Blog Editor: John R. Houk
Intro posted August 29, 2021
In case you have been living under a stone, YOU have to be
aware the science-sewer spewing from the U.S. government and its so-called
science agencies are tainted by a control-the-people for a Left-Wing government
to remain in power. AS SUCH to keep We-The-People brainwashed and pliable to
unconstitutional and bureaucratic despotic laws and rules, the science representing
the Globalist-Dem-Marxist Left is doing EVERYTHING in its nefarious power to
discredit ACTUAL empiric science contradicting the control narrative.
If you concur with my sentiment of government control, here
is some science-history posted by Ryan Matters about mRNA jabs came into
existence and about one of the scientists very instrumental in mRNA research.
That instrumental researcher is Dr. Robert Malone, currently much maligned by
Globalists for warning there is an mRNA jab problem.
To be honest the history lesson is lengthy. This article is well
documented with sources. I emphasize the sourcing because the latter half will
sound a bit like science fiction to the skeptic. The “sourcing” hopefully will
bring some open-mindedness to the skeptic. EXAMINE the information I share into
the hands of Americans still concerned about Liberty more than Sheeple
compliance. If it’s too long for you book mark and return and become aware the
world we now live in is insidiously influenced by Globalist-Marxists who
ironically have infected greedy corporations. This kind of Socialistic mixture
in the past was called Fascism and/or Nazism (an acronym when anglicized translates
as National Socialism).
JRH 8/29/21
I need your generosity in 2021 via - credit cards, check
cards
& debit cards are accepted by my PayPal account:
Please
Support SlantRight 2.0
Or if donating you can support by getting in the Coffee from home
business earning yourself extra cash – OR just buy some TASTE GOOD healthy coffee,
that includes immune boosting products. Big Tech Censorship is pervasive –
Share voluminously on all social media platforms!
*************************
mRNA “Vaccines”, Eugenics & the Push for
Transhumanism
The worldwide rollout of mRNA “vaccines” is part of a
much larger agenda that encompasses eugenics and transhumanism. This agenda is
being funded and promoted by a network of global institutions, politicians, and
billionaire technocrats.
Transhumanism
By Ryan Matters
August 28, 2021
Off-Guardian
In 1989,
researchers from the Salk Institute in California published a paper detailing
how they developed an RNA transfection system that
could “directly introduce RNA into whole tissues and embryos”.
The concept of using RNA as a drug is first described in
this paper, making it the seminal work that formed the foundation for decades
of further research in this area. The “Discussion” section of the paper states
that:
“The RNA/lipofectin method can
be used to directly introduce RNA into whole tissues and embryos (R.W.M., C.
Holt, and I.M.V., unpublished results), raising the possibility that
liposome-mediated mRNA transfection might offer yet another option in the growing
technology of eukaryotic gene delivery, one based on the concept of using RNA
as a drug.”
One of the Salk Institute researchers listed on the paper is
Dr Robert W. Malone, a scientist who has recently been censored on social media for warning
about the possible dangers of the covid-19 vaccines. It could be argued that
there’s no expert more qualified to warn us about the dangers of mRNA
injections than the man who helped pioneer the technology, nevertheless, Big
Tech decided he was expounding “misinformation”, because, well, they know
better apparently.
Malone’s research, which resulted in a procedure that could
be used to “efficiently transfect RNA into human cells” using a “synthetic
cationic lipid” was supported by grants from the American Cancer Society and
the National Institute of Health (who currently have a stake in the Moderna
mRNA vaccine, showing their allegiance to the technology. More on this later).
While Malone’s contributions to the development of mRNA
technology are well-known and well-documented, Wikipedia decided to remove all
mention of him from their “RNA Vaccine” entry shortly after the scientist began
speaking out about the dangers of the rushed-through covid vaccines. The June 14th version of the article mentioned
Malone by name 3 times and cited his work 6 times. The current version of the
article mentions him 0 times and cites his work only 3 times.
However, this is unsurprising considering Wikipedia’s documented bias towards the
pharmaceutical industry. Far more interesting is the institution that produced
the research in the first place – the Salk Institute.
The Salk Institute, named after Jonas Salk, the creator of
the Salk polio vaccine, was constructed in 1962 thanks to
funding from the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis,
today known as the March of the Dimes.
The March of the Dimes (MOD) was established in 1937 with
the mission of eradicating polio and during a time when the Eugenics
Establishment was already a prominent, but not yet popular, feature of the
American health scene. The theory of Eugenics is based on the idea
that selective procreation can lead to the gradual “improvement” of the human
race and that certain families are fit to lead society by virtue of their
“superior” genes.
At the time, the nation’s key eugenics organizations
included the American Eugenics Society (AES) and the American Society of human
Eugenics (ASHE), funded by the Rockefeller, Carnegie and Harriman families, as
well as the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research. It should be noted that
the Rockefellers were instrumental in funding and promoting
eugenics around the world. The Eugenics movement promoted selective mating,
artificial insemination and compulsory sterilization and euthanasia as
important means of weeding out so-called “inferior” human beings.
The first sterilization law in the US was passed in 1907, in
the state of Indiana, and by 1931, many more states had followed suit by
enacting similar laws. According to the Indiana Historical Bureau:
“In 1907, Governor J. Frank
Hanly approved first state eugenics law making sterilization mandatory for
certain individuals in state custody.”
Those sterilized under eugenics law were deemed “undesirable” on account of
mental or physical impairments such as epilepsy, blindness and physical
disabilities, as well as “social inadequacies” such as drug addiction or
criminality. According to estimates, around 60,000 individuals were sterilized
under such laws, deprived of their right to have children and forever branded
as “feebleminded”.
In fact, the prominence of the American eugenics
movement resulted in its adoption by the National Socialist Party of
Germany, which sterilized more than 350,000 persons by the end of
the second world war. After WW2, eugenics notions were dropped from public
conversation, but the movement never dissipated, no, instead it was
“re-branded” using more acceptable terminology such as “population control” and
“reproductive health”, as we shall see later on. [Blog Editor Emphasis]
The emergence of the MOD as a major player in the
American Eugenics movement can be traced back to the organization’s early
association with the Rockefeller Institute from where it procured many of its
key members and advisers, including professor Anton Julius Carlson, a member of the American Eugenics Society,
recruited to serve on the MOD’s Medical and Research Committees and
Professor Clair E. Turner, another AES member who served as assistant to then
President, Basil O’Connor.
Just before the establishment of the Salk Institute, the MOD
announced it would be phasing out its polio programs and focusing
its resources on “birth defects”.
In 1959, the MOD funded courses in “medical genetics” at the
Jackson Laboratory in Maine, a genetics institute founded in 1929 by Clarence
Cook Little, who, “at one time or another” served as the president
of the American Eugenics Society, the American Birth Control League and the
American Euthanasia Society.
Jackson Laboratory’s claimed mission is “to discover precise
genomic solutions for disease and empower the global biomedical community in
its shared quest to improve human health.” Noteworthy is that the lab
received increased funding in 2020, largely from
the National Institute of Health (NIH), including a grant of $10.6 million to
find treatments for rare genetic diseases by using gene-editing technologies.
[Blog Editor Emphasis] And at the start of the coronavirus “pandemic”, the
lab worked to develop genetically modified mice for use in
vaccine studies and other research related to Sars-Cov-2.
Beginning in the 1960s, the MOD financed several “Birth Defects Prevention Centers” located
at medical institutions across the US. These new centers offered prenatal
testing via amniocentesis to determine whether a baby would be born with
“defects” and then gave the couple the opportunity to abort the affected child.
The MOD has also made direct donations to Planned
Parenthood, a clear contradiction of their claimed
mission, which is to “fight for the health of all moms and babies”.
Planned Parenthood is a non-profit organization that provides “reproductive health
care” in the US and abroad.
From 2019-2020 the organization committed over 350,000 abortions and has
been criticized as “steering resources away from women’s health and toward
abortion.” Unsurprisingly, a look into the organization’s history reveals that
Planned Parenthood has its roots in Eugenics ideals.
Planned Parenthood was founded by Margaret Sanger, who, far
from a “birth control activist”, as the mainstream would have you believe, was
a racist eugenicist who sought to rid the world of “unfit” human stock. In her
essay, “A Plan for Peace”, she describes the main
objects of her proposed “Population Congress” which includes
“a stern and rigid policy of
sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is
tainted, or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be
transmitted to offspring.”
She also mentions the need to “control the intake and output
of morons, mental defectives, epileptics.”
As mentioned earlier, these Eugenics ideals inspired the
Nazis who took many of Sanger’s ideas and ran with them, so to speak. In his
book, The War Against the Weak, Edwin Black details how the Nazi sterilization
law of 1933 as well as subsequent euthanasia laws were based on blueprints
drawn up by Sanger and other American “activists”. In fact, associates of
Sanger knew about these Nazi euthanasia programs and
praised them.
Coming back to the Salk Institute, it should be noted that
the mainstream account of the 20th-century polio outbreak, namely the notion
that the disease is caused by a virus and that Dr Salk’s miracle vaccine was
single-handedly responsible for ending the epidemic, is dubious and likely
altogether false.
Paralytic polio appeared suddenly in the US in the early
1900s with continual, dramatic fluctuations in cases – a pattern that continued
until the end of the 1950s. The introduction of the Salk vaccine in 1954 seemed
to coincide with the almost instantaneous decline in cases, which continued for
more than two decades.
But prior to being called “polio”, conditions involving
infirmity of the limbs were known by various other names including apoplexy,
palsy and paralysis. Many historical writings refer to paralysis resulting from
exposure to toxic substances and many of these accounts were documented by Dr
Ralph Scobey in his 1952
statement to the Select Committee to Investigate the Use of
Chemicals in Food Products titled The Poison Cause of Poliomyelitis and
Obstructions to its Investigation.
Scobey’s paper includes references to several investigations
that seemed to indicate a link between polio outbreaks in the 20th century and
the consumption of fresh fruit, providing a link between Polio and toxic
pesticide exposure.
One crop pesticide in widespread use at the time was DDT,
a highly toxic organochlorine that was widely publicized as being “good for you”, but
eventually banned in 1972. In 1953, Dr Morton Biskind published a paper in the American Journal
of Digestive Diseases pointing out that:
“McCormick (78), Scobey
(100-101), and Goddard (57), in detailed studies, have all pointed out that
factors other than infective agents are certainly involved in the etiology of
polio, varying from nutritional defects to a variety of poisons which affect the
nervous system.”
The danger of toxic pesticides, including DDT, and their
disastrous effects on the environment were illustrated by Rachel Carson in her
1962 book, Silent Spring.
In more recent times, researchers, Dan Olmstead, co-founder
of the Age of Autism, and Mark Blaxil conducted two brilliant investigations into the polio
epidemics of the 20th century, reaching a similar conclusion to Scobey and
Biskind, namely that the disease was caused by the widespread use of neurotoxic
pesticides such as arsenite of soda and DDT.
Although Salk’s vaccine was hailed as a success, the vaccine
itself caused many cases of injury and paralysis.
And though there does appear to be a convincing correlation between the timing
of the vaccine and the reduction in polio cases, as all good scientists know,
causation doesn’t equal correlation, especially considering the fact that DDT
was phased out, at least in the US, over the same period.
Interestingly, Dr Salk’s polio research was funded by the mother of Cordelia Scaife
May, an heiress to the Mellon family banking fortune who idealized Margaret
Sanger and later joined the board of the International Planned Parenthood
Foundation.
May’s views on immigration were radical, to say the least,
and according to some, she favoured compulsory sterilization as a means to
limit birth rates in developing countries. May later joined the board of
the Population Council, an organization founded by
John D. Rockefeller III focused on population reduction.
In 1995, the Population Council collaborated with the WHO to
create fertility regulating vaccines.
It would be a mistake to think that the polio epidemic was
not related to the current ‘age of vaccination’ we find ourselves in. On the
contrary, claiming that polio was “eradicated in the United States” due to
vaccination alone is a lie that garnered public favour for childhood vaccinations
and helped to set the groundwork for the widespread belief in the safety and
efficacy of all vaccines.
Diseases such as polio and smallpox (another lie that is
beyond the scope of this article), and the subsequent pro-vaccine propaganda,
“primed” much of the population to accept, without question, an experimental
jab based on poorly understood technology.
TWISTING THE SCIENCE
In 1997, 8 years after the Salk Institute paper, the
FDA approved the first-ever trial of
transfected RNA to develop immunity in cancer patients. The Recombinant DNA
Advisory Committee of the National Institute of Health then voted to continue
approval some months later, leading to the first-ever mRNA-based vaccine
administered to humans.
Though mRNA is propagandized in the media as the next
revolution in health, those with keen perception may be alarmed when reading
excerpts such as this one, taken from an article on the history of mRNA, written by
Damian Garde, a Biotech reporter for STATS:
“The concept: By making precise
tweaks to synthetic mRNA and injecting people with it, any cell in the body
could be transformed into an on-demand drug factory.”
Talk of cells being turned into “on-demand drug
factories” is exactly the sort of meaningless techno-rhetoric meant to
impress and entice an uninformed public. mRNA vaccines are based on the
following concept: a piece of synthetic mRNA is shuttled into your cells, where
it is used as a template to create the viral “spike protein”. Once this protein
leaves the cell, the body produces antibodies and “learns” how to fight future
Sars-Cov-2 infections.
mRNA-based vaccines are often touted as a safer alternative
to DNA-based vaccines, which, according
to experts “may trigger permanent and dangerous changes in the
genetic information of treated people”. However, do we know for sure that mRNA
vaccines don’t permanently change the genetic makeup of our cells? A 2001
paper titled RNA as a tumor vaccine: a review of the
literature states that (emphasis added):
“unlike DNA-based vaccines,
there is little danger of incorporation of RNA sequences into
the host genome.”
The use of the word “little” would seem to indicate that
there may be at least some danger of genome integration, or more likely,
researchers simply don’t know.
In the 2004 “expert opinion” paper by Pascolo cited above,
he outlines the link between mRNA vaccines and gene therapies, something which
is continually denied and dismissed by the mainstream:
“Although located in the cytosol
and not in the nucleus, mature mRNAs belong to the biochemical family of
nucleic acids. mRNA, similarly to DNA, may be considered a gene and,
consequently, it’s use as a vaccine may be viewed as ‘gene therapy’.”
Interestingly, it is purely due to a technicality of regulatory
law that covid-19 gene therapies are allowed to be called “vaccines”. This
is explained in a paper titled The European Regulatory
Environment of RNA-Based Vaccines, which states that:
The definition of a gene therapy
medicinal product as outlined in Annex 1 to Directive 2001/83/EC is as follows:
Gene therapy medicinal product
means a biological medicinal product which has the following characteristics:
(a) it contains
an active substance which contains or consists of a recombinant nucleic acid
used in or administered to human beings with a view to regulating, repairing,
replacing, adding or deleting a genetic sequence;
(b) its
therapeutic, prophylactic or diagnostic effect relates directly to the
recombinant nucleic acid sequence it contains, or to the product of genetic
expression of this sequence.
Gene therapy medicinal products
shall not include vaccines against infectious diseases.
As is evident, the mere act of calling a gene therapy a
“vaccine against infectious disease” negates its classification as a gene
therapy, the approval process for which, at least in Europe, involves going
through the CAT which is the EMA’s (European Medicines Agency)
“Committee for Advanced Therapies”.
Evidently, this play on language would seem to constitute a
“loophole” of sorts, allowing easier approval for mRNA-based gene therapies
planned for human use.
Approval is certainly a contentious topic when talked about
in the context of the current covid-19 vaccines, none of which have been fully
FDA approved, only authorized under emergency use (EUA), and labeled as
“investigational” products, a fact that many people are unaware of.
However, early in the year vaccine manufacturers already set their sights on
full regulatory approval, after only 6 months of trial data.
On the 7th of May, Pfizer formally initiated their
application to the FDA, with the aim of having the first-ever fully approved
covid-19 vaccine. But with millions of vaccines already administered under EUA,
what’s the rush?
Furthermore, for the six “first in disease” vaccines
approved by the FDA over the last 15 years, the median trial duration was just shy of two years. A vaccine approved
after 6 months of data would constitute one of the fastest ever.
The phase
three clinical trials for Pfizer, Moderna and Janssen are two
years in duration, but the FDA has not clearly stated their position with
regards to minimum follow-up prior to consideration for approval.
Longer, placebo-controlled trials are paramount to assessing
vaccine safety. It is extremely alarming then that vaccine manufacturers,
within weeks of receiving EUA, began to unblind
trials by offering those in the placebo group the chance to
get vaccinated.
Moderna announced that “as of April
13, all placebo participants have been offered the Moderna covid-19 vaccine and
98% of those have received the vaccine”, meaning that their placebo
group no longer exists and as such, they have no way to
accurately measure long-term safety.
In an article for
the British Medical Journal, Peter Doshi quotes the FDA, on several
occasions, saying that the maintenance of a placebo group would be critical to
assessing both the safety and efficacy of covid-19 vaccines, which is obvious
to anyone who understands the consequences of failing to adhere to scientific
rigor when testing a new medical therapy.
In reality, there could be many reasons for manufacturers
wanting FDA approval for their vaccines, but likely top of the list is the
“stamp of approval” that comes with full licensure and the ability to use this
as a way to convince those who remain skeptical regarding the safety and
efficacy of the vaccines. Moreover, full FDA approval would pave the way for
easier vaccine mandates, putting immense pressure on those of the “awakened
class” who represent a thorn in the side of the Great Reset/Great Convergence
agenda pushers.
More disturbing inconsistencies can be found in the FDA’s
process for assessing and approving these experimental vaccines. For
example, the FDA recently cautioned against the use
of antibody tests for evaluating immunity or protection from covid-19,
“especially” after a person has received a vaccination, despite their EUA being
originally granted, in part, due to antibody
responses.
The implication for this reversal is that the EUA given for
covid-19 vaccines should also be reversed, but what’s the likelihood of that
happening after millions have already been jabbed?
Moreover, the idea that “antibodies” provide protection from
so-called viral infections represents a poor understanding of the body and the
immune system. The fact that antibodies play little role in viral infections
has been known by medical scientists since the 1950s based on research that shows persons with
the genetic inability to produce antibodies, called “agammaglobulinemia”, have
normal reactions to typical viral infections and even appear to resist
recurrences.
BILL GATES, MODERNA AND EUGENICS 2.0
One of the covid-19 vaccine manufactures most talked about
in the media is Moderna, a biotech company co-founded by Robert Langer, a
researcher and inventor at MIT.
In 2013, the biotech startup received $25m in funding from DARPA (the
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), a research arm of the United States
Department of Defense, and an organization well-known for ruthlessly
pursuing dystopian, transhumanist technologies, such as
implantable nanoparticles and bio-brain interfaces (more on this later).
Noteworthy is that the US government, through the National
Institute of Health, appears to have a financial stake in the Moderna
vaccine thanks to a contract signed by both parties, giving the NIH joint
ownership over Moderna’s mRNA vaccine candidates. According to Axios:
“The NIH mostly funds outside
research, but it also often invents basic scientific technologies that are later
licensed out and incorporated into drugs that are sold at massive profits.”
This is more than alarming considering the NIH is
responsible for prioritizing promising treatments for
covid-19 as well as improving clinical trial effectiveness, which, for Moderna,
is impossible considering their trial no longer contains a control group.
NIH’s vested interest in Moderna’s success may also provide
a plausible explanation for why the biotech startup received EUA for their
vaccine despite failing, for over 10 years, to bring a
single product to market.
In an interview for Economic Club, NIH director
Francis Collins denied that covid-19 vaccines would be money-makers, saying
that “Nobody sees this as a way to make billions of dollars”.
However, evidence points to the contrary as Moderna’s
covid-19 vaccine sales reached $1.7 billion in the first quarter of 2021,
making their CEO, Stephane Bancel, one of the many new pharma billionaires.
“Operation Warp Speed”, the name given to a partnership
between several US Federal agencies aimed at accelerating the development of a
covid-19 vaccine, was also wrought with conflicts of interest.
The Operation Warp Speed administration hired several
“consultants” with ties to Big Pharma, including two former Pfizer executives.
And in May 2020, it was reported that their chief adviser, Dr Monsef Slaoui, a
former pharmaceutical executive himself, held $10m in GlaxoSmithKline stock, the same
company that was later awarded a $2 billion contract to supply the US
government with 100 million vials of covid-19 vaccine.
Dr Slaoui also held significant stock in Moderna, to whom
the federal government has awarded over $2.5b in funding.
Moderna co-founder, Robert Langer, whose net worth has
also skyrocketed into the billions, is one of the
world’s most cited researchers. A scientist at MIT, Langer holds over 1,400
patents and specializes in biotechnology, nanotechnology, tissue engineering
and drug delivery.
Furthermore, Langer holds an administrative role at
the MIT Media Lab, the same institute that was the
focus of a scandal after it was revealed that the lab accepted funding from
convicted sex-offender, Jefferey Epstein. Epstein also happened to have a disturbing fascination with
“transhumanism”, a modern-day version of eugenics
(transhumanism is discussed later in this article).
Then director of the MIT Media Lab, Joi Ito, approved two donations from
Epstein of $1.75m and allowed the prolific paedophile to “direct” funds to the
lab from other wealthy benefactors, including a $2m donation from Bill Gates,
who also has unsettling ties to Epstein, having flown on his private jet and met with him
on several occasions.
When the news broke out and Joi Ito resigned from his post
at the lab, Langer was one of the first people to sign a letter calling for him to stay, and as an
administrator for the lab’s Director’s Office, it’s hard to believe he didn’t
know about the Epstein donations in advance.
Described as the “common denominator” in several coronavirus
efforts, Robert Langer is certainly an interesting player in the transhumanist
movement. In 2015, his company, Microchips Biotech, partnered with
Israeli pharmaceutical giant, Teva Pharmaceutical, to commercialize its “implantable drug delivery device”.
Noteworthy is that Teva Pharmaceutical has received significant investment from Warren Buffett, who,
in 2006, pledged to gradually donate his fortune to the Bill & Melinda
Gates Foundation, an organization whom he served as a trustee up until very
recently.
Langer also has ties to Charles Lieber, a Harvard nanotech
scientist who was arrested in January on account of
making false statements to federal authorities regarding his collaboration with
Chinese researchers at the Wuhan University of Technology.
In 2012, Langer and Lieber worked together to create a “material that
merges nanoscale electronics with biological tissues”. The material was
described as “a first step toward prosthetics that communicate directly with
the nervous system”.
Much of Langer’s research is backed by Bill Gates, who began
funding mRNA technology in 2010 and has also invested millions into Moderna.
In 2017, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation sponsored a project at Langer’s lab to
create a microparticle vaccine delivery system that could generate a “novel
type of drug carrying particle”, allowing multiple doses of a vaccine to be
administered over an extended period of time with just one injection.
Then in 2019, Gates and Langer teamed up again to create an invisible ink
tattoo that “embeds immunization records into a child’s skin”. Disturbingly,
the eventual goal of the project is to inject sensors that can be used to track
“other aspects” of health.
Gates claims he needs the data for “disease prevention”,
referring to his efforts to wipe out polio, measles and other “infectious”
diseases from around the world. However, Gates’ various “health-related”
initiatives in developing countries are not the work of a loving
philanthropist, like the media would have us all believe. Instead, evidence
would suggest that Gates’ involvement in public health represents the
continuation of a long-standing eugenics agenda, hiding in plain sight.
Gates’ links to the eugenics movement start with his father,
who praised the Rockefellers for their work in “public health” and even met with them in 2000 to discuss matters
relating to infectious disease, vaccines and the environment. During the meeting,
Gates senior was quoted as saying:
“Taking our lead and our
inspiration from work already done by The Rockefeller Foundation, our
foundation actually started GAVI by pledging $750 million to something called
the Global Fund for Children’s Vaccines, an instrument of GAVI.”
Interestingly, almost ten years after that meeting, Gates
junior co-hosted a
meeting with David Rockefeller to discuss population
reduction.
Perhaps even more telling is the fact that in 2012 Bill and
Melinda Gates hosted their London Summit on Family Planning, where they
announced their commitment to population control in the third world, on the
100th anniversary of the First International Eugenics Congress, also held
in London.
Gates is well-known for his obsession with vaccines, a
curious pursuit considering that the 9,000,000 people who die every year from
hunger would be better served by having clean water, food supplies and sanitary
living environments.
In 2009, Gates’ Foundation funded observational studies in India for
a controversial
cervical cancer vaccine that was given to thousands of young
girls called “Gardasil”.
Within months, many girls began to get sick and within a
year, five of them had died. During a similar study for a different brand of
the HPV vaccine, many girls were hospitalized and a further two died. The
Economic Times of India reported on this in 2014, with the shocking revelation
that:
Consent for conducting these
studies, in many cases, was taken from the hostel wardens, which was a flagrant
violation of norms. In many other cases, thumbprint impressions of their poor
and illiterate parents were duly affixed onto the consent form. The children
also had no idea about the nature of the disease or the vaccine. The
authorities concerned could not furnish requisite consent forms for the
vaccinated children in a huge number of cases.”
Gates has also heavily promoted the oral polio vaccine in
India, after endeavouring to eradicate the disease. However, as discussed
earlier in this article, toxic chemicals are involved in the etiology of polio
and thus the disease cannot be eradicated by the use of vaccines. In fact,
global health numbers indicate that more cases of polio are now being caused by the vaccines themselves than
anything else.
In 2018, a group of brave Indian researchers published a
paper in the International Journal of Environmental
Research and Public Health showing a correlation between the oral
polio vaccine drives and increased cases of “acute flaccid paralysis”, a
condition described as “clinically indistinguishable” from polio.
Ironically, Gates has a $23m investment in Monsanto, the company
that markets “roundup” a glyphosate-containing pesticide that is known to cause adverse health effects, including
neurological disorders and paralysis.
While many believe Gates to be selflessly giving away his
money in order to fund these vaccination campaigns, it should be noted that
Gates’ investment in vaccines has netted him a massive return. By 2019, the
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation had donated just over $10b to various
vaccine-related initiatives including GAVI (the Global Alliance for Vaccines
and Immunization). Gates called it the “best investment he’s ever made”,
estimating a 20-1 return, or around $200b over 20 years.
Indeed, Gates’ net worth has more than doubled over
the last 10 years.
And lest we forget that more than half of all deaths in low
to middle income countries are caused by noncommunicable diseases, which the
Bill and Melinda Foundation seems to have little interest in, directing less than 3% of their budget towards such
conditions.
Furthermore, Gates’ activities in public health are wrought
with conflicts of interest that that would seem to undermine the notion that
Gates cares about the health of the population. Many of these conflicts
of interest are outlined in a study published by Harvard researcher, David Stuckler,
titled Global Health Philanthropy and Institutional Relationships: How
Should Conflicts of Interest Be Addressed?, in which he states that:
“As one example, we found that
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has substantial holdings in the Coca-Cola
Corporation, and also participates in grants that encourage communities in
developing countries to become business affiliates of Coca-Cola. It has been
noted by some commentators that sugary drinks such as those produced by
Coca-Cola are correlated with the rapid increase in obesity and diabetes in
developing countries.”
Stuckler also notes that:
“Many of the Foundation’s
pharmaceutical development grants may benefit leading pharmaceutical companies
such as Merck and GlaxoSmithKline.” And that “Several grants are linked to
companies that are represented on the Foundation’s board among its
investments.”
The media rarely reports on these disturbing conflicts of
interest, which isn’t surprising considering Gates funds all the major news outlets.
To call the negligent, wide-spread administration of
covid-19 experimental vaccines an initiative steeped in eugenicist thinking
would not be amiss considering how many figures and institutions involved in
the vaccine race have ties to the eugenics movement. In fact, the developers of
the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine are also linked to the now renamed British
Eugenics Society, founded by the father of Eugenics, Francis Galton. These
connections are detailed by investigative journalist, Whitney Webb, in her
article titled Developers of Oxford-AstraZeneca Vaccine Tied to UK
Eugenics Movement.
When it comes to protecting public health, the recklessness
displayed by politicians, scientists and pharmaceutical companies is
unforgivable considering the widespread impact that these experimental vaccines
will have. We have already begun to see the results of unleashing a dangerous
gene therapy technology on a naive and trusting public, with VAERS,
(the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System) showing more deaths linked
with covid-19 vaccines than all other vaccines combined over the last 30 years.
[Blog Editor Emphasis]
None of this is surprising though, considering the haste
with which clinical trials were conducted and the question marks surrounding
the reliability of the data reported. For example, vaccine manufactures
reported their vaccines were “95% effective”, a number they arrived at by using
a relative risk reduction as opposed to an absolute risk reduction, which
was around
1% in most cases, a fact never highlighted by the mainstream media.
Furthermore, vaccine trials were not designed to assess the
vaccines’ effect on infection, transmission, hospitalizations or deaths, which
is puzzling considering that, if there really was a viral pandemic, these would
be the most important endpoints to test for. Though perhaps this was a
calculated move by vaccine manufacturers, who knew they’d have a better chance
at rigging the results using the endpoint of ‘covid-19 of any severity’. After all, the
dramatic increase in the use of influenza vaccines has not
been associated with a decrease in mortality.
Peter Doshi, an editor for the British Medical Journal,
has called into question numerous aspects of
the controversial vaccine trials, including the
potential for pain medication to mask covid-19 symptoms in trial groups and the
objectivity of “primary event adjudication committees” in charge of counting
covid-19 cases. In the case of Pfizer, this committee consisted of Pfizer
employees.
Recently, Doctors for Covid Ethics, a group consisting of Dr
Michael Palmer MD, Dr Sucharit Bhakdi MD and Dr Stefan Hockertz PhD, published
an expert statement relating to the danger and
efficacy of the Pfizer vaccine that was submitted as part of a lawsuit
challenging the EU’s authorization of the use of the vaccine for children 12
years and older. The paper states that the reported efficacy of the Pfizer
mRNA vaccine was “most likely altogether fraudulent” and that “Pfizer, the EMA,
and the FDA have systematically neglected evidence from preclinical animal
trials that clearly pointed to grave dangers of adverse events.” [Blog Editor
Emphasis]
But of course, none of this is ever surfaced in the
mainstream. Instead we are fed the same party lines over and over; “vaccines
are safe and effective”, “follow the science”, “listen to the experts”. And by
“experts” they of course mean the soulless, pharmaceutical sock puppets like Dr
Anthony Fauci, the director of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and
Infectious Diseases whose been spewing lies about so-called viral
infections ever since AIDS broke out in 1984.
The fact that a character like Fauci has held his post for
more than 30 years is rather telling of how the system works. The late Nobel
prize winner and inventor of Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR), Karry
Mullis, castigated Fauci in an interview, saying that:
“He doesn’t know anything really
about anything, and I’d say that to his face. Nothing. The man thinks you can
take a blood sample and stick it in an electron microscope and if it’s got a
virus in there, you will know it. He doesn’t understand electron microscopy and
he doesn’t understand medicine. He should not be in a position like he’s in […]
Tony Fauci does not mind going on television in front of the people who pay his
salary and lie directly into the camera.”
A TRANSHUMANIST FUTURE
Besides being gene therapies, a technology associated
with eugenics and transhumanism, according
to scientists, mRNA technology “allows rapid development of novel
vaccines within a very short time span of weeks rather than months”. Hence, we
may be faced with the possibility of a future filled with on-demand vaccines
created to “protect” the public against new, invisible threats.
Indeed, with vaccinologists already talking about “variants”, booster shots and periodic covid-19
top-up vaccines, it certainly looks like things are headed that way. And of
course, thanks to intelligence-linked Big Tech conglomerates,
this data will all be recorded on a “vaccine passport” linked to your smart
phone, which will no-doubt form the basis for a new type of digital identity
pass tied to your bank account and, eventually, your social credit. [Blog Editor: Something already
practiced by the CCP in Communist China.]
Indeed, in 2019, Bill Gates’ Microsoft filed a patent, aptly
named Patent WO2020060606, for a “Cryptocurrency system using body-activation data”,
another clue as to the true intentions of the technocratic elite who are
funding and promoting the transhumanist agenda. The patent’s title alone
conjures up images of a slave society in which humans are fitted with
biosensors and awarded digital coins for completing tasks issued to them by the
ruling elite.
But perhaps even more alarming is the rush to get gene
therapies licensed for use in young children. Pfizer are currently in the midst
of a global clinical trial, where they are testing their mRNA jabs in babies as
young as 6 months, despite the fact that “Covid-19”, if we suppose there is
such a disease, barely affects children.
In fact, according to CDC numbers, the IFR in children is 20
per 1,000,000, or 0.002%, which is likely
lower than the risk of permanent injury or death from the MMR
vaccine. It’s also lower than the covid-19 vaccine death rate as calculated
using VAERS data at the time of writing (5,612 deaths over 165,000,000 fully
vaccinated in the US = 0.003%).
Furthermore, research has linked Pfizer’s vaccine to
symptomatic myocarditis, with an estimated incidence rate of 1 in 3000 or 1
in 6000 in young men.
The rush to bring mRNA vaccines into the mainstream as part
of the regular childhood vaccination schedule is not about health or
protection, but rather a step towards a much more sinister goal, which is to
attain control over the human body itself.
As mentioned previously in this article, DARPA, the research
arm of the US Department of Defense, has been working to create nanotechnology
that can interface with biological cells. In 2014, DARPA launched its “In
Vivo Nanoplatforms (IVN)” program, with the aim of developing
implantable nanoplatforms to collect biological data and provide “continuous
physiologic monitoring”. The program has since helped to create injectable hydrogels that monitor
physiologic responses and can sync to a smartphone.
Furthermore, DARPA, together with the NIH, heavily funds
Profusa, a Google-backed biotech
company developing and marketing this very same injectable hydrogel technology,
only now it is being punted as a way to detect future “pandemics”.
Allegedly, Profusa’s sensors can “detect flu-like infections
even before their symptoms begin to show”. While incredibly disturbing, this is
only a step towards DARPA’s ultimate goal, which is to establish dominion over
the mind. This goal is reflected in DARPA’s research to create “mutant-powered
soldiers” using “genetic weaponry” that can “undermine people’s
minds and bodies using a range of chemical, neurological, genetic and
behavioral techniques”.
DARPA is also looking at ways to genetically engineer the brain in order to
read peoples thoughts and induce images and sounds in people’s minds. The
research involves the use of “magnetic nanoparticles”, the same technology that
some have speculated may be included in current or future
covid-19 vaccines.
Equally distressing is the “Wellcome Leap”, a new initiative
created by the eugenics-linked Wellcome Trust, the world’s
richest medical research Foundation, in partnership with two former DARPA
frontmen. The program’s official aim is to “Deliver breakthroughs in
human health over 5 – 10 years and demonstrate seemingly impossible results on
seemingly impossible timelines.”
Currently, the initiative has 5 main projects, the first of
which is “RNA
Readiness + Response”, which seeks to (emphasis added) “create a
self-sustaining network of manufacturing facilities providing globally
distributed, state-of-the-art surge capacity to meet future pandemic needs”,
referring to the manufacturing of RNA-based products (mRNA gene therapies).
Note the seeming surety of a future pandemic.
However, the top contender for most disturbing Wellcome Leap
project is, without a doubt, “The First 1000 days” (1kD), a program which
seeks to use infants as test subjects in order to monitor their brain
development and create AI models that can be used to “accurately predict and
improve EF [executive function] outcomes”. The project also notes the use of
“mobile-sensors, wearables and home-based systems”. In a detailed article on the matter, researcher
Whitney Webb writes that:
“True to the eugenicist ties of
the Wellcome Trust (to be explored more in-depth in Part 2), Wellcome Leap’s
1DK notes that “of interest are improvements from underdeveloped EF to
normative or from normative to well-developed EF across the population to
deliver the broadest impact.” One of the goals of 1DK is thus not treating
disease or addressing a “global health public challenge” but instead experimenting
on the cognitive augmentation of children using means developed by AI
algorithms and invasive surveillance-based technology.”
The Wellcome Leap’s timeline of 5-10 years happens to line
up with elite frontman, Elon Musk’s Neuralink project, which seeks to establish “the
future of brain interfaces” in order to “expand our abilities”. In an interview Musk said, “I think we are
about 8 to 10 years away from this being usable by people with no disability”.
Musk, whose wealth increased by more than 500% during the covid-19
“pandemic”, founded Neuralink in 2016. The company recently raised $205m in
funding from 7 venture capital firms (including Google’s GV) and 5
Silicon Valley executives.
However, Neuralink isn’t the only biotech company pursuing
this technology. Recently, Synchron, a small biotech firm and Neuralink
competitor, received the go-ahead from the FDA to begin
testing its brain chip implants in humans.
10 years from now would take us to 2030, a year that comes
up again and again as a year in which transhumanist
technologies will be commonplace in mainstream society. According to
predictions made by the US National Intelligence Council, “human augmentation”
(the merging of man and machine) will be a major theme in 2030. Their Global
Trends 2030 report, published in 2012, states that:
“Successful prosthetics probably
will be directly integrated with the user’s body. Brain-machine interfaces
could provide “superhuman” abilities, enhancing strength and speed, as well as
providing functions not previously available.”
Interestingly, the report also predicts “an easily
transmissible novel respiratory pathogen” that could cause a great disruptive
impact. The report goes on to state that “Unlike other disruptive global
events, such an outbreak would result in a global pandemic that directly causes
suffering and death in every corner of the world, probably in less than six
months.”
ENSLAVEMENT: A FREE WILL CHOICE
The roll out of mRNA gene therapies and the push towards a
transhumanist society represents the continuation of the eugenics movement,
which was based on the pseudoscientific concept that some humans, by virtue of
their genetic composition, were more “fit” to lead society than others.
The “hero” of the Polio epidemic, Jonas Salk, had his own
ties to eugenics and so does the institute named in his favour, the Salk
Institute. Their mRNA research, funded by the NIH, set the foundation for the
development and mass roll out of gene therapies, controversially being called
“vaccines”. The danger of this experimental technology is evident, having
already caused thousands of injuries and deaths worldwide.
The role of intelligence organizations, billionaire
technocrats and pharmaceutical initiatives in funding, researching and
promoting mRNA vaccines, “bio-brain” interfaces, gene editing and other
technologies steeped in eugenicist ideals paints the picture of a global agenda
set to hit its stride fully by 2030.
The current covid-19 “pandemic” has served as a means to
accelerate this agenda by centralizing wealth and power, bringing transhumanist
technology into the mainstream and normalizing authoritarian rule.
Pfizer’s infant trials and the Wellcome Leap’s alarming
“1kD” project indicate that key to this agenda is the conditioning and control
of children from a young age, something that Aldous Huxley detailed extensively
in his disturbingly prophetic, eugenicist novel, Brave New World.
This agenda, though backed by some of the world’s most
powerful individuals and institutions, has an obvious weakness – its success is
reliant on our compliance. It will only advance if we allow it to advance. Therefore,
it is up to each one of us, through compassionate, non-violent resistance, to
sow the seeds of awakening in the collective consciousness of mankind. [Blog
Editor Emphasis]
____________________________
Ryan Matters is a writer and free thinker from South
Africa. After a life-changing period of illness, he began to question
mainstream medicine, science and the true meaning of what it is to be alive.
Some of his writings can be found at newbraveworld.org,
you can also follow him on Twitter and Gab.
Copyright © 2021 OffGuardian
