Category Archives: Vaccine Fraud

Dumbed-down populations accept outrageous vaccine logic

Dumbed-down populations accept outrageous vaccine logic

by Jon Rappoport

February 5, 2013

NoMoreFakeNews.com

I’ve written articles attacking the theory and practice of vaccination from a variety of angles. But the whole issue also needs to be approached from the perspective of logic.

Unfortunately, generations of people have been shut out of learning logic in school. They don’t know what it is. Therefore, vaccine advocates have been able to peddle their basic theory without much challenge.

It’s time to put an end to that free ride.

First of all, I need to point out a massive contradiction. When a person receives a vaccine, it’s said that his body produces antibodies against a particular germ and this is a good thing. Vaccination thus prepares the body for the day when that germ will really make its attack, at which point the immune system (including antibodies) will mount a successful defense.

However, let’s look at another venue: for many diseases, when a person is given a blood test to see if he is infected, quite often the standard for infection is “presence of antibodies.”

This makes no sense at all. If vaccination produces those antibodies, it is heralded as protection. But if a diagnostic blood test reveals those same antibodies, it’s a signal of infection and disease.

Vaccine-produced antibodies=health. Antibodies naturally produced by the body=illness.

Logically speaking, you resolve a contradiction by dropping one of the two sides and admitting it is false. Or you go deeper and reject some prior premise that led to the contradiction in the first place.

So let’s go deeper. What does vaccination supposedly do to “prepare” the body against the future invasion of a particular germ? It stimulates the production of antibodies against that germ.

Antibodies are immune-system scouts that move through the body, identify germs, and paint them for destruction by other immune-system troops.

However, since the entire immune system is involved in wreaking that destruction, why is bulking up one department of the immune system—antibodies—sufficient to guarantee future protection?

On what basis can we infer that bulking up antibodies, through vaccination, is enough?

There is no basis. It’s a naked assumption. It’s not a fact. Logic makes a clear distinction between assumptions and facts. Confusing the two leads to all sorts of problems, and it certainly does in the case of vaccination.

Furthermore, why does the body need a vaccine in order to be prepared for the later invasion of germs? The whole structure/function of the immune system is naturally geared to launch its multifaceted counter-attack against germs whenever trouble arises. The antibodies swing into action when a potentially harmful germ makes its appearance, at age five, eight, 10, 15.

It’s said that vaccination is a rehearsal for the real thing. But no need for rehearsal has been established.

And why are we supposed to believe that such a rehearsal works? The usual answer is: the body remembers the original vaccination and how it produced antibodies, and so it’s better prepared to do it again when the need is real. But there is no basis for this extraordinary notion of “remembering.”

It’s another assumption sold as fact.

The terms “prepared for the real thing,” “rehearsal,” and “remember” aren’t defined. They’re vague. One of the first lessons of logic is: define your terms.

A baby, only a few days old, receives a Hepatitis B vaccine. This means the actual Hep-B germ, or some fraction of it, is in the vaccine.

The objective? To stimulate the production of antibodies against Hep-B. Assuming the baby can accomplish this feat, the antibodies circulate and paint those Hep-B germs for destruction now.

From that moment on, the body is ready to execute the same mission, if and when Hep-B germs float in the door.

But when they float in the door, why wouldn’t the body produce antibodies on its own, exactly as it did after the vaccination was given? Why did it need the vaccination to teach it how to do what it naturally does?

And why should we infer the baby body is undergoing an effective rehearsal when vaccinated, and will somehow remember that lesson years later?

The logic of this is tattered and without merit.

To these arguments of mine, some vaccine advocates would say, “Well, it doesn’t matter because vaccines work. They do prevent disease.”

Ah, but that is a different argument, and it should be assessed separately. There are two major ways of doing that. One, by evaluating claims that in all places and times, mass vaccination has drastically lowered or eliminated those diseases it was designed to prevent. And two, by a controlled study of two groups of volunteers, in which one group is vaccinated and the other isn’t, to gauge the outcome.

Let’s look at the first method of assessment. Those who claim that vaccines have been magnificently effective in wiping out disease have several major hurdles to overcome. They have to prove, for each disease in question, that when a vaccine for that disease was first introduced, the prevalence of the disease was on the rise or was at a high steady rate in the population.

Why? Because, as many critics have stated, some or all of these diseases were already in sharp decline when the vaccines were introduced for the first time.

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

In other words, for reasons having nothing to do with vaccination, the diseases were on the way out. Nutrition had improved, sanitation was better, etc.

So let’s see the proof, for every disease which vaccines are supposed to prevent, that those diseases were significantly raging in the population when the vaccines were first introduced.

Then let’s also see proof that, after the introduction of vaccines, the diseases in question weren’t merely given new labels (or redefined) to hide the fact that they weren’t really going away. There is testimony, for example, that in America, the definition of paralytic polio was changed after the introduction of the Salk vaccine, and by the new more restricted definition, far fewer cases of polio could be diagnosed—thus making it seem the vaccine was effective.

There are also questions about the success of the famous smallpox vaccine campaign in Africa and Latin America. When all was said and done, were new cases of smallpox then diagnosed as meningitis? Was destruction wreaked by the vaccine then called AIDS?

Researchers, including Robert Gallo, have warned that the smallpox vaccine, when given to people whose immune systems are already grossly weakened, can destroy what’s left of the immune system—and immune-defense destruction is the hallmark of the definition of AIDS.

The second major way of assessing the success of mass vaccination is through a proper controlled study.

For any vaccine, this is how it would be done. Assemble two large groups of people. Total, at least eight thousand. Make sure these two groups are very well matched. That means: similar in age; very similar in medical history and medical drug history; similar exposure levels to environmental chemicals; very close nutritional levels, status, and dietary habits.

The first group gets the vaccine. The second group doesn’t. They are tracked, with very few dropouts, for a period of at least eight years. The INDEPENDENT researchers note how many from each group get the disease the vaccine is supposed to prevent. They note what other diseases or health challenges the volunteers encounter.

Such a study, using these proper standards, has never been done for any vaccine.

If that fact seems rather illogical, you’re right. It is.

Finally, vaccine advocates need to prove that substances in vaccines like mercury, formaldehyde, and aluminum, although classified as toxic when studied alone, are somehow exonerated when shot directly into the body through a needle. The (absurd) logic of this needs to be explained fully.

This is not a matter of claiming that “a particular disease,” like autism, isn’t caused by a particular chemical, like mercury. That’s a logical ruse all on its own. We are talking about harm caused by toxins under any name or no name. When a person ingests cyanide, do we say he has a disease? Of course not.

The Matrix Revealed

Children in school, their parents, and teachers have never been exposed to logic, so it’s easy to sell them vaccines as valid. But selling is not the same thing as science.

And “being a scientist” is not the same thing as knowing what science and logic actually are. The same fact can be applied to news anchors, public health officials, and politicians. They can say “the evidence for vaccinating is overwhelming,” but so can a parrot in a cage, with enough training.

Of course, these so-called experts won’t come out and engage in a serious debate about the theory and practice of vaccination. They refuse to.

Millions of people around the world would eagerly watch a true extended debate on the subject. Such debate used to be a standard practice when logic was studied, when it was understood to be vital for deciding the truth or falsity of a position.

Now, it’s all about PR and propaganda, the modern version of logic for the dumbed-down crowd.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

The Vaccine Empire Collapsed

The Vaccine Empire Collapsed

by Jon Rappoport

October 9, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

You may not have heard the explosion, but it happened.

A review (sourced below) from The Cochrane Collaboration, a widely respected research-analysis team, went over all the evidence, and entered its conclusion:

In healthy adults, no flu vaccine delivers protection from the flu.

Boom!

It doesn’t protect against transmission of flu viruses from person to person, either.

Boom!

So all the promotion and all the pandering and all the scare tactics and all the “expert medical opinion” and all the media coverage…useless, worthless, and irrelevant.

Billions of dollars of financed lies about flu vaccines were just that: lies.

It gets worse, because the entire theory about how and why vaccines work is sitting on a razor’s edge, ready to fall into the abyss of discarded fairy tales.

We’ve been told that vaccines stimulate the immune system with a “rehearsal” of what will happen when an actual disease comes down the pipeline. When the disease does show up, the immune system will be locked and loaded, ready to destroy the attacking germ.

But since flu vaccines don’t protect against flu or even stop the transmission of flu viruses from person to person, the so-called “rehearsing” of the immune system is merely somebody’s fancy story. A legend. A myth.

Also, you can forget about the widely sold herd-immunity tale. How can the group be immune when vaccines are doing nothing to prevent the free movement of germs from person to person?

As always, The Cochrane Collaboration did an exhaustive review of all previous studies on flu vaccines they could discover. They rejected the studies that were badly constructed. In some cases, to expand available data, they contacted individual researchers who had conducted studies.

Therefore, Cochrane’s findings represent the best of the published literature on flu vaccines. However, because the Cochrane team owes nothing to pharmaceutical companies, they analyzed the literature with sober eyes and minds.

The Matrix Revealed

Here is an interesting comment from the analysis: “The review showed that reliable evidence on influenza vaccines is thin but there is evidence of widespread manipulation of conclusions…”

Now who in the world would benefit from such manipulating?

Oh yes. One other thing.

The Cochrane review, published by John Wiley and Sons, appeared online on July 7, 2010 .

Over two years ago.

We must have missed the massive mainstream media coverage. Perhaps we were fishing that day, or buying tires for the car, or vacationing on our yachts in the Mediterranean.

What? There was no massive media coverage? Impossible. I mean, surely…

Sources:

No Value in Any Influenza Vaccine: Cochrane Collaboration Study

http://www.whale.to/v/no_value.html

Title: Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy adults
Tom Jefferson
Carlo Di Pietrantonj
Alessandro Rivetti
Ghada A Bawazeer
Lubna A Al-Ansary
Eliana Ferroni
Editorial Group: Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group
Published Online: 7 JUL 2010
Assessed as up-to-date: 2 JUN 2010
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001269.pub4
The Cochrane Library
(registration required)

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD001269.pub4/full

 

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world.

www.nomorefakenews.com

How many of these vaccine facts do you know?

How many of these vaccine facts do you know?

by Jon Rappoport

September 6, 2012

NoMoreFakeNews.com

In 1988, I was researching my first book, AIDS INC. (*) Interested in the subject of vaccines, I delved into published accounts of vaccination gone wrong.

(*) A copy of AIDS INC. is included in my collection Power Outside The Matrix.

The following series of quotes from authors only begins to cover the territory of vaccine damage, deception, and failure. It is nevertheless the start of a history which has been hidden from the public by corporate media, whose ties to pharmaceutical interests are infamous.

In 1988, I knew nothing about mercury in vaccines, or about the numerous chemicals and contaminating germs in vaccines that cause human illness and damage. I was merely looking for evidence that past vaccination campaigns had backfired.

What I found was shocking.

Here are the statements I uncovered:

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

“In a recent British outbreak of whooping cough, for example, even fully immunized children contracted the disease in fairly large numbers; and the rates of serious complications and death were reduced only slightly. In another recent outbreak of pertussis, 46 of the 85 fully immunized children studied eventually contracted the disease.” (Richard Moskowitz, MD, The Case Against Immunizations, 1983, American Institute of Homeopathy)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

power outside the matrix

The above quotes reflect only a mere fraction of an available literature which shows the public has been kept in the dark about vaccination. It is certain that undisclosed, unlooked for illness occurs as a result of vaccines, or as a result of infection after protective immunity should have been conferred but wasn’t.

A certain amount of this sort of illness is immunosuppressive in the widest sense, and some in a narrower sense (depression of T-cell numbers, etc.). When looking for causes of unusual illness and immune suppression, vaccines are one of those areas which remain partially hidden from investigation. That is a mistake. It is not adequate to say, “Vaccines are simple; they stimulate the immune system and confer immunity against specific germ agents.” That is the glossy presentation.

What vaccines often do is something else. They engage some aspect of the body’s immune-response, but to what effect over the long term? Why, for example, do children who have measles vaccine develop a susceptibility to another more severe, atypical measles? Is that virulent form of the disease the result of reactivation of the virus in the vaccine?

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

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

Dirty tricks alert: Bill Gates will smear and slime anti-vaccine advocates

Dirty tricks alert: Bill Gates will smear and slime anti-vaccine advocates

by Jon Rappoport

August 28, 2012

NoMoreFakeNews.com

Here is the direct quote from Bill Gates’ grant-award machine:

July 18, 2012… An anti-vaccine surveillance and alert system: Seth Kalichman [twitter, blog] of the http://www.uconn.edu/ in the USA will establish an Internet-based global monitoring and rapid alert system for finding, analysing, and counteracting communication campaigns containing misinformation regarding vaccines to support global immunization efforts. …(via technet21.org)… TechNet21 is generously supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, under the oversight of WHO and UNICEF. The information in this forum is provided by users, as a service…

Source:

http://www.technet21.org/index.php/issue-166/gates-foundation-awards-17-million-to-inspire-supply-chain-innovation.html

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:STCtOoU0cwQJ:www.technet21.org/index.php/forum/technet21/general-discussion/2972-gates-foundation-awards-1.7-million-to-inspire-supply-chain-innovation.html+gate+supply+chain+innovation&hl=en&gl=us&prmh

http://jonrappoportmedia.blogspot.com/2012/08/gates-foundation-awards-17-million-to.html

This means the attack is on.  Gates intends to do a surveillance operation across the Internet and locate anti-vaccine advocates.  His minions will then undertake a counter-insurgency campaign to neutralize them.

How does such an operation work?  I’ll tell you how it works: “This writer has no medical credentials.”  “This writer is spreading dangerous information that will harm children.”  “This filmmaker tells lies about the most important medical technology the world has ever seen.”  “The evidence for vaccination is overwhelming, and this writer is operating out of the Dark Ages.”

And that’s just the nice stuff.

“This writer was once an MD, but it’s been said he gave up his practice after several patients made complaints to the medical board.  Now he spends all his time attacking vaccines.  He’s a criminal menace.”

“Don’t read anything by this writer.  He’s obviously mentally ill.  He wants you to stop vaccinating your children, so they can catch life-threatening diseases.”

And it will go downhill and get nastier from there.

This is Nixon’s dirty-tricks war all over again.  But instead of having a few million dollars in a slush fund, Gates has billions at his disposal.

He’s going to use surrogates to do his work for him, so it will be difficult, in many cases, to know where the attacks are coming from.  That’s how cowards operate.  They slink around behind the scenes and let other people do the heavy lifting.

The last thing they want is an honest and open debate about the issue itself.  That would expose them.  The truth would expose them.

Gates is obviously out to create an atmosphere and set a tone for legislation that would make vaccination mandatory everywhere, with no exemptions allowed.  That’s what he’s shooting for.  That’s his wet dream, the one that goes hand in glove with depopulation, his mountaintop desire.

http://www.infowars.com/in-vaccines-we-trust-vaccine-inventor-paul-offit-seeks-end-to-religious-and-philosophical-vaccine-exemptions/

The press, as always, will be on his side.  They were on his side by giving short shrift to the explosive story out of India, where 47,000 cases of paralysis were caused by his polio vaccine.

http://www.naturalnews.com/035627_polio_vaccines_paralysis_India.html

He intends to create his very own Surveillance State, in which the targets are all Internet reporters and groups that have dug up the real facts about vaccines.  The facts the medical cartel wants to hide in their vaults: vaccine deaths, paralysis, maiming, brain damage, autism, immune dysfunction…

He wants to create a chilling effect, for those who are thinking about covering the vaccine issue honestly.

Well, here’s a newsflash.  Those facts are already out there, on thousands and thousands of sites.  The horse left the barn years ago.

He’s late to the party, but he’s going to throw a lot of money at the problem.  Essentially, he’s opting for suppression of accurate journalism.  Like so many before him, once he wrangled his fortune in the free market (?), he turned around and realized he didn’t want a semblance of freedom anymore.  He only wanted control.

Those of us who have been writing and speaking about vaccines for years would love to go up against Gates’ medical doctors in an open debate.  Nothing would please us more.  But Bill doesn’t want that.  People like him are terrified of openness.  So be it.

He can take the low road.  He’ll only induce more opposition.  That’s the way his style of attack works.  People who were asleep will wake up, once they realize he’s just another puffy Marmaduke who, when he doesn’t like the game, decides to take his bat and ball and go home.

And he will go home.

His money against our freedom is a game in which many of us like the odds.

Go ahead, Bill.  Deal your first greasy card from the bottom of the deck.  We’ve got eyeballs on you, too.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at NoMoreFakeNews.com or OutsideTheRealityMachine.

Martial law shakes hands with the US vaccine program

by Jon Rappoport

August 1, 2012

(To join our email list, click here.)

Who knew the Pentagon had muscled into the US vaccine program?

DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) has been doing research on vaccine production. They’ve found a way to produce flu vaccines a lot faster than Big Pharma.

DARPA Effort Speeds Biothreat Response (Nov. 2, 2010, by Cheryl Pellerin, American Forces Press Service)

http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=61520

DARPA’s Blue Angel – Pentagon prepares millions of vaccines against future global flu (28 July, 2012, RT.com)

http://rt.com/usa/news/future-vaccine-darpa-research-255/

Utilizing vaccines grown on tobacco cells, instead of the traditional chicken eggs, DARPA has turned out a staggering 10 million doses of flu vaccine in just one month.

This “Blue Angel” project, as it’s called, suddenly puts the Pentagon in the forefront of the vaccine business. The big question is: why is the Army involved in vaccines at all? And the answer is no surprise. According to DARPA, it’s all about readiness in containing bio-threats. Translated, that means terrorist attacks that could use flu viruses.

This is a sinister development. It creates a potential scenario in which the military can invent the “bio-threat” and then step in and provide the solution. It doesn’t really matter whether the bio-threat is real or imaginary.

The threat would offer the chance to initiate a martial-law scenario, after which the military vaccine would be made mandatory, destroying the right of each state in the union to permit, as is now the case, people to opt out of vaccination on religious, medical, or ethical grounds.

The Pentagon is famous for developing weapons and then lobbying for battlefield opportunities to use them. This is part and parcel of their “war is forever” mentality. Well, in this case, the vaccine becomes the defensive weapon, and you can be sure the Pentagon will strive to deploy it in a situation that “demands it”—a chilling prospect.

Several medical issues arise as well. First, what safety tests have been done to ensure that tobacco viruses don’t enter these DARPA vaccines through lab contamination, thereby finding their way into the human bloodstream, via injection, and causing uncharted health problems? No word about that, just as there was no word, historically, about various Pentagon weapons systems that later proved to be dangerous to the soldiers using them (e.g, the Bradley Fighting Vehicle).

Hidden in the story about the new means of vaccine production: the employment of a synthetic construction that is supposed to mimic the human immune system. To test the ability of the tobacco-vaccines to induce a “robust immune response,” this new chemical lab-version of an immune system becomes the guinea pig. But there is no proof that such an artifact works or is translatable to actual processes of the human body.

Finally, DARPA states that the vaccine it just produced contains aluminum. Toxicity for humans is thus guaranteed.

In the hands of the Pentagon, what could possibly go wrong with this Blue Angel program? Everything.

In case we need to review the most recent “epidemic” advertised by the CDC and the World Health Organization (WHO), it killed, by the most generous estimates, 20,000 people worldwide. Despite being labeled a catastrophic level-6 pandemic, the H1N1 Swine Flu turned out to be a comparative dud. WHO states that, every year, seasonal non-pandemic flu kills between 250,000 and 500,000 people.

The CDC and WHO relentlessly promoted Swine Flu as a monster menace that could invade and decimate the planet. Therefore, everyone needed to step up and take the vaccine. These civilian agencies are mere pikers compared to the Pentagon. Can you imagine what the Dept. of Defense would promote and launch to guarantee their vaccine finds a place in your bloodstream? The DOD regularly makes conflict of interest into an art form.

Martial law? No problem.

The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

A STAGED BIOTERROR ATTACK

Clues to look for when determining if a bioterror event has been staged or not

by Jon Rappoport

June 10, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

There are certain future scenarios which, with enough exposure BEFORE THEY HAPPEN, can be stopped, or at least analyzed correctly when they occur.

A staged bioterror event is one of those, and I want to spell out a scenario for you.

This goes along with what I’ve been discussing in my last few articles about germ theory (click here and here). First, the germ theory of disease is wrong. I don’t care what kind of germ you’re talking about or where it came from, releasing it intentionally does not create predictable results.

People whose immune systems are at different levels of strength are going to react differently.

The perpetrators may find that less than 2% of people exposed get sick and die.

Furthermore, spreading a germ poses the serious problem of containment.

How do biowar operatives confine the spread of a germ?

There is no easy answer.

BUT, there is another way. And this is something to look out for.

The use of a germ as a cover story for a chemical.

In other words, there is no germ attack. It’s called a germ attack, but that’s a lie. The perps bring in researchers, to the affected area, who go on to claim they have isolated a germ that is the cause of death and illness. It’s a sham. What really happened was the spread of a toxic chemical that is almost impossible to detect, unless you suspect it is there.

The chemical has severe and deadly effects for a week. Then it disperses and loses potency and the “epidemic” is done.

A chemical CAN be used in pinpoint fashion.

In some town, a fairly isolated community, the word goes out that people are suddenly falling ill and dying. The CDC and the Army are called in to cordon off the area and quarantine all citizens. A peremptory announcement is made, early on, that this is a biowar attack.

Major media are allowed outside the periphery. Network news anchors set up on-location and do all their nightly broadcasts “from the scene.”

The entire nation, the entire world is focused on the “event,” 24/7.

People inside the cordon fall ill and die. Reports come out from the town.

The networks report that “heroic doctors are taking samples of blood and the blood is being analyzed to find the germ that is causing the epidemic.” The DOD confirms this is, indeed, a biowar attack. A terrorist event.

Human interest stories pile up. This family lost three members, that family lost everybody. Tragedy, horror, and the desired empathic response from “the world community.”

It’s a soap opera, except real people are dying.

The medical cartel promotes FEAR OF THE GERM.

All controlling entities get to obtain their piece of the terrorist pie.

Finally, the doctors announce they have isolated the germ causing the death in the small town, and researchers are rushing to develop a vaccine (which they produce in record time).

Everyone everywhere must be vaccinated, now. No choice. Do it or be quarantined or jailed.

Now that the (phony non-existent) germ has been found, “relevant” (toxic) medical drugs can be shipped into the town for the residents.

In this declared martial law situation, the doctors are the heroes. The doctors and the Army. And the government and even the media.

Then, after a week, when the potency of the secret chemical has dispersed, it’s over.

The Matrix Revealed

When you think about it, this scenario is a cameo of what happens every day, all over the world, in doctor’s offices. The doctor has already diagnosed the patient with a germ-caused disease and prescribed a drug. The patient is coming back with new serious symptoms caused by the drug. The doctor says no, the symptoms are an escalation of the original germ-caused disease. So the doctor now prescribes a more toxic drug, and that will produce new effects, and at the next appointment the doctor will either continue to say the original disease has gotten worse or the the patient has a new disease. The chemicals (drugs) are the real culprits, but the doctor keeps saying it’s a germ(s). This is the template of much of modern medicine.

In other words, a chem-war attack is being leveled at people all over the world all the time.

A so-called bio-terror event in a small town is simply a repeat performance dressed up in a different way, to induce fear and compliance.

See Dr. Barbara Starfield (Johns Hopkins School of Public Health), July 26, 2000, Journal of the American Medical Association, “Is US health really the best in the world?” 106,000 people in America are killed every year by FDA-approved medical drugs. That’s a MILLION people per decade (click here for more info). Also Google “FDA Why Should You Learn About Adverse Drug Reactions.” the FDA admits 100,000 people in America die every year from the effects of medical drugs. (Click here to go directly to the FDA page in question. See also this news roundup concerning the FDA in this regard.)

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world.

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

CNN GOES PSYCHOTIC ON BIN LADEN, VACCINES

CNN Goes Psychotic on Vaccines, Bin Laden

by Jon Rappoport

June 7, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

Maybe they’re dropping acid at CNN. But they’re running a story on how the killing of Bin Laden is tied to a recent “surge” in polio cases in Pakistan.

(CNN: “Bin Laden raid harms Pakistan polio fight”)

I’m not kidding. Here is the thread, such as it is. A Pakistani doctor, secretly working for the CIA, showed up at the bin Laden compound pretending he was promoting vaccinations against polio. He was really there to try to gain intel on the compound and who was living in it.

Since this has gone public, there is now a widespread fear of vaccination in Pakistan because, well, the whole effort to deliver shots to the population must be a CIA op.

This is why, medical authorities say, the people of Pakistan don’t want needles??

Actually, people everywhere are waking up to the fact that vaccines are toxic and ineffective.

The recent “incredible surge” in polio in Pakistan? 198 claimed cases.

Which proves that public health agencies will say ANYTHING to try to get people to take vaccines.

A little history helps here. In the US, in the early 1950s, as the first polio vaccine was being introduced, doctors were being paid $25 for every case of polio they diagnosed. In those days, that was a significant sum. So any patient who walked through the door of a doctor’s office with a slight limp or a fever or a sniffle risked the danger of a diagnosis. Naturally, these payoffs to physicians inflated the numbers of cases of polio being reported.

THEN, after the vaccine was put in play, health authorities changed the definition of polio. By the new standards, it was much harder to claim a person had polio, so case numbers dropped. Of course, the drop was attributed to the vaccine.

I explain all this in detail in my book, AIDS INC., which is a bonus included as an e-book, in my new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED. During the writing of the book, I interviewed Dr. Herbert Ratner who, during the 1950s, was the public health officer for Oak Park, Illinois. Ratner documented these scams at the time.

The whole issue of whether polio is even related to a virus has been shoved under the carpet and kept there for a long time. Here you should consult the unique research of Jim West, who wrote a stunning analysis, Images of Poliomyelitis, in the Townsend Letter for Doctors (June, 2000). West connects paralytic polio to the DDT pesticide, and earlier, to lead and arsenic pesticides.

The Matrix Revealed

Coming up to the present, recent revelations about the Bill Gates- sponsored polio vaccine in India are quite staggering. 47,000 cases of paralysis from the vaccine. They’re calling these “non-polio paralysis,” but it’s clear the vaccine has been doing the damage. Don’t worry. Bill is still smiling.

Ever since the advent of the germ theory of disease, germs have been used as cover stories to conceal the actual causes of illness and death. In the Third World, contaminated water supplies, lack of basic sanitation, overcrowding, chronic malnutrition and starvation, stolen farm land, and Western medical intervention with toxic drugs and vaccines are the true causes. They are conveniently unsolved, because it is in the interests of those in charge to maintain debilitated and weak populations.

I pointed this out in AIDS INC., as the HIV hysteria spread. HIV was the latest attempt to deflect attention from the truth. In the course of writing the book, I interviewed a doctor who had set up a small AIDS clinic in Uganda. He decided it would do no good to treat the patients with AZT, because they were too weak from lack of food. (Of course, AZT, a failed chemo drug, is perhaps the most toxic medicine ever released for public consumption.) So this doctor tried something unprecedented. He created a small farm, where food was grown to feed his patients.

Eventually, he said, they grew stronger AND ALL THEIR SO-CALLED AIDS SYMPTOMS DISAPPEARED. At this point, because he was a mainstream doctor, he was baffled. He didn’t know what to do. His people were now healthy. They had been diagnosed with a lethal disease. They “needed drugs.” But why? They were doing well.

It turns out that, in Africa, in 1985, a researcher named Serwadda wrote a paper in which he essentially reinterpreted all the usual symptoms of starvation, contaminated water, lack of sanitation as “slim disease,” and he claimed this wasting away was the result of HIV. From that moment on, the medical cartel had its cover story. The death-dealing hoax was in full bloom.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive new collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world.

www.nomorefakenews.com

VACCINES–YES OR NO?

 

VACCINES—YES OR NO?

 

By Jon Rappoport

February 16, 2012

www.nomorefakenews.com

qjrconsulting@gmail.com

 

For some time, I’ve been wanting to do a complete seminar on vaccines, since I’ve investigated that territory on and off for the last 20 years.

 

Well, finally it’s done. My friend and colleague, radio host Robert Scott Bell, and I put together 10 hours of audio and accompanying online text. On my site, www.nomorefakenews.com you’ll see the box to click, to order it.

 

My idea was to present a kind of hologram on vaccines that you could walk around and examine and see from a number of points of view.

 

Such as:

 

What arguments do mainstream medical people use to promote and defend vaccines? Do these arguments hold up? Are they fallacious? If so, why?

 

What are the hidden assumptions about vaccines that need to be probed and picked apart?

 

Is vaccination basically a good practice if the vaccines are protected from contamination? Or is the whole concept false?

 

Exactly how are vaccines supposed to immunize people from disease?

 

What’s the actual track record of vaccination?

 

What studies prove they’re safe and effective?

 

What’s the relationship between vaccines and a person’s own immune system?

 

And so on and so forth.

 

I wanted to be able to arm people with information they can use to make a TRULY informed choice.

 

I wanted to raise and examine the big questions and provide big answers—and also get very specific.

 

I’m happy to say Robert and and I have fulfilled those objectives.

 

You know, the idea and practice of political correctness today reaches far beyond social issues and words that can be said and can’t be said. It extends especially to medical issues, because the promotion of medical solutions to everything under the sun has become more widespread and more relentless.

 

The medical cartel seeks to drive all opposition underground into small marginalized spaces.

 

The notion of intelligent debate on medical solutions is off-limits, because we have a government-medical partnership that exceeds any Constitutional intent. It is a racket. Profits for pharmaceutical companies are, in many areas, guaranteed by government edict, and government is basically claiming that medical pronouncements are golden Truth that can’t be argued against.

 

Say and think what you want to about government-controlled health insurance. Up the road, we are looking at a form of fascism, where you will be able to access only those treatments the government decides you can. Doctors who discover you’re “into natural health” will relegate you to the back of the line. You’ll be told you’re a “non-compliant patient” and you need to accept the mainstream and only the mainstream treatments and prescriptions.

 

In fact, this future is the main reason why the national health insurance bill was pushed through Congress. Behind the Congressional wrangle sit the real benefactors of such a system: the drug companies, and the insurance companies who can muscle their way to the money table where the big profits are handed out.

 

The plan is to “streamline” health care in America, so the millions of people who are seeking help in the natural arena will be forced to give in and accept new limitations.

 

Among these limitations? Take your vaccines when you are told to, and give them to your children without objection. “We know what’s good for you.”

 

That’s the new and improved definition of freedom. Accept the Truth as the government shapes and defines it.

 

But this master plan has flaws. It isn’t a done deal. The future can be changed. People can change it. The natural health revolution has legs. When it comes to vaccines, my objective with this seminar was to provide you with your very own “PhD” on the subject, so you could make a decision you could STAND ON, with confidence.

 

“Medical freedom” and “health freedom” aren’t empty terms. They reflect CHOICE. Your choice. The powers-that-be are banking on the prediction that you’ll eventually give in and go along with the tide. You’ll decide they really are the experts.

 

For every supposed medical condition and solution, there are hundreds or even thousands of studies that purport to explain WHAT REALITY IS. The sheer weight of the details is supposed to make you throw up your hands and surrender. Because that’s what doctors do, after all. They don’t have time to read everything, and they go along with their own system—and then they manage to sound like they’re wizards when they tell you what’s needed and what you should do.

 
large
When I was running for a seat in Congress in 1994, against one of the staunchest defenders of the medical apparatus (Henry Waxman), my launching issue was health freedom, your right to make your own choices, no matter what the experts or the government tells you. In that regard, nothing has changed for me. Except this aspect of freedom has, in the interim, become more and more a co-opted part of the political correctness universe.

 

Which means people need better information, and they need to stand on it.

 

A lot of what I read these days doesn’t make it into print in my articles, because I have my own subjects backed up from here to the moon. But I have to tell you (and I know this doesn’t come as a shock) the sheer mass of criminal behavior in our society is increasing geometrically, from top to bottom. From the White House and Congress and boardrooms all the way down to the street.

 

No matter at what level the crimes are being perpetrated, the criminals have all sorts of stories to explain their actions. Reasons, excuses, denials. And they have colleagues who rally to their “cause,” who will lie at the drop of a hat.

 

The idea that a person should be responsible for his own actions seems to be on the way out.

 

One of the greatest repositories of such crimes and such irresponsibility is the medical system. Children are being shoved into debilitating drugs for imaginary reasons, and they’re being changed for the worse. They’re being drafted into ongoing-patient status. They’ll receive new diagnoses and new harmful drugs for the rest of their lives. And they’ll become crippled and incapable on many levels. And doctors and their masters will NEVER admit fault.

 

Those of us who can still think and reason need to understand this wholesale transformation that is taking place before our eyes.

 

“Being nice about the whole thing” as a “spiritual stance” isn’t an answer at all. It’s bizarre and it’s useless. It’s another form of surrender.

 

I continue to work from the premise that people have eyes and they can see, and if they can see they can make choices and stand up for those choices. They can go against the tide, if necessary, and protect their own. They can refuse all the temptations to sacrifice their freedom and give in. They can become more intelligent and better informed, and they can operate in the world with confidence and even power.

 

They can share what they know. They can achieve victories.

 

When I was growing up, I was given one vaccine for smallpox. That’s it. The Centers for Disease Control now recommends 16 different vaccines for chkldren. According to Answers.com, a child can receive 21 vaccines before the age of six and six more before the age of 18. Some vaccines, like the DtaP, are delivered more than once. DtaP is given five times. The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia states that a child is given 24 shots by the age of two and five shots in one visit. If you think this incredible medical intervention needs no rational and extensive debate, you’re whistling in the dark.

 

Jon Rappoport

When the Blood Boils

Vaccines and Autism

by Jon Rappoport

July 2, 2011

Lies passed around like conjured pieces of gold. Medical liars speaking their messages with straight faces, from their pulpits of influence.

We’ve watched them work. We’ve experienced the inner sensation of blood boiling; outrage.

Who are these people? Where did they come from? How did they attain their positions of power? Are they a different species?

And like you, I have watched the passive faces of audiences as they take in these lies, as they know something is wrong, as they refuse to act.

If you control the meaning of words like “evidence,” “cause,” “relationship between,” you own the playing field. You can manipulate outcomes and conclusions, and you can define science itself.

Your power derives from ownership of those simple words.

Suppose a healthy baby with all his faculties intact receives a barrage of vaccines at 15 months. Then, three days later, his temperature soars to 105, he has seizures, he screams, and then he goes silent. He withdraws from the world, from his parents. In the ensuing months, he doesn’t speak. He doesn’t laugh. He shows no interest in life around him. He doesn’t recover from this. He doesn’t regain his former health.

In what sense can it be said that the vaccines caused his condition? That may seem like an absurd question to be asking, but scientists claim it is important. So do judges and government officials. So do drug companies who make and sell vaccines.

They claim it’s very important, because they want to maintain control over the concept of “cause.” It’s their protection in the racket they are running.

Can we track the path, step by step, of these vaccine ingredients as they are injected into a baby and make their way through his system? Can we observe every reaction they produce, in sequence, all the way into and through the recesses of the nervous system and the brain?

Of course not.

By such an impossible standard, everyone falls short.

If perverse officials and scientists suddenly invoke that standard, can anyone fulfill it? No.

But make sure you understand that scientists and bureaucrats judge their own work by far looser principles.

They assert, for example, with psychotic arrogance that the underlying cause of autism is in the genes, although their research has only given them the foggiest of reasons for even beginning to crawl out on that limb—where they crow and lie and ask for more research money.

They say ADHD is created by certain brain abnormalities, even though their scans produce on-again off-again evidence—which, finally, is no evidence at all.

In fact, for every one of the 297 so-called mental disorders that are named and defined and described in the official bible of psychiatric literature, there is not one, not one lucid diagnostic test to back up, biologically, their disease labels and descriptions and definitions.

It’s a game. “We may hold you to an impossible standard. We hold ourselves to no standard at all.”

So you should be aware that, if you choose to enter this game, for whatever reasons, you are playing against a monumentally stacked deck.

The powers-that-be will do everything they can to subvert, deny, and destroy THE STORY OF ONE PARENT ABOUT ONE CHILD.

Why? Because the story is too convincing. It’s too obvious. It’s too real. It’s too DEVASTATING. It’s too dangerous.

“My child was healthy. He was vaccinated. Then he collapsed. He never recovered.”

With that, you are setting dynamite on the rails of the medical princes.

And you are also waking up other parents whose stories are essentially the same. You are igniting a fire in their heads.

Can you imagine what would happen if you said, “Look, my child was hit by a cluster of vaccines delivered when he was fifteen months old, and he was never the same after that, and THAT is what I’m seeking compensation for, and that is ALL I’m seeking compensation for. I don’t care what you call it, what name you give to it.”

And the government said, “Well, all right.”

The ensuing flood would drown them. And would drown the vaccine manufacturers, too.

You must be stopped.

And the way they will stop you is by manipulating the word “cause.” That’s all. That’s their entire policy and program. They execute it on an arcane and pseudo-technical level, employing models and constructs and numbers in their private little universe, while they polish their credentials.

They don’t want YOUR STORY to stand naked in front of the public.

Of course it is obvious that, when health turns to tragedy, the vaccines were at fault, just as when a blow to the head causes memory loss. Of course everyone concerned knows the truth.

But they say: science is not done this way. We must have “evidence of causation.” They occasionally throw a few crumbs to parents whose child was brain-damaged by a vaccine. But in the main, they conjure up a version of pseudo-science and use it to obfuscate the otherwise unpardonable reality of what the vaccine has done.

And how does this conjured and manufactured science work?

It starts with the owned and operated definition of a disease or disorder. In the case of autism, the old behavioral criteria are dragged out. Here they are. I’m sorry for loading the full display on you, but I want you to see it in print:

The following is from Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: DSM IV

(I) A total of six (or more) items from (A), (B), and (C), with at least two from (A), and one each from (B) and (C)

(A) qualitative impairment in social interaction, as manifested by at least two of the following:

1. marked impairments in the use of multiple nonverbal behaviors such as eye-to-eye gaze, facial expression, body posture, and gestures to regulate social interaction
2. failure to develop peer relationships appropriate to developmental level
3. a lack of spontaneous seeking to share enjoyment, interests, or achievements with other people, (e.g., by a lack of showing, bringing, or pointing out objects of interest to other people)
4. lack of social or emotional reciprocity ( note: in the description, it gives the following as examples: not actively participating in simple social play or games, preferring solitary activities, or involving others in activities only as tools or “mechanical” aids )

(B) qualitative impairments in communication as manifested by at least one of the following:

1. delay in, or total lack of, the development of spoken language (not accompanied by an attempt to compensate through alternative modes of communication such as gesture or mime)
2. in individuals with adequate speech, marked impairment in the ability to initiate or sustain a conversation with others
3. stereotyped and repetitive use of language or idiosyncratic language
4. lack of varied, spontaneous make-believe play or social imitative play appropriate to developmental level

(C) restricted repetitive and stereotyped patterns of behavior, interests and activities, as manifested by at least two of the following:

1. encompassing preoccupation with one or more stereotyped and restricted patterns of interest that is abnormal either in intensity or focus
2. apparently inflexible adherence to specific, nonfunctional routines or rituals
3. stereotyped and repetitive motor mannerisms (e.g hand or finger flapping or twisting, or complex whole-body movements)
4. persistent preoccupation with parts of objects

(II) Delays or abnormal functioning in at least one of the following areas, with onset prior to age 3 years:

(A) social interaction
(B) language as used in social communication
(C) symbolic or imaginative play

(III) The disturbance is not better accounted for by Rett’s Disorder or Childhood Disintegrative Disorder

And now you have the full and complete definition of autism from the official manual. There is no other definition. There are no physical tests or blood tests or brain scans. There is only this menu of behaviors.

And there are many so-called related disorders, and each one has its similar complex behavioral definition. These depictions overlap. But no matter. As far as the psychiatrists and pediatricians and medical bureaucrats are concerned, autism is defined. Engraved on tablets.

Does, in the judgment of a doctor, your child fit the definition or doesn’t he? The word is given from on high. The decision is rendered. And we are then one step removed from the reality of the simple and brutal destroying effects of the vaccines. This is good for them. They are now in familiar territory. Protected land.

Now they can say, “Your child, who at fifteen months collapsed, has autism.”

This is the bridge to the next giant step. Which is:

“We have determined that vaccines are not the cause of autism.”

“We know this.”

“We have proved this.”

Therefore, you’re trapped. Your child has been painted with the label “autism”–and perhaps you were actually hoping for that, because you knew something was terribly wrong, and the designation confirms you were correct. But as far as making a link to the vaccines, you’re suddenly at their mercy.

If they decide to compensate you through the federal vaccine compensation system, they will say, “Well, your child actually is suffering from encephalopathy and has autism-like symptoms.” But far more frequently, they will fall back on their pronouncement that vaccines and autism are unconnected, and you will get nothing.

How did these medical experts and their bureaucratic partners determine that vaccines are not the cause of autism?

They examined studies. And the studies “found no link.” In particular, there is the key Verstraeten study, published in two phases. Three HMOs’ records of babies were considered by Verstraeten and his colleagues.

I’m going to quote from the study and then comment:

“Results. In phase I at HMO A, cumulative exposure at 3 months resulted in a significant positive association with tics (relative risk [RR]: 1.89; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05–3.38). At HMO B, increased risks of language delay were found for cumulative exposure at 3 months (RR: 1.13; 95% CI: 1.01–1.27) and 7 months (RR: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.01–1.13). In phase II at HMO C, no significant associations were found. In no analyses were significant increased risks found for autism or attention-deficit disorder.”

“Conclusions. No consistent significant associations were found between TCVs and neurodevelopmental outcomes. Conflicting results were found at different HMOs for certain outcomes. For resolving the conflicting findings, studies with uniform neurodevelopmental assessments of children with a range of cumulative thimerosal exposures are needed.”

First of all, notice how far away we are from that basic fact that vaccines were delivered to your child and your child collapsed and never recovered. We are miles from that. We’re now discussing correlations between vaccines containing mercury (thimerosal) and various indicators and labels: tics, language delay, autism, attention-deficit disorder, neurodevelopmental outcomes.

We now have a complex situation. First of all, in order to conclude that mercury-containing vaccines are correlated with autism or attention-deficit disorder, the researchers would have to have observed, in these children’s medical records, reports detailing all the behavioral criteria THE RESEARCHERS ASSUME add up to a positive diagnosis of these two INVENTED disorders—neither of which even exists on the basis of actual biological or chemical tests of any kind.

So essentially, if we make the translation from psychiatric-speak to basic English, we have this: “There is no convincing correlation between mercury-containing vaccines and those disorders we invented by slicing and dicing human behavior into compartments and giving them disease-labels.”

This is staggering when you think about it.

Continuing: In the first HMO records, Verstraeten and his colleages found a significant correlation between the vaccines and tics. As in facial tics. Why is that important? Because tics can be a sign of motor brain damage. They have a name for that: tardive dyskinesia. But it means brain damage.

However, if you look at the concocted definitions of the concocted disorders called autism and ADD, you’ll find no mention of tics or tardive dyskinesia. Therefore, an increased risk of tics doesn’t bring the researchers any closer to connecting vaccines and autism—simply because autism wasn’t defined that way. It wasn’t invented that way.

Perusing the records at the second HMO, Verstraeten found an increased risk of language delay. The babies didn’t start speaking when normally expected to. This is one of the listed criteria for a diagnosis of autism, but of course it is not enough, by the concocted rules of the game, to rate a placing of the invented label, autism, on any of those children.

At the third HMO, which was investigated as a separate phase 2 of the study, researchers found no significant associations—meaning no tics, no language delay…nothing that would rate a diagnosis of autism or suggest the presence of any of the invented symptoms of autism.

All in all, Verstraeten and his colleagues found no reason to conclude that mercury-containing vaccines were correlated with autism or other signals of neurological problems.

He played off one HMO against another: “In this one, we found X. But in the other one, we didn’t. We found Y instead. And in the third one, we found neither X nor Y.” Why didn’t he simply use all three HMOs as one reservoir? Possibly because he was trying to guard against the possibility of biased records at one HMO. Who knows?

And why didn’t he conclude, “All in all, we discovered some evidence of harm from the vaccines.”

Again, notice how far we are from the actual event of vaccines causing brain damage in a child.

The study decides that there is no increased risk, from vaccines, for autism or ADD. And that’s that. “Further research” is needed.

A child harmed by vaccines could have a tiny brain lesion or severe immune deficiency or a rewired connection somewhere deep in the recesses of the brain—undetected—but none of this matches up to the invented criteria for a diagnosis of autism.

But millions of people actually believe that autism is a distinct entity which was “discovered,” like a pre-set embedded pattern of errant pathways in the brain. And when those people are told, by experts, that vaccines don’t cause it, the PR value is enormous. For doctors who give the vaccines, for drug companies, for public-health agencies.

This is all a ruse. It’s a fabrication, and the studies that follow from it serve to mask the facts of vaccine damage.

They invent define the disorder, they have no definitive diagnostic tests for it, they conclude that vaccines don’t cause it. It’s one fantasy after another.

It’s as if you drew a map of a gold mine that doesn’t exist, and then you passed a law forbidding people from searching for it.

There are various degrees and events of tragic and lasting impact-damage that are laid upon children. The causes are multiple. One significant cause is vaccines. There is no such thing as autism. It is a construct ultimately designed to get certain people off the hook. And to make profit. And to engender money for research.

They will never find a cure for autism, because it doesn’t exist, except as a menu of behaviors wrapped inside their fantasy. Of course, if they were in the world, the world you live in, they would acknowledge that vaccines do cause brain and neurological damage, and they would compensate for that. They would act in a straightforward and honest fashion.

I spoke to one psychiatrist off the record, who said, “A genetic cause for autism? Are you serious? Autism is an artifact to begin with. So how do you find a gene that causes a fairy tale?”

The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

How madmen think

How madmen think

JUNE 22, 2011. From 1 to 4 this afternoon, all politically correct statements are bullshit.

For instance:

“The scientific consensus is even stronger. It has been endorsed by every National Academy of science of every major country on the planet, every professional scientific society in the study of global warming and 98 percent of climate scientists throughout the world. In the latest and most authoritative study by 3,000 of the very best scientific experts in the world, the evidence was judged ‘unequivocal.’”

This is the sad man, Al Gore, writing in Rolling Stone.

I could start off picking at his remarks. How does he know 98% of climate scientists in the world endorse the notion of manmade dangerous warming? He has a slide rule in his shirt pocket? He gets hourly updates from the Thought Police?

And the category “climate scientist” doesn’t exist as a discipline in most universities.

How does he personally know this latest and greatest study was conducted by 3000 of the “very best scientific experts in the world?” In fact, how can a study be conducted by 3000 scientists? Did its publication list all of them? Alert to Guinness Book of World Records.

But these aren’t the core issues. The core mind-boggle is that a human of supposed intelligence can think that consensus is the way science is done.

When a researcher does an experiment, his work and methods are supposed to be tested by many other independent researchers, who perform his experiment for themselves. This is called replication.

But even if they agree the first scientist is right, the buck doesn’t stop there. Because replication has a reason and purpose: arriving at the the truth.

That’s the standard.

And truth requires open and honest and extensive debate in professional journals. A back and forth explication of issues and questions and shortcomings.

In the area of climate science, this has never happened. As in: never.

So whether it’s Al Gore, or Jon Stewart, or Bill Maher, or other such important scientists, we must reserve judgment, despite the confirming applause that thunders from their college audiences.

Even when I was in college, I knew students massed in a hall were lunatics.

Gore is a champion of consensus. He lives by it. He builds it, profits from it, and then turns around and cites it.

Using consensus is the last refuge of democracy.

The scientific merits of global warming or any other hypothesis are not about a vote.

As a medical reporter, I’ve heard the consensus argument many times. And in each case, I’ve discovered the consensus was wrong. Often it was promoted as a strategy for making profit or protecting it.

And when I write about imagination, consensus is also a factor, because it is the very essence of surrender to a reality without imagination. Consensus is what you get when imagination does not play a featured role. It’s the default and leftover structure of society.

Consensus, in this regard, is a movie called The Creation of the Drones.

Prior to any important, shattering scientific breakthrough, if you had polled “the best experts” and asked them whether or not the substance of that breakthrough might be true, the majority would have said no. That should tell you something.

It tells you that humanity at large wants to huddle in its bunker of assumed and traditional reality and protect against the incursion of the New.

Then much later, humanity says, of the breakthrough, “Oh, of course. Everybody knows that.”

Everyone knows it because everyone agrees.

So much for consensus.

Yesterday, on my radio show on prn.fm —I interviewed Mary Holland, co-author of the book, VACCINE EPIDEMIC. One of the upshots of that conversation was: the official consensus about vaccines is artificially constructed. It is sustained through fear, peer pressure, media close-mindedness, and government intervention.

Which is to say, frankly, that no one in his right mind would accept the pronouncements of the pro-vaccine “community” at face value.

A drone would, though. A drone would automatically assume that all vaccines are necessary and wonderful, because he had heard it voiced so many times, from so many towers of authority, with so much assurance. A drone would slip right into the consensus, thinking he was a first cousin to a “real scientist.”

On July 27, I’ll be interviewing Andrew Wakefield on my radio show. Don’t miss that one. Andy knows a great deal, first hand, about how the consensus works. He was bulldozed by its architects.

And now, here’s your definition for today:

“Politically correct”: A statement, idea, or position based on, and backed up by, the engineering of a false consensus.

Boom, you’re a PhD.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com