Tag: pandemic

COVID-19 Tested Our Commitment To Freedom. Three Years Later, We’re Still Failing

“The remedy is worse than the disease.”

– Francis Bacon

The government never cedes power willingly.

Neither should we.

If the COVID-19 debacle taught us one thing it is that, as Justice Neil Gorsuch acknowledged, “Rule by indefinite emergency edict risks leaving all of us with a shell of a democracy and civil liberties just as hollow.”

Unfortunately, we still haven’t learned.

We’re still allowing ourselves to be fully distracted by circus politics and a constant barrage of bad news screaming for attention.

Three years after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, which gave world governments (including our own) a convenient excuse for expanding their powers, abusing their authority, and further oppressing their constituents, there’s something being concocted in the dens of power.

The danger of martial law persists.

Any government so willing to weaponize one national crisis after another in order to expand its powers and justify all manner of government tyranny in the so-called name of national security will not hesitate to override the Constitution and lockdown the nation again.

You’d better get ready, because that so-called crisis could be anything: civil unrest, national emergencies, “unforeseen economic collapse, loss of functioning political and legal order, purposeful domestic resistance or insurgency, pervasive public health emergencies, and catastrophic natural and human disasters.”

COVID-19 was a test to see how quickly the populace would march in lockstep with the government’s dictates, no questions asked, and how little resistance the citizenry would offer up to the government’s power grabs when made in the name of national security.

“We the people” failed that test spectacularly.

Keep reading

Caught Red Handed: Fauci, Gates & Moderna are responsible for the COVID Pandemic – U.S. D.O.D issued a ‘COVID-19 Research’ contract 3 Months before COVID was known to exist – & Fauci & Moderna had a Vaccine ready in Dec. 2019

The discovery of a contract awarded by the U.S. Department of Defense to Labyrinth Global Health for “COVID-19 Research” in November 2019 has raised questions about the permanent U.S. Government’s knowledge of the novel coronavirus.

The contract was part of a larger project for a “Biological threat reduction program in Ukraine,” suggesting the permanent U.S. Government was at the very least aware of the alleged virus before it spread through Wuhan, China in December 2019.

But the findings also suggest the permanent U.S. Government may have had a hand in the creation of this alleged virus in Biolabs through Gain of Function Research overseen by Dr Anthony Fauci.

This would explain why they knew the name of the novel coronavirus disease three months prior to the World Health Organization officially naming it Covid-19 in February 2020.

And it may also explain why Moderna and Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) had a confidentiality agreement for an mRNA Coronavirus vaccine candidate in early December 2019, which was developed and jointly owned by Moderna and Fauci’s NIAID.

Keep reading

Study of Nearly 100 Million COVID-19 Vaccine Recipients Reveals a Host of Adverse Events

A multinational study of over 99 million vaccinated people has identified higher incidences of neurological, cardiovascular, and blood disorder complications than what the researchers expected.

The peer-reviewed observational cohort study, published in the Vaccine journal on Feb. 12, aimed to evaluate the risk of 13 adverse events of special interest (AESI) following COVID-19 vaccination. The AESIs spanned three categories—neurological, hematologic (blood), and cardiovascular.

It reviewed data collected from more than 99 million vaccinated people from eight nations—Argentina, Australia, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, New Zealand, and Scotland—looking at risks up to 42 days after getting the shots.

The study looked at three vaccines—Pfizer and Moderna’s mRNA vaccines as well as AstraZeneca’s viral vector jab.

Researchers found higher than expected cases that they deemed met the threshold to be potential safety signals for multiple AESIs, including for Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS), cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST), myocarditis, and pericarditis. A safety signal refers to information that could suggest a potential risk or harm that may be associated with a medical product.

  • GBS is a disorder in which a body’s immune system attacks the nerves, and can eventually paralyze the whole body. Most people with the condition require hospitalization. A “statistically significant increase” in GBS cases was observed after the first AstraZeneca shot. The researchers had expected 76 GBS events in the observational cohort study but ended up identifying 190.
  • Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM) is a condition that typically occurs after a bacterial or viral infection. It causes inflammation of the central nervous system. Two cases were expected. However, the study identified seven events after the first Moderna jab.
  • Bell’s palsy is a weakness or paralysis of facial muscles. Higher than expected Bell’s palsy cases were identified after the first dose of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines.
  • CVST is a condition in which blood clots form in the brain, blocking the blood from draining out. This can end up causing a hemorrhage. While 21 events were expected, researchers identified over three times the number of cases at 69 following the first dose of AstraZeneca vaccine. CVST cases were also higher than expected after the first and second Pfizer shots.
  • Myocarditis is inflammation of the heart muscle. Higher than expected cases of myocarditis that met the threshold for “prioritized safety signals” for the condition were “consistently identified following a first, second, and third dose of mRNA vaccines,” both Pfizer and Moderna, according to the study.
  • Pericarditis is an inflammation of the outer lining of the heart. The number of pericarditis cases exceeded expectations following “all doses of all the three vaccines,” researchers wrote.

Keep reading

US Officials Concede No Active Surveillance On Long-Term Effects Of COVID-19 Vaccines

In a Feb. 15 hearing by the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, U.S. health officials side-stepped a question when asked whether the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is actively conducting extended safety surveillance on those who received early COVID-19 vaccines.

Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (R-N.Y.) asked Dr. Peter Marks, director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, whether the FDA is conducting active surveillance and if there are any specific health markers they’re studying that may signal trends requiring further inquiry.

“Every time we go through and do the safety surveillance, we start back, and it goes back to 2020. In some cases where we’re looking for certain things, we might use a different window, but indeed, we have to look from the beginning of the period of surveillance. I can turn it over to Dr. Jernigan because he can speak for CDC [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] in that regard,” Dr. Marks said.

“So with regard to myocarditis, we certainly have been monitoring the issue with various different data systems. I think the most recent data really demonstrates that you’re about eight times less likely to get myocarditis if you’re vaccinated compared to those that are unvaccinated,” Dr. Daniel Jernigan, director of the National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases at the CDC responded.

Rep. Malliotakis told Jernigan she wanted to know about “everything,” not just myocarditis.

Dr. Jerrigan asked her to repeat the question, and she asked again whether the FDA was conducting extended safety surveillance on early recipients of COVID-19 vaccines.

“Most of the reports that we get of adverse events are in the few weeks following the vaccination,” Jernigan said. In terms of monitoring these over time, Jernigan said the agency has “vaccine effectiveness” systems in place at the CDC.

Neither Jernigan nor Marks referenced any active surveillance initiatives being undertaken by their agencies to monitor people who received the original COVID-19 vaccines for long-term health effects.

“There is no system in place for long-term vaccine safety surveillance in this country,” Ms. Liz Willner, founder of OpenVAERS, told The Epoch Times.

Keep reading

BREAKING: FIRST LOOK AT THE “FREE-TEXT” COVID VACCINE SAFETY DATA THE CDC WANTED TO HIDE

When the CDC created V-Safe as a way to track individuals who received the experimental COVID-19 “vaccines,” the agency vowed to be completely transparent. Remember—despite forcing millions of frightened human beings to take the jab—there were subpar clinical trials. One recipient shared, “The only reason I took this b******* vaccination is because my job gave me two choices. Sign a waiver or get the shot. I [got] the shot in fear of losing any benefits.” So it makes sense, and seems mandatory, that the CDC create a system for individuals to share how they feel after receiving the experimental, mRNA-driven “vaccines.” To build trust in that system, the CDC touted V-Safe as “the most intensive safety monitoring effort in U.S. history.” Yet, as severe adverse events, including death, rapidly ascended following the EUA-pushed jabs, the CDC failed to be transparent with the data, releasing, when ordered by the Court in 2022, only superficial details. But persistence paid off. Last month, a federal judge ordered the CDC to release all 7.8 million detailed “free-text” data entries over the next 12 months. The “free-text” section is the only place in V-Safe for participants to potentially report serious adverse events. Yesterday, the CDC released the initial batch of data containing symptoms reported after being injected. The eye-opening entries are telling.

The free-text entries are critical because, shockingly, despite having an index of “adverse events of special interest” listed in its protocol, V-Safe entirely omitted those same adverse events from being tracked. As explained by ICAN, instead of asking V-safe participants about whether, for example, they experienced things such as anaphylaxis, myocarditis, or coagulopathy after taking an entirely experimental “vaccine” based on technology never before used, the CDC carelessly only asked about minor and generalized reactions, such as “chills,” “headache,” “fatigue or tiredness,” and “vomiting.” Thus, for users who may have wanted to report more serious adverse events, they must use the “free-text” field, which allows up to 250 characters. This data is crucial to understanding the safety profile of the COVID-19 “vaccines.” The fact the CDC had not thus far voluntarily released this critical data is indicative of the overall failure of the federal government’s responsibility to protect the health of Americans.

ICAN’s initial win in two previous lawsuits opened the door to obtaining V-Safe data. However, the taxpayer-funded CDC argued that producing the “free-text” entries was too burdensome an endeavor for them to be responsible for. Nevertheless, the Court strongly disagreed, noting that the “Production of the free-text data will permit independent researchers to put the government agencies to their proof by considering all of the available data.” Reporting on this outstanding victory  brought by the lawyers that regularly represent ICAN on behalf of the Freedom Coalition of Doctors for Choice, ICAN explained the Court recognized that:

“The development and distribution of the COVID-19 vaccine was one of the greatest endeavors in recent history. Predictably, the American public now seeks access to COVID-related papers to ensure that relevant government policies were — and still are — supported and justified by the available data. That is precisely what FOIA contemplates and facilitates.”

Indeed, District Court Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk’s ruling is a huge win for transparency, and yesterday’s first production of at 390,000 entries outlining what users experienced in the first two days of receiving the “vaccine” is telling. And unfortunately, it’s indicative of what’s to follow. Indeed, the “free-text” data, which is available here, has an overall theme of uneasiness. Users reported “anaphylaxis”—a severe, potentially life-threatening allergic reaction—numerous times, detailing experiences such as, “Emergency room visit for anaphylaxis … went to the ER … I had repeat facial swelling.” One user wrote, “Anaphylaxis within 10 min. of being vaccinated. Throat swollen almost shut.” Another user wrote:

“After receiving the shot (within 15 mins) I had an allergic reaction (tightening of the throat, dizziness, confusion, elevated heart rate) and was taken to the ER. Received steroid shot, Benadryl shot, and ephephrine shot. Was released to go home.” The user later wrote, “Feeling of mild allergic reaction in the throat. Elevated heart rate.”

Interestingly, thousands of users reported an odd “metallic taste” in their mouth, often accompanied by a tingling feeling in their tongue, lasting anywhere from a few minutes to hours or longer. Equally as many people—in the thousands—experienced rapid and concerning heart rates. Likewise, in addition to ongoing feelings of intense anxiety, numbness, dizziness, stiffness, fatigue, and diarrhea, thousands went to the emergency room within 24 to 48 hours of receiving the “vaccine.” One user described their experience at the ER, stating, “3 to 5 days after my shot, I experienced a rash around my eye that was painful and burning. I reported to the emergency room on Thursday, 12/24, diagnosed with shingles/herpes zoster, which I’ve never had before, so I’m just suspicious if that could have been a result of my first dose of the COVID vaccine.” Sadly, over 600 users specifically noted they were pregnant when they received the shot. Did the CDC monitor them more closely? They should have. Twenty-two users reported having a miscarriage that coincided with receiving the “vaccine.” One such user wrote:

“I had a miscarriage. I should’ve been 8 weeks pregnant but the baby stopped  growing at 6 weeks which would’ve been very close to when I received my vaccine.”

It will take weeks to sift through the disturbing “free-text” entries detailing the myriad of troubling symptoms users experienced within the first couple of days after getting the “vaccine.” The 390,000 initial entries emphasize the potential for more serious adverse event symptoms like myocarditis that may be revealed as more “free-text” data files are released. Despite the unsettling entries, given the disaster that has been the COVID-19 “vaccine” campaign, reviewing the data is a massive step in the right direction. ICAN remarked, “This ruling sends a clear message to our federal agencies: we are not moving on and forgetting about the pandemic or the actions they took. ICAN will not stop until ALL the data is released to the public and there is true transparency and accountability around COVID-19.”

Keep reading

Conspiracy Theory Debunker Finds Real Conspiracies

The 2023 book Misbelief by Dan Ariely belongs to a genre I would label “debunking Covid conspiracy theories.” The book is meant to explore the thought process of people who subscribe to conspiracy theories, especially about Covid and the Covid vaccines. 

Thus I was surprised to encounter in the book two stories in which the author uncovered real conspiracies to hide information about Covid from the public. 

Ariely, a professor of psychology at Duke University, played a bit part in promoting Covid lockdowns around the world. By his own description, he worked 

…on projects related to Covid-19 with the Israeli government and a bit with the British, Dutch, and Brazilian governments as well…I was mostly working to try to get the police to use rewards to incentivize good mask-wearing behavior and observance of social distancing instead of using fines… (p. 4) 

The first genuine conspiracy he describes involved the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) manipulating data in the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS).

The second involved a newspaper editor-in-chief refusing to report about vaccine side effects observed by a hospital. The author reports these situations matter-of-factly, and even gives the conspirators the benefit of the doubt, saying maybe they did the right thing! 

Let’s look at the VAERS conspiracy (recounted on pp. 274-276). Ariely says he got this information directly from a person who works “in the information technology department of the FDA.” The agency, according to the story, determined that: 

…foreign powers, mostly Russian and Iranian, had found a way to spread disinformation using VAERS. So when the FDA identified cases that had clearly come from such sources, it removed them from the system…

Not only did it delete this data, but it did so silently. Ariely only found out by accident: Parents of vaccine-injured children maintained their own copy of the VAERS data, downloaded from the FDA site. They noticed that cases appearing in their downloaded data later disappeared from the government copy of the database, and they told Ariely about this. 

Supposedly the FDA tried to keep these actions secret because it “did not want to announce to the foreign powers that it was onto them,” the FDA employee told him. But to anyone reasonably well-versed in information technology, keeping such acts secret is an obvious mistake. The bad guys will figure out what is going on; the folks we are trying to protect are left in the dark about possible mischief affecting data they rely on. And that’s the most charitable assessment of their actions. It could be worse: the FDA might have removed valid information inadvertently (putting aside possible nefarious intentions at this point). How might that come about? 

Keep reading

COVID Vaccine Shedding Is ‘Real,’ FDA and Pfizer Documents Are Proof: Clinicians

The topic of COVID-19 vaccine shedding has long been controversial; now, some doctors say it is real.

“Shedding is unfortunately real,” said Dr. Pierre Kory at the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) conference in Phoenix, Arizona, in early February. “The FDA (U.S. Food and Drug Administration) knows that.”

Dr. Kory is a co-founder of the FLCCC, a non-profit advocacy group founded by physicians for the treatment of COVID-19, long COVID, and postvaccine syndromes. He is also the co-founder of the Leading Edge Clinic and has treated over a thousand long-COVID and postvaccine patients.

Mainstream fact-checkers have largely denied shedding on the basis of definition. The commonly cited definition comes from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website, which defines shedding as the release of viruses, bacteria, and their components from live vaccines.

While mRNA and adenovirus vaccines are not live vaccines, they function similarly to gene therapy products.

All gene therapy products pose a risk of shedding, according to the FDA.

Keep reading

ASIAN MEDICAL EXPERTS CALL FOR IMMEDIATE HALT TO COVID JABS

A panel of experts in Japan called the ‘Vaccine Issues Study Group’ is calling for an immediate halt to the use of COVID mRNA gene therapy, marketed to the public as ‘vaccines.’

The group includes eminent medical and science academics, such as Masanori Fukushima (Professor Emeritus, Kyoto University), Yasufumi Murakami (Professor of Science at Tokyo University) and Masayasu Inoue (Professor Emeritus, School of Medicine at Osaka City University).

The group said they had identified 201 diseases which are caused by the mRNA gene therapy, in addition to 3,071 side effect papers. The documented side effects and diseases were from ‘all fields of medicine’, and affected ‘all organs without exception.’

As a cancer specialist Fukushima said he was well aware of the side effects from chemotherapy, but the pattern of those were ‘pre-determined and well-known.’

The side effects from COVID ‘vaccination’ however were not ‘pre-determined’ with multiple side effects and diseases occuring ‘simultaneously throughout the entire body.’

Murakami noted the tendency for mulitple COVID jab side effects to present simultaneously and affect ‘whole families.’

According to the panel, the cause of the side effects and disease was well-known – the spike protein found in the ‘vaccines’ was toxic. The Lipid Nanoparticles (LNP) used to deliver it were also highly dangerous to human health.

‘The major problem is we are injecting two toxic substances into people, one of which makes human cells produce the spike proteins. Since the immune system will attack this, this causes very violent reactions.’

Keep reading

CDC’s Own Scientists Found Masks Ineffective for COVID — But Agency Recommended Them Anyway.

According to an investigation by independent journalist Paul D. Thacker published this week in the Disinformation Chronicle,, officials at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention openly questioned the findings of its own scientists’ studies contradicting the agency’s public messaging about mask effectiveness.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) own scientists conducted studies showing N95 respirators are no more effective at stopping viruses than surgical masks — yet the agency issued guidance contradicting those and other studies showing both types of masks are ineffective at stopping the spread of COVID-19, according to an investigation by independent journalist Paul D. Thacker.

The investigation, published this week in two parts on The Disinformation Chronicle, details how CDC leadership openly questioned the findings of CDC scientists’ studies contradicting the agency’s public messaging about mask effectiveness.

During the pandemic, mask advocates “shifted goalposts and demanded N95 respirators,” Thacker said, claiming they perform better than surgical masks at stopping the virus.

However, Thacker said CDC scientists found no difference between N95 and surgical masks in the ability to stop the spread of respiratory viruses. The findings of the CDC studies are consistent with other peer-reviewed studies on the efficacy of masks in preventing COVID-19, according to Thacker.

“But the CDC responded by saying people can’t say that,” Thacker told The Defender.

To shut down the controversy, the CDC, in its Jan. 23 post on preventing the transmission of pathogens in healthcare settings, warned researchers that to suggest facemasks and respirators are the same “is not scientifically correct,” Thacker wrote.

Keep reading

U.S. Military Told Pharma Exec the Virus “Posed a National Security Threat” on February 4th 2020 – Weeks Before a Single Death Occurred

A leaked recording obtained by investigator and writer Sasha Latypova features an executive at the pharmaceutical company AstraZeneca stating the following:

It wasn’t a surprise to me when I got a call on February 4th from the Defence Department here in the U.S. saying that the newly discovered SARS-2 virus posed a national security threat.

This is an astonishing, major-newspaper headline-worthy revelation.

Here’s what was happening on February 4th 2020:

Virus activity in the U.S.:

  • According to CNN, on February 4th there were 11 “confirmed cases of the novel coronavirus” in the United States. 
  • There were zero reported deaths from the virus in the U.S.
  • As documented in my recently launched Covid Timeline Wiki Project, the New York Times had two headlines about the virus focused on China and travellers from Wuhan. There were no op-eds on the virus.

Virus activity internationally:

  • Approximately 490 reported deaths.
  • The disease caused by the virus had not even been named “COVID-19” yet.
  • The WHO said the outbreak “was not yet a pandemic”.

Behind-the-scenes virus-related activity: EUA & PREP Act:

  • Crucially, the FDA and HHS declared the first emergency basis for issuance of Emergency Use Authorisation (EUA) for Covid on February 4th. 
  • EUA is an authority that was granted to the FDA “to strengthen public health protections against biological, chemical, nuclear and radiological agents”.
  • As explained in a previous article, EUA powers were granted to the FDA to be used in situations of grave, immediate emergencies involving weapons of mass destruction. They were intended to allow the use of countermeasures against biological, chemical, nuclear or radiological (CBRN) agents without going through all the usual steps of ensuring safety and efficacy, because the immediate threat of the CBRN attack would be so much greater than any potential risks caused by the countermeasure.
  • In conjunction with EUA, PREP Act protection was also granted retroactively to February 4th (announced March 17th). The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act, as noted in a previous article, legally indemnifies from all liability anyone who does anything related to a product that receives Emergency Use Authorisation. Again, this was intended for very extreme emergency situations involving CBRN agents, so that if a countermeasure caused harm while being used during the attack, no one would get sued.

Origins cover-up:

  • Anthony Fauci, Jeremy Farrar, Francis Collins, Eddie Holmes and others in the international group of gain-of-function funders and researchers were conspiring to publish multiple documents denying the possibility that the virus could have emerged from the virus lab they were funding and working with in Wuhan, China.
  • Emily Kopp at U.S. Right to Know has compiled a detailed timeline of these activities, many of which occurred on the days just before and just after February 4th 2020.

Keep reading