7-Year-Old Died of Cardiac Arrest 13 Days After Pfizer Shot, VAERS Data Shows

/

U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to March 4, 2022, for 5- to 11-year-olds show:

9,009 adverse events, including 213 rated as serious and 5 reported deaths.

The most recent death involves a 7-year-old boy (VAERS I.D. 2152560) from Washington who died 13 days after receiving his first dose of Pfizer’s COVID vaccine when he went into shock and suffered cardiac arrest. He was unable to be resuscitated and died in the emergency department. [MORE]

From [CHD] The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) today released new data showing a total of 1,168,894 reports of adverse events following COVID vaccines were submitted between Dec. 14, 2020, and March 4, 2022, to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). VAERS is the primary government-funded system for reporting adverse vaccine reactions in the U.S.

The data included a total of 25,158 reports of deaths — an increase of 331 over the previous week — and 203,888 reports of serious injuries, including deaths, during the same time period — up 3,557 compared with the previous week.

Excluding “foreign reports” to VAERS, 783,282 adverse events, including 11,505 deaths and 75,286 serious injuries, were reported in the U.S. between Dec. 14, 2020, and March 4, 2022.

Foreign reports are reports foreign subsidiaries send to U.S. vaccine manufacturers. Under U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations, if a manufacturer is notified of a foreign case report that describes an event that is both serious and does not appear on the product’s labeling, the manufacturer is required to submit the report to VAERS.

Of the 11,505 U.S. deaths reported as of March 4, 17% occurred within 24 hours of vaccination, 22% occurred within 48 hours of vaccination and 60% occurred in people who experienced an onset of symptoms within 48 hours of being vaccinated.

In the U.S., 554 million COVID vaccine doses had been administered as of March 4, including 327 million doses of Pfizer, 209 million doses of Moderna and 18 million doses of Johnson & Johnson (J&J).

Every Friday, VAERS publishes vaccine injury reports received as of a specified date. Reports submitted to VAERS require further investigation before a causal relationship can be confirmed. Historically, VAERS has been shown to report only 1% of actual vaccine adverse events.

U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to March 4, 2022, for 5- to 11-year-olds show:

The most recent death involves a 7-year-old boy (VAERS I.D. 2152560) from Washington who died 13 days after receiving his first dose of Pfizer’s COVID vaccine when he went into shock and suffered cardiac arrest. He was unable to be resuscitated and died in the emergency department.

  • 17 reports of myocarditis and pericarditis (heart inflammation).

The CDC uses a narrowed case definition of “myocarditis,” which excludes cases of cardiac arrest, ischemic strokes and deaths due to heart problems that occur before one has the chance to go to the emergency department.

U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to March 4, 2022, for 12- to 17-year-olds show:

The most recent death involves a 14-year-old boy (VAERS I.D. 2148498) who experienced a cerebral aneurysm leading to death one day after receiving his first dose of Pfizer’s COVID vaccine.

  • 69 reports of anaphylaxis among 12- to 17-year-olds where the reaction was life-threatening, required treatment or resulted in death — with 96% of cases attributed to Pfizer’s vaccine.

  • 650 reports of myocarditis and pericarditis with 631 cases attributed to Pfizer’s vaccine.

  • 161 reports of blood clotting disorders, with all cases attributed to Pfizer.

U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to March 4, 2022, for all age groups combined, show:

The Fully Vaccinated Make up the Vast Majority of COVID Cases, Hospitalizations and Deaths in the UK. Triple Jabbed Account for 8 in Every 10 COVID Deaths in England

/

 From [HERE] Data from the United Kingdom show that Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) deaths among the unvaccinated have plummeted, while COVID-19 deaths from the country’s vaccinated population continue to surge.

This claim is confirmed by a report from the U.K. Health Security Agency (UKHSA), a government agency less than a year old that was formed to be the British government’s health improvement and health protection agency.

As part of its duties, the UKHSA regularly published COVID-19 Vaccine Surveillance Reports. These reports contain data on COVID-19-related cases, hospitalizations and deaths. The reports also group the information based on the vaccination status of the patient or the deceased.

One of the agency’s latest reports, published March 3, proves that the fully vaccinated and those who have received booster doses of the vaccine make up the vast majority of COVID-19 cases in the United Kingdom.

“[The report] does absolutely no favors for Pfizer and the claimed efficacy of its COVID-19 injection,” wrote the Daily Expose in an article covering the latest UKHSA report.

It should also be noted that the U.K. is dealing with a surge in COVID-19 cases. On March 6, the government confirmed 71,259 new COVID-19 cases, the highest number of new cases in over a month and up by 56 percent from last week.

The government also recorded 1,406 new COVID-related admissions into hospitals on that day, up by a third from last week and it is the seventh day in a row where COVID-19 hospitalizations have risen week-on-week.

Seventy-nine percent of the British population has received at least one dose of the vaccine. Seventy-three percent are fully vaccinated and 57 percent are fully vaccinated and boosted.

Children likely getting infected by fully vaccinated parents

The UKHSA’s March 3 report covers cases, hospitalizations and deaths by vaccination status in England between Jan. 31 and Feb. 27.

It shows that, of the nearly 1.1 million COVID-19 cases reported in England during this period, 846,616 – or 77 percent of all cases – were vaccinated and only 244,313 were unvaccinated.

Of the vaccinated cases, 67,669 were partially vaccinated, 162,998 were fully vaccinated and a whopping 615,949 were fully vaccinated and boosted.

The data also shows that more than half of the unvaccinated COVID-19 cases – 169,482 – are under 18 years old. This means children are most likely getting infected with COVID-19 through their fully or triple-vaccinated parents, other loved ones or possibly even their teachers. (Related: Fully vaccinated individuals are SHEDDING GRAPHENE and infecting the unvaccinated, causing serious health complications.)

UKHSA’s report shows that between Jan. 31 and Feb. 27, there were a total of 7,931 confirmed COVID-related hospitalizations in England. Of those, only 1,832 were unvaccinated and the remaining 6,099 were vaccinated. Among the unvaccinated hospitalizations, 812 were among children.

Of the vaccinated hospitalized COVID-19 cases, 363 were partially vaccinated, 1,178 were fully vaccinated and 4,558 were fully vaccinated and boosted.

A similar situation can be seen when looking at COVID-19 deaths during this time. There were a total of 3,939 confirmed COVID-19 deaths in England. Unvaccinated individuals only account for 397 of these deaths. This means that the vaccinated individuals account for 90 percent of all COVID-19 deaths in England.

Among the 3,542 vaccinated COVID-19 deaths, 113 were partially vaccinated, 725 were fully vaccinated and a whopping 2,704 were fully vaccinated and boosted at the time of their death.

Instead of looking at this data and using it to push for an end to vaccinations in England, the government is preparing to administer the fourth dose of the COVID-19 vaccines later this month. The first groups eligible for this second booster include people over 75, care home residents and people with weakened immune systems.

Data Shows Fully Vaccinated Individuals in UK, New Zealand are Developing AIDS

/

From [HERE] Data recently released by the New Zealand government showed fully vaccinated individuals developing acquired immunodeficiency syndrome or AIDS, showing major degradation of the immune system.

Just like other governments before, the New Zealand Ministry of Health only provides a cumulative total of Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) cases from August 16, 2021, showing misleading numbers considering that the nation is currently experiencing its biggest outbreak to date.

However, this is not the only problem when it comes to New Zealand’s reporting. On August 16, 2021, the date the Health Ministry has chosen to provide a cumulative total, only 18.4 percent of the population was considered fully vaccinated.

Infections have been increasing, with 20,632 new infections reported on average every day. This is around 99 percent of the peak average reported on March 7.

New Zealand has administered at least 10,757,940 doses of the vaccines so far. Assuming every person needs two doses, that number is enough for 109.4 percent of the country’s population. However, only 78 percent are considered fully vaccinated.

The data presented by the government showed that the real-world two-dose COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness between January 6 to February 11,  proved to be in the negative at -94.4 percent. However, between February 12 to 24, the numbers declined further, with effectiveness estimated to have fallen to -281.35 percent. This means the fully vaccinated are 3.8 times more likely to be infected with COVID-19 than the unvaccinated or single-dose population.

Much of the data that is being released also showed that the shots are slowly giving the population AIDS, which is a complete degradation of the immune system. When this happens, even the slightest cold could be detrimental to their health, as their immune systems will be too weak to fight off the virus. (Related: Dr. Zev Zelenko: Anyone with immune deficiency can die from a cold.)

UK data shows similar evidence

The U.K. government also recently released more documentation that showed strong evidence of the COVID-19 vaccine causing AIDS. According to compiled data, vaccine immunity is not supposed to wane. The human immune system, however, can get damaged or degraded.

Vaccine effectiveness, as it turns out, is not the measure of a vaccine per se, but a measure of its effectiveness in terms of the recipient’s immune system performance compared to the immune system performance of an unvaccinated person.

The first time the body encounters a germ, it can take several days to make and use all the germ-fighting tools needed to get over the infection. After, the immune system remembers what it learned about how to protect the body against the disease.

Vaccines, on the other hand, help develop immunity by imitating an infection. Once the imitation goes away, the body is left with a supply of “memory” t-cells and antibodies that will remember how to fight the disease in the future. So when authorities say that vaccine effectiveness weakens over time, they really mean that the immune system is the one that is weakening.

In taking the case rates found in previous reports, tracking the real-world vaccine effectiveness and immune system performance is easy based on previously published data.

Based on the information given, the 40 to 49-year-old age range had the worst immune system performance, which was recorded at -60 percent by January 2. It declined further to -67.7 percent by January 30.

With the information given, it can be gauged that COVID-19 death rates per 100,000, by vaccination status in England, calculated from the number of deaths found and the size of the double-vaccinated population, it seems that the double vaccinated population has the highest death rate per 100,000 in every age group except for the 18 to 29 and 40 to 49-year-olds. However, it is expected that the rate could switch up in the coming weeks.

Dr. John Campbell: Court Ordered Release of Pfizer Documents Provides No Factual Basis to Support FDA and Pfizer Claims that the "Vaccine" is Safe and Effective

/

From [KIRSCH] and [HERE] a former advocate of the vaccine, trusted by millions of people, has now realized he’s been deceived and he’s not happy about it at all.

Dr. John Campbell published a video entitled “The Pfizer documents” where he steps through just one of the 150 released Pfizer documents in detail: the ADVERSE EVENTS OF SPECIAL INTEREST (AESI) document (aka the “5.3.6 document”). 

One of the most disturbing findings was that the number of doses shipped was redacted from the safety document. The (b) (4) designation in the video snip below is a FOIA redaction code that means “Trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person and privileged or confidential.”). Wow. The number of doses shipped is a secret?! Dr. Campbell was justifiable upset by this redaction, as he should be.

But even if we knew the number shipped, we still wouldn’t know the number of doses actually administered which we’d need to calculate the safety profile of the drug.

Dr. Campbell correctly points out that there is no way to assess safety if you don’t know what the denominator is. 

He wonders out loud, why on earth would they redact that? It can’t be proprietary. 

Indeed, I believe that the only reason you’d redact such a number is if you are trying to hide something. 

The underreporting factor

More troubling is that nobody has talked about the underreporting factor, including Dr. Campbell. This is the factor that you multiply the reports by in order to get the number of events that actually occurred. Voluntary reporting systems often have an underreporting factor of 10 to 100 or even more depending on the severity of the symptom.

There was no attempt whatsoever to calculate the underreporting factor (URF) by Pfizer in the report. Are you surprised?

I guarantee you, all of these event reports are unreported. But Pfizer is silent on this and of course the CDC is never going to calculate this number because they don’t want anyone to know it either. If you ask them for it, they stonewall you and never provide it. So nobody can do a proper risk benefit analysis, including the CDC. This is not a problem for them since they are not required to produce such a document. Have you ever seen it? What URF did they use? Answer: they assume that VAERS and everything else is fully reported and never bother to calculate the URF. They know this is wrong. This is intentional. Their job is to push the vaccine and ignore all the safety signals.

Because our health authorities, mainstream academia, mainstream press, and members of Congress don’t want to know the underreporting factor (since if people knew that, they’d realize the vaccines are unsafe and it would create vaccine hesitancy), it’s up to the so-called “misinformation spreaders” such as myself to calculate this number.

I’ll do that three different ways, just to show you how large the number is. The smallest URF is 89 (for serious events). The largest URF is over 163 (for less serious events).

To make this article shorter, I’ve moved the three URF derivations to my Pfizer article.

Overall safety data

Dr. Campbell never even considered the underreporting factor at all in his analysis. He assumed everything was fully reported and even with that he was appalled. The absolute numbers are way too high for a safe vaccine. 

He concludes “This has just destroyed trust in authority” (watch @21:55).

I couldn’t agree more. I’ve been saying that for almost a year now, since I first blew the whistle on the vaccine safety story on May 25, 2021.

Now, can you imagine how he’s going to feel when he realizes it is nearly 100X worse than he thought??

The FDA wanted to hide all of these documents from us for over 75 years

Dr. Campbell never mentioned the fact that the FDA, who knew all of this, believed it should be kept hidden from the public for over 75 years.

Doesn’t that erode trust in the authorities as well, Dr. Campbell?

Unelected Authorities at CDC Admit Collecting and Harvesting People's DNA if They Took a COVID Nasal Swab PCR Test - Without People's Consent to Do So

/

From [HERE] The Centers for Disease Control published a controversial post on Twitter, admitting that Americans who took a Covid-19 nasal swab PCR test may have had their DNA harvested.

“Remember that #COVID19 nose swab test you took?” the post reads. “What happened to the swab? If it was processed with a PCR test, there’s a 10% chance that it ended up in a lab for genomic sequencing analysis. Learn more about the process and its importance.”

Linked in the CDC Twitter post is a video by tech website Wired explaining how nose swabs detect new strains of SARS-CoV-2.

The video report says the alleged “10%” of samples collected are sent in for genomic sequencing testing, claiming the scientists only look at the genetic makeup of the viruses and not the DNA of the humans connected to each sample.

The sequencing is done with cooperation between local, state and federal agencies as well as academic and clinical labs.

While they claim there’s a “10% chance” of samples being tested, the number is surely much higher.

Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene (GA) asked on Twitter, “Did the CDC get permission from people to take their DNA?”

Talking with Newsweek, a professor of Epidemiology and Nutrition at Harvard named Albert Ascherio downplayed the “conspiracy” that anyone’s DNA is being collected by the government or any labs before going on to admit it is actually possible.

“There is no need to test human DNA, but of course, it will be on the swab so it could be tested, which is probably what people may worry about if they are in [a] conspiracy mood,” Ascherio said.

There is a precedent to suspect a government would seek to build a database of human DNA.

The U.S. government has been collecting DNA samples of nearly every child born in the nation’s hospitals for decades now.

According to the left-leaning ACLU, “The DNA of virtually every newborn in the United States is collected and tested soon after birth… It used to be that after the screening was completed the blood spots were destroyed. Not anymore. Today it is increasingly common for states to hold onto these samples for years, even permanently.”

In December of 2019, the Pentagon warned all military personnel not to take mail-in DNA tests.

Forbes questioned at the time, “Could this genetic information lead to genetic surveillance, tracking, and grave privacy concerns for military personnel and others who use these kits?”

Lawsuit: b/c COVID Shots Don't Prevent Infection or Transmission They are Treatments Not Vaccines; and People Have a Right to Refuse Medical Treatment. Mandates Violate Rights/Equal Protection

/

From [HERE] “I take care of a lot of kids with birth defects, cleft lips, cleft palates, extra fingers, extra toes,” Dr. Devan Griner from Lehi is a pediatric craniofacial plastic surgeon. During his six years working in Utah and around the world, he estimates he’s helped hundreds of patients.  

“These are kind of like my own children.  I take care of kids from the time they are born, sometimes before they’re born, all the way until they’re 25 years old and go off. I watch them grow up, they are part of my family,” Griner said. 

The current Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services covid-19 vaccine Federal mandate has Griner scared he may not be able to continue that work because he has not received any doses of the shot. So, he’s filed a lawsuit in federal court to overturn that mandate.  

“I’ve watched over the last year, year and a half as things have progressed, where they’re going, I really want to put a stop now so I’m never in the position where I have to tell my patients and their families they need to go somewhere else or find somebody else,” Griner said. 

The historic federal suit filed in the US District Court for the District of Utah is funded by Dr. David Martin, a renowned IP underwriter and analyst. It names as defendants, President Biden, US Govt, HHS, CMS and others. The lawsuit claims the vaccine mandate is unconstitutional and violates Dr. Griner’s fundamental rights and equal protection under the law.

COVID SHOTS ARE NOT A VACCINE AND THE RIGHT TO REFUSE MEDICAL TREATMENT

The complaint states: "the CMS Mandate must be struck down because:

  1. i. The overwhelming evidence shows that the Injections do not prevent transmission, infection, or reinfection in those who receive them.

  2. The CDC Director has admitted that the Injections do not prevent infection or transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that has been identified by various public health agencies as causing the disease known as COVID-19. “[W]hat [the vaccines] can’t do anymore is prevent transmission.”1

  3. The CDC has acknowledged that the “vaccinated” and “unvaccinated” are equally likely to spread the virus.2

  4. The Injections do not confer immunity but are claimed to reduce the severity of symptoms experienced by those infected by SARS-CoV-2. They are, therefore, treatments and not vaccines as that term has always been defined in the law.

  5. In fact, the CDC has actually changed its definitions of “vaccine” and “vaccination” so that the Injections would fit within the new definition. Until recently, the Centers for Disease Control defined a “Vaccine” as: “A product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease.”3

  6. The CDC also previously defined “Vaccination” as: “The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to a specific disease.”4

  7. Both prior definitions fit the common understanding of those terms. To be vaccinated meant that the recipient should have lasting, robust immunity to the disease targeted by the vaccine.

  8. But on September 1, 2021, the CDC quietly rewrote these definitions. It changed the definition of a “Vaccine” to: “A product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases.”5 It changed the definition of “Vaccination” to: “The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to protection from a specific disease.”6

  9. Thus, the CDC has eliminated the word “immunity” from its definitions of “Vaccine” and “Vaccination.” Upon information and belief, the CDC did so because it recognizes that the Injections do not produce immunity to the disease known as COVID-19.

  10. This is a critical factual and legal distinction. The Supreme Court has long held that the right to refuse medical treatment is a fundamental human right. Since the Injections do not stop the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 as a matter of fact, they are not “vaccines” as a matter of law. Instead, they are a therapeutic or medical treatment which Dr. Griner has the fundamental human right to refuse.

MANDATES VIOLATE FUNDAMENTAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS

The complaint explains,

“Because the Injections are treatments, and not vaccines, strict scrutiny applies. The US Supreme Court has recognized a “general liberty interest in refusing medical treatment.” Cruzan v. Dir., Mo. Dep’t of Health, 497 U.S. 261, 278, 110 S. Ct. 2841, 2851, 111 L.Ed.2d 224, 242 (1990). It has also recognized that the forcible injection of medication into a nonconsenting person’s body represents a substantial interference with that person’s liberty. Washington v. Harper, 494 U.S. 210, 229, 110 S. Ct. 1028, 1041, 108 L.Ed.2d 178, 203 (1990), see also id. at 223 (further acknowledging in dicta that, outside of the prison context, the right to refuse treatment would be a “fundamental right” subject to strict scrutiny).32

As mandated medical treatments are a substantial burden, Defendants must prove that the CMS Mandate is narrowly tailored to meet a compelling interest.

No such compelling interest exists because, as alleged above, the Injections are not effective against the now dominant Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 in that they do not prevent the recipient from becoming infected, getting reinfected, or transmitting SARS-CoV-2 to others. Indeed, evidence shows that vaccinated individuals have more SARS-CoV-2 in their nasal passages than unvaccinated people do.

The Injections may have been somewhat effective against the original SARS-CoV- 2 strain, but that strain has come and gone, and the Injections—designed to fight yesterday’s threat—are simply ineffective against the current variant.

Since the Injections are ineffective against the Delta and Omicron viral variants, and the original variant has been supplanted, there can be no compelling interest to mandate their use at this time.”

But even if there were a compelling interest in mandating the Injections, the CMS Mandate is not narrowly tailored to achieve such an interest.

The blanket mandate ignores individual factors increasing or decreasing the risks that the plaintiff—indeed, all healthcare workers—pose to themselves or to others.

Defendants entirely disregard whether employees have already obtained natural immunity despite the fact that natural immunity does actually provide immunity whereas the Injections do not.

Treating all employees the same, regardless of their individual medical status, risk factors, and natural immunity status is not narrowly tailored.

Moreover, the CMS Mandate fails entirely to consider other existing treatment options beyond the Injections as part of a more narrowly tailored approach. 97. Given these facts, as more fully set forth above, the CMS Mandate has no real or substantial relation to public health or is beyond all question, a plain, palpable invasion of rights secured by the fundamental law. Alternatively, the CMS Mandate has no real or substantial relation to public health or is beyond all question, a plain, palpable invasion of rights secured by the fundamental law as to Plaintiff, who already has natural immunity.”

Mandates Violate the unconstitutional-conditions doctrine.
The complaint states;

The CMS Mandate also violates the unconstitutional-conditions doctrine, under which the government may not condition employment “on a basis that infringes [an employee’s] constitutionally protected interests.” Perry v. Sindermann, 408 U.S. 593,597 (1972); see also Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Mgmt. Dist., 570 U.S. 595, 606 (2013) (“[T]he unconstitutional conditions doctrine forbids burdening the Constitution’s enumerated rights by coercively withholding benefits from those who exercise them.”).

Unconstitutional conditions case law often references the existence of varying degrees of coercion. According to that body of law, Defendants cannot impair Plaintiff’s right to refuse medical care through forms of coercion and through this explicit mandate. See, e.g., Koontz, 570 U.S. 595 (2013). 100. (“[U]nconstitutional conditions doctrine forbids burdening the Constitution’s enumerated rights by coercively withholding benefits from those who exercise them”); Memorial Hosp. v. Maricopa Cty., 415 U.S. 250 (1974) (“[An] overarching principle, known as the unconstitutional conditions doctrine ... vindicates the Constitution’s enumerated rights by preventing the government from coercing the people into giving them up.”)

The decision whether to take a medical treatment or not is a fundamental human right which Plaintiff enjoys. Plaintiff cannot be forced to choose between his right to refuse medical treatment by the government coercively withholding his right to pursue his career as a surgeon, and his passion to heal children with congenital defects such as cleft palates.

Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to temporary, preliminary, and permanent injunctive relief restraining Defendants from enforcing the CMS Mandate.

Pursuant to 28 U.S. Code §§ 2201-02 and other applicable law, Plaintiffs are entitled to a declaration that the CMS Mandate is unlawful and any further relief which may be appropriate.

Violation of Equal Protection

The Equal Protection Clause prohibits classifications that affect some groups of citizens differently than others. (Engquist v. Or. Dept. of Agric. (2008) 553 U.S. 591, 601.) Thetouchstone of this analysis is whether a state creates disparity between classes of individuals whose situations are arguably indistinguishable. (Ross v. Moffitt (1974) 417 U.S. 600, 609.)

The CMS Mandate creates two classes of healthcare workers; injected and uninjected. The members of one class, the uninjected, get terminated. The uninjected cannot advance their careers. They cannot provide for their families, pay their mortgages, or make a car payment. The other class, the vaccinated, get to keep their job in their chosen profession, advance their careers, provide for their families, pay their mortgages, and make their car payments.

Yet the situations of these employees are indistinguishable because injected healthcare workers can become infected with SARS-CoV-2, become re-infected with SARS-CoV- 2, and can transmit SARS-CoV-2 to fellow healthcare workers, patients, and visitors. The Injections make no difference in these respects. Their only function is to make symptoms less severe.

Discriminating against the uninjected controverts the goals of the Equal Protection Clause – i.e., to abolish barriers presenting unreasonable obstacles to advancement on the basis of individual merit.

Pursuant to the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, Plaintiff is entitled to temporary, preliminary, and permanent injunctive relief restraining Defendants from enforcing the CMS Mandate.” [MORE]

Dr. Griner told the media, “Morally I can’t go against what I’m feeling.  If that means the hospitals take away my privileges, then that’s what’s going to happen.  It breaks my heart which is why I want to get on the forefront of this and stop that from ultimately happening,” Griner said.  

Dr. David Martin: mRNA vaccines are gene therapy designed to harm and enslave humanity

/

From [HERE] Well-known truth-teller Dr. David Martin told “Thrive Time Show” host Clay Clark that the mRNA Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines are gene therapy designed to harm people.

“We now have data that has been clearly published in the last several days showing that mRNA does get into the genome, does modify the genome and is not something that’s just this innocent little shot that creates a spike protein and you kind of get you fever and get you COVID symptoms and you get over them,” Martin said during the March 2 episode of the “Thrive Time Show” on Brighteon.TV.

“This is a genetic engineering and genetic modification, as stated by the companies. And it is, in fact, gene therapy, designed to harm humanity and perpetually make humanity a slave to the ongoing gene editing fantasies of psychopaths.” (Related: Bayer executive says covid mRNA shots are “gene therapy” falsely marketed as “vaccines.”)

Martin also gave an explanation about CRISPR after Clark brought up the technology that uses mRNA in gene editing.

CRISPR technology

“CRISPR has been around for almost a decade. It is a technology where we use nucleic acid engineering sequences to go in and essentially clip out what are called palindromic repeats,” Martin stated.

“Most people don’t understand that this whole thing, this whole mess that we’re in right now actually started in the 1950s, when we took what was chromosomes, which is the natural occurring form of nucleic acids in the human body, and pulled them apart and turn them into what we call DNA, that model does not exist. In reality, it doesn’t exist in any living system.

“What do exist are chromosomes, the entangled version of nucleic acids. But what we did was we took them apart, we took them into these long strings. And then what we found is that there are sequences inside of those we call genes. In those genes, what we found was sub-sequences which actually are the ability to insert or delete information into the genome.”

The speaker and author also compared CRISPR technology to patchwork quilts. He said that a patchwork quilt has a series of patterns and what CRISPR does is it takes one of the patches of the quilt out and replaces it with a different patch.

“But here’s the problem. Chromosomes actually have multi-dimensional information. When we decide to clip out a piece and clip in another piece. We’re not just changing the color of the quilt pattern. We’re changing the quilt. That’s a problem,” Martin said.

Prophets of AI

Clark showed a video clip of Dr. Yuval Noah Harari, who is a historian and bestselling author, speaking at the World Economic Forum. The host asked Martin about his opinion on the top adviser of WEF founder and Executive Chairman Klaus Schwab.

Martin said Harari has a very warped view of human experience just like theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking and businessman-entrepreneur Elon Musk.

He elaborated: “His worldview is like the worldview of those who are the prophets of AI, the prophets of simulated reality. Those prophets all are calling for the erasure of diversity, so that we can actually have a command and control system that quite literally controls what would be called a human population through nothing more than simple upgrades, modifications, Trojan horses, viruses, literally and figurative.

“Their worldview is one that says that there will be an architect and the architect will come in and establish the code and the code will be what the expression of humanity is, in their likeness and image.

“The bottom line is to have a worldview that says, ‘We, those individuals who have creative thought, who have freedom of expression who have liberty, we are going to be exterminated, so that we become a slave race bent on the consumption and control of a few people who think they’re the programmers.’

“The fact of the matter is, Yuval Harari is wrong. Stephen Hawking was wrong. Elon Musk was wrong. AI is not to fear, because it, in fact, has no power over those individuals who have decided to preserve the integrity of their bodies, their minds and their spirits.”

COVID-19 Spike Protein Sequence ‘100% Match’ to Sequence Patented in 2016 by Moderna, Study Shows

/

Story at-a-glance:

  • A study published Feb. 21, 2022, in Frontiers in Virology claims to have discovered that a sequence of the virus’ spike protein is a 100% match to a modified messenger RNA (mmRNA) sequence patented by Moderna in 2016.

  • The genetic sequence patented by Moderna is part of a human DNA repair gene called MSH3. This patented sequence is found in SARS-CoV-2’s furin cleavage site in the spike protein — the part that gives the virus such easy access into human cells.

  • According to Moderna’s patent application, the gene sequence was modified “for the production of oncology-related proteins and peptides,” ostensibly for use in cancer research.

  • According to the researchers, the chance that SARS-CoV-2 would have randomly acquired this furin cleavage site through natural evolution is 1 in 3 trillion.

  • In a Feb. 24, 2022, interview, Moderna CEO Stéphane Bancel proposed the COVID-19 pandemic may have been the result of a lab leak.

From [CHD] The facts surrounding SARS-CoV-2’s origin just keep getting stranger and more disturbing as time goes on.

From the start, most of the evidence seemed to point to the virus being a lab creation that somehow escaped the confines of the laboratory. We really don’t have much of anything to suggest otherwise.

Now, a study published Feb. 21 in Frontiers in Virology claims to have discovered that a sequence of the virus’ spike protein is a 100% match to a modified messenger RNA (mmRNA) sequence patented by Moderna — in 2016.

Some believe this is a smoking gun, proving gain of function research is at the heart of this mystery. Of course, more research is needed to verify the findings, but if proven correct, it could be rather incriminating.

What did Moderna patent?

The genetic sequence patented by Moderna — and now found to be part of the SARS-CoV-2’s furin cleavage site in the spike protein that gives the virus access into human cells — is a 19-nucleotide sequence of a human gene called MSH3, which is a DNA repair gene.

Nucleotides code for specific amino acids. The MSH3 gene works with the part of your immune system responsible for combating cancer by repairing damaged cells. This pathway has been identified as a potential target for new cancer treatments.

As noted in the patent application, the gene sequence has been modified “for the production of oncology-related proteins and peptides,” ostensibly for use in cancer research. The first name listed on the patent is Stéphane Bancel, a Frenchman who has been Moderna’s chief executive officer since 2011.

What’s so curious here is that the scientists of the Frontiers in Virology paper searched all viral and bacterial databases looking for matches to the furin cleavage site patented by Moderna, and SARS-CoV-2 is the only pathogen that has this sequence. It’s an absolute match — 100% identical.

What are the chances of a naturally-occurring virus having a rarely encountered furin cleavage site that is genetically identical to an engineered and patented one? As noted by the authors:

“The absence of CTCCTCGGCGGGCACGTAG from any eukaryotic or viral genome in the BLAST database makes recombination in an intermediate host an unlikely explanation for its presence in SARS-CoV-2.”

In other words, the sequence being a natural zoonosis is extremely unlikely. According to the researchers, the chance that SARS-CoV-2 would have randomly acquired this furin cleavage site through natural evolution is 1 in 3 trillion.

They also noted that “Recombination in an intermediate host is an unlikely explanation.” What’s more, it’s known that inserting a furin cleavage site on the spike protein of a virus will make it more infectious.

Moderna CEO suggests lab leak responsible for COVID-19

One hypothesis raised in the paper is that the matching code might have been introduced into the SARS-CoV-2 genome through infected human cells that express the MSH3 gene. The question, then, is how and when did that happen?

Interestingly, in a Feb. 24 interview, Fox Business host Maria Bartiromo questioned Bancel about the finding. He responded saying their scientists are looking into the claim, adding:

“That it came from a lab is possible. Humans make mistakes. It’s possible that the Wuhan lab in China was working on virus enhancement or gene modification and then there was an accident where somebody was infected in the lab, which affected family and friends. It is possible. On the claim you just mentioned, scientists will look to know if it’s real or not.”

Why This Code?

Now, if SARS-CoV-2 was man-made, why would they use this particular code? As noted in the Frontiers of Virology paper, the MSH3 sequence in question has been shown to cause mismatch repair in DNA, and faulty repair of genetic damage can lead to a number of diseases, including cancer. But overexpression of MSH3 also plays a role in virology:

“Overexpression of MSH3 is known to interfere with mismatch repair … which holds virologic importance. Induction of DNA mismatch repair deficiency results in permissiveness of influenza A virus (IAV) infection of human respiratory cells and increased pathogenicity. Mismatch repair deficiency may extend shedding of SARS-CoV-2 …

“A human-codon-optimized mRNA encoding a protein 100% homologous to human MSH3 could, during the course of viral research, inadvertently or intentionally induce mismatch repair deficiency in a human cell line, which would increase susceptibility to SARS-like viral infection.”

It’s interesting to note that Moderna did not have a single successful mRNA product brought to market before the COVID-19 pandemic allowed them to bypass normal regulatory requirements.

Now, all of a sudden, we’re to believe they managed to throw together a safe and effective mRNA injection against SARS-CoV-2, a virus that just so happens to contain one of its own patented components. What are the odds?

Did Dr. Anthony Fauci, a leading promoter of mRNA technology as a replacement for traditional vaccines, have anything to do with Moderna’s sudden “success”? It certainly looks that way.

After all, the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), an arm of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), both funded and co-developed Moderna’s COVID-19 jab.

As explained by the NIH, the injection “combines Moderna’s mRNA delivery platform with the stabilized SARS-CoV-2 spike immunogen (S-2P) developed by NIAID scientists.”

In mid-November 2021, Moderna granted co-ownership of its COVID-19 mRNA “vaccine” patent to the NIH to resolve a dispute involving the naming of the inventors.

Can the COVID jab trigger cancer?

Incidentally, since the release of the mRNA COVID jab, some doctors have raised concerns about the possibility of the injections to trigger cancer, largely due to its detrimental impact on your immune function.

For clarity, this may have nothing to do with Moderna’s patented MSH3 sequence specifically, because the RNA code in the jab is not identical to the RNA code of the actual virus. The RNA in the jab has been genetically altered yet again to resist breakdown and ensure the creation of abundant copies of the spike protein.

So far, the link to cancer post-jab seems to be related to the downregulation of toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4), which is involved in both infections and cancer. In an October 2021 article, Dr. Nicole Delépine, a French pediatric oncologist, discussed reports of exploding cancer cases post-jab:

“Several months ago, we expressed at least “theoretical reservations” about vaccinating cancer patients or former patients who had been cured, because of the underlying mechanism of the gene injection on immunity.

“Several geneticists had also expressed their concerns about the possible interference between active or dormant cancer cells and the activity of gene therapy on lymphocytes in particular. Months have passed, and the vaccine madness has amplified …

“[C]learly there seems to be three situations:

  • The appearance of a cancer rapidly after the injection (two weeks to a few months) and very progressive, in a person who was previously free of known carcinological pathologies.

    1. The resumption of cancer in a patient who has been in complete remission for several months or years.

    2. The rapid, even explosive, evolution of a cancer that is not yet controlled.

“Beyond the testimonies that are pouring in from relatives and friends and on social networks, a Swiss newspaper has finally addressed the subject in a broader way. Here are some excerpts from their article and their references:

“‘Can COVID vaccines cause cancer? In some cases, the answer seems to be yes … [It] has been shown that in up to 50% of vaccinees, COVID vaccines can induce temporary immunosuppression or immune dysregulation (lymphocytopenia) that can last for about a week or possibly longer.

“Furthermore, COVID mRNA vaccines have shown to ‘reprogram’… adaptive and innate immune responses and, in particular, to downregulate the so-called TLR4 pathway, which is known to play an important role in the immune response to infections and cancer cells.

“Thus, if there is already a tumor somewhere — known or unknown — or if there is a predisposition to a certain type of cancer, such a state of vaccine-induced immune suppression or immune dysregulation could potentially trigger sudden tumor growth and cancer within weeks of vaccination …’”

Dr. Ryan Cole, in August 2021, also reported seeing a significant increase in certain types of cancer, especially endometrial and uterine cancers, since the start of the mass injection campaign. Cole runs a large pathology laboratory in Idaho.

Other key components of SARS-CoV-2 have also been patented

Time will tell where this all leads, but clearly, SARS-CoV-2 does not appear to be the result of natural evolution. The evidence for it being man-made is simply overwhelming. So far, few in mainstream media have been willing to touch this story, for obvious reasons.

Finding a key gene sequence of the virus in a patent of one of the primary vaccine makers is inconvenient to say the least — and this is in addition to all the other patents relating to the virus.

As previously detailed by David Martin, Ph.D., SARS-CoV-2 appears to have been engineered in the 1990s, perfected in 1999 and patented in 2002. Evidence also shows that plans for mandatory vaccinations were hatched in 2015. That year, during an Academies of Science meeting, Dr. Peter Daszak, president of EcoHealth Alliance stated:

“… until an infectious disease crisis is very real, present and at an emergency threshold, it is often largely ignored. To sustain the funding base beyond the crisis, we need to increase public understanding of the need for MCM’s [medical countermeasures] such as pan-influenza or pan-coronavirus vaccine.

“A key driver is the media, and the economics follow the hype. We need to use that hype to our advantage to get to the real issues. Investors will respond if they see profit at the end of [the] process.”

According to Martin, “That’s admission of a felony, and the felony is domestic terrorism.”

In a November 2021 Red Pill Expo speech, Martin reviewed the timeline of the COVID-19 jab, which began in 1990 with the first coronavirus vaccine patent for canines (dogs) filed by Pfizer.

That vaccine was an S-1 spike protein vaccine — just like the current Pfizer COVID shot, and according to Martin, that S-1 spike protein is a bioweapon, not a pathogen.

Nine years later, in 1999, Fauci, as director of the NIAID, tasked the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill with the creation of “an infectious replication-defective coronavirus” specifically targeted for human lung epithelium.

The patent for that replication-defective coronavirus that attacks human lung cells, filed April 19, 2002, (Patent No. 7279327), details the gene sequencing of the resulting virus, and how the ACE receptor, the ACE2 binding domain and the S-1 spike protein were engineered and could be synthetically modified in the lab using readily available gene sequencing technologies.

Basically, computer code is turned into a manmade pathogen, or an intermediate pathogen. This technology was initially funded in order to harness the coronavirus as a vector for an HIV vaccine, but it clearly didn’t end there.

CDC holds patents on SARS coronavirus

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also holds key patents, including an illegally obtained patent for the entire gene sequence for the SARS coronavirus (Patent No. 7220852), which Martin says is 99% identical to the sequence now identified as SARS-CoV-2.

That CDC patent also had several derivative patents associated with it, including U.S. patent 46592703P and U.S. patent 7776521, which cover the gene sequence of SARS coronavirus and the means for detecting it using RT PCR testing.

With these two patents, the CDC has complete scientific control, as it owns the provenance of both the virus and its detection.

According to Martin, there’s also evidence of a criminal conspiracy involving the CDC and Sequoia Pharmaceuticals. April 28, 2003 — three days after the CDC filed its patent for the SARS coronavirus — Sequoia Pharmaceuticals filed a patent on an antiviral agent for the treatment and control of infectious coronavirus (Patent No. 7151163).

So, the CDC filed a patent on SARS coronavirus, and three days later there’s a treatment? This strongly suggests there was a working relationship behind the scenes. Sequoia Pharmaceuticals, founded in 2002, develops antiviral therapeutics with a special focus on drug-resistant viruses. Its lead investors include the Wellcome Trust.

But there’s yet another problem with Sequoia’s 2003 filing for an antiviral agent. It was actually issued and published before the CDC patent on SARS coronavirus had been granted, which didn’t happen until 2007, and the CDC had paid to keep the application private.

So, there is zero possibility for anyone but an insider to have that information. This is clear evidence of criminal conspiracy, racketeering and collusion, Martin notes. You cannot develop a treatment for something that you do not know exists.

Sanofi also owns a series of patents detailing what we’ve been told are novel features of SARS-CoV-2, namely the polybasic cleavage site, the spike protein and the ACE2 receptor binding domain. The first of those patents, U.S. Patent No. 9193780, was issued Nov. 24, 2015.

Between 2008 and 2017, a series of patents were also filed by a long list of players, including Crucell, Rubeus Therapeutics, Children’s Medical Corporation, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität in München, Protein Science Corporation, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, University of Iowa, University of Hong Kong and the Chinese National Human Genome Center in Shanghai.

According to Martin, there are 73 patents, issued between 2008 and 2019, that describe the very elements that are said to be unique to SARS-CoV-2. It’s unclear whether Moderna’s 2016 patent filing is part of that list.

Some of the world’s most dangerous bioweapons are made at a lab in Maryland

/

From [NaturalNews]The United States Army’s premier biolaboratory in Maryland has been exposed as an incubator for the development of deadly pathogens like weaponized coronaviruses, Ebola, Zika, anthrax and more.

USAMRIID was originally commissioned to respond to the Soviet Union’s biological weapons program (or so we were told). But now, it conducts research on some of the deadliest bioweapons known to mankind – and it routinely receives taxpayer funding from Congress to do this.

A state public records request by U.S. Right to Know further revealed that USAMRIID changed its mission statement in 2014 to eliminate references to the Cold War and the creation of medical products for military servicemen. Now, the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, as it is called in long form, appears to function much like the infamous Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in China.

While USAMRIID supposedly stopped developing bioweapons back in 1969, it now conducts research on alleged biological threats including Ebola, Zika, Anthrax and the plague. Its roughly 900 employees, which include military, civilian and contract researchers, also conduct research for universities and private companies.

“The global biological threat landscape has changed due to gain-of-function technology, the limited capacity of the intelligence community to identify biological threats and the proliferation of ‘dual-use’ research programs that generate pathogens that could be harmful in the wrong hands, the report states,” The Defender reported.

Why is the U.S. military wasting taxpayer dollars creating new vaccine and other pharmaceutical products for Big Pharma?

The revelation about USAMRIID comes alongside another revelation that similar U.S.-NATO biolabs litter Europe, North Africa and elsewhere, including in Ukraine.

All over the world, the U.S. military-industrial complex has been building bioweapons laboratories where all sorts of deadly pathogens are being tampered with and released. Whether these releases are accidental or intentional is still up for debate.

USAMRIID has suffered many such problems in recent years, including biosafety “breaches” that have shut down high-security work. Many allege that the Department of Defense (DoD) is wasting gobs of taxpayer dollars in the process.

USAMRIID Commander David Franz says that the Maryland lab has failed to deliver on its mission statement. He also says that the lab’s work does not necessarily involve any type of medical advances, despite claims that this is what goes on there.

“The emphasis on products to the warfighter has become less relevant,” reads a report he helped compile.

“Because prophylaxis for ‘biological agents’ (traditional vaccines) requires great specificity and a period of at least weeks before protection is achieved, the era of vaccines for the force, one of USARMIID’s greatest historic strengths, is essentially over.”

Franz and the others who put together the report recommended that the mission of USARMIID change to focus on the creation of vaccines and drugs. The lab apparently listened and now develops new pharmakeia products for Big Pharma.

“To be the leader in the advancement of medical biological defense with world-renowned experts dedicated to protecting our military forces and the nation,” USAMRIID’s vision statement now reads.

Since 2014 when the vision statement was changed, USAMRIID has faced numerous allegations of “financial mismanagement.” It is also one of two facilities at Fort Detrick with so-called BSL-4 labs, which handle the most dangerous pathogens in the world.

Caree Vander Linden, a public affairs officer at USAMRIID, says that the lab has not developed a Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “vaccine” candidate. However, the facility did test the jabs in their pre-clinical trial stage.

USAMRIID also played a part in developing and unleashing the deadly covid drug remdesivir, which is a major cash cow for Tony Fauci and friends.

Ontario Judge Refuses to Accept as Fact that Injecting Children against COVID is what’s best for them simply because it’s encouraged by the government

/

From [HERE] In a very rare case, an Ontario Judge has actually ruled against a forced COVID vaccination for two children, ages 10 and 12, where a father was requesting that they be forced to receive the shots against their wish, and against the wish of their mother.

While this judge actually just simply did his job, which was to listen to the evidence that both sides presented before ruling, it made waves in the Canadian corporate media, because similar previous cases did not do that, but simply took the Government’s position regardless of what the facts were.

Global News reports:

An Ontario judge says he is not prepared to accept as fact that vaccinating children against COVID-19 is what’s best for them simply because it’s encouraged by the government, noting a number of factors – including the children’s own preferences – must be taken into account.

In a decision issued last week, Superior Court Justice Alex Pazaratz rejected a father’s motion to have his two younger children – ages 12 and 10 – vaccinated despite their mother’s and their own objections, and cautioned against dismissing certain viewpoints without evidence.

The ruling represents a departure from earlier Canadian cases involving disputes over COVID-19 vaccinations, where courts have taken what’s called “judicial notice” – essentially accepting statements as fact – that immunization is beneficial for children, said Alyssa Bach, an associate lawyer at Shulman & Partners LLP.

“We now have cases where judges have taken that judicial notice that the vaccine is in the best interest, and now one where it was decided that that wasn’t the case. And so it’s a reminder that each family’s circumstances, and the circumstances of the children, are going to be taken into consideration on a case-by-case basis,” she said Tuesday.

“It’s notable that Justice Pazaratz, in his decision, did go through the other cases where this judicial notice had been taken and distinguished it and how this case was different than the other cases.”

In most of the previous cases, the children were younger, so their views on COVID-19 shots were “either unascertainable or less relevant because of the child’s lack of maturity,” the judge wrote in his ruling.

And in the cases where the children’s preferences were overridden, the court found the parent seeking vaccination had presented more reasonable information to the children and made more compelling arguments in court, Pazaratz said.

As well, the court in many of those cases found the materials presented by the parent opposed to vaccination were “grossly deficient, unreliable and – at times – dubious. This lack of an equally credible counterpoint to government recommendations may well have been determinative in those earlier cases,” he said.

Not so in the case at hand, the judge noted.

Here, the parents, both in their mid-30s, separated more than seven years ago. The oldest, a 14-year-old boy, lives primarily with his father and chose to vaccinated against COVID-19 last fall – a decision both parents supported, the ruling says.

The two younger children, a 12-year-old girl and a 10-year-old boy, live primarily with their mother. Both were interviewed twice by a social worker and explained why they didn’t want to be vaccinated, with the youngest also expressing fears that his father would force him to get the shots, the document says.

The mother stressed she is not against vaccines overall, adding all three have received their regular immunizations, the ruling says. She also stated she would be open to having the younger two – who have already had the virus and recovered – get COVID-19 shots at a later date “if safety concerns can be better addressed,” it says.

Among the materials she submitted were a fact sheet issued by Pfizer, the drugmaker behind one of the main COVID-19 vaccines, and scientific papers, Pazaratz said.

The father, meanwhile, submitted fact sheets issued by the government and the Canadian Paediatric Society, as well as “numerous downloads” from the mother’s social media accounts on allegations she was promoting conspiracy theories, the ruling says.

“The mother’s evidence focused entirely on the medical and scientific issues. In contrast, the father focused extensively on labelling and discrediting the mother as a person, in a dismissive attempt to argue that her views aren’t worthy of consideration,” the judge said.

What’s more, he said, there is no evidence the mother has sought to impose her views on the children.

Pazaratz warned against allowing personal attacks, rather than debate based on evidence, into the judicial system.

He also cautioned against applying judicial notice in cases “where expert opinion is unclear or in dispute,” noting the government has historically been wrong on many issues, including the residential school system.

The judge further noted that health directives have “constantly changed” during the pandemic as new information emerged.

“This is not the kind of case where the court can say that either side is necessarily correct. Nor that the same determinations should apply for every child, no matter the circumstances,” he wrote.

“Anyone reading even some of the articles presented by the mother would likely conclude that these are complicated and evolving issues, and there can be no simplistic presumption that one side is right and that the other side is comprised of a bunch of crackpots. That’s why the court should require evidence rather than conclusory statements.”

The father, meanwhile, provided no evidence that the mother’s views had been debunked, the judge wrote. (Full article.)

COVID Vaccines Killed More People In 2021 Than All Other Vaccines Killed in 32 Years

/

From [HERE] Year 2021 will go down in history as the year of unprecedented lives destroyed by experimental COVID-19 vaccines.

What I am going to report here at the end of 2021 is that using the U.S. Government’s own data, available to the public (at least at the time of publication), proves conclusively that more people died and were injured by the experimental COVID-19 shots than all other vaccines combined for the past 32 years.

I am going to refer to these COVID-19 experimental injections as “vaccines” since that is how the industry and the U.S. Government refers to them, even though this new class of drugs injected into people does not meet the classic definition of a “vaccine” prior to this year.

I am going to keep this report very simple, and focus on only two data points of the experimental vaccines: reported cases and deaths.

There are other data points that were headline news in 2021, such as the unprecedented amount of fetal deathsfollowing these experimental vaccines, as well as the record number of people suffering and dying from heart diseasefollowing the injections, but we are just going to look at cases and deaths in this report, and I am going to expose some government data that I have not previously reported that will leave no doubt that 2021 was America’s holocaust.

The Globalists and their puppet politicians are guilty of genocide and crimes against humanity, and if the people do not rise up and take these criminals down, things are only going to get worse in 2022.

FOIA Response Reveals that Biden's HHS Paid $1B to Mass Media Outlets to Propagandize the False Safety of COVID Shots in a Uniform Media Campaign that Destroyed Informed Consent and Concealed Reality

/

What is The Dependent Media?

From [HERE] A Freedom of Information Act request filed by Del Bigtree and Robert F Kennedy Jr at Children’s Health Defense has revealed that Biden’s Health and Human Services Department paid $1 billion of your tax dollars to bribe all the major news outlets to tell you to get vaccinated.

“HHS revealed that it purchased advertising from major news networks including ABC, CBS, and NBC, as well as cable TV news stations Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC, legacy media publications including the New York Post, the Los Angeles Times, and the Washington Post, digital media companies like BuzzFeed News and Newsmax, and hundreds of local newspapers and TV stations. These outlets were collectively responsible for publishing countless articles and video segments regarding the vaccine that were nearly uniformly positive about the vaccine in terms of both its efficacy and safety.

“Hundreds of news organizations were paid by the federal government to advertise for the vaccines as part of a ‘comprehensive media campaign,’ according to documents TheBlaze obtained from the Department of Health and Human Services. The Biden administration purchased ads on TV, radio, in print, and on social media to build vaccine confidence, timing this effort with the increasing availability of the vaccines. The government also relied on earned media featuring ‘influencers’ from ‘communities hit hard by COVID-19’ and ‘experts’ like White House chief medical adviser Dr Anthony Fauci and other academics to be interviewed and promote vaccination in the news.”

We weren’t supposed to see this information for 75 years. It was the fight of people like Dr Robert Malone and Dr Naomi Wolfe and others that got this disclosed and the two joined Steve Bannon for this episode of the War Room.

Dr Malone tells Steve, “The courts have forced Pfizer and the FDA to comply with the law, which is that after licensure is granted, these documents must be made available. Previously, they’re considered confidential – and remember that, as Naomi’s about to discuss and what the truckers are so upset about: we have been forced to take these vaxxines, and we have been told that they’re totally safe and effective.

“What this documents is the government has been well aware that they are not fully safe and has hidden this information from us. How that really matters for Pfizer is that the indemnification clauses require that Pfizer disclose known adverse events and this documentation demonstrates they didn’t do so. So, a lot of the lawyers are licking their chops over this, because it seems to indicate a break in the veil, that may allow legal action, basically due to fraud and concealment of these risks from the general public.

“This is why you have not been able to have full informed consent, is they’ve hidden all this information from you and they’ve used all the propaganda and censorship tools – which you’re about to cover – and paid media to keep all this information from you and spin it, so that you think the left is right and the down is the up and the Moon is made of green cheese.”

Bannon refers to so some “Pretty big events that are happening early in the week,” the details of which he’s not at liberty to reveal but in which Dr Malone will be involved and which he will be back on the show to discuss.

Internal Memo Shows Biden, CDC Making Plandemic Decisions by Following Poll Numbers, Not Science

/

Everything Biden said about COVID vaccines was nonsense.

These are the points he made “First, stay protected with vaccines and treatments.  We know how incredibly effective vaccines are.  If you’re vaccinated and boosted you have the highest degree of protection.  …We will never give up on vaccinating more Americans. Now, I know parents with kids under 5 are eager to see a vaccine authorized for their children.  … If necessary, we’ll be able to deploy new vaccines within 100 days instead of many more months or years.  … And with 75% of adult Americans fully vaccinated and hospitalizations down by 77%, most Americans can remove their masks, return to work, stay in the classroom, and move forward safely.”

Actual data contradicts what Biden said.  If COVID vaccines were really effective, then how can the nearly one million COVID deaths be explained with 75% percent of adults vaccinated?  The US COVID death rate is incredibly high compared to other nations.  Biden failed to acknowledge the many hundreds of thousands of Americans who have died or suffered serious illness from the COVID vaccines, not the infection.  No one who follows actual medical science and looks at benefits and risks of vaccination would seriously question whether they or their children should get the shot. [MORE]

From [CHD] An internal memo from a firm that conducted polling for President Biden’s 2020 presidential campaign advises the Democratic Party on how it can present itself as having “defeated” COVID-19. 

The content of the Feb. 24 memo, “Taking the Win over COVID-19,” closely matches statements Biden made Tuesday during Tuesday’s State of the Union address.

The two-page memo was distributed to “interested parties” by Impact Research, a public opinion research firm that provides “strategic thoughts for Democrats positioning themselves on COVID-19 after nearly two years of the pandemic.” 

The “strategic thoughts” proffered by Impact Research include:

  • Declare the crisis phase of COVID over and push for feeling and acting more normal.

  • Recognize that people are “worn out” and feeling real harm from the years-long restrictions and take their side.

  • Acknowledge COVID still exists and likely will for a long time.

  • Don’t set “COVID zero” as the victory condition.

  • Stop talking about restrictions and the unknown future ahead.

The authors of the memo, Molly Murphy and Bryan Stryker, provided an explanation of the thought process underlying these strategic thoughts while describing efforts against COVID as a “war” – one that is now moving into a new phase:

“After two years that necessitated lockdowns, travel bans, school closures, mask mandates, and nearly a million deaths, nearly every American finally has the tools to protect themselves from this virus. It’s time for Democrats to take credit for ending the COVID crisis phase of the COVID war, point to important victories like vaccine distribution and providing economic stability to Americans, and fully enter the rebuilding phase that comes after any war.”

Acknowledging that shifting public opinion has a tangible political and policy impact, the memo also references the increasing fatigue with and unpopularity of COVID-related mandates among the general public:

“Twice as many voters are now more concerned about COVID’s effect on the economy (49%) than about someone in their family or someone they know becoming infected with the coronavirus (24%).

“Two-thirds of parents and 80% of teachers say the pandemic caused learning loss, and voters are overwhelmingly more worried about learning loss than kids getting COVID. Six in ten Americans describe themselves as “worn out” by the pandemic. 

“The more we talk about the threat of COVID and onerously restrict people’s lives because of it, the more we turn them against us and show them we’re out of touch with their daily realities.”

Translated, this could be interpreted to mean that harsh COVID mandates — described in the memo as “onerous” — are costing votes for the politicians enforcing them.

As reported Feb. 25 by the political blog Punchbowl News, the memo “has been making the rounds among House and Senate Democratic campaigns and consultants.”

According to Punchbowl News, the pollsters at Impact Research, “certainly have tapped into the mood of Democratic campaign pros, who see disaster in November unless the party figures out a better message on Covid,” adding that “Biden administration sources have told us they plan to talk about turning a corner on Covid during the State of the Union [address], so clearly they share some of these thoughts.”

Biden follows the script

Indeed, Biden’s message Tuesday night closely paralleled the talking points of the Impact Research memo:

“For more than two years, COVID-19 has impacted every decision in our lives and the life of the nation. 

“And I know you’re tired, frustrated, and exhausted. 

“But I also know this. 

“Because of the progress we’ve made, because of your resilience and the tools we have, tonight I can say we are moving forward safely, back to more normal routines.  

“We’ve reached a new moment in the fight against COVID-19, with severe cases down to a level not seen since last July.  

“Just a few days ago, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — the CDC — issued new mask guidelines. 

“Under these new guidelines, most Americans in most of the country can now be mask-free.   

“And based on the projections, more of the country will reach that point across the next couple of weeks. 

“Thanks to the progress we have made this past year, COVID-19 need no longer control our lives.  

“I know some are talking about “living with COVID-19.” Tonight – I say that we will never just accept living with COVID-19.

“We will continue to combat the virus as we do other diseases. And because this is a virus that mutates and spreads, we will stay on guard.”

When compared with the “strategic thoughts” put forth by Impact Research, it is clear Biden declared the crisis phase of COVID over, recognized people are “worn out,” acknowledged and “COVID still exists and likely will for a long time.” 

Biden — whose approval rate has dropped to as low as 38% according to recent polls — also did not, as the memo advised, set “COVID zero” as “the victory condition.”

The Impact Research memo was circulated one day before the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Feb. 25 eased their mask guidance, and a series of Democratic governors and mayors announced the end of mask and vaccine mandates.

The U.S. Capitol lifted its own mask mandate just two days prior to the State of the Union address.

Mass media outlets, which for the most part until now vehemently supported such countermeasures, also visibly shifted their position in recent days. 

For instance, a CNN medical analyst who had previously compared unvaccinated people to drunk drivers and who strongly favored strict COVID mandates, recently said “the science has changed” and that it is now appropriate to end mask mandates.

Moreover, on the same week, the Impact Research memo circulated, Saturday Night Live, which for the past two years also toed the pro-mandate orthodoxy, openly mocked vaccine and mask mandates and questioned whether they were ever necessary, with such lines as “Do I have to dump my oldest friend just cause he didn’t get … a booster?” [MORE]

The Dependent Media, who are Complicit in the COVID Genocide, are Now Creating "Myth-Information," Blaming Anything but COVID Injections on Increases in Heart Attacks & Strokes

/

From [DAILYEXPOSE] The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) quietly admitted back in October 2021 that the Covid-19 vaccines cause heart inflammation, heart attack and stroke.

Specifically, the CDC admitted that the vaccines cause myocarditis and myopericarditis. The former occurs when the heart muscle – also known as the myocardium – becomes inflamed. The latter occurs when both the heart muscle and the sac that surrounds the heart – known as the pericardium – become inflamed.

Myocarditis can weaken the heart’s ability to pump blood and cause arrhythmias. Severe cases of myocarditis could weaken the heart so much that it becomes unable to pump enough blood to the entire body. This can also lead to clots forming in the heart, which can cause either strokes or heart attacks.

“Evidence from multiple safety monitoring systems in multiple countries supports the finding of an increased risk of myocarditis and myopericarditis following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination,” read a CDC report titled “COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Updates,” written by a member of the CDC’s COVID-19 Vaccine Task Force.

The report pointed out that the risk of myocarditis and myopericarditis is highest in adolescents and young adults. Males are also more likely to experience either condition than females.

The conditions are more likely to occur following the second dose than following the first, and the onset of symptoms occurs within a few days of vaccination, up to a week.

Mainstream media outlets are diverting people’s attention away from the COVID-19 vaccines by trying to blame the heart conditions and their symptoms on other factors. Shane St. Pierre, the host of the “Anti-Disinformation” show, pointed this out on the show’s March 3rd episode.

St. Pierre first noted that most of the Western world’s largest and most influential mainstream media outlets have deep ties to – if they aren’t outright controlled by – Big Pharma companies.

Mainstream media outlets are tied to Big Pharma through two of the world’s largest investment management corporations – BlackRock and The Vanguard Group. Together, their portfolio holdings are worth over $17 trillion.

“More importantly, they are the owners and controllers of the Big Pharma industry. And even more importantly than that, BlackRock and Vanguard own the world’s mainstream media,” said St. Pierre. “In other words, Big Pharma owns the mainstream media.”

This gives mainstream media outlets a strong incentive to publish a deluge of articles claiming that certain factors in life and not the experimental and deadly COVID-19 vaccines were raising people’s risks of developing different health conditions. He then pointed out that all of these articles only started coming out when the COVID-19 vaccines started becoming more widespread.

One article published by the Daily Express on Dec. 12, 2021 claimed that skipping breakfast may increase the risk of heart attacks “despite intermittent fasting being the biggest proven health benefit of all time,” said St. Pierre. “Now, suddenly, skipping breakfast causes heart attacks.”

“But if you don’t skip breakfast, suddenly the world’s most popular breakfast food – eggs – enhances your risk of blood clots,” he added. St. Pierre is referring to another Daily Express article, published on Jan. 22 that claimed a substance in eggs is actually why people have an increased risk of blood clots, heart attacks and strokes.