Saturday, December 12, 2020

Officers raid home of former Florida COVID-19 data scientist

The Florida scientist who specialized in curating COVID-19 data recently had her home raided and a gun pointed at her children. The raid of her Tallahassee home came after Rebekah Jones was fired in May. Jones claims that she lost her job for refusing to “manipulate” COVID-19 data, and she’s b


Yet Another Major Escalation In Establishment Internet Censorship


YouTube, whose corporate owner Google is arguably the most powerful company on earth, is now deleting user videos which claim the US election was fraudulent.

YouTube’s official statement on its decision to do this is very revealing, not so much for what it says as for what it does not say.

At no point does the video publishing platform attempt to argue that it is removing these videos because they jeopardize anyone’s health or safety, as it did when it began deleting videos deemed to be spreading misinformation about Covid-19.

At no point does it attempt to argue that these videos are inciting violence, as it did when it began deleting QAnon videos.

At no point does it claim that these videos are misleading voters, as it initially began collaborating with the US government to prevent, since all the voting is over and done with.

It’s simply deleting the videos because they are believed to be wrong. This is an important distinction, because it’s a marked deviation from the previous policy of content deletion used by YouTube and other new media platforms.

 — @YouTubeInsider

“Yesterday was the safe harbor deadline for the U.S. Presidential election and enough states have certified their election results to determine a President-elect,” YouTube writes. “Given that, we will start removing any piece of content uploaded today (or anytime after) that misleads people by alleging that widespread fraud or errors changed the outcome of the 2020 U.S. Presidential election, in line with our approach towards historical U.S. Presidential elections. For example, we will remove videos claiming that a Presidential candidate won the election due to widespread software glitches or counting errors. We will begin enforcing this policy today, and will ramp up in the weeks to come.”

I neither know nor care whether the sort of election fraud alleged to have taken place in the contest between Joe Biden or Donald Trump actually happened; I know the processes by which candidates are elevated to run in a US general election are corrupt and rigged from top to bottom, so the question of whether additional manipulation took place between two establishment-approved imperialist oligarch lackeys in a pretend election is not particularly interesting to me. But this new move by YouTube is a major escalation in the continually escalating rollout of internet censorship protocols by US government-tied Silicon Valley megacorporations.

Even if America did not have the single most flawed election system in the entire western world (and it does), and even if it had been conclusively proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that no election fraud of any sort took place (and it hasn’t), it would still be a massive escalation beyond previous online censorship protocols to begin censoring people simply because they are wrong. People are allowed to be wrong. A free society allows people the right to voice wrong beliefs because the only alternative is creating a monolithic Ministry of Truth which has authority over what the right and wrong beliefs are.

Those of us who’ve been warning of the dangers of government-aligned plutocratic corporations lowering their standards for silencing speech further and further were not committing a slippery slope fallacy; it’s not fallacious to warn of a slippery slope when the slope is demonstrably real. The fact that we’ve been methodically paced from accepting the cross-platform deletion of Alex Jones a couple of years ago to random internet users being silenced for no other reason than expressing wrongthink today shows us the slope is very real and very consequential, and our slide into information totalitarianism will continue if something major does not change.

 — @mtaibbi

Matt Taibbi has written a solid article condemning YouTube’s latest ramp-up and highlighting the double standard in the way Democrats have been pushing narratives about Trump colluding with Russia to fraudulently steal the 2016 election for four years with no consequences whatsoever while Trump supporters are banned from doing essentially the exact same thing. I would add that the primary source of this double standard is not ideological bias (though that’s surely a factor as well) but the coziness these Silicon Valley tech giants have formed with US government agencies who signed off on Russiagate but not on Trump’s claims. It’s not so much a liberal bias as it is a US intelligence cartel bias.

In reality, there was never any more evidence for liberal claims of Russia interfering with the US election in any meaningful way than there is for election fraud in 2020. Actual journalists and impartial social media platforms would have recognized the indisputable fact that the Russian hacking narrative was extremely porous and remains completely unproven, and the narrative about Russian memes swaying the election is a complete joke. The only thing giving the Democrats’ claims more narrative weight than those of the Republicans today is that one was endorsed by the US intelligence cartel (the same US intelligence cartel which just so happened to wind up advancing multiple preexisting agendas using Russiagate) and the other was not. That’s it.

Those who understood that whoever controls the narrative controls the world and that plutocrat-controlled mass media is the linchpin of the oligarchic status quo were very excited about the arrival of the internet, because they understood its information-democratizing potential. Now we’re all watching those hopes slowly eroded into nothing as the same power structures which control and influence the mainstream media now work to take full control over online information.

 — @aaronjmate

“On average 88% of the videos in top 10 search results related to elections came from authoritative news sources (amongst the rest are things like newsy late-night shows, creator videos and commentary),” YouTube boasts in the aforementioned statement on its deletion of wrongthink election videos. “And the most viewed channels and videos are from news channels like NBC and CBS.”

As though rigging your algorithms to give users results which link to the same plutocratic media outlets who’ve helped deceive the public about every war and continuously manipulate them into believing status quo politics totally work is something to be proud of.

If information which isn’t approved by the powerful continues to be squeezed into smaller and smaller fringe circles, the information-democratizing potential which once gave revolutionary thinkers so much hope will be completely nullified, and all that will remain is a network which allows establishment power structures to distribute propaganda much faster than they could back in the days of the old media. Here’s hoping our rulers fail in their attempts to do this, and that we succeed in our desire to stop them.


Thanks for reading! The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for at my website or on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics on Twitter, throwing some money into my tip jar on Patreon or Paypal, purchasing some of my sweet merchandise, buying my new book Poems For Rebels or my old book Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge.

Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2


Vitamin C Treatment for COVID-19 Being Silenced

Disclaimer: The entire contents of this website are based upon the opinions of Dr. Mercola, unless otherwise noted. Individual articles are based upon the opinions of the respective author, who retains copyright as marked.


Friday, December 11, 2020

China's extensive 'honey trap' spy network could involve thousands of ploys underway now, ex-operative says

close Video Democrat Rep.


Supreme Court rejects Texas election case


President Donald J. Trump (Official White House photo by Joyce N. Boghosian)

The U.S. Supreme Court late Friday rejected the Texas case against four battleground states that President Trump called "the big one."

The court said Texas lacked standing under Article III of the Constitution.

"Texas has not demonstrated a judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another State conducts its elections."

Justice Clarence Thomas joined Justice Samuel Alito in dissent.

"In my view, we do not have discretion to deny the filing of a bill of complaint in a case that falls within our original jurisdiction," Alito wrote.

The complaint was filed directly with the Supreme Court on the premise that the high court has original jurisdiction over disputes between states.

Alito said he would "therefore grant the motion to file the bill of complaint but would not grant other relief, and I express no view on any other issue."

Alito cited the Supreme Court's decision in Arizona v. California, which said "we likely do not have discretion to decline review in cases within our original jurisdiction that arise between two or more States."

Texas alleged Georgia, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania "exploited" the coronavirus pandemic to "justify unlawfully enacting last-minute changes and ignoring both federal and state election laws, thus skewing the results of the 2020 General Election."

Allen West, the chairman of the Republican Party of Texas, said in a statement in response to the denial that the Supreme Court has "decreed that a state can take unconstitutional actions and violate its own election law."

"This decision will have far reaching ramifications for the future of our constitutional republic," he said. "Perhaps law-abiding states should bond together and form a Union of states that will abide by the constitution."

Michael Gwin, a spokesman for Joe Biden, said the Supreme Court "has decisively and speedily rejected the latest of Donald Trump and his allies' attacks on the democratic process."

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz told the Washington Examiner that Trump asked him on Tuesday to present oral arguments in the case. The senator had offered to do the same in a similar case filed by a Pennsylvania congressman that was denied an injunction by the Supreme Court.

President Trump had asked to join the Texas case, along with Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Utah.

Missouri filed a friend-of-the-court brief Wednesday afternoon that was joined by Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah and West Virginia. The District of Columbia filed a brief on Thursday on behalf of the defendant states that was joined by 20 states and the territories of Guam and the Virgin Islands.

In addition, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and 126 other House Republicans signed a brief presenting their "concern as Members of Congress, shared by untold millions of their constituents, that the unconstitutional irregularities involved in the 2020 presidential election cast doubt upon its outcome and the integrity of the American system of elections."


The post Supreme Court rejects Texas election case appeared first on WND.


Is the COVID economic collapse orchestrated? Uh … YES!



I'm going to be quoting a lot of sources in this column rather than writing much original content. That's because there are so many others saying things better than I can.

A few days ago, I read a piece by Daisy Luther (The Organic Prepper) called "How the COVID Response has Destroyed the Personal Finances of Americans." It was so depressing that I could only read it a little at a time. Normally Luther does a superb job of offering hope in seemingly hopeless situations; but boy, this one was a downer from start to finish.

Among much else, the author wrote: "In the United States, our personal finances have taken blow after blow. Eight million more Americans than last year are now living in poverty as millions of jobs have disappeared, never to return. Data from the review site Yelp shows that 60% of the businesses that shut down due to COVID have permanently closed. People who were formerly struggling are sinking, and many of those who were comfortably middle class are desperately trying to stay afloat. It isn't so much the virus that has caused our financial woes – it's the response to the virus. Federal, state, and local governments have deemed what businesses are allowed to operate and how they must do so. This has resulted in the loss of businesses themselves, loss of sales, and loss of jobs. Nearly every family is feeling the effects to some degree."

For families affected by the lockdowns, the pain is unimaginable. I nearly wept when I read one comment written by a desperate mother: "All our savings are gone. We will probably lose our only vehicle this week. Our house will be foreclosed on in January. We have done everything we can to stop the bleeding, most of our bills are 3-6 months behind. I've applied everywhere I can, fast food, everything and I haven't been hired. Our kids have asked for socks for Christmas and basically only that, because they know how bad it is and they all need socks. I sew and I tried to create an Etsy shop, sell things on Facebook marketplace and I sold nothing. So much wasted time. We've sold quite a few of our belongings. I don't even know what to do anymore. We've asked for help, but there isn't any charity with money left. So being homeless with 5 kids is going to be excellent. If anything major were to happen right now, I don't know what we would do. Major stuff is coming."

Make no mistake, we're in the throes of an orchestrated economic collapse. Orchestrated. Got that? Orchestrated. It's not about controlling a virus; it's about controlling people. Even Rush Limbaugh is calling this a "plandemic."

One person commented: "I remember thinking when the lockdowns started – don't they know this is going to destroy the economy? And then reality hit me, and I knew that this is their end game and that it's all been planned."

"It just seems like the goalposts keep moving and some of these policies don't seem tied to science," says Steven Greenhut, a Sacramento-area resident working for R Street Institute. "I mean, we ought to treat coronavirus seriously, but just to try to shutdown society without considering the impact on people who are trying to feed themselves and earn a living, it seems crazy."

"Science," in other words, usually means whatever a political tyrant wants it to mean. We all know Trump rallies are "superspreader" events, but BLM or Antifa protests or Biden celebrations are fine, just fine.

Along with millions of others, we've experienced the economic fallout. Our wholesale woodcraft business that has supported us for nearly 30 years absolutely tanked during 2020. Thirty years of building up a business, and now it's gone. Thankfully, we had other financial irons in the fire, but our wholesalers are struggling because their sales venues have been completely shut down for the foreseeable future.

"At some point, we have to realize that while the pandemic is real, the removal of our freedoms is a bigger threat to society," notes Jared Dyson on the Liberty Loft. "The Democrats are openly destroying our economy. They are killing small businesses while providing no relief or aid to those that are suffering. … The coronavirus has infected over 15 million Americans, less than 10% of the U.S. population, and has a death rate of less than 0.5%. Does that warrant destroying small businesses and livelihoods across the country?"

"When policymakers promulgate COVID-19 restrictions, they are asking the people with the least economic margin for error to sacrifice the most," adds Rich Lowry with National Review.

And the worst may yet to come. According to ZeroHedge, "January is going to be a mess. America's small-time landlords, along with their tenants, are in trouble as safety nets are set to expire. Tenants haven't paid rent in months, with a looming eviction moratorium expiring at the end of December. According to Reuters, the lack of rental income for landlords has also been troublesome, with many skipping mortgage payments, potentially resulting in a firesale of properties in the year ahead. For 12 million Americans and their families – this Christmas will be their worst – as the extended unemployment benefits that have kept many of them afloat are set to expire later this month. Then on New Year's Day, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's eviction moratorium expires, which could result in a massive wave of evictions in the first half of 2021. At the moment, $70 billion in unpaid back rent and utilities are set to come due."

And it's not just in America. Even liberal sources such as Time magazine are admitting "COVID-19 linked hunger could cause more deaths than the disease itself," stating: "121 million more people [globally] could be 'pushed to the brink of starvation this year' as a result of disruption to food production and supplies, diminishing aid as well as mass unemployment."

Rand Paul has pointed out there's no scientific evidence tyrannical lockdowns work: "You can take advice and you can give advice. But once you mandate it, it doesn't become advice. It becomes a form of tyranny."

OK, my rant is over. But the economic misery for millions of people continues. Folks, the pain isn't worth the cost.


The post Is the COVID economic collapse orchestrated? Uh … YES! appeared first on WND.


FBI Has Files From Seth Rich’s Laptop Computer


Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours)

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has files from the laptop computer belonging to Seth Rich, a Democratic National Committee (DNC) employee who was killed in 2016, according to a new email.

The bureau also has tens of thousands of documents mentioning Rich.

The FBI “has completed the initial search identifying approximately 50 cross-reference serials, with attachments totaling over 20,000 pages, in which Seth Rich is mentioned,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrea Parker wrote in the message to attorney Ty Clevenger, who is representing a plaintiff in Huddleston v. Federal Bureau of Investigation, a case dealing with a Freedom of Information Act request to the bureau.

FBI has also located leads that indicate additional potential records that require further searching,” Parker added.

The Epoch Times confirmed the email is legitimate.

Parker, who is representing the FBI in the case, didn’t respond to an email or return a voicemail.

The bureau also confirmed it has files from Rich’s laptop and suggested it still has the computer in its possession.

The bureau is “currently working on getting the files from Seth Rich’s personal laptop into a format to be reviewed,” Parker said in the email. She also said the FBI plans on undertaking some level of review of the computer.

The disclosure came as part of a case brought in federal court by Texas resident Brian Huddleston, who filed a Freedom of Information Act request in April asking the FBI to produce all data, documents, records, or communications that reference Seth Rich or his brother, Aaron Rich.

The FBI told the plaintiff in June that it would take 8 to 10 months to provide a final response to the request, prompting the filing of the case in the U.S District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.

Rich was working for the Democratic National Committee when he was shot and killed in Washington on July 10, 2016. The murder remains unsolved.

The new email bolsters a key charge in Huddleston’s filing: that David Hardy, the FBI’s records chief, was wrong when he said in two affidavits that the FBI searched for records pertaining to Rich but could not find any.

Seth Rich is pictured on a poster created by police officials to urge people with information about his murder to come forward. (Metropolitan Police Department)

The first sign that the testimony was erroneous came earlier this year when the nonprofit watchdog Judicial Watch received emails exchanged between FBI agent Peter Strzok and Department of Justice lawyer Lisa Page. The production included several emails mentioning Rich.

Another sign came in March, when former Assistant U.S. Attorney Deborah Sines was deposed in a separate case, Ed Butowsky v. David Folkenflik et. al.

Sines testified that the FBI conducted an investigation into possible hacking attempts on Seth Rich’s electronic accounts following his murder. She said FBI agents examined Rich’s laptop as part of the probe and that a search should uncover emails between her and FBI personnel. She also said she met with a prosecutor and an FBI agent assigned to special counsel Robert Mueller’s team.

The FBI declined to comment, citing a policy of not commenting on pending litigation.

The judge overseeing the Huddleston case in October ordered the defense to produce documents and an index.

In the new email, the government lawyer said the FBI has made “significant progress” in searching for documents mentioning Rich, but still has much work left, including processing the approximately 50 cross-references, undertaking some level of review of the laptop, and completing all remaining services.

The efforts are hampered by the FBI’s Freedom of Information Act office being at 50 percent of its normal workforce due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The government is proposing an amended schedule that would give it three more months to produce the records.

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange arrives at court in London on May 1, 2019. (Daniel Leal-Olivas/AFP via Getty Images)

Clevenger, Huddleston’s lawyer, told The Epoch Times via email that his client is hoping to find out why the FBI was involved in the case, and why it originally denied involvement.

We suspect the FBI may be right that the Metropolitan Police Dept. in D.C. was responsible for investigating Seth’s murder, so that leaves a couple of likely explanations for the FBI’s role: it was investigating a counterintelligence matter or a computer crime. Either scenario would be consistent with Seth transmitting DNC emails to Wikileaks,” he added, referencing a theory put forth by Fox News in 2017 in a report that was later retracted.

Fox was sued over the report. It settled with Rich’s family last month.

A federal judge overseeing the case had earlier this year requested testimony from Wikileaks’ founder Julian Assange.

Rich was killed less than two weeks before WikiLeaks “released a collection of thousands of internal emails and documents taken from the DNC servers,” according to a court filing. One month after Rich’s murder, Assange referenced the DNC staffer in an interview with a Dutch television reporter when discussing the dangers faced by WikiLeaks sources. On Aug. 9, 2016, WikiLeaks offered $20,000 for information about Rich’s murder. The website increased the reward to $130,000 in January 2017.

The Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) several weeks after Rich was shot dead offered a reward for information. A spokeswoman told The Epoch Times via email that the case “remains under active investigation.”

The spokeswoman declined to answer whether the FBI assisted police with its probe. “MPD remains the lead investigative agency over this homicide,” she said.

Clevenger said he thinks the timing of the email from Parker, the assistant U.S. attorney, is significant.

“Some of my colleagues suspect the Trump Administration has pushed the release, but I doubt that,” he wrote. “With the purported election of Joe Biden, the FBI brass probably think they are in the clear, and nothing will ever happen to them, so they no longer have any reason to hide what they did.”

Ivan Pentchoukov contributed to this report.


DEPOPULATION VAX: Trial subjects injected with coronavirus vaccines suddenly test positive for HIV

(Natural News) The coronavirus vaccine is a global depopulation bioweapon. People injected with covid-19 vaccines are suddenly testing positive for HIV.


Is This Why The Media Is Suddenly Reporting On Hunter Biden’s Corruption?


Authored by Andrea Widburg via,

In the world of Democrat politics, there are no coincidences. With that principle in mind, it’s possible to understand why Democrat media outlets are suddenly reporting about Hunter Biden’s corruption, a story that spills over onto his father. The first is to get ahead of potential breaking news about Hunter’s imminent arrest. The second theory is the one Monica Showalter advanced: The leftists used Biden to attain the White House (or so they believe) and are now ready to get rid of him. Having a criminal son may be just what the Obama/Harris camp needs to make that happen. And if there’s any doubt about this theory, an article in The New York Times seems to lay it to rest.

We conservatives remember how, in October, the media and the tech tyrants conspired to block any reports about Hunter Biden, whether those reports were the Senate Intelligence Committee’s findings about the $3.5 million Hunter received from the wife of a Russian politician, or the shocking details of political corruption, drug addiction, and sexual debauchery contained on his hard drive.

Well, to ordinary people, these stories were shocking. To the media and the tech tyrants, these stories were potential dangers to Joe Biden’s candidacy. They had to be stopped – and stopped they were. Twitter and Facebook, the two biggest social media tech tyrants, refused to allow any reports to circulate and banned people, including President Trump’s press secretary, from their platforms when they refused to bow down to this censorship.

News outlets derided the reports about the Biden family’s corrupt dealings, all of which implicated Joe Biden as the man who pimped out his addled son for huge sums of money, as non-stories. That’s not an exaggeration. It’s explicitly what NPR’s public editor said:

Likewise, CNN’s Christiane Amanpour, who’s served as a shill for every tyrannical regime on earth, insisted that, because she was a real “journalist,” it was not her job to investigate stories. Instead, it was only her job to determine whether the results of other people’s investigations met her standards. The Hunter Biden story did not:

Of all the media deceit and propagndizing disseminated in the lead-up to the election to justify their refusal to report on the Hunter Biden documents — despite knowing they were genuine and not from Russia — this on CNN from @camanpour may be the most amazing:

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) December 10, 2020

When President Trump tried to bring the story to Americans’ attention during the first presidential debate, Biden snapped back that it was Russian disinformation, a lie that the media and tech tyrants enthusiastically disseminated

Joe Biden cited the Politico story with former intelligence officials saying the Hunter Biden story was Russian disinformation during the second debate.

Turns out, Hunter’s business dealings with China had been under investigation since 2018.

Nice work @NatashaBertrand

— Greg Price (@greg_price11) December 10, 2020

Suddenly, though, the media is releasing information about the criminal investigations into not both Hunter Biden and Joe’s brother, James Biden. As the above tweet notes, these investigations have been ongoing for years. We also know that a sizable number of voters would have passed over Biden for Trump had they known about Biden family corruption. So, what gives? Why are Hunter and, by extension, Joe himself, suddenly fair game?

It could be that bad things are about to come down from the FBI. After all, Trump did promise that “a lot of big things” will happen soon. The sudden flurry of reports about the Bidens could just be the Democrats’ way of getting ahead of the story so that, if Hunter is shown doing the perp walk, they can say that it’s “old news.”

However, it’s equally likely that the Democrats are making plans to get Biden out of office as quickly as possible – or perhaps, sideline him before he’s even sworn in (assuming, of course, that Biden hangs onto that president-elect title). As Monica Showalter pointed out on Thursday, Biden is not making leftists happy. He’s filling his possible administration with corporate insiders, he wants a former military officer to head the defense department, and he’s continuing to show a very rapid cognitive decline. He’s offering Clinton-era politics with a side of dementia and that is not what the hard left side of the party wants.

In any event, the goal, always, was to get Kamala into the White House. It didn’t and doesn’t matter that the voters don’t like her — as demonstrated by the fact that even her home state of California didn’t like her and her early retreat from the primaries. What matters is that she, unlike both Hillary and Joe, is Barack Obama’s true third term.

Harris is as hard left as they come and willing to do whatever it takes to maintain power. While Joe Biden, despite his corruption and his shift to the hard left, still cherishes some residual notions about the Constitution, Kamala is not hindered by such old-fashioned ideas:

Harris is as hard left as they come and willing to do whatever it takes to maintain power. While Joe Biden, despite his corruption and his shift to the hard left, still cherishes some residual notions about the Constitution, Kamala is not hindered by such old-fashioned ideas:

FLASHBACK: Kamala Harris laughs when Joe Biden brings up the fact that the Constitution would prevent the President from taking Executive Action to confiscate guns.

I wonder how they both feel about this issue now.

— Benny (@bennyjohnson) August 13, 2020

With Americans at large finally learning that Hunter Biden and James Biden are crooked and that Joe is the big, corrupt tree from which these rotten apples fell, there’s going to be lots of pressure on Joe to retire as quickly as is politely possible. It’s The New York Times that gives the game away. On Thursday, it published a positively wistful article entitled “Investigation of His Son Is Likely to Hang Over Biden as He Takes Office: Unless the Trump Justice Department clears Hunter Biden, the new president will confront the prospect of his own administration handling an inquiry that could expose his son to criminal prosecution.” The opening paragraph, speaks of Biden in a “no-win situation” that could be “politically and legally perilous,” and the report continues in that vein. The subtext is clear: Leave. Leave now.

Joe served his purpose by being the bland front person for a full leftist assault on the White House. Now it’s time for him to go. And while his handlers may reward him for a job well done with the pleasure of the inauguration, you can be sure that they’ll pressure him to do what he promised to do, which is to invent a respectable disease and quit ASAP.



Life-Threatening Reactions to Pfizer COVID Experimental Vaccines Results in Warnings to People Who Have Allergies

In August, CHD asked regulators to investigate the use of polyethylene glycol (PEG) in COVID mRNA vaccines, which could have caused the severe allergic reactions reported this week by two of the first UK recipients of Pfizer’s vaccine.


New York State Assembly Introduces Bill Mandating COVID-19 Vaccine

New Yorkers will no longer get to decide if they will receive a COVID-19 vaccine if a bill calling for a mandatory vaccine gets approved. New York State Assemblywoman Linda Rosenthal, a Democrat who represents New York’s 67th Assembly District, quietly introduced a bill on Dec.


CNN: ‘Don’t Be Alarmed’ if People Start Dying After Taking the COVID Vaccine

by Summit News In an article on the COVID vaccine rollout, CNN says that Americans shouldn’t be alarmed if people start dying after taking the vaccine because “deaths may occur that won’t necessarily have anything to do with the vaccine.


99% of U.S. Population Would Not Benefit From Mass Vaccination With Pfizer’s RNA Covid-19 Vaccine


News headlines claim 95% effectiveness for Pfizer RNA COVID-19 vaccine. In hard numbers, there is only a marginal (less than 1%) statistical advantage to vaccination compared to an inactive placebo vaccine. This deception will lead to massive overvaccination of the U.S. population. 

Knowledge of Health, Dec. 9, 2020 – Analysis of data released by the FDA reveals mandated vaccination of the entire U.S. population with PFIZER’S COVID-19 RNA vaccine would prevent less than 1% of COVID-19 cases.

On December 10, 2020, the Food & Drug Administration, acting as a front-man for Pfizer drug company, released a seemingly positive report on the safety and effectiveness of a 2-dose RNA COVID-19 vaccine, claiming 95% effectiveness.

The design for this ongoing vaccine study is intended to determine how well an RNA-altering COVID-19 vaccine reduces incidence of COVID-19 infection as determined by a PCR (polymerase chain reaction) nasal swab test and by symptomology over a short-term (sometime 7 days after the 2nd inoculation).  The PFIZER Report is available for viewing and analysis.

The 2-inoculation regimen is used to reduce dose-related side effects.

Both vaccinated and placebo groups experienced less than 1-percent infection rates in hard numbers, but on a relative basis vaccinated subjects experienced 95% less risk for infection.

The chance of benefiting from vaccination is less than 1-percent because very few are infected in the first place.  This scheme hides the fact massive overvaccination needs to occur to produce a health benefit for very few.

Over all there were 9 cases of COVID-19 among 19,965 vaccinated subjects vs. 169 among 20,172 subjects in the placebo group. (9 divided by 169 = .05 or ~95% relative reduction in new cases of COVID-19). This is how investigators came up with the quoted 95% effectiveness for this vaccine.

It should not be misconstrued that 95% effectiveness means 95 out of 100 benefited from vaccination by reduction of risk for infection.

Over 38,000 subjects had to be inoculated to determine the number of lab-tested cases of COVID-19 were reduced from 169 to 9; (9 in 19,965 vaccinated subjects = 0.00045% or 4.5 cases in 10,000); compared to 162 COVID-19 infections among 20,172 that received an inactive placebo (0.00803% or 8 cases in 1000).

Extrapolated to entire US population (325,000,000)

If the data gleaned from the FDA/PFIZER vaccine report were applied and the entire U.S. population was vaccinated, the following chart reveals the number of infected cases would dramatically drop to 146,250 compared to 2,609,750 cases if an inactive placebo were administered, but 325,000,000 Americans would have to be inoculated to achieve these numbers, with no assurance immunity would last, with no assurance deaths would decline, and with uncertainty whether side effects will exceed benefits.

The RNA vaccine activated dormant viruses that resulted in cases of temporary facial nerve paralysis (Bell’s palsy) and could activate incapacitating Guillain barre syndrome, shingles and hepatitis.

A number of vaccines that have undergone more rigorous study than the current COVID-19 vaccines now being licensed have been recalled due to severe side effects, some years after gaining licensure.

The data reveals 99% of the U.S. population would not benefit from RNA-vaccination against COVID-19.  There is the possibility the number of side effects will exceed the number of infections prevented.

Public health authorities report 15.5 million accumulated cases of COVID-19 whereas the extrapolation presented here shows only 2,609,750 cases of COVID-19 infection with an inactive placebo vaccine.  For explanation, the 15.5 is an accumulated number of cases  while the 2,609,750 cases is tabulated at one point in time.

Guesstimated deaths

286,000 COVID-19-related deaths have been reported since January of 2020, or 53 cases for every death.  (15.2 million cases divided by 286,000 deaths = 53)

According to the Centers for Disease Control, only 6% of the reported 286,000 deaths are solely attributed to COVID-19 with the rest attributed to advanced age and co-existent weakened immune systems and co-morbid conditions such as diabetes and heart disease.

Therefore, the corrected number of deaths attributed solely to COVID-19 is 6% of 286,000 = 17,160 COVID-only deaths, which is a ratio of ~885 cases for every death without an effective vaccine.  (17,160 COVID-19-only related deaths in a population of 325 million would be a 0.000053% death rate or 5.3 in 100,000).

That would mean the number of subjects needed to treat (NNT) to prevent 1 death would be 885.  That is the reason why COVID-19 death numbers need to be skewed higher in order to justify vaccination.  Hence, older people who have comorbidities + a positive PCR COVID-19 test are considered to have died of COVID-19, not with COVID-19.

Mandatory vaccination with Pfizer’s yet unproven RNA vaccine would be presumed to raise the number of cases required to produce 1 death (now 1 in 885), thus reducing risk, which would be a very challenging task.

In the PFIZER vaccine study, there were 2 deaths in the RNA-vaccine group and 4 in the placebo group.  Those deaths were not attributed to vaccination.  Regardless of the numbers, there is no data to show  Pfizer’s COVID-19 RNA vaccine reduces the COVID-19 death rate whatsoever.  Only a long-term study would reveal any survival benefit for vaccination.  They study was not designed to determine death rate.

When only 286,000 subjects (w/comorbidities) die in a population of 325 million, that equals 8.8 deaths in 10,000 or 0.00088%.  When only 17,160 die with COVID-19 (w/o comorbidities), that is 5.3 deaths per 100,000 or 0.000053%.  Either way, whichever mortality numbers are used, a lot of people have to be vaccinated to save 1 life.

Any analyst would conclude, from these numbers, this is not a pandemic.  Only a flawed PCR test and re-categorization of deaths produces the above mortality numbers.  Even then, the chance of dying of or with COVID-19 is remote and contrived.

Confirmation of infection

Occurrence of COVID-19 was assessed by PCR (polymerase chain reaction) testing of a nasal swab sample and also by symptomology.  The PCR test is notoriously inaccurate and produces 100% false positives and is known to start pseudo-epidemics.

Prior to the beginning of the Pfizer study, almost no cases of COVID-19 were detected in both vaccine and placebo groups respectively.  Again, with all of the fear mongering over this COVID-19 pandemic, only 3 subjects entered the study with a positive PCR test for COVID-19 out of ~38,000 study participants (0.000078% or ~8 in 100,000).

Side Effects and adverse events

A major problem is that vaccination itself often induces symptoms of infection such as fever, vomiting, diarrhea, headache, fatigue, which makes it difficult to distinguish vaccine-related side effects from symptoms of the disease.

Among 18,804 vaccinated subjects, 8 experienced an adverse event.

Among 18,892 patients receiving placebo (inactive agent by injection), 5 experienced an adverse event.

There were very few severe side effects: Just 1 participant experienced a severe side effect in the vaccine group versus 3 in the placebo group.

Obesity is a strong risk factor for COVID-19 infection.  Only 3 (37.5%) were obese in the vaccine group and 67 (41.4%) in the placebo group.

Only 14.2% of 19,000 vaccinated subjects reported fever.  Fever is necessary to activate antibodies against any infectious disease.  It is questionable whether vaccination will produce long-term immunity against COVID-19 coronavirus.

A total of six deaths occurred in the reporting period (2 deaths in the vaccine group, 4 in placebo group).

Suspected cases of COVID-19

There were 3410 total cases of “suspected” but unconfirmed COVID-19 by PCR test in the overall study population; 1594 occurred in the vaccine group (8.2%) among ~19,500+ vaccinated subjects vs. 1816 (~9.3%) among ~19,500 placebo-treated participants. This reveals there was very little relative difference (1.1%) between vaccinated and unvaccinated groups when evaluated by symptomology.

Within 7 days after any vaccination, suspected COVID-19 cases as determined by symptomology were 409 in the vaccine group vs. 287 in the placebo group.  There was a small favorable reduction in symptoms in the placebo group compared to the vaccinated group in this immediate post-inoculation period.  (409 among 19,500 vaccinated = 2.0% vs. 287 among 19,500 unvaccinated group = 1.5%).

Contents of vaccine and likely method of action

Any resistance to infection may have been temporarily produced by the noxious chemicals in the vaccine.  The Pfizer vaccine contains noxious chemicals that will likely activate the immune system and transiently raise the resistance to infection, regardless of the RNA-altering activity of the vaccine.  However, this immune system activation would not be expected to last long.  Post-vaccination testing was done 7+ days following immunization.

According to the FDA report, the Pfizer RNA vaccine contains the following:

A nucleoside-modified messenger RNA encoding the viral spike glycoprotein (S) of SARS-CoV-2. The vaccine also includes the following ingredients: lipids (4-hydroxybutyl)azanediyl) bis(hexane-6,1-diyl)bis(2- hexyldecanoate), 2-[(polyethylene glycol)-2000]-N,N-ditetradecylacetamide, 1,2-distearoyl-snglycero-3-phosphocholine, and cholesterol), potassium chloride, monobasic potassium phosphate, sodium chloride, dibasic sodium phosphate dihydrate, and sucrose.

Nerve palsy

News headlines point to four cases of temporary facial nerve paralysis (Bell’s Palsy) in the vaccinated group versus none in the unvaccinated group.  Certainly, noxious chemicals in the vaccine may have activated dormant herpes viruses in the facial nerve.  Bell’s palsy and shingles are more often reported by older adults, especially adults over age 80.  The 80+ age group is the most vulnerable to COVID-19 but very few participants in this study were over age 75 to accurately assess this risk.  RNA-COVID-19 vaccination may cause dormant viruses to erupt and result in cases of shingles, facial nerve paralysis (Bell’s palsy), Guillain Barre syndrome, and hepatitis.

The post 99% of U.S. Population Would Not Benefit From Mass Vaccination With Pfizer’s RNA Covid-19 Vaccine appeared first on LewRockwell.


Covid Vaccine—History Matters



Now that governments are going to roll out “a vaccine to save the world” (see here and here), people should become aware of a history they don’t know exists.

The article below was a small section of my book, AIDS INC., which I wrote in 1987-8. At the time, I decided to take a look at vaccines and see what I could find out about them.

My ensuing research led me into all sorts of surprising areas.

Since the period of 1987-8, much more has come to light about vaccine safety and efficacy. Here is what I discovered way back when—

“The combined death rate from scarlet fever, diphtheria, whooping cough and measles among children up to fifteen shows that nearly 90 percent of the total decline in mortality between 1860 and 1965 had occurred before the introduction of antibiotics and widespread immunization. In part, this recession may be attributed to improved housing and to a decrease in the virulence of micro-organisms, but by far the most important factor was a higher host-resistance due to better nutrition.” Ivan Illich, Medical Nemesis, Bantam Books, 1977

“In a recent British outbreak of whooping cough, for example, even fully immunized children contracted the disease in fairly large numbers; and the rates of serious complications and death were reduced only slightly. In another recent outbreak of pertussis, 46 of the 85 fully immunized children studied eventually contracted the disease.

“In 1977, 34 new cases of measles were reported on the campus of UCLA, in a population that was supposedly 91% immune, according to careful serological testing. Another 20 cases of measles were reported in the Pecos, New Mexico, area within a period of a few months in 1981, and 75% of them had been fully immunized, some of them quite recently. A survey of sixth-graders in a well-immunized urban community revealed that about 15% of this age group are still susceptible to rubella, a figure essentially identical with that of the pre-vaccine era.” Richard Moskowitz, MD, The Case Against Immunizations, 1983, American Institute of Homeopathy.

“Of all reported whooping cough cases between 1979 and 1984 in children over 7 months of age – that is, old enough to have received the primary course of the DPT shots (diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus) – 41% occurred in children who had received three or more shots and 22% in children who had one or two immunizations.

“Among children under 7 months of age who had whooping cough, 34% had been immunized between one and three times…

“… Based on the only U.S. findings on adverse DPT reactions, an FDA-financed study at the University of California, Los Angeles, one out of every 350 children will have a convulsion; one in 180 children will experience high-pitched screaming; and one in 66 will have a fever of 105 degrees or more.” Jennifer Hyman, Democrat and Chronicle, Rochester, New York, special supplement on DPT, dated April, 1987.

“A study undertaken in 1979 at the University of California, Los Angeles, under the sponsorship of the Food and Drug Administration, and which has been confirmed by other studies, indicates that in the U.S.A. approximately 1,000 infants die annually as a direct result of DPT vaccinations, and these are classified as SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) deaths. These represent about 10 to 15% of the total number of SIDS deaths occurring annually in the U.S.A. (between 8,000 and 10,000 depending on which statistics are used).” Leon Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, CW Daniel Company Limited, Saffron Walden, Essex, England, 1987.

“Assistant Secretary of Health Edward Brandt, Jr., MD, testifying before the U.S. Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources, rounded… figures off to 9,000 cases of convulsions, 9,000 cases of collapse, and 17,000 cases of high-pitched screaming for a total of 35,000 acute neurological reactions occurring within forty-eight hours of a DPT shot among America’s children every year.” DPT: A Shot in the Dark, by Harris L. Coulter and Barbara Loe Fischer, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

“While 70-80% of British children were immunized against pertussis in 1970-71, the rate is now 39%. The committee predicts that the next pertussis epidemic will probably turn out to be more severe than the one in 1974/75. However, they do not explain why, in 1970/71, there were more than 33,000 cases of pertussis with 41 fatal cases among the very well immunized British child population; whereas in 1974/75, with a declining rate of vaccination, a pertussis epidemic caused only 25,000 cases with 25 fatalities.” Wolfgang Ehrengut, Lancet, Feb. 18, 1978, p. 370.

“… Barker and Pichichero, in a prospective study of 1232 children in Denver, Colorado, found after DTP that only 7% of those vaccinated were free from untoward reactions, which included pyrexia (53%), acute behavioral changes (82%), prolonged screaming (13%), and listlessness, anorexia and vomiting. 71% of those receiving second injections of DTP experienced two or more of the reactions monitored.” Lancet, May 28, 1983, p. 1217

“Publications by the World Health Organization show that diphtheria is steadily declining in most European countries, including those in which there has been no immunization. The decline began long before vaccination was developed. There is certainly no guarantee that vaccination will protect a child against the disease; in fact, over 30,000 cases of diphtheria have been recorded in the United Kingdom in fully immunized children.” Leon Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, p. 58.

“Pertussis (whooping cough) immunization is controversial, as the side effects have received a great deal of publicity. The counter claim is that the effectiveness and protection offered by the procedure far outweigh the possible ill effects… annual deaths, per million children, from this disease over the period from 1900 to the mid-nineteen seventies, shows that from a high point of just under 900 deaths per million children (under age 15) in 1905, the decline has been consistent and dramatic. There had been a lowering of mortality rates of approximately 80% by the time immunization was introduced on a mass scale, in the mid-nineteen fifties. The decline has continued, albeit at a slower rate, ever since. No credit can be given to vaccination for the major part of the decline since it was not in use.” Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, p. 63.

“… the swine-flu vaccination program was one of its (CDC) greatest blunders. It all began in 1976 when CDC scientists saw that a virus involved in a flu attack outbreak at Fort Dix, N.J., was similar to the swine-flu virus that killed 500,000 Americans in 1918. Health officials immediately launched a 100-million dollar program to immunize every American. But the expected epidemic never materialized, and the vaccine led to partial paralysis in 532 people. There were 32 deaths.” U.S. News and World Report, Joseph Carey, October 14, 1985, p. 70, “How Medical Sleuths Track Killer Diseases.”

“Despite (cases) in which (smallpox) vaccination plainly failed to protect the population, and despite the rampant side-effects of the methods, the proponents of vaccination continued their attempts to justify the methods by claims that the disease had declined in Europe as a whole during the period of its compulsory use. If the decline could be correlated with the use of the vaccination, then all else could be set aside, and the advantage between its current low incidence could be shown to outweigh the periodic failures of the method, and to favour the continued use of vaccination. However, the credit for the decline in the incidence of smallpox could not be given to vaccination. The fact is that its incidence declined in all parts of Europe, whether or not vaccination was employed.” Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, pp. 6-7.

“Smallpox, like typhus, has been dying out (in England) since 1780. Vaccination in this country has largely fallen into disuse since people began to realize how its value was discredited by the great smallpox epidemic of 1871-2 (which occurred after extensive vaccination).” W. Scott Webb, A Century of Vaccination, Swan Sonnenschein, 1898.

“In this incident (Kyoto, Japan, 1948) – the most serious of its kind – a toxic (vaccine) batch of alum-precipitated toxoid (APT) was responsible for illness in over 600 infants and for no fewer than 68 deaths.

“On 20 and 22 October, 1948, a large number of babies and children in the city of Kyoto received their first injection of APT. On the 4th and 5th of November, 15,561 babies and children aged some months to 13 years received their second dose. One to two days later, 606 of those who had been injected fell ill. Of these, 9 died of acute diphtheritic paralysis in seven to fourteen days, and 59 of late paralysis mainly in four to seven weeks.” Sir Graham Wilson, Hazards of Immunization, Athone Press, University of London, 1967.

“Accidents may, however, follow the use of this so-called killed (rabies) vaccine owing to inadequate processing. A very serious occurrence of this sort occurred at Fortaleza, Ceara, Brazil, in 1960. No fewer than 18 out of 66 persons vaccinated with Fermi’s carbolized (rabies) vaccine suffered from encephalomyelitis and every one of the eighteen died.” Sir Graham Wilson, Hazards of Immunization.

“At a press conference in Washington on 24 July, 1942, the Secretary of War reported that 28,585 cases of jaundice had been observed in the (American) Army between 1 January and 4 July after yellow fever vaccination, and of these 62 proved fatal.” Sir Graham Wilson, Hazards of Immunization.

“The world’s biggest trial (conducted in south India) to assess the value of BCG tuberculosis vaccine has made the startling revelation that the vaccine ‘does not give any protection against bacillary forms of tuberculosis.’ The study said to be ‘most exhaustive and meticulous,’ was launched in 1968 by the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) with assistance from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta, Georgia.

“The incidence of new cases among the BCG vaccinated group was slightly (but statistically insignificantly) higher than in the control group, a finding that led to the conclusion that BCG’s protective effect ‘was zero.’” New Scientist, November 15, 1979, as quoted by Hans Ruesch in Naked Empress, Civis Publishers, Switzerland, 1982.

“Between 10 December 1929 and 30 April 1930, 251 of 412 infants born in Lubeck received three doses of BCG vaccine by the mouth during the first ten days of life. Of these 251, 72 died of tuberculosis, most of them in two to five months and all but one before the end of the first year. In addition, 135 suffered from clinical tuberculosis but eventually recovered; and 44 became tuberculin-positive but remained well. None of the 161 unvaccinated infants born at the time was affected in this way and none of these died of tuberculosis within the following three years.” Hazards of Immunization, Wilson.

“We conducted a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial to test the efficacy of the 14-valent pneumococcal capsular polysaccharide vaccine in 2295 high-risk patients… Seventy-one episodes of proved or probable pneumococcal pneumonia or bronchitis occurred among 63 of the patients (27 placebo recipients and 36 vaccine recipients)… We were unable to demonstrate any efficacy of the pneumococcal vaccine in preventing pneumonia or bronchitis in this population.” New England Journal of Medicine, November 20, 1986, p. 1318, Michael Simberkoff et al.

“But already before Salk developed his vaccine, polio had been constantly regressing; the 39 cases out of every 100,000 inhabitants registered in 1942 had gradually diminished from year to year until they were reduced to only 15 cases in 1952… according to M. Beddow Baylay, the English surgeon and medical historian.” Slaughter of the Innocent, Hans Reusch, Civitas Publishers, Switzerland, and Swain, New York, 1983.

“Many published stories and reports have stated, implied and otherwise led professional people and the public to believe that the sharp reduction of cases (and of deaths) from poliomyelitis in 1955 as compared to 1954 is attributable to the Salk vaccine… That it is a misconception follows from these considerations. The number of children inoculated has been too small to account for the decrease. The sharp decrease was apparent before the inoculations began or could take effect and was of the same order as the decrease following the immediate post-inoculation period.” Dr. Herbert Ratner, Child and Family, vol. 20, no. 1, 1987.

“So far it is hardly possible to gain insight into the extent of the immunization catastrophe of 1955 in the United States. It may be considered certain that the officially ascertained 200 cases (of polio) which were caused directly or indirectly by the (polio) vaccination constitute minimum figures… It can hardly be estimated how many of the 1359 (polio) cases among vaccinated persons must be regarded as failures of the vaccine and how many of them were infected by the vaccine. A careful study of the epidemiologic course of polio in the United States yields indications of grave significance. In numerous states of the U.S.A., typical early epidemics developed with the immunizations in the spring of 1955… The vaccination incidents of the year 1955 cannot be exclusively traced back to the failure of one manufacturing firm.” Dr. Herbert Ratner, Child and Family, 1980, vol. 19, no. 4, “Story of the Salk Vaccine (Part 2).”

“Suffice it to say that most of the large (polio) epidemics that have occurred in this country since the introduction of the Salk vaccine have followed the wide-scale use of the vaccine and have been characterized by an uncommon early seasonal onset. To name a few, there is the Massachusetts epidemic of 1955; the Chicago epidemic of 1956; and the Des Moines epidemic of 1959.” Dr. Herbert Ratner, Child and Family, 1980 vol. 19, no. 4.

“The live (Sabin) poliovirus vaccine has been the predominant cause of domestically arising cases of paralytic poliomyelitis in the United States since 1972. To avoid the occurrence of such cases, it would be necessary to discontinue the routine use of live poliovirus vaccine.” Jonas Salk, Science, March 4, 1977, p. 845.

“By the (U.S.) government’s own admission, there has been a 41% failure rate in persons who were previously vaccinated against the (measles) virus.” Dr. Anthony Morris, John Chriss, BG Young, “Occurrence of Measles in Previously Vaccinated Individuals,” 1979; presented at a meeting of the American Society for Microbiology at Fort Detrick, Maryland, April 27, 1979.

“Prior to the time doctors began giving rubella (German measles) vaccinations, an estimated 85% of adults were naturally immune to the disease (for life). Because of immunization, the vast majority of women never acquire natural immunity (or lifetime protection).” Dr. Robert Mendelsohn, Let’s Live, December 1983, as quoted by Carolyn Reuben in the LA WEEKLY, June 28, 1985.

“Adminstration of KMV (killed measles vaccine) apparently set in motion an aberrant immunologic response that not only failed to protect children against natural measles, but resulted in heightened susceptibility.” JAMA Aug. 22, 1980, vol. 244, p. 804, Vincent Fulginiti and Ray Helfer. The authors indicate that such falsely protected children can come down with “an often severe, atypical form of measles. Atypical measles is characterized by fever, headache… and a diverse rash (which)… may consist of a mixture of macules, papules, vesicles, and pustules… ”

The above quotes reflect only a mere fraction of an available literature which shows there is a need for an extensive review of vaccination. It is certain that undisclosed, unlooked for illness occurs as a result of vaccines, or as a result of infection after protective immunity should have been conferred but wasn’t. A certain amount of this sort of illness is immunosuppressive in the widest sense, and some in a narrower sense (depression of T-cell numbers, etc.). When looking for unusual illness and immune depression, vaccines are one of those areas which remain partially hidden from investigation. That is a mistake. It is not adequate to say, “Vaccines are simple; they stimulate the immune system and confer immunity against specific germ agents.” That is the glossy presentation. What vaccines often do is something else. They engage some aspect of the body’s immune-response, but to what effect over the long term? Why, for example, do children who have measles vaccine develop a susceptibility to another more severe, atypical measles? Is that virulent form of the disease the result of reactivation of the virus in the vaccine?

Official reports on vaccine reactions are often at odds with unofficial estimates because of the method of analysis used. If vaccine-reaction is defined as a small set of possible effects experienced within 72 hours of an inoculation, then figures will be smaller. But doctors like G.T. Stewart, of the University of Glasgow, have found through meticulous investigation, including visits to hospitals and interviews with parents of vaccinated children, that reactions as severe as brain-damage (e.g., from the DPT vaccine) can be overlooked, go unreported and can be assumed mistakenly to have come from other causes.

Reprinted with permission from Jon Rappoport’s blog.

The post Covid Vaccine—History Matters appeared first on LewRockwell.


Google/YouTube is erasing all evidence of election fraud

Google/YouTube didn’t try to be subtle. It announced on Wednesday that it would delete any videos that so much as mentioned the word “fraud” in connection with Joe Biden’s patently fraudulently ascension to the top of the ticket in the days after the November 3 election.


3 Studies That Show Lockdowns Are Ineffective at Slowing COVID-19

Across America and Europe, many government officials are resuming lockdowns and tightening restrictions in the face of rising COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths.


Thursday, December 10, 2020

YouTube just purged 8,000 channels for promoting “false election claims”



The post YouTube just purged 8,000 channels for promoting “false election claims” appeared first on The Most Important News.


Half of small-business owners fear they won't survive


(Pixabay image)

Nearly half of small-business owners across the nation are at risk of closing by year's end due to the lockdowns implemented in response to the coronavirus pandemic, according to a survey.

About 48% of the owners say they are generating revenues below what they need to stay in business, according to Alignable's Small Business Funding Needs report, Fox Business reported.

The report surveyed 6,300 U.S. business owners during the first week of December.

"It's been nine long, frustrating months for small business owners as they’ve worked tirelessly to save their businesses, livelihoods, and the jobs of everyone they employ," said Alignable CEO Eric Groves in the report.

Groves said the Paycheck Protection Program passed by Congress was only a short-term fix. His organization reported 87% of small-business owners say they need additional funds to survive.

Fully 60% said the need is "critical."

About 82% of the business owners surveyed sought loans of up to $100,000.


Many business owners question "the science" upon which politicians say they rely.

A reporter for the Los Angeles Fox TV affiliate who asked L.A. County Supervisor Sheila Kuehl to provide the evidence behind shutting down outdoor dining in Los Angeles was met with sarcasm.

Kuehl's office said it was "so glad FOX 11 is interested in science," according to Bill Melugin. The reporter received 12 studies but none had anything to do with outdoor dining.

Melugin said he followed up and asked which studies Kuehl used in her decisionmaking.

"They were unable to answer that question," he said.

Yesterday, I reached out to @SheilaKuehl's office to request the "six studies" she claimed to have highlighting outdoor dining risk. They told me they're "so glad FOX 11 is interested in science" & provided me these 12 studies. None of them analyze outdoor dining. @FOXLA

— Bill Melugin (@BillFOXLA) December 9, 2020

And business owners can't be faulted for suspecting the politicians who have closed their businesses don't believe what they say.

The Fox affiliate discovered Kuehl was found dining at a Santa Monica Italian restaurant hours after she voted to move ahead with the ban on outdoor restaurant dining.

But she's one of many across the nation who have been credibly accused of hypocrisy. Among them are Kuehl's governor, Gavin Newsom, who famously was spotted dining indoors with a large group at one of the state's most expensive restaurants.

The toll on business owners was expressed in an emotional video posted on social media by the owner of an L.A. eatery, Angela Marsden. She was overcome by tears as she showed a catering company just 90 feet from her outdoor dining area that was set up one day after L.A. forced her to close her business.

See Angela Marsden's video:

'The near-draconian lockdowns'

Even Joe Biden's coronavirus adviser was once against lockdowns, warning in a March 21 op-ed for the Washington Post of the high economic and social costs of "the near-draconian lockdowns" in effect at the time in China and Italy, which ultimately don't reduce the number of cases, only stretching them out over time.

Michael T. Osterholm, a professor and director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota, advocated the strategy now promoted by epidemiologists at Stanford and Oxford advising Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis: With a 99% survival rate for most, according to the Centers for Disease Control, let the healthy go about their business while protecting the vulnerable, the people over 70 with multiple life-threatening diseases.

Osterholm wrote in his Washington Post piece that "the best alternative will probably entail letting those at low risk for serious disease continue to work, keep business and manufacturing operating, and 'run' society, while at the same time advising higher-risk individuals to protect themselves through physical distancing and ramping up our health-care capacity as aggressively as possible."

"With this battle plan, we could gradually build up immunity without destroying the financial structure on which our lives are based," he said.

In November, however, Osterholm advocating a national lockdown of four to six weeks.

The CDC estimates a 99.997% survival rate for those from birth to age 19 who contract COVID-19. It's 99.98% for ages 20-49, 99.5% for 50-69 and 94.6% for those over 70.

Those who died of coronavirus, according to the CDC, had an average of 2.6 comorbidities, meaning more than two chronic diseases along with COVID-19. Overall, the CDC says, just 6% of the people counted as COVID-19 deaths died of COVID-19 alone.

In a July podcast that resurfaced this week, White House coronavirus adviser Dr. Anthony Fauci admitted the widely used PCR tests pick up harmless fragments of the coronarvirus, resulting in many false-positive cases that result in overstating the threat. In August, the New York Times examined PCR testing data in three states and found "up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus."

WND reported earlier this month an external peer review concluded a major paper supporting the PCR test for COVID-19 has 10 "serious flaws," resulting in many false positive cases.

A briefing published by four British scientists concluded PCR testing is "distorting policy and creating the illusion that we are in a serious pandemic when in fact we are not."

The paper noted that legal cases and technical challenges to PCR mass-testing are growing across Europe, including in the U.K.

"A false positive pseudo-epidemic is a well described phenomenon in the medical literature which results in an exponential rise in diagnosed cases and deaths but no excess deaths," the British researchers write.

WND reported Monday a study published by the peer-reviewed journal Nature found no transmission of the coronavirus among people in close contact with asymptomatic patients.


The post Half of small-business owners fear they won't survive appeared first on WND.


48% Of U.S. Small Businesses Fear That They May Be Forced To “Shut Down Permanently” Soon


What would the United States look like if we lost half of our small businesses?  The reason I ask that question is because approximately half of all small business owners in the entire country believe that they may soon be forced to close down for good.  Not even during the Great Depression of the 1930s did we see anything like this.  The big corporate giants with extremely deep pockets will be able to easily weather another round of lockdowns, but for countless small businesses this is literally a matter of life and death.  Every day we are seeing new restrictions being implemented somewhere in the nation, and the politicians that are doing this are killing the hopes and dreams of countless small business owners.  According to a recent Alignable survey, 48 percent of U.S. small business owners fear that they could be forced to “shut down permanently” in the very near future…

Based on this week’s Alignable Q4 Revenue Poll of 9,201 small business owners, 48% could shut down permanently before year’s end.

In fact, this number jumped from 42% just two months ago, demonstrating how several factors have converged to devastate small businesses: COVID resurgences, forced government reclosures, elevated customer fears, and a surge in online shopping at Amazon and other national ecommerce giants.

When a small business with only a few employees closes down forever, it never makes any national headlines.

But the truth is that small businesses are the heart and soul of our economy, and we are losing more of them with each passing day.

Here are some quotes from actual small business owners that took part in the Alignable survey…

  • COVID has raised its ugly head again. I’m a caterer and I’ve had no work in November and my clients are cancelling for Dec. This is so sad. I have worked so hard to build my business the last 14 years. My business has gone from half a million to not even 200,000. This is devastating for any business.”
  • “COVID closings are killing this country! My business is on hold — no art walks or gallery openings, and I can’t even open my studio. Everything’s online.”
  • “Because therapeutic massage is so ‘up close and personal,’ I have only come back to about 40% of my previous clientele. I am afraid that the governor will shut us down again, which will be the end of my business. I also believe the ‘ruling elite’ does not care about small businesses.”

How would you feel if you spent years putting everything you had into a small business in order to make it successful, only to have the politicians come along and completely destroy it?

And every time a small business has to let workers go, it just makes the unemployment crisis in this country even worse.

On Thursday, we learned that another 853,000 Americans filed new claims for unemployment benefits last week

First-time claims for unemployment insurance totaled 853,000, an increase from the upwardly revised 716,000 total a week before, the Labor Department reported Thursday. Economists surveyed by Dow Jones had been expecting 730,000.

I have been warning that the new lockdowns would make the numbers worse, and that is precisely what is happening.

And one expert that was interviewed by CNBC says that this is just the beginning…

“It looks like the unemployment losses are starting to stack up for the economy. It’s not going to be a good month,” said Chris Rupkey, chief financial economist at MUFG Union Bank. “You’re starting the first week of the month on a bad note, and it’s probably going to be all downhill from here. It feels like the lockdowns are intensifying. It’s closer to reality for those forecasts that look for the economy to go negative in the first quarter.”

It is also important to remember that there are many Americans that have been unemployed for so long that they are no longer eligible to receive benefits.

One of those long-term unemployed workers is 35-year-old Sarah Groome

For six months, she received unemployment benefits from the government – but those payments shrank as the programmes wound down this summer. Since October, she’s received nothing.

“I don’t know what I’m going to do financially,” she says. “I’m applying to jobs and I’ve probably applied to over 100 at this point and I’ve had one interview.”

“It’s scary,” she says. “I don’t know what’s going to happen.”

What do you say to someone in her position?

It’s heartbreaking to hear stories like that, and more people are being laid off with each passing day.

And as our new economic depression gets progressively deeper, an increasing number of Americans are becoming very desperate.

In fact, many have already become so desperate that they are turning to shoplifting

Shoplifting is up markedly since the pandemic began in the spring and at higher levels than in past economic downturns, according to interviews with more than a dozen retailers, security experts and police departments across the country. But what’s distinctive about this trend, experts say, is what’s being taken – more staples like bread, pasta and baby formula.

“We’re seeing an increase in low-impact crimes,” said Jeff Zisner, chief executive of workplace security firm Aegis. “It’s not a whole lot of people going in, grabbing TVs and running out the front door. It’s a very different kind of crime – it’s people stealing consumables and items associated with children and babies.”

Everywhere we look, our society is starting to break down all around us.  Americans have filed new claims for unemployment benefits more than 70 million times this year, the number of homeless in New York City has reached an all-time record high, and civil unrest continues to erupt all over America.

No matter what happens politically, conditions are going to continue to deteriorate as we head into 2021.

Of course the mainstream media is boldly proclaiming that the new vaccines will pull us out of this tailspin and that life in America will soon return to normal.

You can believe the mainstream media if you want, but in the end the “hope” that they are promising will turn out to be a complete mirage.

***Michael’s new book entitled “Lost Prophecies Of The Future Of America” is now available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.***

About the Author: My name is Michael Snyder and my brand new book entitled “Lost Prophecies Of The Future Of America” is now available on  In addition to my new book, I have written four others that are available on including The Beginning Of The EndGet Prepared Now, and Living A Life That Really Matters. (#CommissionsEarned)  By purchasing the books you help to support the work that my wife and I are doing, and by giving it to others you help to multiply the impact that we are having on people all over the globe.  I have published thousands of articles on The Economic Collapse BlogEnd Of The American Dream and The Most Important News, and the articles that I publish on those sites are republished on dozens of other prominent websites all over the globe.  I always freely and happily allow others to republish my articles on their own websites, but I also ask that they include this “About the Author” section with each article.  The material contained in this article is for general information purposes only, and readers should consult licensed professionals before making any legal, business, financial or health decisions.  I encourage you to follow me on social media on FacebookTwitter and Parler, and any way that you can share these articles with others is a great help.  During these very challenging times, people will need hope more than ever before, and it is our goal to share the gospel of Jesus Christ with as many people as we possibly can.

The post 48% Of U.S. Small Businesses Fear That They May Be Forced To “Shut Down Permanently” Soon appeared first on The Economic Collapse.