sábado, 18 de junho de 2022

Monkeypox Mythology


Dr. Sam & Dr. Mark Bailey
23rd May

“Monkeypox” – who could have seen it coming? Well, apparently the organisation founded by Ted Turner in 2001 called the ‘Nuclear Threat Initiative’ (NTI) saw it coming when they published a report in November 2021 called, “Strengthening Global Systems to Prevent and Respond to High-Consequence Biological Threats.” The report states that in March 2021, they partnered with the Munich Security Conference to run an exercise scenario involving a, “deadly, global pandemic involving an unusual strain of monkeypox virus that emerged in the fictional nation of Brinia and spread globally over 18 months…the fictional pandemic resulted in more than three billion cases and 270 million fatalities worldwide.”


The Nuclear Threat Initiative introduces Plandemic 2.0? This time it is even bigger and monkeypox takes centre stage.

Amazingly, the scenario had the monkeypox outbreak emerging as a result of an act of bioterrorism in May 2022, right where we are now. We have dealt with gain of function garbage involving non-existent viruses in several other videos, while Dr Stefan Lanka has also dismantled such fallacies. Regardless, the NTI’s report suggests that what is required in a fantasy outbreak is, “aggressive measures to slow virus transmission by shutting down mass gatherings, imposing social-distancing measures, and implementing mask mandates.” The winning countries in the NTI’s hallucination implemented, “large-scale testing and contact-tracing operations and scaled-up their health care systems.” 


“But, I haven’t got any viruses Peter.”

Their charts, which seem to be produced by Neil Ferguson’s calculator, show that countries that don’t comply with their restrictions and medical interventions will be far worse off. The report goes on to state, “both the exercise scenario and the COVID-19 response demonstrate that early actions by national governments have significant, positive impacts in managing the impact of the disease.” When they say “positive impacts” it is not quite clear who is on the receiving end, although they note that “the COVID vaccine market will exceed $150 billion in 2021.” All in all the NTI’s report reads like Event 201 on Ritalin. (Event 201 took place on 18 October, 2019. It was an exercise involving a, “coronavirus pandemic” just months before the COVID-19 “pandemic” was declared.)


                                  Monkeypox attacks right on cue!

As with COVID-19 it appears that other parties have also been eagerly awaiting a market such a “pandemic” would present. Likewise, these fortune-tellers were preparing vaccines to go where no vaccine had gone before. In this case the biotech company Bavarian Nordic gained approval from the FDA in 2019 to market JYNNEOS, a smallpox and monkeypox vaccine. Other health authorities were also primed to react to a previously rare condition that has been of no concern for their nations…until now apparently. For example, on May 20, 2022, the UK Health Security Agency published a document titled, “Recommendations for the use of pre and post exposure vaccination during a monkeypox incident.” Like COVID-19, it’s starting to feel like all roads lead to vaccines again…

   Just a matter of time before the “rare” monkeypox vaccine comes to your neighbourhood.

So now that the scene has been set we can get into the “science” of monkeypox starting with an official description of the alleged viral disease. The CDC states that, “Monkeypox was first discovered in 1958 when two outbreaks of a pox-like disease occurred in colonies of monkeys kept for research, hence the name ‘monkeypox.’ The first human case of monkeypox was recorded in 1970 in the Democratic Republic of Congo.” They go on to state that, “in humans, the symptoms of monkeypox are similar to but milder than the symptoms of smallpox.” The illness is said to be flu-like with the addition of lymph node swelling and then development of a rash, and then lesions that progress from macules to vesicles to scabs.

In terms of the lethality of monkeypox, the CDC state that, “in Africa, monkeypox has been shown to cause death in as many as 1 in 10 persons who contract the disease.” This 10% fatality rate has already stoked the fear narrative and was also used as the case fatality rate in the NTI’s monkeypox pipe dream. It should be noted that historically monkeypox has been virtually unheard of in first world countries and the rare cases are usually in people that have recently arrived from Africa.  

Indeed, one of the only recorded “outbreaks” of monkeypox in the first world was in the United States in April 2003. Cases were declared in 6 states and said to be caused by rodents that were imported to Texas from Ghana. This was the first time monkeypox had been reported outside of Africa and the CDC published a paper in 2006 analysing the incident. The paper states that, “person-to-person spread of the virus is thought to occur principally via infectious oropharyngeal exudates” although it is clear that this has never been scientifically established. They continue to say that, “the virus is thought to have been transmitted from African animals” – in other words, it’s another species-jumping pathogen tale.    


Blaming it on minority groups, when have we seen that before?

They reported that, “individuals who had illness onset within 21 days after exposure to MPXV [Monkeypox virus] who experienced fever (defined as a body temperature greater 37.4°C) and vesicular pustular rash or rash (potentially uncharacterized) plus orthopox IgM antibodies were classified as having probable cases of infection.” Now 37.4°C is not a fever in our book, it is a normal body temperature and we would suggest 37.6°C and above qualifies as a fever. We noted in their chart that they were using the classification ≥39.4°C, but this appears to be an error as in another paper, we’ll get to soon, it was once again 37.4°C. The second paper even said the “fever” could be subjective, so they appear to be using this loose criteria and pathologising a normal state. Additionally, the CDC’s weekly report from the 11th of July 2003, stated that from a total of 71 cases, only “two patients, both children, had serious clinical illness; both of these patients have recovered.” The remainder had a variety of respiratory and gastrointestinal symptoms.

The CDC’s cases were confirmed on the basis of specimens that showed, “monkeypox virus isolation, detection of monkeypox-specific nucleic acid signatures, positive electron-microscopy findings, or positive immunohistochemical findings.”  We had a look at the electron micrographs presented by the CDC including the image shown below of a skin sample from one of the patients. The caption informs us that the round particles on the right are immature monkeypox virions, while the oval particles on the left are mature viruses. However, all they have is a static image of dead tissue and no conclusions can be made about the biological role of the imaged particles. None of them have been shown to be replication-competent disease-causing intracellular parasites and so should not be called ‘viruses’.   


The oldest trick in the book: Image some vesicles and call them “viruses”. To see why this is insufficient watch Electron Microscopy and Unidentified “Viral” Objects.

Looking at the CDC’s weekly report from 2003 again, it appears that the 35 “laboratory-confirmed cases” all involved polymerase chain reaction (PCR) “tests”, so we investigated the scientific evidence behind this claim. One of the citations for the development of PCR detection of monkeypox is a 2004 paper titled “Real-Time PCR System for Detection of Orthopoxviruses and Simultaneous Identification of Smallpox Virus.” Now a PCR protocol requires them to know the genetic sequences of the alleged monkeypox virus, which takes us to this 2001 paper titled, “Human monkeypox and smallpox viruses: genomic comparison”. The paper claimed to have “isolated” the monkeypox virus in a rhesus monkey kidney cell culture from a scab of a monkeypox patient. Here the virologists are up to their old tricks again by asserting that: (a) the patient’s scab contains the monkeypox virus, and (b) it is now in their culture brew. They claimed to have sequenced the “viral genome” by referring to a process described for sequencing an alleged variola virus in 1993.  

But when we look at this paper there is no virus demonstrated either, simply an assertion that it was “isolated” from, “the material from a patient from India” in 1967. They go on to make the claim that, “the virions were purified by differential centrifugation and viral DNA was isolated” – however, there is no demonstration of what they purified or how they were determined to be virions. In none of these experiments did they perform any controls by seeing what sequences can be detected from other human-derived scabs or similar specimens from unwell individuals. This is where we need to remind the virologists of what a virus is supposed to be – that is, a replication-competent intracellular parasite that infects and causes disease in a host. It is not detecting genetic sequences contained within scabs and claiming that they belong to a virus.  

So returning to the CDC’s paper describing the 2003 “outbreak”, it is unclear how they established they could be diagnosing anyone with monkeypox by using the PCR. Their PCR can only have been calibrated to sequences of unproven provenance. Additionally, it doesn’t matter what kind of analytical specificity their PCR protocol had, there was no established diagnostic specificity – in other words it was not a clinically-validated test, an issue that goes beyond whether the “virus” exists or not. (From the MIQE GuidelinesAnalytical specificity refers to the qPCR assay detecting the appropriate target sequence rather than other, nonspecific targets also present in a sample. Diagnostic specificity is the percentage of individuals without a given condition whom the assay identifies as negative for that condition.) 

The 47 US cases they ended up describing were all in some sort of contact with imported African prairie dogs and the CDC’s paper concludes that, “individuals contracted MPXV infections from infected prairie dogs; no human-to-human transmission was documented, but there were many different potential scenarios of infection involving respiratory and/or muco-cutaneous exposures, percutaneous and/or inoculation exposures.” Now there were some problems with the study design which they admitted to including that, “the analyses were limited by incomplete reporting or recall of information by patients. And, because of the retrospective nature of the study, we were unable to obtain highly detailed data.” 

However, even allowing some wriggle room for them here, the inconsistencies go further still. Firstly, no one in the US incident died from the disease which is said to have a 10% fatality rate in Africa. No doubt, the inconsistent lethality rates will be attributed to different “variants”, but there can’t be variants of something that doesn’t exist.

There were few images available of the skin lesions that were reported in the 2003 incident but two of the US cases are depicted below and an image from a monkeypox case in Africa is shown for comparison. The reader can make up their own mind but those skin reactions do not look remotely comparable to us.


Next, the CDC claim that, “the natural reservoir of monkeypox remains unknown. However, African rodents and non-human primates (like monkeys) may harbor the virus and infect people” – in other words it’s all rather vague and remains an unproven hypothesis. Now, obviously some people became unwell in the US in 2003 but with the viral theory we are supposed to believe that it jumped from some prairie dogs to some humans and the latter became infected with the alleged virus…but then no human could pass it on to another human. The theory falls flat – a virus needs to spread, if it can’t spread, it’s dead and thus it’s not a virus. And the historical patterns of alleged monkeypox virus outbreaks make no sense – why did it pass to these people so easily and yet it can go a decade between alleged “outbreaks”?

Unfortunately, the 2003 incident was investigated as though the viral contagion theory had already been established and other explanations were ignored. If people were allegedly getting sick from these African rodents, wouldn’t it be a good idea to check the animals for other toxicities, particularly in their faeces and also for any ticks or parasites? We did note another reference state that with regards to the US cases, “many of the people had initial and satellite lesions on palms, soles, and extremities.” However, according to the CDC, monkeypox usually starts on the face so the clinical picture in the US cases was not consistent with cases that are typically described in Africa.

In any case, a review of the scientific evidence revealed that with regards to monkeypox: (a) there is no evidence of a physical particle that meets the definition of a virus, (b) there is no evidence of anything transmitting between humans, and (c) there is no way to confirm a diagnosis of monkeypox unless you believe in clinically-unvalidated tests such as the PCR kits that have been produced. In other words, if we see a monkeypox “pandemic” that is used as an excuse to role out more globalist terrorism, it will be on the back of another PCR pandemic, not one that has any basis in nature. 



For those of you wanting to explore more problems with the various monkeypox claims, Mike Stone of ViroLIEgy has written a couple of interesting commentaries. The first article is, “Was Smallpox Really Eradicated?”, which among other things deals with the convenient emergence of monkeypox while smallpox was apparently being eradicated. The second article is, “Did William Heberden Distinguish Chickenpox From Smallpox in 1767?” This outlines the fact that the pox conditions are not as readily distinguishable from each other as the text books suggest and appear to relate more to the severity of a similar disease process. You can also watch our video, “Chickenpox Parties and Varicella Zoster Virus?” to see why there is no evidence of a virus in that related condition either.  

From the perspective of terrain theory it is a fundamental mistake to attribute a person’s illness to a supposed virus, as the subsequent “treatments” don’t address the underlying issues. If someone is unwell, then they are usually deficient in nutrients and need to restore balance, or they have been exposed to environmental toxins and need to help the body detoxify. Wars against alleged pathogens that involve treating everyone the same way with civil rights restrictions and vaccines are certainly not about health. It is good to see more people waking up to the COVID-19 fraud so there is hope that a monkeypox scamdemic, if attempted, will bring even more light to the situation. As always, your best health is in your own hands, not in the hands of a globalist cult and their cronies.

If you have been outsourcing your health, there has never been a better time to free yourself from the virus fear narrative and begin manifesting your full potential instead.

 Source: https://drsambailey.com/viruses/monkeypox-mythology/

sexta-feira, 17 de junho de 2022

Queridos amigos, lamento anunciar un genocidio (Dra. Naomi Wolf)

Dra. Naomi Wolf
17 de junio (Read in English)

He estado en silencio durante algunas semanas. Perdóname.

La verdad es que me he quedado casi sin palabras —o el equivalente literario de eso— porque recientemente he tenido la poco envidiable tarea de tratar de anunciar al mundo que en efecto, un genocidio —o lo que he llamado, torpemente pero urgentemente, se está produciendo una «muerte de bebés».

Los Voluntarios de Investigación de Documentos de WarRoom/DailyClout Pfizer, un grupo de 3000 médicos altamente acreditados, RN, bioestadísticos, investigadores de fraudes médicos, clínicos de laboratorio y científicos de investigación, han estado produciendo informe tras informe, como sabrán, para decirle al mundo lo que es en los 55.000 documentos internos de Pfizer que la FDA había pedido a un tribunal que mantuviera en secreto durante 75 años.

Por orden judicial, estos documentos fueron revelados a la fuerza. Y nuestros expertos están sirviendo a la humanidad leyendo estos documentos y explicándolos en términos sencillos. Puede encontrar todos los informes de los Voluntarios en DailyClout.io.

Las mentiras reveladas son impresionantes.

Los voluntarios de WarRoom/DailyClout han confirmado:

que Pfizer (y, por lo tanto, la FDA) sabían en diciembre de 2020 que las vacunas MRNA no funcionaban , que «disminuían en eficacia» y presentaban «fracaso de la vacuna». Un efecto secundario de vacunarse, como sabían un mes después del lanzamiento masivo de 2020, fue «COVID».

Pfizer supo en mayo de 2021 que el corazón de 35 menores se había dañado una semana después de la inyección de MRNA, pero la FDA implementó la EUA para adolescentes un mes después de todos modos, y los padres no recibieron un comunicado de prensa del gobierno de los EE. UU. sobre los daños cardíacos hasta agosto de 2021, después de que miles de adolescentes fueran vacunados. [Ver esto ]

Pfizer (y por lo tanto la FDA; muchos de los documentos dicen «FDA: CONFIDENCIAL» en el límite inferior) sabía que, contrariamente a lo que los portavoces altamente pagados y los médicos comprados aseguraban a las personas, el MRNA, la proteína de punta y las nanopartículas de lípidos hicieron no se quedó en el sitio de la inyección en el deltoides, sino que pasó, dentro de las 48 horas, al torrente sanguíneo, de ahí a alojarse en el hígado, bazo, glándulas suprarrenales, ganglios linfáticos y, si es mujer, en los ovarios. [Ver esto ]

Pfizer (y, por lo tanto, la FDA) sabía que la vacuna Moderna tenía 100 mcg de MRNA, nanopartículas de lípidos y proteína de pico, que era más de tres veces la dosis de 30 mcg de Pfizer para adultos ; los documentos internos de la compañía muestran una tasa más alta de eventos adversos con la dosis de 100 mcg, por lo que dejaron de experimentar internamente con esa cantidad debido a su «reactogenicidad» (palabras de Pfizer), pero nadie les dijo a todos los millones de estadounidenses que recibieron la primera y la segunda dosis de Moderna de 100 mcg, y los refuerzos .

Pfizer distorsionó a los sujetos del ensayo para que casi las tres cuartas partes fueran mujeres, un género que es menos propenso al daño cardíaco. Pfizer perdió los registros de lo que pasó con cientos de sujetos de prueba.

En los ensayos internos, hubo más de 42 000 eventos adversos y más de 1200 personas murieron. Cuatro de las personas que fallecieron, fallecieron el día que les inyectaron.

Los eventos adversos registrados en los documentos internos de Pfizer son completamente diferentes de los informados en el sitio web de los CDC o anunciados por médicos corruptos, organizaciones médicas y hospitales. Estos incluyen grandes columnas de dolor en las articulaciones, dolor muscular (mialgia), masas de efectos neurológicos que incluyen esclerosis múltiple, Guillain Barre y parálisis de Bell, encefalia, todas las iteraciones posibles de coagulación sanguínea, trombocitopenia a gran escala, accidentes cerebrovasculares, hemorragias y muchos tipos de rupturas de membranas de todo el cuerpo humano.

Los efectos secundarios que Pfizer y la FDA conocían, pero usted no, incluyen problemas de formación de ampollas, erupciones cutáneas, culebrilla y condiciones herpéticas (de hecho, una variedad de condiciones de formación de ampollas que extrañamente presagian los síntomas de la viruela del simio).

Los documentos internos muestran que Pfizer (y, por lo tanto, la FDA) sabían que los verdugones rojos o la urticaria eran una reacción común al PEG, un alérgeno derivado del petróleo en los ingredientes de la vacuna, uno que ciertamente no debe ingerir. De hecho, el PEG es un alérgeno tan grave que muchas personas pueden sufrir un shock anafiláctico si se exponen a él. Pero a las personas con alergia al PEG no se les advirtió que no se vacunaran ni sus médicos las observaron atentamente, con el EpiPen en la mano. Se quedaron a su suerte.

Pfizer sabía que la “exposición” a la vacuna se definía, en sus propias palabras, como contacto sexual (especialmente en el momento de la concepción), contacto con la piel, inhalación o lactancia. Los ‘verificadores de hechos’ pueden negar esto todo lo que quieran. Los documentos hablan por sí solos.

Por supuesto, las personas que han tratado de plantear cualquiera de estos temas han sido descalificadas, reprendidas por el presidente, llamadas locas y severamente castigadas.

Los atletas, los estudiantes universitarios y los adolescentes se están derrumbando en los campos de fútbol y fútbol. Los médicos se retuercen las manos y expresan mistificación. Pero la presentación ante la SEC de BioNTech muestra un hecho sobre el cual los CDC y la AMA no dicen una palabra: desmayarse tan violentamente que puede lastimarse es uno de los efectos secundarios lo suficientemente importantes como para que BioNTech lo destaque ante la SEC.

Pero no para destacarnos a ti ya mí.

Pude procesar todo esto y seguir simplemente informando. Pero en las últimas semanas el horror me venció. Porque ahora, los Voluntarios, bajo el excelente liderazgo de la Gerente de Programa Amy Kelly, han confirmado que hay un genocidio en marcha, intencionalmente o no. Y la periodista israelí Etana Hecht ha añadido su propio análisis soberbio. Aquí está el resumen de la Sra. Hecht de los hallazgos de los Voluntarios:

Parece que sí puede haber un genocidio fortuito. La reproducción en sí está dirigida, intencionalmente o no, por las vacunas de ARNm. Y si sabe que se daña la reproducción, y que se dañan los bebés y los fetos, y sabe que esto es a escala, que todos en Pfizer y en la FDA que leyeron estos documentos sabían, y si no se detiene, entonces eso es ¿No se convertirá finalmente en un genocidio?

Los voluntarios de WarRoom/DailyClout han confirmado que las nanopartículas de lípidos, las diminutas cubiertas grasas duras que contienen el MRNA, atraviesan la membrana amniótica. Eso significa que entran en el entorno fetal, por supuesto. (También atraviesan la barrera hematoencefálica, lo que puede ayudar a explicar los accidentes cerebrovasculares posteriores a la vacunación con MRNA y los problemas cognitivos que estamos viendo). Los Voluntarios profundizaron en los informes de los documentos de Pfizer sobre el embarazo y descubrieron que la garantía de que la vacuna es «segura y eficaz» para las mujeres embarazadas se basó en un estudio de 44 ratas francesas, seguidas durante 42 días (los científicos que dirigieron el estudio son accionistas o empleados de BioNTech).

Los voluntarios descubrieron que, si bien las mujeres embarazadas fueron excluidas de los estudios internos y, por lo tanto, de la EUA sobre cuya base se aseguró a todas las mujeres embarazadas que la vacuna era «segura y eficaz», unas 270 mujeres quedaron embarazadas durante el estudio. Más de 230 de ellos se perdieron de alguna manera en la historia. Pero de las 36 mujeres embarazadas cuyos resultados se siguieron, 28 perdieron a sus bebés.

Los Voluntarios descubrieron que un bebé murió después de ser amamantado por una madre lactante vacunada y se descubrió que tenía el hígado inflamado. Muchos bebés amamantados de madres vacunadas mostraron agitación, malestar gastrointestinal y retraso en el desarrollo (crecimiento) y estaban desconsolados.

Escucho informes anecdóticos de estos síntomas en bebés amamantados de madres vacunadas, ahora, de todo el país.

Los documentos de Pfizer también muestran que algunas madres vacunadas habían suprimido la lactancia o no podían producir leche en absoluto.

Los médicos, por supuesto, están perplejos por todo esto. Perplejo.

La base de datos del NIH tiene un estudio preliminar que demuestra que hay cantidades insignificantes de PEG en la leche materna de las mujeres vacunadas. [Ver esto ]

Pero, ¿qué es una cantidad insignificante de un producto derivado del petróleo en la leche materna, cuando eres un pequeño recién nacido sin inmunidades que acaba de llegar al mundo? La preimpresión del NIH en sí misma informó niveles más altos de malestar gastrointestinal e insomnio en los bebés estudiados, y una madre tenía niveles elevados de PEG en la leche materna, y la letra pequeña concluye que se necesitan más estudios:

“Se necesitan estudios más grandes para aumentar nuestra comprensión de la transferencia de PEG a la leche humana y los efectos potenciales después de la ingestión por parte del bebé. Aunque el consenso de expertos establece que existe un riesgo potencial mínimo o nulo para el bebé debido a la vacunación materna contra el COVID-1, los síntomas menores que se informaron (cambios en el sueño y síntomas gastrointestinales) podrían investigarse más a fondo en estudios futuros para determinar si están relacionados con la vacunación”.

Dado que ningún bebé murió en el breve período de tiempo del pequeño estudio, el estudio concluyó que los bebés lactantes no sufrieron efectos negativos reales de las madres vacunadas. Pero el estudio no siguió a estos pobres bebés, con su insomnio reconocido y su malestar gastrointestinal confirmado, para ver si realmente «prosperaron»: aumentaron de peso y se desarrollaron normalmente.

Con una ciencia tan defectuosa, se les aseguró a las mujeres que las vacunas eran «seguras y efectivas» para ellas y sus bebés lactantes.

Pero, cuatro de las mujeres lactantes vacunadas en los documentos de Pfizer informaron leche materna «azul verdosa». No estoy inventando esto. Y el bebé lactante que murió, con el hígado inflamado, el caso ha sido enterrado; no ha aparecido en los titulares.

Coincidentemente, o no, la MISMA FDA que hizo la vista gorda ante los grandes daños a los humanos y a la subcategoría de madres y bebés, en los documentos de Pfizer, declaró que Abbot, un importante productor de fórmula para bebés en los EE. UU., tenía que cerrar su fábrica. [Ver esto ]

Coincidentemente, con poca fórmula disponible y con algunas o muchas (no sabemos) madres vacunadas que tienen leche materna comprometida, resulta que Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Richard Branson y Mark Zuckerberg han invertido en una empresa emergente llamada «BioMilq ”, que produce leche materna cultivada en laboratorio a partir de células mamarias. [Ver esto ]. Los informes de esta puesta en marcha incluyen este lenguaje similar a Frankenstein como si fuera normal :

“El equipo de BIOMILQ crea su producto a partir de células extraídas de tejido mamario humano y leche, donadas por mujeres de la comunidad local, que reciben a cambio una tarjeta de regalo de Target”. [Ver esto ]

Como si todo esto no fuera lo suficientemente horrible, la Sra. Hecht extrajo estudios de tres países (Canadá, Escocia y ahora Israel) para mostrar que los bebés mueren de manera desproporcionada, durante y después de 2021, en países altamente vacunados, y que los recién nacidos mueren de manera desproporcionada. si tienen madres vacunadas versus madres no vacunadas.

En Escocia, altamente vacunada, casi el doble de la cantidad de bebés que murieron en 2021 en comparación con las cifras de referencia. 

En Ontario, Canadá, 86 bebés murieron en 2021, frente a una línea de base de cuatro o cinco; esta fue una mortandad de bebés tan grave que un parlamentario valiente llevó el tema al Parlamento. [Ver esto ].

En Israel, en el Hospital RamBam de Haifa, hubo un 34 % más de abortos espontáneos y mortinatos en mujeres vacunadas que en mujeres no vacunadas.


La Sra. Hecht también señala que la desregulación menstrual en mujeres vacunadas ahora está completamente confirmada por muchos estudios, con un promedio de un día adicional de sangrado al mes (un efecto secundario sobre el cual advertí en marzo de 2021, que a su vez me hizo llamar por un comentarista de CNN y eliminado permanentemente de Twitter).

No tienes que saber más que biología de octavo grado para saber que un ciclo menstrual desregulado, sin mencionar la acumulación de proteínas en pico en los ovarios, sin mencionar el atravesamiento de las membranas del cuerpo, incluido el saco amniótico, por diminutas grasas duras. Las nanopartículas de lípidos, sin mencionar el PEG en la leche materna, afectarán la fertilidad, la salud fetal, el parto y el bienestar o la angustia gastrointestinal de los bebés y, por lo tanto, su capacidad o fracaso para prosperar (y mucho menos para vincularse).

Y ahora, los bebés se están muriendo. Ahora escale los datos de Canadá, Escocia e Israel a todas las naciones vacunadas del mundo.

¿Qué hacemos con todo esto?

Sabiendo como lo sé ahora, que Pfizer y la FDA sabían que los bebés estaban muriendo y que la leche materna se estaba decolorando con solo mirar sus propios registros internos; sabiendo como sé que no alertaron a nadie y mucho menos detuvieron lo que estaban haciendo, y que hasta el día de hoy Pfizer, la FDA y otras entidades demoníacas de «salud pública» están presionando para vacunar con MRNA a más y más mujeres embarazadas; ahora que están a punto de imponer esto a las mujeres en África y otras naciones de bajos ingresos que no buscan las vacunas MRNA, según el CEO de Pfizer, Bourla, la semana pasada en el WEF, y sabiendo que Pfizer está presionando e incluso puede recibir una EUA de EE. UU. para desde bebés hasta niños de cinco años: debo concluir que estamos ante un abismo de maldad que no se veía desde 1945.

Así que no sé ustedes, pero yo debo cambiar de marcha con este tipo de conocimiento inefable a otro tipo de discurso.

No estoy diciendo que esto sea exactamente como encontrar evidencia de los experimentos del Dr. Mengele; pero digo, con estos hallazgos, que ahora la comparación puede no ser tan excesiva.

Estos antihumanos en Pfizer, hablando en el WEF; estos antihumanos en la FDA; saber lo que saben; tienen como objetivo el milagroso cuerpo femenino, con su capacidad de concebir, gestar, dar a luz y nutrir la vida. Están apuntando a la capacidad del cuerpo femenino para sostener a un ser humano recién nacido con nada más que a sí mismo. Están apuntando a la membrana amniótica, los ovarios que liberan el óvulo, están apuntando a la linfa y la sangre que ayudan a mantener la producción de leche materna, están apuntando al feto en el útero, indefenso.

Están apuntando al entorno mismo del feto humano, uno de los espacios más sagrados de esta tierra, si no el más sagrado.

Y ellos lo saben.

No sé ustedes, y no estoy haciendo proselitismo, pero como sabrán si me leen aquí, en estos días apocalípticos, recurro a la oración. Empecé a decir en público, una vez que tuve que enfrentar el hecho de la mortandad de los bebés, que este es un tiempo bíblico; y me refiero al Antiguo Testamento Bíblico.

Es un tiempo como el de la construcción de la Torre de Babel, de arrogancia masiva contra los planes divinos. Hombres como Bill Gates manipulan y buscan superar las mejores obras de Dios en un laboratorio tras otro, y los Tech Bros «interrumpen» la competencia humana por sus bienes y servicios no buscados, apuntando a los procesos humanos y arruinando los cuerpos creados a la imagen de Dios. Dios.

Es un tiempo como aquel cuando las diez plagas asaltaron a los egipcios en Éxodo 11:4-6:

 Entonces Moisés dijo: “Esto es lo que dice el Señor: ‘Alrededor de la medianoche recorreré todo Egipto.  Todo primogénito en Egipto morirá, desde el primogénito de Faraón, que se sienta en el trono, hasta el primogénito de la esclava, que está en su molino, y también todo primogénito de las bestias.  Habrá fuertes lamentos por todo Egipto, peores de los que ha habido o habrá nunca más. 7”

Esta fue la peor plaga de todas, la matanza de los primogénitos.

Es un tiempo de ha-Satan —Satanás— “que va y viene por la tierra, y […] anda por ella”, como lo describe Job 2.

Es una época en la que los demonios deambulan por los espacios humanos, aunque ellos mismos se ven lo suficientemente humanos, engreídos con sus trajes italianos en los paneles del Foro Económico Mundial.

Ha-Satanás – y sus ejércitos: arruinando la concepción, la leche, la menstruación, el toque, el acunar al infante por su madre, arruinando la alimentación del infante; arruinando a los propios bebés.

Leo mucho los Profetas en estos días, porque ¿cómo podría no hacerlo? Estoy buscando lo que la escritora Annie Lamott llamó «Instrucciones de funcionamiento». ¿Qué haces cuando la humanidad misma está amenazada? ¿Cuando existen batallones profesionales y departamentos burocráticos de personas que actúan con anatema hacia la raza humana?

Seguramente debe haber una pista.

Así que releí mucho la historia de Noé y el Libro de Ester en estos días; Releí Jeremías.

Hemos estado aquí antes. Vergonzosamente a menudo, cuando se trata de eso.

La historia es siempre la misma, al menos en la Biblia hebrea (en el Nuevo Testamento, por supuesto, Dios salta hasta el final y da vuelta la trama).

Al menos en la Biblia hebrea, Dios siempre está tratando de llamar nuestra atención, siempre, al parecer, simplemente pidiéndonos que caminemos junto a él; simplemente pidiéndonos que guardemos sus mandamientos que no son demasiado desafiantes; no, de hecho, pidiendo mucho.

Jeremías 1:13:

Volvió a mí la palabra del Señor: “¿Qué ves?”.

“Veo una olla que está hirviendo”, respondí. “Se está inclinando hacia nosotros desde el norte”.

14  El Señor me dijo: “Desde el norte se derramará calamidad sobre todos los habitantes de la tierra. 15  Voy a convocar a todos los pueblos de los reinos del norte –declara el Señor.

“Sus reyes vendrán y establecerán sus tronos
a la entrada de las puertas de Jerusalén;
vendrán contra todos sus muros circundantes
y contra todas las ciudades de Judá.
16  Pronunciaré mis juicios sobre mi pueblo
a causa de su maldad al abandonarme,
al quemar incienso a otros dioses
y al adorar lo que sus manos han hecho.

En la Biblia hebrea, de todos modos, las matemáticas son simples. Nos volvemos, escuchamos y somos salvos; o seguimos sin cuidado, adorando lo que nuestras propias manos han hecho, putas a otros dioses, a «la ciencia», a las mentiras de los medios; al narcisismo de la convención, en estos días, se podría decir, y por lo tanto estamos perdidos.

Hemos estado casi perdidos, una y otra vez.

Esta vez realmente podría ser la última vez; estos monstruos en los laboratorios, en los paneles transnacionales, son muy hábiles; y tan poderoso; y su trabajo oscuro es tan extenso.

Si Dios está allí, de nuevo, después de todas las veces que hemos puesto a prueba su paciencia, ¿y quién sabe? – ¿Le tenderemos una mano a cambio, nos agarraremos en el último momento de este abismo y simplemente encontraremos la manera de caminar junto a él?

¿O esta vez, al perder a los bebés, y sin embargo seguir adelante descuidadamente, estaremos verdaderamente perdidos nosotros mismos?


Fuente: https://trikooba.blog/47333.html

India Begins Replacing the EU as Russia’s Major Energy Market

Paul Antonopoulos 
June 15, 2022 (leer en español)

Despite Western demands to halt its purchase of Russian oil, a Helsinki-based research agency has found that India bought 18% of all the crude Russia exported in May, up from 1% before the military operation in Ukraine began. Discounts has ensured that New Delhi will not follow the path of sanctions, especially as Indian refiners are extremely satisfied.

According to a Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CRECA) report released on June 13, the largest Indian buyer is the Jamnagar refinery, which got 27% of its oil from Russia in May, up from less than 5% before April. CRECA also said in its report, titled ‘Financing Putin’s war: Fossil fuel imports from Russia in the first 100 days of the invasion’, that much of the oil was re-exported from Jamnagar.

“Approximately 20% of exported cargoes left for the Suez Canal, indicating that they were heading to Europe or the US. We identified shipments to the United States, France, Italy and the UK,”CRECA said.

Although CRECA found that Russian crude oil imports into the European Union fell by 18% in May, “this reduction was taken up by India and the United Arab Emirates, leading to no net change in Russia’s crude oil export volumes.”

None-the-less, despite sanctions and reductions in imports, the EU remains the biggest consumer of Russian fossil fuels, with the bloc purchasing 61% of Russian fossil fuel exports, worth approximately 57 billion euros. The report found that the EU’s share of fuel exports was about 30% coal, 50% crude oil, 75% LNG, 75% oil products and 85% pipeline gas.

Yet, despite the EU effectively funding the Russian military operation, Washington and Brussels have been pressuring India to not increase its import of Russian oil. However, India will not sacrifice its energy interests and its deep and historical bonds with Russia to serve Western interests and react to a war that it has no involvement in. The pressure against New Delhi to lessen its relations with Moscow has evidently failed, especially as India went from being an insignificant buyer of Russian crude to the second-biggest destination for shipments, behind only China.

As the EU has agreed to a sixth package of sanctions in response to the war in Ukraine, including a ban on imports of the country’s crude by sea from December, several refiners, shippers and traders are already self-sanctioning Russian oil. Losing such a market would expectedly be devastating, yet with trade being diverted to Asia, it appears there has been little impact on the overall level of shipments.

Oil tankers traverse through the Suez Canal from the Baltic and Arctic Seas to reach India. With almost 860,000 barrels a day of crude already loading onto tankers at Russia’s western export terminals in the week to June 10 before heading to destinations all over Asia, the figure will likely increase once destinations are found for almost 210,000 barrels a day that are on vessels that have not yet shown a final discharge point.

Meanwhile, the first transfer of Russian goods to India using a new trade corridor that transits through Iran came into operation on June 11. Since the West imposed sanctions against Russia, Iran has sought the revival of the stalled North-South Transit Corridor that uses Iran to link Russia to India and other Asian export markets. The plan involves eventually building a railroad line that can transfer goods arriving at Iranian Caspian Sea ports to the southeastern India-invested port of Chabahar that rivals the nearby China-invested port of Gwadar in Pakistan.

The Islamic Republic News Agency described the transfer as a “pilot”. The report did not say when the cargo left. Despite that, the transfer is expected to take 25 days, significantly reducing shipping times between Russia and India.

This trade between India and Russia has effectively helped the economically besieged country to expand economic ties with non-Western states, an important initiative since it is believed by some that the 21st century is the “Asian Century.” In this way, India has proven itself to be a reliable ally of Russia without necessarily ruining its relations with the West considering their own hypocritical energy policies.

Although lagging behind the Great Powers of the world, India is proving that as its economy and infrastructure continues to develop year-on-year, it is becoming an indispensable part of the 21st century’s multipolar system.


Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Paul Antonopoulos is an independent geopolitical analyst.

Source: https://www.globalresearch.ca/india-begins-replacing-eu-russia-major-energy-market/5783552

quarta-feira, 15 de junho de 2022

The Kirsch-Wakefield Interview


Steve Kirsch
May 31st

Andrew Wakefield was right.

I had the honor to interview him for 90 minutes to get clarity on all the misinformation I’ve heard.

He challenged the status quo and paid the price for telling the truth. He exposed the fact that all childhood vaccines are dangerous. Kids who are not vaccinated at all are uniformly better off than kids who are.

The childhood vaccines are so dangerous that the CDC refuses to collect the data to show how safe they are. No joke. They know the vaccines are dangerous, collecting data wouldn’t change that.

No qualified medical professional has ever agreed to debate RFK Jr. on vaccine safety. The same is true for Andrew Wakefield.

That pretty much tells you everything you need to know about the childhood vaccines in a nutshell. They aren’t collecting the needed safety data for the COVID vaccines either. Nobody has a risk-benefit study of these vaccines.

In other words, all your doctors telling you to vaccinate your kids: they are doing that with NO DATA to justify their recommendations. If you don’t believe me, ask your doctor for the risk benefit study tracking all-cause morbidity and mortality in two groups (at least 100,000 people). If you find one, let me know in the comments.

One reader nicely summed it up:

Thank you Steve and God bless Dr. Wakefield. If there's any justice his name will eventually be cleared as more and more people wake-up to Pharma's misdeeds.

He's been a hero to many of us going back a decade and a half. Unlike so many of his peers, he refused to back down when threatened by the pharma cartel. It cost him nearly everything but he has stood firm, an amazingly principled and fearless man.

I couldn’t have said it better myself.

Here is another comment from one of my readers:

Our first child was born at the hospital where Dr Wakefield worked. We watched on as his reputation was destroyed by the UK Government. BUT because of his stand, we totally changed our view on vaccination and have 3 unvaxxed, healthy kids. Now, since the Covid vax mandates we have also paid a high price for holding our ground. Dr Wakefield led the way as a forerunner who lost so much. We have a lot to thank him for and I'm so glad he is finding kindred people like you Steve who are speaking up in support of him. Bless you both for your incredible work. We are extremely grateful.

And another story, this one tragic:

2001 My son went into convulsions hours after his 4 month old DTap shot. He lived til 13, but the seizures won in the end. I completely agree with Dr. Wakefield. I sued the vaccine compensation program and won in 2010. My lawsuit took 7 years. Since my sons reaction our family has not had any vaccines, including this new gene therapy.

The interview on Rumble

Andrew Wakefield interview by Steve Kirsch


My questions

Topics covered (followed by his answers) include:

  1. Are there any safe vaccines? No.

  2. What do they think your motivation is? They know his motivation is to save lives.

  3. What’s the real story behind this quote from CNN: “An investigation published by the British medical journal BMJ concludes the study's author, Dr. Andrew Wakefield, misrepresented or altered the medical histories of all 12 of the patients whose cases formed the basis of the 1998 study -- and that there was "no doubt" Wakefield was responsible.” It was a setup. All the authors support the study.

  4. Why didn’t your other collaborators stand up for the truth? Do you still talk to them? Some caved to the pressure to admit something that the paper never said.

  5. Will anyone debate you face-to-face, on-camera, for a live discussion? Never happened.

  6. Why is there no risk-benefit data for any childhood vaccine? How can they justify this with a straight face? No. They are never challenged on it.

  7. How old were you when you turned “anti-vaxxer”? About 30 years old.

  8. What was your “red pill” moment when you realized that what you had been told was all a lie? When mothers told him their stories connecting the vaccine with autism. Too many cases where kids were perfectly fine before the vax and changed suddenly after the vax. This sounded just like the COVID vaccines.

  9. What is the best way to convince people that you got it right? He’s made movies.

  10. Do you have any friends in mainstream media? I know the feeling! Not that he knows about.

  11. Are there any doctors who tell you privately they support you, but admit they can’t say so publicly? Plenty. He can’t reveal who they are.

Key takeaways from my interview

  1. You'll be WAY healthier if you AVOID *ALL* vaccines

  2. Vaccines do cause autism

  3. The CDC, FDA, NIH and drug companies are adept at silencing critics, especially if you lack the funds to properly defend yourself

  4. It's a rigged system and you pay the price.

  5. There are no risk-benefit analyses for any vaccine

  6. It’s not clear at all that vaccination did anything to eradicate diseases

  7. Wakefield wasn’t born an “anti-vaxxer.” He became one when mothers showed him the direct connection between vaccines and autism.

  8. Vaccines can be quite problematic since unlike recovered immunity, the immunity doesn’t last. You’d have been much better off getting the virus when you were young.

  9. Déjà vu… hearing him relate his story didn’t sound a lot different from the situation we have today with COVID and the vaccines.

From the NY Times

This photo is from the NY Times. Honesty at last!
Source: https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/im-interviewing-andrew-wakefield?s=r

Applying Anti-Interventionist Analysis to Russia


What questions would we be posing if the "special operation" was waged by the US?

Marko Marjanovic
June 14th

As early internet coincided with the “Global War on Terror” it so happened that one of its best parts was the breadth of writings shining a critical light on America’s wars of empire. Progressives, libertarians, and conservatives alike contributed common sense critiques of these costly wars of choice from a broadly anti-interventionist standpoint.

When these anti-interventionists took a look at the wars of Bush and Obama they did not raise the flag of Mullah Omar, Sadam Hussein, or Abu Musa al-Zarqawi. Their argument wasn’t that the other side was the side of good and ought to win. There was no sense in which the likes of Alexander Cockburn, Justin Raimondo, or Pat Buchanan were Islamists or anti-Americans.

On the contrary, their argument was often that the wars were bad for America and its interests. They often spelled out a reality where the anti-interventionists were the true patriots, and where the War Party had harmed America more than its enemies ever could, all the while making these enemies stronger and more of a threat.

By and large, they did not do so by breathing fire but by posing the most pedestrian questions. A favorite approach was to take the declared goals of the intervention at face value but ask rudimentary questions such as: How do these means get us those ends? Once we start this, what is the exit strategy, how do we get out? Will the enemy get a vote on that? What about blowback? What about the human cost?

It did not speak to the strength of the pro-war position that warmongers felt threatened by such elementary questions and would respond with ad hominems before falling back on talking points.

What I learned reading this stuff for many years wasn’t that specifically America’s wars are bad. What I learned was more broadly the folly of interventionism and the wisdom of staying clear of it. There is no mess so bad that it cannot be made worse by adding in politicians and bombs. Non-interventionism requires making a level of peace with an unappealing and imperfect reality. But frequently interventionism means paying the cost of intervention and then having to make peace with an even poxier reality.

For all its interventionism the US ended up with a stronger and more legitimate Taliban than ever, an Iran-friendly Iraq where Tehran has a strong proxy presence, and Somalia ruled by its erstwhile Islamic Courts Union enemies but now recipients of American support against the even more radical Al-Shabaab. Not the greatest of scoreboards. These wars were not just crimes, they were blunders.

With the non-mainstream media so well-versed in non-interventionist arguments, I thought respect for the general wisdom of non-interventionism was our thing here in the alternative space. Perhaps, I was wrong. Because now that Russia has given the interventionism roulette a spin I don’t see anyone examining the wisdom of this Russian war for Russia in the same way.

To be fair, the bigger part of alt-media simply doesn’t ever cover Russia so it’s not really their job to do so. But there are plenty of us who do cover Russia and who were die-hard anti-interventionists when it came to America’s wars. But if this is the lens through which we see the world why stop its use when the gaze falls upon Russia? Are the wisdom and boon of non-interventionism fit only for the United States but not for Russia?

Is non-interventionism good for America but not for Russia? Perhaps that is so. And perhaps this war will yet conclude as a success that left Russia better off. Perhaps. But if no one is willing to explore also the negative aspects of the intervention then how can we possibly ever have an answer? Surely that requires weighing any positive results as well as any negative ones at the same time.

I have seen some critiques of Russia’s escalation by people who enthusiastically backed every American war. These are hypocrites of the highest order. But are we the mirror images of them? Is that who we are now? Are we to roll out anti-interventionism for the US, then turn around and unquestioningly build monuments to Kremlin’s adventures as solid 5D gold?

Or is it the case that as the Empire can overreach and shoot itself in the foot, so can the much smaller Russia? If anything it sounds like its margin for error is much smaller. It is less well-positioned to absorb the consequences of error to begin with. But then also has to contend with powerful enemies standing at the ready to pounce on any of its mistakes. In such a situation anything but the best-conceived intervention threatens to backfire spectacularly.

The full anti-interventionist examination will have to wait for another time. But for this introductory installment let us briefly look at Kremlin’s stated goals, and ask ourselves if war is a means that can deliver such ends?

The Kremlin has declared it seeks a demilitarized Ukraine. So to “demilitarize” a state you involve it in a major conventional war? How exactly does that work?

Another declared goal is “denazification”. Well now that Russia has gone out of its way to advertise that Nazis participated in the defense of the Ukrainian state and bore sacrifices to do so is their future status in Ukraine supposed to drop? How?

Putin complained that Ukraine was too anti-Russian, but now the only war Ukrainians will have ever fought as Ukrainians will be against Russia. How is that supposed to help things?

Moscow complained that Ukraine had too many ties to NATO — well the escalation of February 24 has opened the floodgates on that. Ukrainian-NATO cooperation has shot up by orders of magnitude.

You could say that in all of these aspects Ukraine was already trending in a negative direction anyway, but what is gained by supercharging the drift?

The Kremlin’s justification for war revolved around what Ukraine had become. But in terms of changing what Ukraine is, the war has backfired spectacularly. On those terms, the war is an astounding failure. Sure enough, Russia will inflict a defeat on Ukraine. But does inflicting defeat on the other side means that you yourself have won? I don’t think so. I think winning a war entails improving the situation you complained about. If you set for yourself war goals that can not be attained by war then you are setting yourself up for defeat regardless of how the fighting goes.

End of Part I.


Source: https://anti-empire.com/who-dares-apply-anti-interventionist-analysis-to-russia/