On Twitter, independent journalist Alex Berenson wrote: “It [the mRNA ‘vaccine’] doesn’t stop infection or transmission. Don’t think of it as a vaccine. Think of it – at best – as a therapeutic with a limited window of efficacy and a terrible side effect profile that must be dosed IN ADVANCE OF ILLNESS. And we want to mandate it? Insanity.”
None of what he said is untrue, but just for daring to say it Twitter banned his account — just as it has wrongly banned and suspended tens of thousands of people for speaking the truth or sharing an opinion (including me).
Berenson’s thread on this reads: “Can’t wait to see Twitter’s lawyers try to explain this. Remember when Twitter banned me? Remember the fifth strike? Yes, that was Twitter banning me for writing that “It doesn’t stop infection. Or transmission.” Hey, check out this “Perspective” piece that ran yesterday in the New England Journal of Medicine, maybe’s the world’s top medical journal: Yeah, but who wrote the Perspective? Probably just some nobody looking for attention [Fauci].” [an allusion to Fauci’s alleged narcissism]
Just as with the Wuhan lab leak, the powers that are having to admit they’re wrong when the evidence became so widespread it was foolish to continue to deny and suppress it (both of which they did over the last year, shamelessly). But the way they’re doing it is both disingenuous and manipulative.
Fauci added his name to a scientific paper that just came out (mid-Dec, 2021). In it, he all but admits that the ‘vaccine’ he pushed onto the world isn’t up to par, by arguing for the need for continued research to find a version of the drug that actually works to prevent transmission of Covid-19.
The mRNA shots are “safe and effective” we’re being told, even though doesn’t do the most basic thing vaccines do: provide immunity or prevent transmission.
The unvaccinated are blamed for its failure, rather conveniently, similar to Nero blaming the Christians for his own act of arson, or Hitler blaming convenient scapegoats for the Reichstag fire.
About a month ago (Nov. 2021) Bill Gates admitted problems with the so-called ‘vaccine’ (which is not a vaccine), essentially acknowledging that they don’t stop viral transmission (even though that’s what a real vaccine is supposed to do).
Instead of calling for it to be abolished – which any sane, responsible person would do, given the disaster that all this has unleashed on the world — Gates argued for its further technological refinement.
And we know from bitter experience over the last two years that whatever drugs they create will be forced on us without room for debate – which is medical tyranny.
Gates admitted, “We didn’t have vaccines that block transmission. We got vaccines that help you with your health, but they only slightly reduce the transmission. We need a new way of doing the vaccines.”
Robert Malone said from the start that mRNA technology was too risky and would result in worse mutations, immune to the drug, due to ADE. This was denied by the propagandists who outrageously call themselves ‘fact-checkers’ (very Orwellian of them).
Malone was maligned for daring to speak the truth — along with thousands of other scientists and physicians. They were right all along, but are still being maligned by the MSM – which has yet to admit it was wrong to shamelessly promote such lies.
These new admissions from two of the core co-conspirators of the new medical tyranny (Gates, Fauci) are tantamount to admitting that humanity is the guinea pig and this really is a violation of the Nuremberg Code.
The intent of that law was to prevent medical experiments on unwilling test subjects, such as happened at Auswitsch and Unit 731, during World War II.
Are we unwilling test subjects? If we’re coerced into taking them, against our will, then yes we are. Austria is the first nation-state to have mandated them for all citizens, so it is a clear violation of that international Law.
It has been argued that vaccine mandates are also coercive and violate the Nuremberg Code since people must have jobs to live. And vax passports too, since access across borders and into some venues is crucial for some people.
Prosecuting this is a different matter, however. When all the power is on the side of the oppressor, this tends to influence courts to side with power. They shouldn’t but they do.
Fauci is affiliated with The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, part of the National Institute of Health (NIH) which funded the development of SARS-CoV2.
Describing the paper, Fauci’s institute says that, “The authors call for an international collaborative effort to extensively sample coronaviruses from bats as well as wild and farmed animals to help understand the full “universe” of existing and emerging coronaviruses.
“Such studies could, they say, provide early warning about coronaviruses poised to cause outbreaks in humans. They write that carefully controlled human challenge trials, in which volunteers are exposed to coronaviruses, could yield a fuller understanding of coronavirus disease processes and inform vaccine design.”
[NB – In other words, instead of shutting down the program, admitting they’re wrong, and facing criminal prosecution for crimes against humanity, they want to increase their efforts to push experimental injections on humanity, by force. What could go wrong?]
They continue: “Despite the availability of safe, effective COVID-19 vaccines, it remains unknown whether and how permanent immunity can be achieved, the NIAID authors note.
[NB – This is yet another example of gaslighting us into believing that a drug that had multiple serious adverse effects and isn’t effective at preventing infection and transmission is both “safe” and “effective.” A safe, effective vaccine is one that provides full, permanent immunity and has no adverse side effects. mRNA shots do neither]
“They say SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, will probably continue to circulate indefinitely in periodic outbreaks, and animal coronaviruses of unknown transmissibility and lethality may emerge at any time.
[NB – In reality, nothing can stop its spread now — but it’s not actually a serious disease. It has a relatively low mortality rate. The only reason people take it seriously is due to media fear-mongering]
“Therefore, we must greatly accelerate our efforts in coronavirus vaccinology, they write. The authors outline the features of an ideal universal coronavirus vaccine that would provide durable protection from most or all coronaviruses for individuals of all ages and communities at large . . .
[NB – But rather than developing such a drug in a lab, as would normally be done, it was forced on the world through an unprecedented campaign of coercion, through lockdowns and mandates, enforced by fines and arrests, with disastrous economic, social, political, and health consequences.]
The net effect is that those who continue to take it will have compromised immune systems — making many of them dependent for life on whatever Big Pharma wants to pump us full of. And Fauci et al plan to force us to take even more experimental drugs in the future, turning humanity into a race of perpetually ill drug addicts.
In other words, we can expect a dystopian nightmare in which pharmaceutical corporations control all our lives, ruin our health, get the media to lie to us, and force us to accept all of it at the end of a loaded gun. All because of an ordinary respiratory disease that under normal circumstances no one would pay attention to.
Technological optimism and pessimism
Technological optimists always push ahead with experimental technologies in this way, violating the precautionary principle at our expense, and replacing ethics with the ideal of ‘progress.’ A good metaphor is gambling: a person could win everything, but it’s more likely that they’ll lose everything.
To be sure, this haphazard attitude has brought us many great conveniences and inventions, but it has also caused great tragedies and perils, including the environmental crisis — which is often compared to a runaway train nearing a canyon with no bridge. It is now giving us medical tyranny.
In the face of this, what’s called on is a healthy dose of what’s termed “technological pessimism” to counter the reckless optimism that’s already driven us well past the danger zone.
According to a research paper on attitudes towards new technologies, one can “receive contradictory messages from media and opinion leaders” and
“risks may be intrinsically uncertain or not known; psychological proclivities shape
the reception of messages.” This can lead to either risk over- or under-estimation. Right now, we’re suffering from a bad case of risk under-estimation at the highest levels of governance.
The worst-case scenario is a dystopian future like that pictured in the film THX-1138, in which everyone is forced to take meds all the time, to control them, robots and computers run everything, and humanity is reduced to a herd of obedient slaves. If they make the drug addictive, that would be the final touch.
Were the mRNA shots designed to fail?
The first comment on that thread (which has thousands of comments now) is quite good and worth sharing: “the term “breakthrough infection” is engineered, Orwellian doublespeak. Up until Covid, it was understood that the correct, scientific term to use when someone is A) vaccinated and then B) gets infection/disease anyway is “vaccine failure.””
That’s a good point. In other words, the ‘vaccine’ is a failure and this truth cannot be evaded, except with doublespeak. But instead of abandoning the program, which has brought them so much power and wealth, they’re doubling down, insisting that even more experimental injections are necessary.
And it could well be that the mRNA shots were designed to fail in order to create the kind of destabilization through controversy necessary to justify an authoritarian takeover of previously free societies. In other words, this chaos is by design
I have previously reported that some doctors are saying mRNA ‘vaccines’ were designed to fail: “There are simply too many ‘breakthrough’ cases in too many countries for the jab to be called a success. But instead of blaming the jab, and abolishing it, the unvaccinated are unjustly scapegoated. This is in addition to the problem of the negative side-effects.
“Were they designed to fail, on purpose, or did they fail as a result of poor design and lack of sufficient testing? I would tend to go with the former theory: they were designed to fail because (1) their failure can be blamed on the unvaccinated (scapegoating is politically useful if you’re trying to impose Communism) and (2) it makes a lot of people much sicker over time, which is good for business for pharma corporations.”
The hope is that we’ll all awaken out of this nightmare and correct the situation before it goes much further. If we don’t, humanity will go down a very dark path from which it may never emerge. This is just as serious as the environmental crisis, in my view. They both pose existential threats to humanity.