ‘to strike down state laws, regulatory of business and industrial conditions, because they may be unwise, improvident, or out of harmony with a particular school of thought.’” To “business and industrial” we add “social,” thus definitively repudiating Dred Scott, the first adventure in substantive due process. We justify this overruling decision not merely by the prolix five tests of the legal academy, but in the words of Fiorello La Guardia: “When we make a mistake, it’s a beaut.”

The judgment is reversed.

*****

This article was published on December 1, 2021, and is reproduced with permission from The American Conservative.

Joe Manchin Does It Again thumbnail

Joe Manchin Does It Again

/in , , , , , /by

By Rick Moran

Senator Joe Manchin announced he would join all 50 Republicans in the Senate in voting for a resolution of disapproval that would roll back the OSHA vaccine mandate.

The Congressional Review Act (CRA) allows for a majority of Congress to disapprove of any agency rule. Since the CRA vote is in the form of a resolution, only a simple majority is needed in the Senate to pass it.

The CRA would still have to be approved in the House where several Democrats have said they’re considering voting for it. And even if it’s passed by both chambers, Biden would almost certainly veto it.

But it would be a powerful statement to make prior to a Supreme Court ruling on the case.

“Let me be clear, I do not support any government vaccine mandate on private businesses. That’s why I have cosponsored and will strongly support a bill to overturn the federal government vaccine mandate for private businesses,” Manchin said in a statement.

“I have long said we should incentivize, not penalize, private employers whose responsibility it is to protect their employees from COVID-19,” he added.

Manchin had an opportunity to eliminate the mandate when Senate Republicans were able to get Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer to allow a stand-alone vote on an amendment that would defund the OSHA mandate.

But Manchin chose to vote against it, knowing that the CRA vote would be held next week.

*****

Continue reading this article, published December 3, 2021 at PJ Media.

The Geneva Conventions War With Forced Vaccines thumbnail

The Geneva Conventions War With Forced Vaccines

/in , , , , , , , /by

By Rod Thomson

Combining various international treaties since its inception in 1864, the Geneva Conventions were originally intended for, and still stand as, protections for soldiers and civilians in wartime. So, with the vaccines for COVID being discussed as a possible crime against humanity under the Nuremberg Code, which falls under the Geneva Conventions, the question arises: Are we at war? 

During what became known as “The Doctors’ Trial” after WWII, concerns arose about medical experimentation on humans.

According to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, “German doctors had argued in their own defense that their experiments differed little from those conducted before the war by German and American scientists. They showed that no international law or informal statement differentiated between legal and illegal human experimentation.” (Emphasis mine). Thus, the Nuremberg Code was created comprising ten points outlining acceptable medical research and standards.

Part I of this series is entitled, “How the Nuremberg Code Applies to the Vaccine.” It explains the doctrine of voluntary and informed consent of the participant in medical applications under the Code. Its “adoption into the 1949 Geneva Conventions later gave [it] international standing. Breaking from the Convention’s intent presumably constitutes a war crime.”

More importantly, the term “medical experimentation” as stated in the Nuremberg Code is defined in Part 1.

My argument in Part I of this series asks why, since the Code falls under the Geneva Conventions, ought not the Conventions’ umbrella classification applying to “wartime” victims also extend to the Code’s intention by default? And, if true, where do civilians fall? Of course that’s a legal question and I don’t pretend to be an attorney. But it seems to me that the presumption could easily be made. Yet no one is making it.

That said, why have tens of thousands of doctors recently signed on to what’s being called the new “Nuremberg Trials 2021?” Legal proceedings have been filed against the CDC, the WHO and the Davos Group for crimes against humanity by over a thousand attorneys worldwide.

Led by Dr. Reiner Fuellmich, the “Nuremberg Trials 2021” team argues that the vaccines are in violation of Article 32 of the 1949 Geneva Convention IV. It claims that Article 32 states that “mutilation and medical or scientific experiments not necessitated by the medical treatment of a protected person” are prohibited. And, “according to Article 147, conducting biological experiments on protected persons is a grave breach of the Convention.”

Indeed, the International Committee of the Red Cross confirms that Article 32 specifies that “protected persons must not in any circumstances be used as ‘guinea-pigs’ for medical experiments. ‘Biological experiments’ are also prohibited by the other three Conventions of 1949.”

I believe, as laid out in Part 1, that there are convincing arguments as to why the COVID-19 vaccines fall into the “experimental” definition of the Nuremberg Code in multiple ways.

Regardless, on a deeper dive into Article 32, its title is telling. The formal document, shown in an uploaded PDF version from the United Nations, is called the “GENEVA CONVENTION RELATIVE TO THE PROTECTION OF CIVILIAN PERSONS IN TIME OF WAR OF 12 AUGUST 1949.” Again the reference to wartime is notable.

Cornell Law School says that, “[t]he Geneva Conventions … provide minimum protections, standards of humane treatment, and fundamental guarantees of respect to individuals who become victims of armed conflicts.” It doesn’t say ‘victims of unarmed conflicts.’

Multiple educational resources concur with the aforementioned references to “wartime” terms, including World Atlas. It states that “[t]he Geneva Conventions refer to international agreements that are made up of four treaties and three protocols that define the treatment of people during a war.” (Emphasis added.)

How can it be, then, that the Nuremberg Code, falling under the Geneva Conventions, could be used in any argument against the COVID vaccine during a time of peace? Recent history offers some clues.

In an intriguing article from Wired published on Nov. 7, 2002, it seems as a country we’ve travelled this road before. The article’s title reads, “Forced Vaccines Haunt Gulf Vets — Rule No. 1 in the Nuremberg Code for conducting medical experiments: Get the subjects’ consent.” The author explains how our soldiers were given non-FDA-approved drugs prior to deploying to Desert Storm. Many returned with assorted unexplained illnesses.

“‘We had a third day of shots before we went over (to the Gulf),’ said the ex-Ranger, who requested anonymity because his Army Reserve commitment [had] yet to expire. ‘Guys in other units only had two, but most Rangers had three. They wouldn’t tell us what they were for.’”

According to the article, the question of forced vaccines had been addressed years before. “In a February 1953 directive, Defense Secretary Charles Wilson established what [was] still the ‘law of the land’ governing such experimentation. Consistent with the Nuremberg Code, the directive’s cornerstone is voluntary consent,’ according to Wilson.

“‘The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential,’ Wilson wrote, ordering that such consent be given in writing before at least one witness. Wilson also banned use of ‘force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion’ in obtaining consent. When did that change?

“Did the Pentagon obey this directive during the Gulf War? According to Dr. Jane M. Orient, executive director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, it did not. The administration of experimental drugs without consent was, Orient said, ‘the first instance in which an official government agency officially sanctioned the direct violation of the Nuremberg Code.’” And it was intentional!

“In a 1994 report called Human Experimentation and Other Intentional Exposures Conducted by the Department of Defense, [the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs] claimed that “‘[t]he results of our investigation showed a reckless disregard that shocked me,’ said Committee Chairman John D. Rockefeller IV. ‘The Pentagon … threw caution to the winds, ignoring all warnings of potential harm, and gave these (investigational) drugs to hundreds of thousands of soldiers with virtually no warnings and no safeguards.’”

“‘There is no provision in the Nuremberg Code,’ the Rockefeller Committee report concluded, ‘that allows a country to waive informed consent for military personnel or veterans who serve as human subjects in experiments during wartime or in experiments that are conducted because of threat of war.’”

If it protects our soldiers then in time of war, one would think it would also protect our civilian populations who are NOT in a state of war, right?

Responding to the accusations at the time, a Pentagon spokesperson stated: “‘[i]n all peacetime applications, we believe strongly in informed consent and its ethical foundations…. But military combat is different.’

In other words, according to the Pentagon in 1994, the Nuremberg Code only applied to soldiers in peacetime. It seems the narrative changes by what the “powers that be” deem convenient, at any given time.

In my book and articles, I habitually reference radical leftist Saul Alinsky’s book, Rules for Radicals, because it contains the tactics by which the left endeavors to transform America to socialism and then communism. As important as his thirteen tactics, however, are his lesser-known eleven rules of ethics of means and ends. They provide a window into why the left, and Democrats by extension, can justify their out-of-control unethical behavior.

“Alinsky’s third rule of ethics of means and ends, ‘in war the end justifies almost any means’, applies to the left’s unapologetic, unethical shaming of all things conservative.” (Rules for Deplorables, pg. 215)

Arguing for the new “Nuremberg Code 2021” wouldn’t require convincing others that we’re at war with China per se (as if they even needed such justification). In order for the experimental vaccines to be criminalized, just say: We’re at war with the left!

If, on the other hand, the Pentagon’s position in 1994 is considered, then the Code’s “informed consent and its ethical foundations” are binding “in all peacetime applications” stays. They can’t have it both ways.

Necessarily, Alinsky’s fourth tactic, “make the enemy live up to its own book of rules,” must be applied. If the original Nuremberg Code of 1949 falls under the “wartime” parameters of the Geneva Conventions, and the vaccine is indeed “experimental” as my Part I of this series argues, then the signers of the “new Code” may well have a case.

It’s a fact that the military knowingly condoned experimental medical treatment well after the 1949 Nuremberg Code was established under the Geneva Conventions. And, that they felt justified in doing so. Why on earth should Americans believe the government would follow ethical standards now?

The simple answer is, we shouldn’t. Whether Americans accept it or not, we are in a state of war for the very survival of our country. The enemy should neither be trusted nor obeyed.

We ought to be fighting for transparency, the right of informed consent, and most importantly, the right to freedom of choice. If we do not stand strong for these minimal protections now, we are not mere guinea pigs, we are the experiment itself.

COLUMN BY

CATHI CHAMBERLAIN

Cathi Chamberlain, aka The Deplorable Author and founder of The Deplorable Report, is a four-time start-up business owner, published author of a self-help book featured on CNN worldwide and owner of the nation’s first all-female construction company. She is a sought-after political speaker and has been a regular contributor on the Salem Media Radio Network. In her book, “Rules for Deplorables: A Primer for Fighting Radical Socialism,” Cathi heavily references Saul Alinsky’s 1970’s blockbuster book, “Rules for Radicals.” She is currently on her “Florida Deplorable Book Tour.” Contact her for your next speaking event at Cathi@RulesforDeplorablesBook.com.

RELATED TWEET:

This is how Romania does it….70% of all citizens refusing the Jab and dictatorships…. pic.twitter.com/oJjujjFhnN

— 🔴⚪️💙 DEAN 🔴⚪️💙 (@777DEAN777) December 4, 2021

EDITORS NOTE: This The Revolutionary Act column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Like us on Instagram

Majority Of Voters Worry About Vaccine Side Effects, Oppose Federal Mandates thumbnail

Majority Of Voters Worry About Vaccine Side Effects, Oppose Federal Mandates

/in , , , , /by

By Pamela Geller

Why are top athletes dropping face-first onto playing fields worldwide? Why is the New England Journal of Medicine dropping research like this the day before Thanksgiving?

Thank the former top NYT science writer (now banned on Twitter) for this –

Reader Alert: Majority Of Voters Worry About Vaccine Side Effects, Oppose Federal Mandates

Developing … https://t.co/2bIE9tpqXQ

— Rasmussen Reports (@Rasmussen_Poll) December 3, 2021

The jab does not prevent contraction or stop the spread,

Many thousands have died of COVID fully jabbed,

The jab causes variants

Tens of thousands have serious medical problems because of the jab,

and Many have died specifically of the jab.https://t.co/eTY7ohDvau

— Lyudmila Skarkov (@LSkarkov) December 2, 2021

RELATED VIDEO: Inside Australia’s Covid internment camp.

RELATED TWEET:

Wait, she’s being held even after testing negative? pic.twitter.com/477gH6q60T

— Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) December 3, 2021

RELATED ARTICLES: 

EXCLUSIVE: People of New York Uniting Against MANDATES. Taking Action!

U.S. Covid-19 Deaths in 2021 Far Surpasses 2020’s – When There was No Vaccine

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.

Respecting the Corona Virus thumbnail

Respecting the Corona Virus

/in , , , , /by

By Neland Nobel

It is one thing to describe something. It often is different actually to experience it. In this case we are talking about the Corona virus.

I am a 73-year-old, unvaccinated male in generally good health who came down with the Chinese virus almost exactly two weeks ago. It came along just in time to screw up Thanksgiving and the beginning of Hannukah.

Everyone is different and so what I will describe is simply my experience.  Of course, that could differ from another person’s experience. No doubt many had it easier, and a number had it worse. Overall, I feel fortunate it was not worse than it turned out to be. I feel bad for those who have had a more severe case or lost someone they loved.

My wife had it first so we went down pretty much two days apart. She had a milder case and I had it a bit more severe. I had all the standard ailments: cough, fever and chills, loss of taste, brain fog, fatigue, and weakness. The body wanted to sleep, even after the most minor exertion. Weakness followed in the wake of other symptoms retreating.

The beginning was mild, days three to four were rough, and by the end of the first week, I started feeling better, and have continued to gain strength. As I write, we are exactly two weeks from initial symptoms, and I was able to take a short hike and get outside in the glorious sunshine.

I used the word respect in the title. My wife and I expected to get infected and were surprised it took so long. We never curtailed our activities, flew on airplanes, hugged friends and relatives, lived as best we could in this confusing period. Thus, we were exposed. We knew if we got it, it could be severe but chose to live our lives without undue fear. We knew from others and from reading, most will recover but a minority of those with preconditions and advanced age are at greater risk. We did not take the bug for granted.

We know so many vaccinated people who have gotten it, we decided we would take our chances getting natural immunity, which seems far superior to the short-term benefits of the jab. That was our decision to make and we faced the consequences.

We pre-positioned ivermectin which we took for five days, had thermometers, oximeters to watch oxygen levels, took our own blood pressure, and tried to get extra rest.

Over the recent weekend, news of the Omicron variant hit the news. Stock markets tanked and Governor Kathy Hochul of New York declared a state of emergency. She said she was concerned about a cold-weather variant, even though it came from South Africa, where it is summer. No cases have been reported in New York, but she has gone into “emergency mode.” The doctor who discovered the new variant has described it as “mild.”

Still, though, Governor Hochul thought it was wise to panic.

Meanwhile, the Courts are striking down Federal vaccine mandates, and the White House just caved on mandatory vaccines for Federal employees.

As we suggested earlier, a healthy respect for the bug certainly is due, and intelligent people should take preparations because it is clear the much-touted vaccine does not stop one from getting it.  The virus will do its thing, therefore respect its power. As a society, we are not going to stop it. It was foolish to think we could. Better to be prepared and learn to live with it.

Having gone through this now on a personal level, turning our society inside out seems both unnecessary and damaging.

The arrogance of our officials is on display. Not only do they think by seizing power and changing the Constitutional order they can change these natural processes, they continue to behave this way in the face of obvious failure. Stifle your hubris. You are not going to stop the virus and you are not going to change the climate of the earth either.

During the worst of the illness, I thought to myself, despite all the inflation of prices, the disruption of life government policy has caused, I still got it and must suffer through it. While many of us will get it, we all, in the end, suffer alone. And so, must my fellow citizens. Government cannot save us.

The chief job of any public officials is to protect the liberty of its citizens.

Having just come through this experience, I have to say the fear mongers have done a great disservice to the world. The virus is nasty to be sure, but not so much nastier than other illnesses I have had. Such concentration on ineffective vaccinations while largely ignoring, dare we say even prohibiting, the development of treatments, looks particularly stupid.  This is particularly so as it becomes clear the vaccines don’t work as advertised and that variants and boosters will be in a constant arms race.

My wife and I had to jump through a number of hoops to get the ivermectin we wanted. The government did not only not help, it actually actively got in the way of us helping ourselves. Big media and much of the medical profession were equally useless.

Respecting and fearing are two quite different things. Taking steps to inform people objectively, giving them broad choice for their individual circumstances, respecting their autonomy to make decisions, respecting their property, prosperity, and liberty; all seem to be much better than the one size fits all dictatorial panic from “experts” like Dr. Fauci and Governor Hochul.

When you look at the actual results of policy, Sweden and Florida, look so much better than Austria and New York, it can’t be ignored. And if the health outcomes are not demonstrably better in Austria and New York, how can these constant panic attacks by the government be justified?

It is time for government and health professionals to grow up and show some maturity. Most of us will survive this thing, but we may not survive the destruction to society these Covid policies are inflicting.

We have reached a point where the governmental reaction to Covid poses a greater threat to both health and liberty than the virus itself. Respect the power of the virus but governmental panic neither stops the virus nor helps the people.

As government becomes so much more entangled in our lives, it is worth asking, if I am going to get it and suffer with it, is the government over reach in my interests or theirs? And why in the heck are our tax dollars being used to develop this plague, that was then set upon the land?

The virus needs to be respected but irrational fear is hardly a helpful public policy.

While the government did little to get me through this virus, I have renewed respect for the wonderful body God gave me. I took some meds, drank water, and slept. My immune system, which runs pretty much on its own, did the rest. That is true for most Americans and that is why about 99% of us will survive.

That is something truly to be thankful for.

Covid-19 exposes the link between Safetyism and Wokeism thumbnail

Covid-19 exposes the link between Safetyism and Wokeism

/in , , , , /by

By MercatorNet – Navigating Modern Complexities

‘Wokeism’ and ‘Safetyism’ are closely linked.

In their now justly famous 2018 book The Coddling of the American Mind, Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff proposed “Safetyism” as the name for a novel “moral culture” that had originated on college and university campuses and was rapidly colonizing the larger American culture. Haidt and Lukianoff define Safetyism as “a culture or belief system in which safety has become a sacred value, which means that people become unwilling to make trade-offs demanded by other practical and moral concerns.”

This was followed by other cultural treatments, such as Bradley Campbell and Jason Manning’s The Rise of Victimhood Culture, some of which more emphatically connected this novel Safetyist culture to the new form of political leftism that has been increasingly ascendant since at least 2013. It’s often been referred to as “social justice” leftism but is increasingly being labelled “Wokeism,” “woke leftism,” or some variant thereof.

The core of this ideology consists in a combination of philosophical postmodernism and political leftism; like classical Marxism, it dictates that all social phenomena are to be viewed through a lens of oppression and domination, but it extends this Marxist thesis beyond economic class to encompass all social identities whatsoever. The goal of this ideology is to categorize all such identities as either “oppressor” or “oppressed” and to politically mobilize the latter against the former.

When the Covid-19 pandemic hit, my first thought was that a Safetyist culture, as ours had increasingly become, was the worst possible type of culture for handling such a threat to public health. My concern wasn’t only that such a culture would prioritize safety from the virus over all other concerns, such as the negative impacts of economic lockdowns.

I also worried that Covid-19 protective measures would provide cover for the spread of Wokeism.

The alliance of Safetyism and Wokeism

Why would I think this? Because Safetyism and Wokeism are fellow travellers, joined at the hip in many more contexts than not. They find their greatest purchase in the same demographics, most prominently what Charles Murray identified in Coming Apart as the “new upper class,” the elite-educated members of which “run the nation’s economic, political, and cultural institutions.” This class includes politicians and the wealthiest percentile of managers and professionals, as well as “journalists, academics, and public intellectuals in general.”

Safetyism and Wokeism also originate from the members of this “new upper class” and the institutions they control, not least academia and the postmodernist leftists dominating it. And the two ideologies also share a host of characteristic features. Because bureaucratic elites’ heavy-handed response to Covid-19 is rooted in Safetyism, submission to Covid-19 Safetyism also strengthens Wokeism, even if only indirectly.

A prime feature of both Safetyism and Wokeism is the semantic inflation of safety-related terms and concepts—including, most prominently, “safety” itself. As Haidt and Lukianoff note, “In the twentieth century, the word ‘safety’ generally meant physical safety. . . . But gradually, in the twenty-first century, on some college campuses, the meaning of ‘safety’ underwent a process of ‘concept creep’ and expanded to include ‘emotional safety.’”

In the case of Covid-19 Safetyism, the lines between physical safety and psychological comfort are blurred almost as frequently as in the case of Wokeism. The most glaring example of this is the infamous “wearing cloth facemask while alone outside” phenomenon, something I observe with astonishing frequency.

Other parallels are hard to miss. One of the most obvious is the institution of a novel orthodoxy, the censorship of any heterodox opinions, and the ostracism of heretics who dissent from the orthodoxy.

In the case of Covid-19 Safetyism, we see safety measures being carried out under the aegis of “The Science,” as though scientific findings always reach uniform conclusions that conveniently align on one side of the political divide. Invocations of “The Science” often function dogmatically rather than rationally in this context, and any dissent is vigorously suppressed. For example, now-credible theories about the virus accidentally leaking from a Wuhan research lab were initially met with an exasperated dismissal that was nearly uniform in the mainstream media. Often in the name of safety, progressives invoke science as a supposedly indisputable basis for their positions.

Another parallel between Wokeism and Safetyism is captured by Douglas Murray’s “runaway train” metaphor in his 2019 book, The Madness of Crowds: namely, the more identity-based oppression is actually eliminated, the more inflated claims of oppression become relative to reality, which propels the proposal of more extreme policies (the closer the train gets to its destination, the more it speeds up). The most familiar examples of such “progressophobia” from Wokeism concern race, as when Ibram Kendi characterized the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by saying “racism did not end—it progressed,” or as when Charles Blow wrote that “American racism has evolved and become less blunt, but it has not become less effective” since the era of slavery and the Civil War.

Such claims echo ones made earlier by academics, such as Critical Race Theory progenitor Derrick Bell, who in 1987 wrote that “progress in American race relations is largely a mirage,” and Microaggression Theory progenitor Derald Wing Sue, who in 2010 wrote that racial microaggressions “may have significantly more influence on anger, frustration, and self-esteem than traditional overt forms of racism.”

If conditions have not in fact improved for a historically oppressed group, then the unsafety of that group would indeed warrant radical, progressive policies to rectify this. Conversely, if we admit that progress has been made on a given problem, we would have to admit that the threat has subsided, which would diminish the need for affirmative policies that purportedly combat it. In other words, the political activation potential for supposedly oppressed groups would decrease. If people recognize significant improvements in a given form of oppression, the basis for a political ideology almost entirely founded on the goal of solving that problem would be severely weakened. Moreover, it would threaten the perceived legitimacy of those empowered to enforce those policies.

Safetyism and medical theatre

The ballooning of what is considered “safety” has also led to resistance to rational argument about the relevant evidence.

Consider many universities’ mask policies. Masks are often required for those indoors at all times except when alone in a room, any type of mask satisfies this requirement, and the vast majority of people wear cloth or surgical masks that are only really effective in preventing spread by respiratory droplets. But transmission by respiratory droplet occurs primarily through coughing and sneezing, which are symptoms of Covid-19, and all persons exhibiting such symptoms are typically barred from public university spaces by school policy. So what rational purpose does requiring non-N95 masks serve?

At this point, some people might propose that such policies constitute “medical theatre.” This point is worth considering for a moment. What is the purpose of theatre? Generally speaking, theatre aims to elicit audience emotions rather than conduct rational argument. And it is impossible to miss how frequently Safetyist rhetoric, specifically vis-à-vis Covid-19 policies, is framed in terms of feelings of safety that are decidedly irrational.

At Rice University, an assistant teaching professor and health sciences advisor recently went on record as saying: “I am fully vaccinated, but I have two young children who are ineligible to be vaccinated. . . . With masks, I personally feel more comfortable being in the classroom and have less worries about exposing my children to the virus through me.” Never mind that the sort of transmission these masks prevent is already prevented by other policies, and never mind that children face miniscule risk from Covid-19. The point, at least from the perspective of medical theatre, isn’t to make people safer, but to make them feel safer.

Still, why not just wear a mask without objection if it does in fact make others feel safer—isn’t this an altruistic end worth some minor inconvenience on your part? I hear this argument all the time, often formulated as: “Just don’t be a jerk.”

If it sounds familiar, that’s because it was first and frequently deployed in defence of mandating the use of people’s “preferred pronouns.” Rather than signifying objective reality, Woke and Safetyist language alike more often cater to subjective desires and are used to manipulate emotions. Both Safetyism and Wokeism elevate people’s subjective and emotional experiences (so long as they point in a progressive direction) over biological reality and scientific fact.

Resisting Wokeism and Safetyism’s expanding frontiers

The point is that Safetyism and Wokeism leverage our altruistic instincts to effect submission to irrational policies that were never designed to be rationally justifiable in the first place. Instead, it seems increasingly clear, both ideologies function sociologically like religion. More and more people seem to be noticing this, both in relation to Covid-19 Safetyism and in relation to Wokeism. But what goes less remarked upon is the connection between these two novel forms of secular religion, and specifically how they mutually reinforce one another.

For consider: if you are willing to submit to irrational Covid policies for the sake of helping others feel safer—however irrational you may think those feelings are—then why wouldn’t you do the same in the case of the various norms and policies of Wokeism? The future frontiers of Wokeism are often unpredictable, and its awakenings might demand of dissenters impossible violations of conscience—as they already have for many.

As Safetyism’s star continues to rise, so will Wokeism’s, and for the same sorts of reasons. And if Wokeism is the great threat to free speech, impartial justice, and liberal education that it is so often—and rightly—made out to be, then its connection to Safetyism should be sufficient reason to resist unreasonable Covid-19 policies. It is time for both conservatives and traditional liberals to wake up to this reality, which requires more consistently translating our convictions into action.

This article has been republished from The Public Discourse with permission.

Did They Murder Him? thumbnail

Did They Murder Him?

/in , , , , /by

By Save America Foundation

“Self-control is strength. Right thought is mastery. Calmness is power.” – James Allen

Please watch the below video of Dr. Andreas Noack, a chemist and graphene expert unlike any under in the EU. He got attacked on a livestream months ago by special police for laughable reasons.

Now, just hours after publishing this work, the forces that be decided that he hit the mark so hard with uncovering their plans, that they decided to take him out.

Was this a hit by the elite to silence this good doctor for exposing their ugly truths? You decide.

Forbidden Knowledge in a column titled “German chemist Dr. Andreas Noack was arrested by and armed police unit during YouTube live stream” reported:

On November 18, 2020, well-known German chemist and a top graphene expert in the EU, Dr Andreas Noack was arrested by an armed police unit in the middle of his YouTube livestream.

Now, just hours after publishing his latest video a few days ago, he died suddenly and mysteriously.

Best News Here in an article titled “Murder? Just Hours After Publishing the Secret of the Vax the Doctor Is Dead (Must Video)” reported:

This video is of This is Dr. Noack, a chemist and graphene expert unlike any under in the EU. He got attacked on a livestream months ago by special police for laughable reasons.

Now, just hours after publishing this work, the forces that be decided that he hit the mark so hard with uncovering their plans, that they decided to take him out.

Was this a hit by the elite to silence this good doctor for exposing their ugly truths? You decide!

©Fred Brownbill. All rights reserved.

RELATED TWEET:

JOE: “In order to beat this pandemic, we need to go to where it came from in the rest of the world. We also need to vaccinate the rest of the world!” https://t.co/zebg94X1mU

— Sean Hannity (@seanhannity) December 3, 2021

Dying COVID-19 Patient Recovers After Court Orders Hospital to Administer Ivermectin thumbnail

Dying COVID-19 Patient Recovers After Court Orders Hospital to Administer Ivermectin

/in , , , /by

By Pamela Geller

While mandating ineffective vaccine, the Biden administration and its media ministry of propaganda has directed no efforts into treatment of the Chinese virus.

On the contrary, they have worked to keep effective treatments away from the American people. The fraudulent Democrat regime is the enemy of the people.

By: Matthew Vadum,  Epoch Times, December 1, 2021:

An elderly COVID-19 patient has recovered after a court order allowed him to be treated with ivermectin, despite objections from the hospital in which he was staying, according to the family’s attorney.

After an Illinois hospital insisted on administering expensive remdesivir to the patient and the treatment failed, his life was saved after a court ordered that an outside medical doctor be allowed to use the inexpensive ivermectin to treat him, over the hospital’s strenuous objections.

Ivermectin tablets have been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to treat humans with intestinal strongyloidiasis and onchocerciasis, two conditions caused by parasitic worms. Some topical forms of ivermectin have been approved to treat external parasites such as head lice and for skin conditions such as rosacea. The drug is also approved for use on animals.

Remdesivir has been given emergency use authorization by the FDA for treating certain categories of human patients that have been hospitalized with COVID-19. But the use of ivermectin to treat humans suffering from COVID-19 has become controversial because the FDA hasn’t approved its so-called off-label use to treat the disease, which is caused by the CCP virus also known as SARS-CoV-2.

Critics have long accused the FDA of dragging its heels and being dangerously over-cautious and indifferent to human suffering in its approach to regulating pharmaceuticals, a criticism that led to then-President Donald Trump signing the Right to Try Act in May 2018. The law, according to the FDA, “is another way for patients who have been diagnosed with life-threatening diseases or conditions who have tried all approved treatment options and who are unable to participate in a clinical trial to access certain unapproved treatments.”

Medical doctors are free to prescribe ivermectin to treat COVID-19, even though the FDA claims that its off-label use could be harmful in some circumstances. Clinical human trials of the drug for use against COVID-19 are currently in progress, according to the agency.

The drug “most definitely” saved the elderly patient’s life “because his condition changed right immediately after he took ivermectin,” attorney for the family, Kirstin M. Erickson of Chicago-based Mauck and Baker, told The Epoch Times.

Sun Ng, 71, who was visiting the United States from Hong Kong to celebrate his granddaughter’s first birthday, became ill with COVID-19 and within days was close to death. He was hospitalized on Oct. 14 at Edward Hospital, in Naperville, Illinois, a part of the Edward-Elmhurst Health system. His condition worsened dramatically and he was intubated and placed on a ventilator a few days later.

Ng’s only child, Man Kwan Ng, who holds a doctoral degree in mechanical engineering, did her own research and decided that her father should take ivermectin, which some medical doctors believe is effective against COVID-19, despite the FDA’s guidance to the contrary.

But against the daughter’s wishes, the hospital refused to administer ivermectin and denied access to a physician willing to administer it.

The daughter went to court on her father’s behalf and on Nov. 1, Judge Paul M. Fullerton of the Circuit Court of DuPage County granted a temporary restraining order requiring the hospital to allow ivermectin to be given to the patient. The hospital refused to comply with the court order.

At a subsequent court hearing on Nov. 5, Fullerton said one physician who testified described Sun Ng as “basically on his death bed,” with a mere 10 to 15 percent chance of survival. Ivermectin can have minor side effects such as dizziness, itchy skin, and diarrhea at the dosage suggested for Ng, but the “risks of these side effects are so minimal that Mr. Ng’s current situation outweighs that risk by one-hundredfold,” Fullerton said.

The judge issued a preliminary injunction that day directing the hospital to “immediately allow … temporary emergency privileges” to Ng’s physician, Dr. Alan Bain, “solely to administer Ivermectin to this patient.”

The hospital resisted the order on Nov. 6 and 7, denying Bain access to his patient. The hospital claimed that it couldn’t let Bain in because he wasn’t vaccinated against COVID-19 and that its chief medical officer wasn’t available to “proctor” Bain administering ivermectin.

The daughter’s attorneys filed an emergency report with the court on Nov. 8 and Fullerton heard from both sides. The judge admonished the hospital and restated that it must allow Bain inside over a period of 15 days to do his job. When the hospital filed a motion to stay the order, Fullerton denied it, again directing the facility to comply.

The ivermectin appears to have worked, and Sun Ng has recovered from COVID-19. He was discharged by the hospital on Nov. 27.

“My father’s recovery is amazing,” his daughter, Man Kwan Ng, said in a statement.

“My father is a tough man. He was working so hard to survive, and of course, with God’s holding hands. He weaned off oxygen about three days after moving out of the ICU. He started oral feeding before hospital discharge. He returned home without carrying a bottle of oxygen and a feeding tube installed to his stomach. He can now stand with a walker at the bedside and practice stepping. After being sedated for a month on a ventilator in ICU, his performance is beyond our expectations. Praise the Lord.”

Attorney Erickson said the “happy” end result here provides “hope for the nation.”

“We get calls from all over the place,” she told The Epoch Times. “People that want to sue hospitals after someone’s passed, they wanted to get the medicine and couldn’t. Obviously, that’s a different, difficult case because a medical malpractice case is very difficult.”

People just want to do what’s best for their family members and “find ivermectin themselves” and have it on hand “and use it when someone starts to develop symptoms,” Erickson said.

She said her legal team and client were “really thankful” that Ng recovered and “we salute” Judge Fullerton, Dr. Bain, and others, as well as the hospital for abiding by the court order in the end.

For more information on ivermectin and how to obtain it, Erickson said people should visit the website of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance at Covid19CriticalCare.com.

Keith Hartenberger, system director for public relations for Edward-Elmhurst Health, declined to comment.

“We’re not able to comment due to patient privacy guidelines,” he told The Epoch Times by email.

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.

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

STAY INFORMED

Receive regular news, commentary, and analysis straight to your inbox.

POWERED BY

DrRichSwier.com | ThePricklyPear.org

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.