Health Friday 5.30.2025 Open Thread: What is Going On at HHS, the FDA, and the CDC?

The above graphic is with thanks to https://www.thefocalpoints.com/p/fda-recommends-more-mrna-shots-despite, “FDA Recommends More mRNA Booster Shots Despite New Study Showing Booster Failure — and Major Public Outcry”, by Nicolas Hulscher, 26 May 2025.

Health Friday is a series devoted to information about Big Pharma, vaccines, general health, and associated topics. As today’s offering has to do with the disaster of the COVID-19 “vaccines” (Bioweapon Toxin Injections), Yours Truly dedicates it to all persons, of whatever age or location, who have passed away due to the negative effects of the COVID-19 “vaccines” that they had injected into their bodies.

There are Important Notifications from our host, Wolf Moon; the Rules of late, good Wheatie; and, certain caveats from Yours Truly, of which readers should be aware. They are linked here. Note: Yours Truly has checked today’s offering for any AI-generated content. To the best of her knowledge and belief, there is none. If readers wish to use any AI-generated material in the discussion thread for today’s post, they must cite their source. Thank you.

Yours Truly has been researching, reading about, and writing about, the COVID-19 disaster since March 2020. She had a sense, early in 2020 when the speculation about the development and use of a COVID-19 “vaccine”, that something was “off” in the hype regarding “how this will stop the spread” of the virus, “how this will prevent COVID-19 infection”, and so on. As it turns out, that “Suspicious Dog” feeling was the correct one — the COVID-19 “vaccines” have been, are now, and will be, a disaster. These injectables do not prevent COVID-19 infection. These injectables have injured, sickened, disabled, and even killed, millions of “vaccinated” persons all over the world. These “vaccines” will continue to injure, sicken, disable, and even kill, those who have them put into their body — not only because of the ingredients and mechanisms of these injectables, but now also because of the “new and improved” (not) faulty foundation of “lab-created antibody titer levels tests” that will be used in the development of the “latest mutation version” of the “vaccines”, instead of doing actual clinical trials with lab animals and/or with human subjects. I will make it clear at the start that today’s offering is not meant to “stir the pot.” There are, in my opinion, legitimate questions that need to be asked regarding certain recent news items.

There are several central elements of the current situation regarding the “2025-2026 COVID-19 Vaccine Formula”, and the actions of certain people and entities. One such entity is the FDA. The current Commissioner of the FDA is Dr. Martin Makary, MD, MPH, who is also a proponent of COVID-19 “vaccination” (including in pregnant women), and is himself “vaccinated.”

On 22 May 2025, the FDA’s VRBPAC (Vaccines and Related Biological Advisory Committee) members met to “consider” and then to “recommend” the “2025-2026 COVID-19 Vaccine Formula.” The committee voted unanimously, after “presentations” by Pfizer-BioNTech, by Moderna, and by Novavax, to “recommend” the “formulas” for the modRNA (Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna) and the “inactivated protein” (Novavax) COVID-19 “vaccines.” Please see: https://www.contagionlive.com/view/fda-makes-recommendations-for-2025-2026-formula-for-covid-19-vaccines, 23 May 2025. A screenshot from this article is below:

These “vaccines” will be lab-developed, then lab-tested regarding the amount of “antibody titers” that “might” be “effective” in the “2025-2026 Formula COVID-19 Vaccines.” There will be no clinical trial testing of these “vaccines.” This protocol, outlined in the “Option 4” method, was adopted by the FDA on 28 June 2022. Please see the Briefing Document for this meeting: https://www.fda.gov/media/159452/download. “Option 4” is located on page 19. Please see the screenshot below:

Therefore, it appears that any person who takes an injection of the “2025-2026 Formula COVID-19 Vaccine” by Pfizer-BioNTech, by Moderna, or by Novavax, will be, in essence, a “human lab rat”, since these “vaccines” will only have been tested under “Petri-dish conditions” in a lab to confirm whether the “antibody titer amounts” expressed by the “vaccine” ingredients “might” be “effective” in humans.

There were over 95,000 public comments that were submitted to the FDA regarding the VRBPAC meeting of 22 May 2025, indicating a “major public outcry” against the “recommending” of more COVID-19 “vaccines.” Nonetheless, the VRBPAC members voted to endorse the “2025-2026 COVID-19 Vaccine” formulas, as described above, using the “Option 4” method. Please see: https://www.thefocalpoints.com/p/fda-recommends-more-mrna-shots-despite, “FDA Recommends More mRNA Booster Shots Despite New Study Showing Booster Failure — and Major Public Outcry”, Nicolas Hulscher, MPH, 26 May 2025. Please see the screenshot from this article, below:

The phrase, “immunogenicity data” refers to the “Petri-dish lab experiments” as described above.

The image below is from the “opinion piece” written and published by Dr. Martin Makary and Dr. Vinay Prasad, MD, MPH. Dr. Prasad is another important person in the current situation regarding the HHS / FDA / CDC. As of 6 May 2025, Dr. Prasad is the new Director of the FDA’s CBER department (Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research.) The “opinion piece” was published on 20 May 2025, two days prior to the FDA’s VRBPAC meeting. Please see: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsb2506929. A screenshot of the combined Figure 2 and Figure 3 from the “opinion piece” are below:

Dr. Prasad made it clear, in a podcast, that the FDA will implement the elements outlined in the “opinion piece” as the “new framework” for COVID-19 “vaccination.” Please keep this in mind for later on in today’s offering.

The paper regarding the failure of COVID-19 “booster shots”, already online-published but will appear in a medical journal in June 2025, is found here: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2025.127257, “Effect of the 2022 COVID-19 booster vaccination campaign in people aged 50 years in England: Regression discontinuity analysis in OpenSAFELY-TPP”, Andrea L. Schaffer, et al., journal Vaccine, Volume 59, 20 June 2025, 127257. The salient image from this paper is below:

Regarding the impact of COVID-19 “vaccination” on the lifetime supply of eggs in a female’s ovaries, it is now known that BOTH the modRNA AND the “inactivated” COVID-19 “vaccines” have a devastating impact on this egg supply. Please see: https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines/13040345, “Impact of mRNA and Inactivated COVID-19 Vaccines on Ovarian Reserve”, Enes Karaman, et al., 30 January 2025. This paper demonstrates that there is a 30% conception failure rate, and an overall loss of up to 60% of the lifetime egg supply in the female ovaries, both induced by COVID-19 “vaccination” in a female of child-bearing age.

Then, there is Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, MD, PhD, the new Director of the NIH (National Institutes of Health.) It appears that Dr. Bhattacharya may be “betting on both sides of the game” regarding COVID-19 and the COVID-19 “vaccines.” While it is true that Dr. Bhattacharya has stated that lockdowns, “mandated masking”, “social distancing”, and so on, are not real methods to deal with the virus, he also said this, in 2021, regarding the COVID-19 “vaccines”:

Link to the above: https://www.newsweek.com/stanford-doc-jay-bhattacharya-calls-vaccine-mandates-unethical-says-patients-can-choose-1611938. The above statement from Dr. Bhattacharya raises some questions: One, if COVID-19 is “basically a cold”, how can a “vaccine” protect against it? Two, if COVID-19 is “basically a cold”, why are there so many persons who have had a COVID-19 infection (either from the mechanisms of the COVID-19 “vaccines” themselves, or from the virus itself) and have since presented with symptoms of “Long COVID”? Three, if indeed a person who had a COVID-19 infection and recovered, is “protected against new disease”, why are people (COVID-19 “vaccinated” or not) still coming down with COVID-19 virus mutation infections?

Next is Susan Monarez PhD, the current Acting Director of the CDC. Previously, she had worked in the Department of Homeland Security with BARDA and with other HHS departments. Dr. Monarez is a “biosecurity expert” who has also endorsed the COVID-19 “vaccines.” Please see: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/24/health/cdc-director-monarez.html, “Trump Nominates Susan Monarez to Lead C.D.C.”, 24 March 2025. The pullquote from the article: “Monarez is a biosecurity expert who endorsed the Covid vaccines, and her selection may signal a growing impatience with anti-vaccine sentiment.”

And, finally, there is current HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., an attorney who founded the Children’s Health Defense organization (https://childrenshealthdefense.org/), and who has been an outspoken opponent of the COVID-19 “vaccines.”

And here begins Yours Truly’s presentation of the Kabuki theater going on at HHS / FDA / CDC:

On Tuesday 27 May 2025, HHS Secretary Kennedy, Jr., appeared in a video with Dr. Markary and Dr. Bhattacharya to announce that the COVID-19 “vaccines” that are “recommended” (in actual practice, they are called “routine”) by the CDC for healthy children under age 18, and for healthy pregnant women, would be removed from the CDC Immunization Schedules. Please see: https://x.com/bennyjohnson/status/1927374665745342535, a screenshot of which is below:

Where was Dr. Monarez, the Acting Director of the CDC? Why wasn’t she included in the video? An “announcement” of this importance would surely have required her to be included. To the best of Yours Truly’s knowledge and belief, neither Dr. Makary (FDA), nor Dr. Bhattacharya (FDA CBER), have the direct authority to remove vaccines from the CDC Immunization Schedules. The CDC is a separate departmental entity of HHS.

However: In reality, nothing has changed regarding the CDC Immunization Schedules. The CDC is still using the same 2025 Immunization Schedules that were issued on 21 November 2024. Please see: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/imz-schedules/index.html. The CDC is still “recommending” that pregnant women get COVID-19 “vaccinated”. Please see: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines-pregnancy/about/index.html. This “recommendation” was issued by the CDC on 17 June 2024.

The “elaborate costumes and dance of Kabuki theater” approach were on display during this video with Secretary Kennedy, Jr., Dr. Makary, and Dr. Bhattacharya. But it was a “performance.” And the audience suspended reality for the “performance.”

Yours Truly now turns to the blog article by Sasha Latypova, a former medical technology and pharmaceutical technology professional, about this “Kabuki theater performance” of 27 May: https://sashalatypova.substack.com/p/eugenics-for-dummies-aka-hhss-evidence, “Eugenics for Dummies, aka HHS’s “Evidence-Based Approach” to covid shots.”, 29 May 2025. Please see the screenshots from her article, below:

It appears that, in reality, what has happened is that the current CDC Immunization Schedules have been neatly “absorbed into” the “new evidence-based approach to the COVID-19 vaccines” so-called “opinion piece” of Dr. Makary and Dr. Prasad (see the links to their “opinion piece”, above; and, also, the statement by Dr. Prasad that this “new approach” will be implemented at the FDA / CDC (so, it seems, they aren’t “opinions” at all.)

Further confirmation of the “Kabuki theater” element regarding the 27 May “announcement” by Secretary Kennedy, Jr., Dr. Makary, and Dr. Bhattacharya, comes from The Kingston Report: https://karenkingston.substack.com/cp/164733998, “Who’s Calling the Shots at HHS?”, 29 May 2025.

WHO IS IN CHARGE OF HHS? If Secretary Kennedy, Jr., can take the time to write letters to ask that ostriches in Canada are not “culled” due to a “possible” infection from Avian Influenza; if he can issue a directive to have titanium dioxide removed from candy (Skittles) — why did he participate in a “Kabuki theater performance” on 27 May regarding something incredibly important to the health of every American — the dangerous, deadly COVID-19 “vaccines”? Did he, or anyone else, at HHS, inform Dr. Monarez about the “change” in the CDC Immunization Schedules? If so, did she agree?

In Yours Truly’s opinion, there appears to be some sort of “issues” going on at HHS, the FDA, and the CDC. HHS Secretary Kennedy, Jr., needs to get to the bottom of all of them.

FLASH! AS OF TODAY, 30 MAY 2025: THE CDC HAS JUST ISSUED THE “NEW CHILDHOOD VACCINE IMMUNIZATION SCHEDULE” RELATED TO THE COVID-19 “VACCINES”:

It appears that Dr. Susan Monarez, PhD, has finally weighed in regarding the 27 May “announcement” (aka “Kabuki theater performance”) by HHS Secretary Kennedy, Jr., Dr. Makary, and Dr. Bhattacharya COVID-19 “vaccines” and the CDC Childhood Immunization Schedule. Please see Sasha Latypova’s presentation here: https://sashalatypova.substack.com/p/cdc-issued-the-anticipated-updates, “CDC issued the anticipated updates to the children’s schedule for covid shots”, 30 May 2025.

HOWEVER, there’s some “catches” in the “updates.” Huge “catches.” These have to do with the CDC “definition” of what a “healthy child” means. In short summary: It will be the CDC who decides if a child meets their “criteria” for being a “healthy child” (meaning, the COVID-19 “vaccines” aren’t “necessary” or “recommended”); it will be the CDC’s “guidance” on this that will be in control of any discussion between a child’s parent(s)/guardians, and the clinician who can administer COVID-19 “vaccines”; there are no provisions that Yours Truly can see in the CDC “guidance” for exemptions on religious or other grounds; and, that ANY clinician who is cleared to administer COVID-19 “vaccines” will ultimately make the decision on whether or not to COVID-19 “vaccinate” a child who does not fit the CDC “criteria” for a “healthy child.” This includes clinicians who have never treated the child (in other words, a CVS pharmacist, for example.) Please see the screenshots below, from the Latypova article of today:

Peace, Good Energy, Respect: PAVACA

Health Friday Open Thread 5.23.2025: The FDA’s EUA to Pfizer-BioNTech for BNT162b2 on 11 December 2020 Is Invalid

The above free vintage image of a vaccine vial and syringe is courtesy of iStock and Google Images.

Health Friday is a series devoted to information about Big Pharma, vaccines, general health, and associated topics. As today’s offering is related to the COVID-19 biological toxin injections, aka the COVID-19 “vaccines”, Yours Truly dedicates it to all persons, of whatever age or location, who have been injured, made ill, become disabled, or have passed away, from the negative effects of these “vaccines” that they had in their body.

There are Important Notifications from our host, Wolf Moon; the Rules of our late, good Wheatie; and, certain caveats from Yours Truly, of which readers should be aware. They can be found here. NOTE: Yours Truly has checked today’s post for any AI-generated content. To the best of her knowledge and belief, there is none. If readers wish to post any AI-generated content in today’s discussion thread, they must cite their source. Thank you.

Yours Truly began writing about the results of the huge C4591001 clinical trial of the Pfizer-BioNTech modRNA COVID-19 “vaccine”, BNT162b2, on the board here back in 2023. I was reading through document after document that the company generated related to this clinical trial, documents that were released to the general public only after Pfizer-BioNTech, in partnership with the FDA, lost their case in federal court to keep all of the data about C4591001 sealed for 75 years, and they were then sued by Attorney Aaron Siri’s group, Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency (PHMPT.) Please see: https://www.biospace.com/non-profit-group-wins-transparency-lawsuit-over-fda-records-of-pfizer-vaccine-authorization, 7 January 2022. Note: regarding the Pfizer-BioNTech and the Moderna COVID-19 “vaccines”, “mRNA” and “modRNA” are interchangeable descriptive words for these injectables.

The FDA press release of 11 December 2020, announcing the agency’s granting of the EUA for the Pfizer-BioNTech modRNA COVID-19 “vaccine” BNT162b2 is here: https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-annoucenments/fda-takes-key-action-fight-against-covid-19-issuing-emergency-use-authorization-first-covid-19, “FDA Takes Key Action in Fight Against COVID-19 By Issuing Emergency Use Authorization for First COVID-19 Vaccine.” A screenshot from this press release is below:

Note the phrase, “Follows Thorough Evaluation…”. It is now known that this manifestly was NOT performed before the EUA was granted.

Regarding the invalidity of the 11 December 2020 EUA that was granted to Pfizer-BioNTech for BNT162b2 to be used “to prevent COVID-19 infection” in the United States: Yours Truly begins here: https://www.thefocalpoints.com/p/fda-authorization-of-pfizer-covid. “FDA VRBPAC December 11, 2020 Decision on Pfizer mRNA Found Invalid”, Nicolas Hulscher, MPH, 17 May 2025. There are several screenshots from this article, below:

Regarding the delaying by the FDA and the CDC of important information regarding the incidence of myocarditis following COVID-19 “vaccination”, and these agencies (and, also, Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna) failing to issue Black Box Warnings about this on the Package Inserts for their modRNA COVID-19 “vaccines” (BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNTech] and mRNA-1273 [Moderna]), please see: https://www.thefocalpoints.com/p/us-fda-and-cdc-delayed-health-advisory, “US FDA and CDC Delayed Health Advisory on COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Myocarditis for Months, Failed to Issue Black Box Warning for Years”, Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH, 18 May 2025. A screenshot from this article is below:

The above slide image is from the FDA’s VRBPAC meeting of 22 October 2020. This meeting was held seven weeks prior to the 11 December 2020 granting of the EUA for BNT162b2. The FDA therefore KNEW before 11 December 2020 that BNT162b2 could cause myocarditis — but went ahead and issue the EUA anyway.

Yours Truly has written extensively on the manufacturing process for BNT162b2, and on associated topics. Please see: https://www.theqtree.com/2023/11/06/the-infamous-process-2-manufacturing-method-for-the-pfizer-biontech-modrna-covid-19-vaccines/

Also: https://www.theqtree.com/2024/02/01/an-open-letter-to-medical-professionals-who-took-the-covid-19-vaccines/

And: https://www.theqtree.com/2024/11/15/health-friday-11-15-2024-open-thread-hold-them-accountable-edition/

The FDA’s VRBPAC members will meet on Thursday 22 May 2025 to make “recommendations” regarding the “2025-2026 COVID-19 Vaccine Formulas.” Public comment is accepted until 11:59PM on Friday 23 May. To submit comments electronically, please see: https://www.federalregister.gov/2025/05/08/2025-080803/vaccines-and-related-biological-products-advisory-committee-notice-of-meeting-establishment-of-a; scroll down this page to the section “Electronic Submissions.”

But wait, there’s more! The “new” leadership of the FDA and the CDC, Dr. Vinay Prasad and Dr. Martin Makary wrote an article which was just published in the New England Journal of Medicine: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsb2506929, “An Evidence-Based Approach to COVID-19 Vaccination”, Vinay Prasad, MD, MPH, and Martin A. Makary, MD, MPH, 20 May 2025. This article is NOT an “opinion piece” — Drs. Prasad and Makary make it clear that they are going to implement this “new approach” to COVID-19 “vaccination” through the FDA and the CDC.

In Yours Truly’s opinion, this “new approach” has many items to question. For example: the granting of FDA authorization for “new formula” COVID-19 “vaccines”, authorization based on lab-performed experiments on the “new formula” ingredients that produce certain numbers of “antibody titers” that might “correspond” to “effectiveness.” There would be no clinical trials at all, performed either on lab rats or on humans. This “lab-experiments with Petri dishes results” authorization method is outlined in “Option 4” of the FDA vaccine authorization / full approval guidelines that the agency adopted in 2022. This “lab-experiments with Petri dishes results” method will now be used for “new formula” COVID-19 “vaccines” for persons age 65 and over; and for persons under age 65 with compromised immune systems or who are part of “vulnerable” or “at risk” populations — such as, for example, pregnant women. Please see, regarding the “Option 4”: https://www.fda.gov/media/159452/download, “VRBPAC Briefing Document”, 28 June 2022. A screenshot of “Option 4” is below:

For another example: COVID-19 “vaccination” will still be “recommended” for pregnant women and for women who have just given birth. This flies in the face of the mounting, and published, evidence that COVID-19 “vaccination” during pregnancy can, and does, result in miscarriages, stillbirths, live births but the infant has medical issues, and so on. In addition, COVID-19 “vaccine” antibodies show up in the breast milk that “vaccinated” new mothers nurse their infants with.

Why do the FDA / CDC continue to ignore the evidence-based facts that Ivermectin, Hydroxychloroquine, Zinc, and Vitamin D both prevent and treat COVID-19 infections?

Three screenshots from the Prasad and Makary article are below:

NOTE THE LAST SENTENCE OF THE ABOVE IMAGE: “Ultimately, these studies alone can provide reassurance that the American repeat-boosters-in-perpetuity strategy is evidence-based.”

Let’s take a look at the combined Figure 2 and Figure 3 image:

Which makes it plain, in Figure 2, that the COVID-19 “vaccines” will be “recommended” for people who “fit” the diagnosis parameters of multiple types of medical conditions, including pregnant women and women who have just given birth — in other words, these groups of people may well be subjected to multiple types of “convincing” strategies to get them to agree to take these “vaccines.” Who made the decisions on the types of “risk factors” for the “increased at-risk” groups?

And, there’s this tweet, from Dr. Martin Makary, of August 2023:

There is published, irrefutable evidence that the COVID-19 “vaccines” can cause death among the “vaccinated.” Please see: https://www.thefocalpoints.com/p/the-causal-link-between-covid-19, “The Causal Link Between COVID-19 Vaccination and Death”, Nicolas Hulscher, MPH, 21 May 2025. There is an embedded interview between Mr. Hulscher and Dr. Idriss J. Aberkane, PhD, on this subject. A screenshot from the Hulscher article is below:

It appears to be unclear, in Yours Truly’s opinion, about where this “new approach to COVID-19 vaccination” fits in as regards the “Generation Gold Standard” that was announced a few weeks ago. Does the federal government control “new” COVID-19 “vaccine” development processes? Where does Big Pharma (Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, Novavax) come in? Is that what “Sponsor-Driven” clinical trials means (see the above image)?

However, here’s the real situation: In Yours Truly’s opinion, given that the initial EUA granted by the FDA to the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 on 11 December 2020 was invalid — that means, by extension, that every other EUA (and “Full Approval”) of the modRNA COVID-19 “vaccines” is also invalid: which would include any “formula” that is “recommended” for the “2025-2026 COVID-19 Vaccine”. Which would also, in Yours Truly’s opinion, invalidate any “Full Approval” of the Novavax COVID-19 “vaccine”, since the foundation of that injectable is the same Wuhan Hu1 SARS-CoV-2 virus that was used as the foundation for BNT162b2.

FLASH! — Meanwhile, the FDA just granted “Full Approval” to the Novavax company’s injectable on 19 May 2025, under the name “NUVAXOVID”: https://ir.novavax.com/press-releases/2025-05-19-U-S-FDA-Approves-BLA-for-Novavax-COVID-19-Vaccine.

FLASH! 2 — The VRBPAC members voted unanimously today to “recommend” that the “2025-2026 COVID-19 Vaccine Formula” injectables contain the JN.1 Omicron variant of the original SARS-CoV-2 virus. This is the same strain that was “recommended” for the “2024-2025 COVID-19 Vaccine Formula” injectables. The decision today by VRBPAC will be implemented according to the Dr. Prasad and Dr. Makary “new approach” method, as outlined above in today’s post. This means that persons age 65 and older, and that persons under age 65 who fall into one of the “increased risk” categories (Figure 2, above in the post) will be “encouraged” to get “vaccinated.” The exact formulation of the “2025-2026 COVID-19 Vaccine Formula” for the Pfizer-BioNTech and the Moderna injectables will be based, as was their other COVID-19 “vaccines” on the modRNA (aka mRNA)-based platform. The Novavax (now called NUVAXOVID) “2025-2026 vaccine” product will be based on the company’s previous “inactivated protein”-based platform. It is unclear whether the NUVAXOVID “2025-2026 vaccine” product will be authorized for persons under age 65 and/or who have underlying “increased risk” conditions. Please see: https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/covid-19/fda-vaccine-advisers-recommend-sticking-jn1-strain-next-covid-vaccines, 22 May 2025; and, https://cen.acs.org/pharmaceuticals/vaccines/FDA39s-new-COVID-19-vaccine/103/web/2025/05?sc=230901_cenrssfeed_eng_latestnewsrss_cen, 22 May 2025. A screenshot from the C&EN / ACS article is below, highlighting items related to the Dr. Prasad and Dr. Makary “new approach” article:

THERE. MUST. BE. JUSTICE.

Peace, Good Energy, Respect: PAVACA

Health Friday 4.25.2026: The AMA is Still Pushing “Strategies” for Physicians to “Combat Vaccine Hesitancy”

Illustration from 19th century.

The free vintage image above of children being vaccinated is courtesy of iStock and Getty Images, via Google Images.

Health Friday is a series devoted to information regarding Big Pharma, vaccines, general health, and associated topics. As today’s post speaks to the disaster of the COVID-19 “vaccines” (Bioweapon Toxin Injections), Yours Truly dedicates it to the memory of all persons, of whatever age or location, who have passed away from the negative effects of these lab-created bioweapons.

There are Important Notifications from our host, Wolf Moon; the Rules of our late, good Wheatie; and, certain caveats from Yours Truly, of which readers should be aware. They are linked here. NOTE: Yours Truly has checked today’s offering for any AI-generated content. To the best of her knowledge and belief, there is none. If readers wish to post anything in the discussion thread for today’s post that is AI-generated, they must cite their source. Thank you.

Yours Truly has written about the American Medical Association (the AMA) on previous occasions. The AMA is one of the most powerful professional organizations for physicians in the United States. The organization, which does not provide a list of its members to the general public, is also one of the most powerful lobbying agents in Congress. In addition, the AMA owns the rights to use the CPT codes, which are the codes for medical procedures, examinations, tests, for ordering medical equipment, and much more. The CPT codes are used to bill CMS (Medicare / Medicaid), and to bill private insurers. Please see below for screenshots from, first, https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/american-medical-association-summary; and, second, https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/american-medical-association/, regarding AMA spending on lobbying:

And, not surprisingly, the CPT code royalties paid to the AMA for use of these codes appear to generate the bulk of income for the organization — no wonder the AMA can spend over $21 million on lobbying efforts. Please see: https://paddockpost.com/2024/12/16/how-revenue-is-spent-at-the-ama-2022/.

The AMA has multiple “sub-units” within the organization. These “sub-units” range from DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion), to “health equity”, and to LGBTQ++ “health inclusion”, among others. The organization offers numerous CME (Continuing Medical Education) online courses and webinars for AMA members, to assist them in accumulating the yearly CME credits they must earn in order to maintain their License to Practice Medicine. It also publishes numerous medical papers, articles, and other media; among them, JAMA (the Journal of the American Medical Association.) Please see: https://www.theqtree.com/2024/04/24/the-ama-edhub-window-to-establishment-medicine/.

An example of an AMA-published article regarding “physician strategies to combat vaccine hesitancy among patients” is here: https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/public-health/covid-19-vaccine-hesitancy-10-tips-talking-patients#, “COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: 10 tips for talking with patients”, by Tanya Albert Henry, 15 December 2023. Here are the “10 tips”: “Know you are the most trusted information source”; “Tell patients they need to get the vaccine”; Understand your patients’ concerns”; “Ask why a patient is hesitant”; Counter any misinformation”; “Tailor your message”; “Address patients’ fear about side effects”; “Prepare our staff to answer questions”; “Show your vaccination pride”; “Tell stories to make impact”.

But, what are physicians supposed to say to the patient in order to “convince” them to take a COVID-19 “vaccine”? Again, the AMA has answers: for example, the “templates” in this published study: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X24004377, “Patient concerns and physician strategies for addressing COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy”, Joy Melnikow, et al., 22 May 2024. Below are three screenshots from this paper: section 2.1 Study sample; followed by Table 2, then Table 3:

All of above is to get a patient to agree to having a COVID-19 Bioweapon Toxin Injection (aka a COVID-19 “vaccine”) injected into their body. In Yours Truly’ opinion, if a physician follows the above “templates”, they are functioning not as physicians who swore to “Do No Harm”; in fact, they may be considered as “government representatives” under the current “extension” of the PREP Act for COVID-19 Countermeasures” that was signed by then-HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra in December 2024. Notice also the use of various aspects of direct psychological manipulation and of gaslighting in the “templates” for the physicians to follow. One wonders: What would these physicians say in response to a “vaccine-hesitant” patient who gives them a hard copy of a published study that clearly shows what the COVID-19 “vaccines” actually do to damage a “vaccinated” person’s body?

And now, to the most recent AMA “strategies for physicians to use on patients with vaccine hesitancy” effort, from the AMA EdHub series: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2025.4882, “Strategies for Communicating with Parents About Vaccines”, Sean T. O’Leary, MD, MPH, 9 April 2025. This article is full-access for AMA members; through an institution; or, via renting it through DeepDyve. Yours Truly went to DeepDyve and was able to get the following screenshot from the first page of Dr. O’Leary’s article, below:

Note the “strategies” that are to be used by the physician, listed in the Table above. Again, it appears to be yet another mixture of “your physician is the most trusted source of information”; plus, “It’s the responsible thing to do for your child”; plus, something new, “Prebunking“, which appears to be a type of psychological manipulation of / gaslighting of, the parent regarding any information they may find online from other physicians (say, Dr. Peter A. McCullough) regarding the dangers of taking the COVID-19 “vaccines”; or, other researchers (say, Steve Kirsch, about how childhood vaccination can induce autism [via the aluminum in the vaccines], and who cites medical statistics to support his contention.) Please see: https://kirschsubstack.com/p/two-pieces-of-evidence-that-together, “Two pieces of evidence that together show that vaccines cause autism”, 21 April 2025. Please also see: https://jessicar.substack.com/p/aluminum-exposure-and-autism-prevalence, 19 April 2025. Dr. Rose cites the following image, from data collected by the CDC:

The following article describes various adjuvants to vaccines, including Aluminum: https://www.chop.edu/vaccine-education-center/vaccine-safety/vaccine-ingredients/aluminum, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, 15 December 2022, reviewed by Dr. Paul A. Offit, MD.

Why is the AMA still pushing psychological manipulation / gaslighting “strategies” for physicians to use to “convince” patients to take a COVID-19 “vaccine”, or to allow their child (children) to be COVID-19 “vaccinated”, or to allow their child (children) to be “vaccinated” with injectables that contain substances such as Aluminum? Why does the CDC have dozens of “vaccines” listed on the agency’s Child and Adolescent Immunization Schedule (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/imz-schedules/downloads/child/0-18yrs-child-combined-schedule.pdf)? With “vaccines” that are to be administered to newborns immediately after birth? Why do almost all public school systems “require” certain “vaccines” to be given to a child in order to attend public school? Why do state legislatures give the force of law to the CDC Child and Adolescent Immunization Schedule through legislative fiat for public school attendance — given that the CDC states on the schedule that the injectables are “Recommended”, not “Required”? Why do the AMA, the CDC, and the FDA refuse to acknowledge that the COVID-19 “vaccines” are dangerous and deadly, given the mountain of evidence currently in print which proves this to be the case?

THERE. MUST. BE. JUSTICE.

Peace, Good Energy, Respect: PAVACA

Health Friday 4.4.2025 Open Thread: the COVID-19 “Vaccines” Decimate the IgG Immune System Cells

Vaccination Certificate 1867

The above free image of an 1867 vaccination certificate is courtesy of iStock and Google Images.

Health Friday is a series devoted to information regarding Big Pharma, vaccines, general health, and associated topics. As today’s post speaks to the disaster of the COVID-19 “vaccines”, Yours Truly dedicates it to the memory of all persons, of whatever age or location, who have passed away from the negative effects of these lab-created bioweapon toxin injections.

There are Important Notifications from our host, Wolf Moon; the Rules of our late, good Wheatie; and, certain caveats from Yours Truly, of which readers should be aware. They are linked here. Note: Yours Truly has checked today’s post for any AI-generated content. To the best of her knowledge and belief, there is none. If readers wish to post any AI-generated content in the discussion thread for today’s post, they must cite their source. Thank you.

Today’s Health Friday offering is one of a “mini-series” devoted to one topic and to one important news item related to that topic (although there may be other items related to the topic presented as supporting and/or clarifying information. The topic for today is what the COVID-19 “vaccines” do to damage and/or destroy the crucial IgG3 immune system cells in the “vaccinated” person’s body.

Yours Truly begins here, with the news item, and the paper cited in the article: https://www.theburningplatform.com/2025/03/27/immune-changes-from-repeated-mrna-jabs-are-linked-to-a-higher-risk-of-covid/, by Alex Berenson. Below is a screenshot from the article:

This 80% higher risk was found in persons who had had multiple injections of COVID-19 “vaccines.”

The COVID-19 “vaccines”, especially via repeated injections, damage and destroy the crucial IgG3 (“fight it off”) immune system cells in the “vaccinated” person’s body; while, at the same time, fostering the increase of the IgG4 (the “tolerate but never clear”) immune system cells. Another screenshot from the Berenson article is below:

Among the many other online media outlets that have reported on the Monocunill, et al., paper are these: https://www.thefocalpoints.com/p/breaking-study-covid-19-mrna-injections, “BREAKING Study — COVID-19 mRNA Injections Dangerously Reprogram the Immune System, Increasing Infection Risk”, by Nicolas Hulscher, MPH, 27 March 2025; and, https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/coronavirus/spanish-fluke-repeat-covid-jabs-provoke-two-kinds-inferior-antibodies. “Repeat COVID vaccines provoke two kinds of inferior antibodies, study finds”, by Greg Piper, 30 March 2025.

The paper referred to in the Berenson article is here: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2025.106473, “Post-Vaccination IgG4 and IgG2 class switch associates with increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infections”, Gemma Monocunill, et al., 18 March 2025. Below is a screenshot from this paper:

An important paper regarding descriptions and functions of the IgG immune system cell class in the human body is here: https://journals.aai.org/jimmunol/aticle/205/12/3400/107683/IgG-Subclasses-Shape-Cytokine-Responses-by-Human, “IgG Subclasses Shape Cytokine Responses by Human Myeloid Immune Cells through Differential Metabolic Reprogramming”, Willianne Hoepel, et al., 15 December 2020. A screenshot of the Abstract of this paper is below:

Note that this paper was published after the modRNA COVID-19 “vaccines” by Pfizer-BioNTech and by Moderna were granted their initial EUAs in the United States by the FDA (this occurred on 11 December 2020), but before these bioweapon toxin injections entered widespread use.

Yours Truly has written about the IgG immune system cells subclasses, and what the modRNA COVID-19 “vaccines” do to damage the IgG3 cells, here: https://www.theqtree.com/2024/12/06/health-friday-open-thread-12-6-2024-the-immune-system-after-covid-19-vaccination-and-a-note-on-the-virus-itself/.

Back to the Monocunill, et al., paper. There is mention in the paper regarding the involvement of the T17 cells in the “vaccinated” person’s body in the IgG subclass switching. Yours Truly wrote about the importance of the T17 cells (also called Th17 cells or T17 Helper Cells), and the role of the N1-Methylpseudouridine in the modRNA COVID-19 “vaccines” in “turning off” these cells in the “vaccinated” person’s body (thus paving the way for continuous inflammation of many types) here: https://www.theqtree.com/2025/03/21/health-friday-3-21-2025-open-thread-more-on-the-n1-methylpseudouridine-in-the-modrna-covid-19-vaccines/.

However, there is another aspect of the situation discussed in the Monocunill, et al., paper that is of huge importance: The similarities between malaria, COVID-19 infection, and the class switch to IgG4 that the COVID-19 “vaccines” induce. Below is a screenshot from the Discussion section of the paper regarding this:

Yours Truly will now blow something out of the water regarding the FDA’s and the CDC’s official opposition to, and prohibition of, using Ivermectin or Hydroxychloroquine to prevent or to treat COVID-19 infection.

Malaria and COVID-19 infect the lungs in similar ways. Ivermectin can be used to treat malaria. Please see: https://www.isglobal.com/en/-/nueva-evidencia-respalda-el-uso-de-ivermectina-como-una-herramiente-en-la-eliminacion-de-la-malaria, “New Evidence Supports the Use of Ivermectin as a Tool for Malaria Elimination” (article in English translation regarding malaria treatment in Africa), 28 March 2018.

And, Hydroxycholoquine (and also Chloroquine) can be used to treat malaria AND COVID-19. Please see this paper from September 2020: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7476892/, “Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of malaria and repurposing in treating COVID-19”, Zi-Ning Lei, et al. (USA and CCP), 8 September 2020.

In Yours Truly’s opinion, it is inconceivable that the NIH / NIAID / FDA / CDC did not know about the existence of these papers. Instead, by September 2020, these entities were hell-bent in pushing through the unproven modRNA “technology” for the Pfizer-BioNTech and the Moderna modRNA COVID-19 “vaccines” then in development. This meant that the FDA / CDC accepted the manipulated / incorrect “data” that were given to them from the truncated “clinical trials” for these “vaccines” by Pfizer-BioNTech and by Moderna. This meant that the FDA / CDC did not question the sudden “vaccine”-manufacturing switch from the original “Process 1” method to the “Process 2 method” that occurred in August 2020, that is still in use by both companies in the production of their respective “new formula” COVID-19 “vaccine booster shots”, and is based on “culturing” the modRNA of the said “vaccines” in a “bath” of E. coli.

Further confirmation that malaria and COVID-19 infect the lungs in similar ways is here: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9445119/, “The striking mimics between COVID-19 and malaria: A review”, Emadeldin Hassan E Konozy, et al. A screenshot from this paper is below:

Note the mention of the ACE2 receptors as regards malaria infection. These cells are also attacked by the COVID-19 virus itself (and, therefore, since they are based on the virus, so do the COVID-19 “vaccines” attack the ACE2 receptors of the “vaccinated” person’s body.)

In short: the FDA / CDC pushed, and continue to push, COVID-19 “vaccines” to “prevent” COVID-19 infections, while knowing that Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine also prevent — and treat — COVID-19 infections. Why is this still going on? How about ASKING BILL GATES. UNDER OATH.

This is aside from the fact that those who lab-created the bioweapon of the COVID-19 virus itself, and those who lab-created-and-enhanced the bioweapons of the COVID-19 “vaccines” — knew that malaria and COVID-19 would attack the lungs in similar ways. They knew what would “turn off” the T17 cells that are so important for the immune system and for Uridine in the human body. They knew what would damage or destroy the crucial IgG3 cells of the natural immune system of the human body, while fostering the increase of the IgG4 cells that allow illness and medical conditions to take hold and thrive. These things they incorporated into the creation of the COVID-19 virus itself, and into the creation of the COVID-19 “vaccines.”

THERE. MUST. BE. JUSTICE.

Peace, Good Energy, Respect: PAVACA

The 2024-2025 Formula COVID-19 “Vaccines”: Injection Dose #10

The above is a vintage image of mass vaccination. (Courtesy Google Images.)

This series on the disaster of the COVID-19 virus itself, and of the COVID-19 “vaccines”, is dedicated to the memory of Yours Truly’s cousin Bill, who “died suddenly and unexpectedly” in September 2023.

The origination of today’s post begins here: www.dossier.today/p/double-digits-biden-admin-tells-americans, “Double Digits: Biden Admin tells Americans that it’s soon time for their 10th Covid shot“, by Jordan Schachtel, 13 June 2024. (Mr. Schachtel wrote about the ninth COVID-19 “vaccine” injection here: www.dossier.today/p/dose-number-nine-cdc-panel-green, “Dose number NINE: CDC panel green lights yet another Covid mRNA shot“, 29 February 2024. The CDC recommended that persons over age 65 take another “booster shot” of either the Pfizer-BioNTech or of the Moderna “2023-2024 Formula COVID-19 Vaccine” of these manufacturers.) A person age 65 or older, if that person adhered to every CDC recommendation regarding taking a COVID-19 “vaccine” injection since December 2020 (when the FDA granted first Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to Pfizer-BioNTech and to Moderna for these companies’ “flagship” modRNA COVID-19 “vaccines” (BNT162b2 by Pfizer-BioNTech; and, mRNA-1273 by Moderna), would have taken injection number nine starting on 28 February 2024.

Today’s post is long. There is a large amount of information to “unpack.” Stay with me here.

Below is an image from the FDA’s 13 June “updated” authorization announcement for the “2024-2025 Formula COVID-19 Vaccine”, the TENTH injection dose of the modRNA “vaccine” formula: www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/updated-covid-19-vaccines-use-united-states-beginning-fall-2024.

Note the language regarding the “selection of a specific JN.1 lineage SARS-CoV-2 strain…” More about that later.

The trail behind the 5 June 2024 FDA announcement begins with the VRBPAC Briefing Document for the meeting held on 28 June 2022: www.fda.gov/media/159452/download, “FDA Briefing Document Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee Meeting June 28, 2022.” It was at this meeting that the FDA “codified” the types of “strain composition recommendations” that the agency would use regarding “new versions” of COVID-19 “vaccines.” Yours Truly presents page 17, page 18, and page 19 of this document:

It appears that the FDA simply decided that it would be permissible for the agency to authorize a new COVID-19 “vaccine” strain composition along what, in Yours Truly’s opinion, may be called “very flexible” options. For example, the Pfizer-BioNTech XBB.1.5 COVID-19 “vaccine”, which was FDA authorized in the fall of 2023, had test results only from mouse testing prior to FDA authorization. Following are: The link to the Pfizer-BioNTech slide presentation about this “vaccine” to the CDC’s ACIP committee (Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices) meeting of 12 September 2023; and, an image of slide CC4 from this presentation. First, the presentation: www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-2023-09-12/10-COVID-Modjarrad-508.pdf.

Second, slide CC-4 from the above presentation:

The XBB.1.5. Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 “vaccine” had only been given as a single injection to humans in the company’s clinical trial; a clinical trial which had only just begun prior to the ACIP meeting. Slide CC-5 of the presentation, the start of the company’s human trial of this “vaccine”, is below:

Slide CC-6 of the presentation has to do with the mouse studies of this “vaccine”, which were of longer duration.

Notwithstanding the above, the FDA authorized the use of the company’s XBB.1.5 COVID-19 “vaccine” on 11 September 2023 (in Yours Truly’s opinion, it appears that the ACIP meeting of 12 September 2023 was a “catch-up” formality.) It also appears (again, in Yours Truly’s opinion), that the FDA used a very loose interpretation of “Option 4” on page 18 of the FDA Briefing Document above in granting the EUA for this “vaccine”.

** Now, on to the latest “new version” of the COVID-19 “vaccines”, the “2024-2025 Formula COVID-19 Vaccines”, that the FDA authorized in June 2024.

The following linked items are important regarding background information related to this situation and to the FDA: First, the FDA document, stating that the agency would “align” its COVID-19 “vaccine” antigen composition to the recommendations of the World Health Organization’s TAG-CO-VAC recommendations: www.fda.gov/media/179139/download (the TAG-CO-VAC recommendation for the “2024-2025 Formula COVID-19 Vaccines” was to use the JN.1 strain); second, the FDA document regarding “considerations and recommendations” for the “2024-2025 Formula COVID-19 Vaccine” composition: www.fda.gov/media/179145/download; third, the FDA announcement of the 5 June meeting of its VRBPAC committee (Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee.): www.fda.gov/advisory-committees/advisory-committee-calendar/vaccines-and-related-biological-products-advisory-committee-june-5-2024-meeting-announcement. From this last link, chick on “Event Materials” to see the slide presentations and other items that were discussed at this meeting.

Two important items from the “Event Materials” list: the FDA Briefing Document; and the VRBPAC roster for this meeting. First, the FDA Briefing Document: www.fda.gov/media/179003/download; and, second, the VRBPAC roster for this meeting: www.fda.gov/media/179225/download. The roster for the 5 June 2024 meeting has some “familiar” members and speakers: Paul Offit, MD; and Peter Marks, MD (director of CBER [Center for Biologics Evaluation the Research of the FDA]); and, among the “Temporary Voting Members”, are: Bruce Gellin, M.D., M. PH., the Chief of Global Public Health Strategy for the Rockefeller Foundation; and, Melinda Wharton, M.D., M. PH., Associate Director of Vaccine Policy of the CDC. (Italics mine)

The VRBPAC members voted unanimously to endorse the Pfizer-BioNTech, the Moderna, and the Novavax “2024-2025 Formula COVID-19 Vaccine” by these companies, based on the presentations of these companies’ representatives at the meeting. Yours Truly can find no registered human clinical trials performed in advance of the 5 June VRBPAC meeting by Pfizer-BioNTech, or by Moderna, or by Novavax, for any “2024-2025 Formula COVID-19 Vaccine”; that would indicate that any “clinical trials” were performed in these companies’ facilities on mice; and that any “human trials” were also performed in these companies’ facilities, prior to the meeting. The FDA then issued the agency’s original announcement of 7 June 2024: www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-roundup-june-7-2024; and, a screenshot from this announcement:

Note in particular “…the selection of a specific JN.1 lineage SARS-CoV-2 strain (e.g., JN.1. or KP.2) and expressed a strong preference for JN.1.” Here’s where it starts to “get interesting.”

First, on 12 April 2024 (well ahead of the 5 June VRBPAC meeting), Pfizer-BioNTech issues a statement regarding the company’s “taking reservations” for the coming “2024-2025 Formula COVID-19 Vaccine” (also, see the Pfizer-BioNTech presentation at the 5 June meeting, linked above): www.cvdvaccine-us.com/reservation. This is followed, after the meeting, by Moderna filing an application with the FDA for a “vaccine” to target the JN.1. COVID-19 strain (also, see the Moderna presentation at the 5 June meeting, linked above): https://investors.modernatx.com/news/news-details/2024/Moderna-Files-FDA-Application-for-the-JN.1-Targeting-COVID-19-Vaccine/default.aspx; then, Novavax files with the FDA for that company’s version (also, see the Novavax presentation at the 5 June meeting, linked above): https://ir.novavax.com/press-releases/2024-06-14-Novavax-Submits-Application-to-U-S-FDA-for-Updated-Protein-based-2024-2025-Formula-COVID-19-Vaccine.

But then, “something happens”, and the FDA suddenly makes a large “about-face” and switches its “2024-2025 Formula COVID-19 Vaccine” choice to the KP.2 strain on 13 June 2024: www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/updated-covid-19-vaccines-use-united-states-beginning-fall-2024. This is the “second” announcement, which was cited at the beginning of today’s post.

What was it that happened? Part of the answer lies in the fact that the NIH and Moderna co-own the patents (and, therefore, share the royalties) for the Moderna “flagship” modRNA COVID-19 “vaccine”, mRNA-1273. This agreement would extend to “descendant clone COVID-19 vaccines” by Moderna. www.citizen.org/article/modernas-mrna-1273-vaccine-patent-landscape/. The NIH’s Dale and Betty Bumpers Vaccine Research Center (part of NIAID — which Dr. Anthony Fauci led from November 1984 until his retirement in December 2022) and Moderna co-developed mRNA-1273. https://covid19.nih.gov/news-and-stories/nih-vaccine-research-center; a screenshot from the article is below:

The other part of the answer is that Moderna was already developing a KP.2 strain COVID-19 “vaccinefor 2024-2025. This, and the FDA’s decision to shift away from the JN.1 strain to the KP.2 strain, are described in this post at Sasha Latypova’s blog: https://sashalatypova.substack.com/p/all-roads-lead-to-resilience, “All Roads lead to Resilience. FDA is removing competitors for the Pentagon & CIA’s baby…Moderna”, 23 June 2024.

The FDA’s “about-face” announcement regarding the switch from the JN.1 strain to the KP.2 strain was also covered here: www.contagionlive.com/view/fda-advises-manufacturers-to-consider-kp-2-strain-for-covid-19-vaccines, 14 June 2024, by Sophia Abene. Below is a screenshot from this article:

However, there’s yet another detail in play here, regarding the FDA’s switch, “based on evaluation of the most recent circulating strains of COVID-19”, from JN.1 to KP.2 — the CIA and the Pentagon. Here is a screenshot from Sasha Latypova’s Substack article:

Here is the report, linked from the Latypova blog article cited above, that describes the CIA-linked company, “National Resilience”, or “Resilience”, that manufactures the RNA for the Moderna modRNA line of COVID-19 Omicron “vaccines”: https://unlimitedhangout.com/2022/08/investigative-reports/rna-for-modernas-omicron-booster-manufactured-by-cia-linked-company/, by Whitney Webb, 17 August 2022. Below is a screenshot image from this blog article:

And here is story on this “interesting development”, from Resilience: www.businesswire.com/news/home/20210908005443/en/Resilience-to-Manufacture-mRNA-for-Moderna’s-COVID-19-Vaccine, 8 September 2021. Note that per this “multi-year contract”, Resilience manufactures the mRNA for the Moderna COVID-19 “vaccines” at this Canadian facility. Resilience was founded in 2020.

But wait, there’s more! Resilience lists multiple “partners”, such as the Mayo Clinic. The company also, apparently, has a “partnership” with the United States Army’s Joint Program Executive Office for Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Defense https://resilience.com/learn/partnerships. Below is a screenshot from this website:

The website link in the screenshot above is broken. Here is the Army’s website on this: wwwt2.army.mil/T2-Laboratories/Designated-Laboratories/Joint-Program-Executive-Office-for-Chemical-Biological-Radiological-and-Nuclear-Defense/. Note: this link may or may not work. One will need to do a search for “Joint Program Executive Office for Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Defense” to see links to this department of the United States Army. One such link: https://globalbiodefense.com/directory/name/joint-program-executive-office-for-chemical-biological-defense-jpeo-cbd/.

It appears, then, in Yours Truly’s opinion, that the FDA was perhaps “reminded” of the”details” regarding the NIH-Moderna co-ownership (and royalties – sharing) agreement related to Moderna’s modRNA COVID-19 “vaccines”; and, the role of the CIA-Pentagon-National Resilience (aka Resilience) in manufacturing the mRNA used in the Moderna COVID-19 Omicron “booster vaccines” — and the KP.2. strain is indeed a “descendant strain” in the Omicron lineage (as is the JN.1 strain.) Hence, the FDA’s 2024-2025 COVID-19 “vaccine” strain “sudden switch” announcement of 13 June 2024, only one week after the agency gave the nod to the JN.1 strain.

In Yours Truly’s opinion, it is statistically, medically, and ethically impossible for a new vaccine (let alone any COVID-19 “vaccine”) to be developed; tested (on lab animals, then on human subjects); the test data thoroughly collated and analyzed for “safety and efficacy” on both lab animals and on human subjects; then, which data is presented to the CDC / FDA for consideration; then, these agencies doing their own “due diligence” research; then, and only then, being granted an EUA by the FDA; then, and only then, manufactured for use in humans — in a time span of fewer than three to five years, let alone within a time span of only a few months. It appears, again in Yours Truly’s opinion, that the CDC and the FDA are playing “fast and loose” with the health and safety of the people who choose (or will be “mandated”) to take the “2024-2025 Formula COVID-19 Vaccine.” And, also, that “other entities” are in play here to perhaps “influence” decision making by these agencies.

All of above is in addition to the fact that the COVID-19 “vaccines” (actually, gene therapy injections) have caused, are causing, and will cause, multiple health issues, serious adverse reactions, and deaths, in those who are “vaccinated.” Just two of the most recent discoveries: One, the COVID-19 “vaccines” can cause brain damage, an article by Dr. William Makis: www.globalresearch.ca/brain-damage-covid-19-mrna-vaccines/5861012, “Brain Damage Caused by COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines”, 26 June 2024. Below is a screenshot from Dr. Makis’ article:

The second most recent discovery, that the COVID-19 “vaccines” reduce life expectancy (even in “all-cause” analysis) among COVID-19 “vaccinated” persons, by Dr. Peter A. McCullough: https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/p/breaking-publication-a-critical-analysis, “BREAKING Publication — A Critical Analysis of All-Cause Deaths during COVID-19 Vaccination in an Italian Province”, 1 July 2024. The peer-reviewed paper is here: https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms12071343, “A Critical Analysis of All-Cause Deaths during COVID-19 Vaccination in an Italian Province”, Marco Alessandria, et al., published 30 June 2024. Below is a screenshot from the Conclusions section of this paper:

In Yours Truly’ opinion, it is apparent at “half a glance” that the COVID-19 “vaccines” (actually, gene therapy injections) must be completely withdrawn for human use until these products have been fully investigated, and then re-designed, before being re-introduced for human use; and, that there is no “co-ownership” or sharing of royalties between a government agency and a COVID-19 “vaccine” manufacturer; and, that there is no involvement of the United States military in the development or manufacture of such products.

Peace, Good Energy, Respect: PAVACA


Dear KMAG: 20240122 Joe Biden Didn’t Win ❀ Open Topic


Joe Biden didn’t win. This is our Real President:

AND our beautiful REALFLOTUS.


This Stormwatch Monday Open Thread remains open – VERY OPEN – a place for everybody to post whatever they feel they would like to tell the White Hats, and the rest of the MAGA/KAG/KMAG world (with KMAG being a bit of both).

And yes, it’s Monday…again.

But we WILL get through it!

We will always remember Wheatie,

Pray for Trump,

Yet have fun,

and HOLD ON when things get crazy!


We will follow the RULES of civility that Wheatie left for us:

Wheatie’s Rules:

  1. No food fights.
  2. No running with scissors.
  3. If you bring snacks, bring enough for everyone.

And while we engage in vigorous free speech, we will remember Wheatie’s advice on civility, non-violence, and site unity:

“We’re on the same side here so let’s not engage in friendly fire.”

“Let’s not give the odious Internet Censors a reason to shut down this precious haven that Wolf has created for us.”

If this site gets shut down, please remember various ways to get back in touch with the rest of the gang:

Our beloved country is under Occupation by hostile forces.

Daily outrage and epic phuckery abound.

We can give in to despair…or we can be defiant and fight back in any way that we can.

Joe Biden didn’t win.

And we will keep saying Joe Biden didn’t win until we get His Fraudulency out of our White House.


Wolfie’s Wheatie’s Word of the Week:

doppelganger

noun

  1. A ghostly double of a living person, especially one that haunts such a person.
  2. An evil twin.
  3. A remarkably similar double.
  4. Alter ego.
  5. A person who has the same name as another.
  6. A book by anti-Trump feminist Naomi Klein, about Trump-friendly feminist Naomi Wolf.

From Wikipedia

A doppelgänger (/ˈdɒpəlɡɛŋər, -ɡæŋər/), sometimes spelled as doppelgaenger or doppelganger, is a biologically unrelated look-alike, or a double, of a living person. In fiction and mythology, a doppelgänger is often portrayed as a ghostly  paranormal phenomenon and usually seen as a harbinger of bad luck. Other traditions and stories equate a doppelgänger with an evil twin. In modern times, the term twin stranger is occasionally used.

The Book Cover


MUSIC!

How about a “fiddle chicks X bagpipe grlz” video?

It turns out there is actually a song called “Doppelganger”. It’s not bad at all, but kinda sad.

How about some fresh country? Just found this song!

OK, let’s finish with a TRUMP RALLY SONG! WOOHOO!!!


THE STUFF

The stuff, this week, is about Naomi Klein vs. Naomi Wolf.

I began by picking up the recent “Naomi vs. Naomi” book, Doppelganger.

You’re all most likely familiar with feminist Naomi Wolf, that perennial guest of Steve Bannon. She, the anti-COVID-vaccine-fighter extraordinaire, whose stellar work on the Pfizer FOIA documents caused Rochelle Walensky to flee her harpy perch at CDC for better cover.

There is another feminist who is sometimes confused with Wolf, named Naomi Klein. Klein is a cabal defender, ultimately, but she has managed a bit of some weak “insider” criticism on the left – enough to be considered an intellectual – not enough to lose her perks and privileges.

Supposedly because Klein is sometimes mistaken for Wolf, and takes wrongly directed criticism from the left for it, Klein decided to attack Wolf, and hence the book. Or at least, that is her story.

Right now, both the Kindle version and the hardback version of Klein’s book are $15, which means that the hardcover is NOT doing well in those cabal bookstores like Barnes & Lucifer.

“WHAT???!!!” – you may be saying. Why would this Wolf (“DA WOOF”) be picking up RADICAL LEFT TRASH?

The book is basically one long REEEEEEEEEE!!!!!, and it’s glorious, and that is why I bought it.

More specifically, the book is a left-wing, globalist, overly verbose, incredibly narcissistic, and eye-rollingly navel-gazing attack by stereotypical “New York culture, Canada address” feminist Naomi Klein on “MAGA-friendly liberal” feminist Naomi Wolf.

Once I realized how much of a REEEEEEEEEE!!! this book was, I began laughing in the store at every breathless outrage, and eventually realized that I needed to buy it.

The thing is, Naomi Klein is OBSESSED with Naomi Wolf, and the more one reads, the more one understands that FAKERY is chasing AUTHENTICITY – obsessed – because Fakery cannot stand to be in the same room as Authenticity, and yet it MUST be in that room, getting all the attention, so it has to ATTACK what it cannot be.

In the same way that people like Romney, Pelosi, Obama, Kasich, and all the rest are OBSESSED with Trump, and simply MUST try to destroy him – in the same way that Satan is OBSESSED with Christ, and must try to destroy Him, so Naomi Klein is obsessed with the “other Naomi” whose coattails she rode in on, and from whose coattails she exited, in the name of holding onto respect by the media, the government, and the rest of the elite.

It is my belief that Naomi Klein is the real doppelganger, and that her work is a kind of sub-critical hysterical confession. IMO, Klein always benefited from confusion with Naomi Wolf – until Naomi Wolf “walked the walk” right into the fire – in a way that Naomi Klein could not follow, nor even pretend to “talk the talk” without losing her seat at the elite table.

Wolf lost her academic position for speaking the truth. Klein still has hers. Do the math.

Klein wrote a book called The Shock Doctrine, which was a very insightful look at how neo-liberal corporate capitalism piles into crisis to make money. Klein was basically starting to see the phoniness of things like the Green New Deal. The problem was, she could never go far enough, because she’s too close to the agenda. Whether Klein can’t see, won’t see, or is just pretending not to see, it doesn’t change the outcome – she doesn’t see.

Klein can never see – nor admit that she sees – the corruption of centralized government, working hand-in-hand with phony crisis capitalism.

COVID and the vaccines provide a perfect example. Klein simply can’t leave the plantation. She stays safely on the “Bad Wolf” designated cheer circle, criticizing Wolf for departing from “the science” into “conspiracy theories”, and utterly refusing to admit that “the science” is no longer interested in saving pleb lives, when government money, taken from the plebs, is there for the taking.

Does Klein know? Is she wise to the globalist scam? Probably, IMO.

Klein also takes some interesting heat from the left.

For example, Klein is seen as a bit too friendly toward big-government-big-corporation-big-NGO-big-academia solutions, and the “gang-green” take her out for not going totally Maoist and anarchist on climate change, like those brave souls who glue themselves to roads, art exhibits, and whatnot.

Then there is this great work of TLDRism from the intellectual left, seeing the same thing in a more complicated way.

Whatever. The bottom line is that I took one for the team, to figure out what’s up with this Klein broad. Save your money – don’t buy the book unless you want to “see the REE“!


Just sayin’!

Until victory, have faith!

And trust the big plan, too!

And as always….

ENJOY THE SHOW

W


Dear KMAG: 20240115 Joe Biden Didn’t Win ❀ Open Topic


Joe Biden didn’t win. This is our Real President:

AND our beautiful REALFLOTUS.


This Stormwatch Monday Open Thread remains open – VERY OPEN – a place for everybody to post whatever they feel they would like to tell the White Hats, and the rest of the MAGA/KAG/KMAG world (with KMAG being a bit of both).

And yes, it’s Monday…again.

But we WILL get through it!

We will always remember Wheatie,

Pray for Trump,

Yet have fun,

and HOLD ON when things get crazy!


We will follow the RULES of civility that Wheatie left for us:

Wheatie’s Rules:

  1. No food fights.
  2. No running with scissors.
  3. If you bring snacks, bring enough for everyone.

And while we engage in vigorous free speech, we will remember Wheatie’s advice on civility, non-violence, and site unity:

“We’re on the same side here so let’s not engage in friendly fire.”

“Let’s not give the odious Internet Censors a reason to shut down this precious haven that Wolf has created for us.”

If this site gets shut down, please remember various ways to get back in touch with the rest of the gang:

Our beloved country is under Occupation by hostile forces.

Daily outrage and epic phuckery abound.

We can give in to despair…or we can be defiant and fight back in any way that we can.

Joe Biden didn’t win.

And we will keep saying Joe Biden didn’t win until we get His Fraudulency out of our White House.


Wolfie’s Wheatie’s Word of the Week:

volens

adjective

  1. In the state of mind where one voluntarily accepts a specific risk.
  2. Willing.
  3. In Latin: wishing, willing, welcome.
  4. Primarily a legal term.
  5. Part of another term, nolens volens (willing or unwilling; willy-nilly).

In law, volens is a state of mind, referring to voluntary acceptance of a specific risk. It is usually pleaded by way of defense, and often employs the legal Latin volenti non fit injuria. The term volens itself is often used in contradistinction to the terms sciens (meaning mere knowledge of the risk, without any voluntary assumption of it).

History of the term

The earliest known use of the adjective volens is in the 1870s. OED’s earliest evidence for volens is from 1872, in Law Journal . volens is a borrowing from Latin.

Exemplary legal usage

Sanjeet Singh Kaila vs Union Of India And Another [2nd May 2017]

In this case it was said that the risk may arise from a defect in a machine which the servant has engaged to work of such a nature that his personal danger and consequent injury must be produced by his own act, If he clearly foresaw the likelihood of such a result, and, not withstanding, continued to work, I think that, according to the authorities, he ought to be regarded as volens. The case may be very different when there is no inherent peril in the work performed by the servant, and the risk to which he is exposed arises from a defect in the machine used in another department over which he has no control.(emphasis supplied)


MUSIC!

Start off with some super-classic country re-done by the next generation – twenty years ago.

I always liked Lee Ann, as part of “90’s country” which is currently held in some kind of classic esteem, but which seemed edgy and modern to us back then!

Let’s jump forward ten years to 2014, looking back again.

OK – we’re back to the present, with a recent recording of current country music. It’s poppy, but still very listenable.

Any classic rock fans out there? If so, check out this gigantic medley of Rush tropes to create one massive intro.

I was led to this song from last week’s bagpipe video. Weirdest fusion of genres (Punjabi and Scot) in forever. Then add rap music and stunning visuals. Enjoy!


THE STUFF

Yup. The left takes over everything, including Community Notes. “Note” how Milloy has to preemptively defend against abuse.

Some ‘hottest year in 125,000 years’. Just in from

@NOAA: Despite 550 billion tons of global emissions, the US was cooler in 2023 than 2012. So every emission warms the planet except for the US?

🤔

Note for

@CommunityNotes censors: My red line is not a trend line. It’s just a line to show that 2023 was cooler than 2012.

https://twitter.com/JunkScience/status/1744917998337462307

Let’s just save that image.

Milloy is using a very effective tactic to make people understand the most basic science – cause and effect. He’s showing that people are right to suspect there is no correlation between what the Climate Commies say affects climate, and reality.

We would expect to see direct connections, but we don’t. Why not? They will have answers, but the answers will ultimately fail to convince, as Occam’s Razor is repeatedly violated by hand-waving excuses and Rube Goldberg alibis, rather than pleasingly straightforward and multi-explanatory science.


Now let’s look at the COVID lies.

Note that Avril Haines is an Obama Girl – one of the Furies – or Harpies as I like to call them. The other two are Susan Rice and Lisa Monaco, also running the country. They’re part of the plot that runs Dementia Hitler as an avatar for Obola, who’s really behind what’s happening to America.

How about something angelic, instead of demonic?

COUGH.

Let’s just save that image, shall we…..

Speaking of SMOKING CRACK…..

Thank God this is America. And keep thanking God if you want to keep it that way.

Meanwhile, the old false gods are crawling out of the grave….


Just sayin’!

Until victory, have faith!

And trust the big plan, too!

And as always….

ENJOY THE SHOW

W


Dear KMAG: 20231016 Joe Biden Didn’t Win ❀ Open Topic

Joe Biden didn’t win. This is our Real President:

AND our beautiful REALFLOTUS.


This Stormwatch Monday Open Thread remains open – VERY OPEN – a place for everybody to post whatever they feel they would like to tell the White Hats, and the rest of the MAGA/KAG/KMAG world (with KMAG being a bit of both).

And yes, it’s Monday…again.

But we WILL get through it!

We will always remember Wheatie,

Pray for Trump,

Yet have fun,

and HOLD ON when things get crazy!


We will follow the RULES of civility that Wheatie left for us:

Wheatie’s Rules:

  1. No food fights.
  2. No running with scissors.
  3. If you bring snacks, bring enough for everyone.

And while we engage in vigorous free speech, we will remember Wheatie’s advice on civility, non-violence, and site unity:

“We’re on the same side here so let’s not engage in friendly fire.”

“Let’s not give the odious Internet Censors a reason to shut down this precious haven that Wolf has created for us.”

If this site gets shut down, please remember various ways to get back in touch with the rest of the gang:

Our beloved country is under Occupation by hostile forces.

Daily outrage and epic phuckery abound.

We can give in to despair…or we can be defiant and fight back in any way that we can.

Joe Biden didn’t win.

And we will keep saying Joe Biden didn’t win until we get His Fraudulency out of our White House.


Word of The Week:

Pfizer-affirming care

noun

  • mRNA-based coronavirus vaccines manufactured by Pfizer
  • the dual-component COVID drug paxlovid
  • any drug or vaccine made by Pfizer or a subsidiary thereof.
  • prescription or administration of any of the above
  • legislation supporting any of the above
  • mandating any of the above

Shown in a picture

Shown in another picture


Assorted Tweets

On oldie but goody.

This post just makes me smile, too.

New CDC Director in 3….2….1….

While I think Rochelle’s replacement is pretty clueless, I did find one of her college pictures, when she was, like, totally serious!

Looks like Elon has a new vintage toy!

Truly, it is nice having a Twitter X CEO (no, I don’t mean Dorsey) who gets it.

What the heck! This chick will NOT get out of my Twitter X feed!

Bay area. Well, THAT makes sense.

And then there’s this. An important point.

Amen.

No, not that plan. The other one. The one that includes this plan, all other plans, and itself.

So how does that work?

Sorry – it’s complicated. Maybe just Trust In God for now!

How did they put it?

ENJOY THE SHOW

W


Why I’m Glad I Watched the Ken Burns PBS Propaganda Special Blaming the Holocaust on America’s Evil Trump Supporters (Or Their Terrible Nativist Parents and Grandparents)



TL;DR – Watch this sucker while ignoring the myopic neo-Bolshevik “refugee” propaganda, but instead keeping in mind the current COVID/WEF insanity, to get a grip on the incipient climate-excused holocaust of the depopulationists, which is the fault of SOCIALISM, same as the soon-to-be-dwarfed “Holocaust” of the 1930s and 1940s.

OK – just a bit more detail…..

Don’t watch the Ken Burns Holocaust special for any of the slanted, leftist, socialist messaging stapled onto the historical facts in a DNC-approved and ADL-edited way.

Watch this PBS special while subversively keeping in mind the new socialist, depopulationist, eco-nuttery holocaust which now exceeds 6 million COVID dead and will soon DWARF the old “Holocaust” of so much hypocritical and self-centered angst.

Calmly stroke Suspicious Cat, as the Holocaust is falsely linked to rejection of current “asylum seekers” in a face-palmingly stereotypical and Trump-hating way.

Watch this PBS special while “rebelliously” remembering that RIGHT NOW we are in a DESIGNED CRASH of the world economy, which will kill BILLIONS of innocent people if not stopped – and which is largely driven with the eager participation of globalist and socialist “Jazis” – who are no less evil than the Nazis of old – self-righteous in their “ESG/DEI” zeal, with their vain self-assurance that they and they alone know the answers which must be forced upon the world.

Watch this special remembering Andrew Cuomo, Anthony Fauci, Ralph Baric, Joe Biden, WEF, Klaus Schwab, Pfizer, CCP and Albert Bourla, and keeping close in mind, the NEW holocaust which has already killed over 6 million worldwide by the virus ALONE, and is already creating even-more-massive excesses in mortality in every country, in unacknowledged proportion to acceptance of the “vaccines”.

Watch this PBS propaganda special while remembering how the US and China co-created biological “gain of function” which literally DWARFS the mere chemical nastiness of a bug spray, “Zyklon B”, itself more comparable to Fauci’s murderous remdesivir, or the midazolam they apparently used for “COVID euthanasia” in the UK.

Watch this special while remembering the millions who died around the world from both virus and vaccines, including tens of thousands of Israelis, as secular Jewish leaders condemned their own and didn’t lift a finger, other than to censor Zev Zelenko, and to suppress their own report on the dangers of the vaccines they INVESTED IN.

Watch this special in strict analogy of the THEN unbelievability of the “final solution”, to the NOW unbelievability of “depopulation”.

Realize that the problem isn’t antisemitism or “refugee acceptance” – it’s SOCIALISM.

SOCIALISM KILLS – no matter which brand.

Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) were joined by Democratic lawmakers from both the House and Senate on February 7, 2019, to introduce Green New Deal legislation.

Oh, hell. I said enough already. Do I really need to explain this?

If so, I’ll do it in the comments.

But the bottom line is that this special has a lot of great facts, which – if you are prepared to see them in the context of current events – are quite convincing that we ARE in the late beginning of yet another socialist holocaust.

Buckle up.

W


PS – Oh yeah – the URL…..

https://www.pbs.org/kenburns/us-and-the-holocaust/


PPS – The Depopulation Series – a Bibliography

The Population Control Shot – Introduction

The Population Control Shot – New Sodompox Limited Edition

The Population Control Shot – Did Bill Gates Gaffe, Troll, Let it Slip, Or None of the Above?

The Population Control Shot – CDC Backs Out of the Shot-Up Saloon Like Nothing Happened

The Population Control Shot – Understanding the Peoples Climate Temple

Three Little Graphs That Say It’s All One Big Lie


TL;DR – This post explains three graphs which all gave me “AHA” moments when I saw them. They all reveal lies in public science, which are used to manipulate humanity. Strategic and fundamental lies in climate science and planetary history are used to justify more tactical lies in energy and medicine. Together, these three graphs indict the sabotaged and weaponized public science which is being used against humanity.

All of this conforms to a concise and remarkably prescient warning by President (and former General) Dwight D. Eisenhower.

While there is much deep science in each graph, certain basic principles are easily seen without a technical background. Those ideas provide the “wait a second” thought needed for proper scientific skepticism.

If you want to get the “executive tour” and finish this in under 5 minutes, just read through anything that says TL;DR in bold, and the images next to the headline text. If you have 30 minutes, watch the videos next to TL;DR. If you have an hour or two, read everything.


If you read THIS paragraph, then consider the slow route. Or consider doing the TL;DR fast track first, and then coming back for the full ride.


Mood Music


Introduction

I wanted to keep this short, but I know that’s almost impossible. I’ve put off this post until I was ready, but I wasn’t ready until I heard this music (see above), while reading over an older post that aged well in a variety of ways.


The Molnupiravir Contradiction

Why would we mass treat a virus with a drug which forces the virus to mutate, when mutation is how the virus creates new variants that reinfect the vaccinated? Before I explain the title contradiction, let me start with an admission. Most of my life, I have been very friendly with the pharmaceutical industry. I …


The point I saw was that mass formation psychosis has been used at all levels of science, and the only way for us to fix science now is

MASS FORMATION AWARENESS.

Be part of it. NOW.

Q = MFA

(The equation is a bit of a joke – but you are welcome to elaborate it humorously, fellow nerds.)

I had thought that maybe I was putting off this post until the last post was done, but the next post was always the last one, and I knew that I would always find just one more post to do first.

Nope. Now is the time. The last “Wheatie” post is in the can, strengthening my soul, and in hearing this song that I used for it, while knowing that we are on the right path, I’m suddenly ready.

There is a certain beautiful sadness in knowing that I’ve remained silent about even ONE lie for far too long. And now, with THREE beautiful lies – three FURIES against mankind – it’s time to take them all on.


More Mood Music

(A song literally about mass formation psychosis.)


It’s The Jabs

TL;DR – The Ethical Skeptic analyzed CDC data for causes of death in the US. By looking at deaths caused by blood and immune disorders, but not by COVID itself, vs. projections from pre-COVID data, two things show up – more “late” deaths related to COVID, and a MUCH BIGGER group of similar deaths that started precisely with the jabs.

You can see this in the graph as space between the two curves, widening first in Spring 2020 (twice), and much more in April 2021, coincident with the biggest deployment of the jabs.

I’m pretty sure Ethical Skeptic doesn’t believe in God, but that does nothing to keep me from saying “Thank God for Ethical Skeptic”. When Truth is an unyielding goal of individuals, they don’t need to agree on what Truth is, to create a world of good faith.

It was gil00 who brought me this tweet, wondering if it was important. I told her at the time that I needed to do a post on it, but that is just the beginning of its importance. Tradebait, Gail Combs, and the rest of the gang, also saw that this was a biggie.

The fact that it contains one of three graphs that “change everything”, should give you an idea of exactly how important I think it is.

ALL Americans need to understand this graph.

No – I take that back. All intelligent life within the sphere of influence of this planet and this moment need to understand this graph. THEY THE PEOPLE need to understand exactly who they’re dealing with.

Let’s blow that up a bit…..

Before telling you WHY, let me assure you that there are MANY more graphs like this, which will all say roughly the same thing – IF one is honest enough to let the data talk. I choose this graph because it’s probably the clearest and simplest that I’ve seen so far – due in large part to its creator, The Ethical Skeptic, or “TES” as I will refer to him now.

We have talked about TES’s work before, since he emerged as one of the most skillful and impossible-to-censor critics of what might be called “Fauci science”. I may quibble with minor points on his more far-reaching hypotheses and theories, but I always find that his general and bigger principles “age spectacularly well”, and are best taken very seriously at the earliest possible moment.

Again, hence the need for this post.

Here is what I said originally – it was my “initial reaction”. You don’t have to follow it too closely, unless you find it all obvious. I’m going to explain this in detail.

By looking just at blood and immune disorders, and comparing mortality of 2018-2019 (pre-COVID) as a baseline (which was then extended by seasonal extrapolation into 2020, 2021 and 2022, with normal population increase meaning a slight increase in deaths), and then looking at 2018-2022 actual for all years, using the actual figures, but removing COVID, one can see the population reduction effect of the jabs, as the excess cardio and immune mortality, which just keeps increasing with time.

It’s clear as a bell in the data, when one compares to the “expected deaths based on the last two years of pre-COVID times”.

The striking thing is how STRONGLY the sum which includes 2020 and 2021 deviates away from the prior years, starting exactly with the jabs.

2020 includes TESTING of jabs.
2021 includes DEPLOYMENT of jabs.
2022 includes BOOSTING of jabs.

It’s a depop shot. And it works. All they would have had to do is dial up the dose just enough, while normalizing the deaths with the media, and it’s totally tunable to the rate of depop that one desires.

OK – so what does all that mean?

Let’s take it slower.

First of all, at any time, you can go to theethicalskeptic.com and check out his article on this topic, which does not YET have THIS particular graph (except in the comments), but which will likely have said graph in the next two parts of the article.

LINK: https://theethicalskeptic.com/2022/08/20/houston-we-have-a-problem-part-1-of-3/

I also call your attention to this highlighted point made near the beginning of the article.

Nonetheless, by the end of 2021 it had become abundantly clear that US citizens were not just dying of Covid-19 to the excess, they were also now dying of something else, and at a rate which eventually became higher than that of Covid itself.

The Ethical Skeptic, Houston, We Have a Problem (Part 1 of 3)

If you just read that, where TES couches his words VERY carefully, and you know what he’s hinting at, then you know why I said this is one of the three big graphs you need to understand. He ain’t lyin’. My only quibble is that I suspect that his estimate of “decades” of damage to health policy may be conservative, and “centuries” is a horrifying possibility.

Are you ready to dig into the graph?

GOOD. Here we go.

Let’s start with some ACRONYMS.

  • NHCS = National Center for Health Statistics
  • MCD = MCoD = Multiple Cause of Death
  • UCoD = Underlying Cause of Death
  • ICD-10 = International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision
  • MMWR = Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report
  • wk = week
  • M-Avg = moving average (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_average)
  • Dnm (n = 5-8, m = 0-9) = Death codes

This is enough to understand it fully.

The basic graph is DEATHS going up on the left, and TIME going across from left to right, over a period of YEARS.

The DEATHS on the left are showing from 350 per week (at the bottom left) to 950 per week (at the top left). That means that we are not seeing the 0-350 region, which is featureless and below the portion of the graph that we can see. It’s a legitimate suppression – it’s not hiding anything except relative magnitudes of the changes to a SMALL extent, and it helps us see the differences in those changes better. It’s a magnifier – just remember that it’s there.

The title says that this is US-NCHS data for Multiple Cause of Death, meaning it’s looking at all causes of death listed on death certificates in the US and then databased by the National Center for Health Statistics, which is part of the CDC. This database is then searchable online.

The title also says that this data is for SELECTED cause-of-death codes listed in the ICD-10 system. The data runs up to week 29 of 2022, and is adjusted for the lag in reporting to CDC at the end (see right-hand side).

Let’s jump briefly to the topic of those codes.

Using the drop-down buttons you can see in the image, TES has chosen death codes 50-89, but has excluded COVID-19. Those codes are briefly described as “diseases of the blood and blood-forming organs” (but excluding COVID-19). TES has also selected ALL ages.

In the lower left you can see several descriptions of that different groups of the D-codes mean. Generally speaking, these are related to blood, blood-forming organs, and some immune problems. We will quote from TES himself about these later.

This does NOT include cardiac arrests, strokes, and certain other “stereotypical” clot-shot diseases, but it DOES include more “obscure” diseases that we can intuitively expect would be affected by both COVID and the CLOT SHOT. Thus, it serves as a kind of sensitive test for “something bad in the blood”.

A critical point for understanding is in the subtitle below the title.

2020/21/22 Compared to Baseline 2018/19

What this means is that what we are really doing OVERALL is looking at the 3 years of data “from and after Wuhan COVID”, 2020-2022, and comparing those numbers to “before Wuhan COVID”, 2018-2019. This explains why there are TWO curves on the graph. But in order to do this VALIDLY, we have to PROJECT the numbers from 2018-2019 FORWARD into the next three years, since the baseline would automatically increase on its own. Thus, we have TWO CURVES that run for all 5 years.

It helps to look at the red dashed curve first. This is listed as 2018-2019 Baseline 5 week moving average. Don’t worry about the “moving average” stuff. What this does is to take a bunch of scattered points and smooths them into closer points that can be used to draw a curve through them. It’s a neat trick to create the “best curve through scattered points”.

You can see that this is a bumpy “sawtooth” curve, higher in the winter, lower in the summer, and slowly rising over time. Typically, over time, this is what you see. Every year can be predicted largely from one or more prior years. You just take the past, find all the patterns you can, and project them all into the future.

There is a related red note in the lower left corner of the graph that says “1.4% baseline growth rate”. This is the annual growth in the baseline numbers from 2018-2019. The numbers vary rather strongly from month to month, but not much year from year, meaning that it’s easy to predict what they SHOULD look like in future years, such as 2020, 2021, and 2022. Each year will look pretty much like the last, months and weeks will go up and down, but day to day it will be 1.4% higher than the previous year, following the patterns of previous years.

This idea works remarkably well.

OK – so what is the pink solid line? THAT is the ACTUAL NUMBERS, for all five years, from week to week, using a 7-week moving average, and reporting it as the LAST week of the seven weeks. This is where we’re going to find any interesting phenomena.

The use of a DIFFERENT number of weeks for the multi-week moving average serves as a kind of sanity check in the region where both curves derive from the same ACTUAL data (2018-2019). The curves will not be much different, and the differences are just an artifact of the methodology, but if you see a big difference in that region of the same actual data in both curves, it’s probably meaningful, and probably something WRONG in your processing of the data.

Any minor differences you DO see in the region of actual data vs. itself (2018-2019), serve as a nice comparison of SCALE to any systematic differences you see in the 2020-2022 region, which is the region of ACTUAL DATA (pink solid) versus PROJECTED DATA (red dashed).

For example, if TES has a similar graph for some code like automobile accidents or choking on food, you can confidently predict that ACTUAL data for 2020-2022 should match the curve for PROJECTED DATA from 2018-2019 fairly closely – apart from any unexpected societal effects of COVID such as lockdowns, but those would then appear rationally in the data.

SO WHAT DO WE SEE?


TL;DR – the actual deaths begin to exceed the projected deaths in stages, with a lesser jump happening due to COVID itself, but a far bigger jump (over 2.5 times as big) happening after people began taking the jabs in a big way in April of 2021.


Looking at the two curves with the innocence of a child, we see them separating in stages. We see them separate a certain amount (call it 1X) during spring and early summer of 2020 (call this region 1), then separating about twice as much (2-3X) during summer, fall and winter of 2020, and early spring of 2021 (region 2). Then, in late spring of 2021, the separation grows suddenly and substantially (7-10X) (region 3), and it just keeps growing into 2022 (15X+).

This is NOT an accident. TES knew that the vaccines began being given in a big way around week 14 of 2021 (early mid-April), as shown by this graph.

TL;DR – this additional graph shows how the slope (derivative) of total jab doses given is used to see when most of the jabs were administered. This is near the beginning of dosing, and explains the sudden rapid widening between the two curves in the primary graph. It’s a “pandemic of vaccination” much like COVID itself.

Based on this date, TES looked for ICD codes which show a dramatic WIDENING at “Critical Inflection 1” – meaning when the jabs were introduced (what I called the beginning of region 3), VERSUS any prior widening in spring of 2020, when COVID-19 of the Wuhan strain was introduced (what I called the beginning of “region 1”).

Stated differently, TES is only counting things which appeared dramatically MORE for the jabs, than they did for COVID itself.

Basically, TES is being “too fair” to the jabs. We know that there are many causes of death by both COVID and the JABS, “because spike protein”, but if it’s not overwhelmingly obvious IN THE DATA that they’re significantly and primarily due to the jabs, he’s not counting them.

He’s letting a bunch of jab deaths “get away”, to make sure that he’s indicting only real jab deaths.

As a side-note, this is what Gregg Phillips did with True The Vote’s geospatial data, by only counting the most blatant and obviously organized mule data (10 drop boxes and 5 stash houses). It becomes almost impossible to criticize the science, when data is winnowed down to exclude even the most marginally debatable data.

Deny the unethical skeptics even a foothold, and they cannot even begin to raise an unethical argument.

Pretty BOSS LEVEL if you ask me.

Here is what TES has to say about the ICD codes that he used.

With regard to these select ICD-10 codes, I have endeavored to highlight only those which have exhibited a stark difference between their arrival patterns during the 2020 pandemic period, and that period after MMWR Week 14 2021. While there are indeed increases in deaths incumbent inside the other ICD-10 codes, those increases appeared to plausibly conform to their same arrival patterns for 2020 as well. In other words, they appeared to be heavily Covid-related in their dynamics, both before and after the Week 14 2021 inflection.

Of particular concern, are those deaths which relate to body-wide regulatory systems as opposed to specific organs or causes. In other words, cancer and lymphomas, heart, autonomous myocarditis/pericarditis/conductive disorders, injuries to the liver and kidneys, etc. These are not only the canaries in the coal mine in terms of pathology, but may serve to indicate as well that a pervasive systemic disruption is at play inside the average US citizen human physiology, especially over the last 71 weeks. These are the death groups which exhibit the most stark trend of increase post MMWR Week 14 2021.

There have nevertheless been some attempts to “take down” TES’s analysis, but after two of them were burnt to a crisp on Twitter, it’s pretty clear that these attacks were not “ethical skepticism”, but in fact beautiful examples of what has happened to science in the wake of politicization and corruption. One academic was even outed by a sharp Twitter user as a practiced shill for the Faucism narrative, referred to humorously as “a regular on the fact-check circuit”.

NOW, knowing what the graph means – that the cure turned out to be worse than the disease (something which Trump said could not happen, thus forcing a coup to maintain the plot) – it is really worth it to go back and read TES’s article, if you have not already.

LINK: https://theethicalskeptic.com/2022/08/20/houston-we-have-a-problem-part-1-of-3/

It’s tough science, but even if you just “kinda get it”, it’s WORTH IT.

It is important to read the comments at the end, too. Not only does TES have links to his Twitter defenses, and the graph highlighted in this article appears – there is comment by somebody who did a rough calculation based on mRNA therapies that have failed human trials in the past. Based on his calculations…. well, let me just quote.

Great work. I did a small quick model using a Gaussian Distribution over 9 years to see what the numbers would be each year for “events” given 80% of the total population vaccinated had active ingredients and would develop events similar to past other mRNA failed trials. 7,887 deaths per week is about 179% above my model for 2022. If the past is indeed playing out here, this excess deaths per week will increase by a factor of 9 over the next year. Most adverse events in past similar trials did not take place until year three. By year six, 84% of the cohort was positive for adverse events.

https://theethicalskeptic.com/2022/08/20/houston-we-have-a-problem-part-1-of-3/#comment-12577

TL;DR – It’s now very likely that these late jab deaths will increase dramatically during the next few years, based on mRNA therapy trial information which was available but seemingly ignored.

Watch this video if you have 3 minutes.

I would even go so far as to say that this highly censored video of an alleged mRNA trial participant from several years ago (see above), breaking his NDA and claiming serious cardiac problems affecting almost all of the people in his trial, may not be a fraud.

If that video is entirely true, then based on his numbers, my assessment is that his trial was very likely a secret depopulation trial flying under the false flag of a secret mRNA therapy trial. Which may then make COVID-19 and the jabs, the mother of all false flags.

In my opinion it is important to force the finding and recognition of the truth, so that we can begin saving the people who are not lucky.

Any effort to work toward #TeamHeadsOnPikes to prevent the next one of these incidents from happening, is a separate problem I leave for others. I’m a bit too good at forgiving.

TL;DR – There has been plenty of data telling us that the jabs are problematic, but now we are faced with very clear proof that CDC must easily see in their own data, yet pretends not to see. Combine these two memes.

The illogical arguments conceal real goals and tactics.

Buckle up. They know we know, and they have a plan for it.


Even More Mood Music

(Because you must FEAR CARBZILLA!)

https://youtu.be/BJHuX_jeSf4

Carbon Dioxide Is Life’s Friend and Savior

TL;DR – This graph shows terrestrial life’s remarkably high tolerance for carbon dioxide (which is basically recirculating plant life), but poor tolerance of meteoric impacts during times of low CO2 and preliminary glaciation. We are being severely gaslit, to see climate science backwards, and to operate from reflexive fears which prevent full, true and larger understanding.

The graph you see above is NOT the first one that I saw, which blew my mind, but it’s very similar. The one I saw was basically the orange line, and may have been GEOCARB III or a comparable study. It had the exact same principle features, which told me the same things.

Apparently I missed the “mass formation psychosis” in climate science, and just happened to walk in with my “They Live” glasses on.

Let me state for the record that “I am neither a professional geologist nor an earth scientist, but I have loved the subjects my whole life, and I can read a graph.”

More crucially, I have always been an “allied science fan” of geology and earth science – in part because earth chemistry and earth biology happen on this wonderful planet called Earth. Follow either of these sciences back to the basics, and earth science matters.

Back to the graph.

It’s worth explaining the basics of the scale across the bottom, which is time.

We are at the very end of the graph – a slice so thin that our lives will not show up even under a magnifier. Bring out a microscope and see a tiny hair’s breadth under it. That’s us.

We are at the most recent edge of the Neogene – which is the N on the bottom of the graph. That N is 23 million years. The “preparatory ancestry” of anything strongly resembling our kind easily fits into that, as best as we can tell. You might call it “the age of man“, where man includes pre-men and barely men.

Probably even these guys and gals.

Humans trying to understand climate science.

Next to the left is the Paleogene, abbreviated Pg. This is the “age of mammals“. You will note that while it is much bigger than the Neogene, it is still a VERY SMALL fraction of the history of life on the planet.

Let’s blow it up a bit, using a DIFFERENT type of graph, which is more of a timeline. More recent is at the top.

The three most significant climate events of that time period are on the right. They all bear explanation.

First, Antarctica got its first RECENT permanent ice sheets only a bit over 50 million years ago, near the END of this prior period, and the start of the “age of man”. When you see NOVA specials about Antarctic dinosaurs, or read about fossil specimens from Antarctica, this is why you see them. Antarctica used to be WARM, and gradually cooled down.

Interestingly, Antarctica has never* (*not settled) strayed far from the South Pole. It has not wandered “north-south” as much as many other land masses.

LIFE has at most times covered the entire globe. Life had not RETREATED from the poles to the extent that is has now. Indeed, polar life may have assisted in recovery from some mass extinctions, where prompt damage occurred primarily at the middle latitudes due to normal circulation patterns.

Next, look at the event called “PETM”, which stands for Paleocene–Eocene Thermal Maximum. It’s actually a SPIKE that looks like the thin spike in THIS graph.

This graph is looking at global temperatures (green curve) as determined from oxygen isotopes, VERSUS time, across the “age of mammals”. Recent is on the right.

WOW. Will you look at how much temperatures have fallen. And look at that crazy chaotic glaciation in the lower right, flirting repeatedly with the snowball Earth of the Permian Extinction (to be discussed in a bit).

I don’t know about y’all, but if I had to be concerned about something, it might be that.

TL;DR – it is impossible to look a graphs which show life bottoming hard against planetary freeze, in the big picture of carbon dioxide (recirculating plant life) bottoming hard in conjunction, and walk away with any true sympathy for worries about increasing CO2 and warming. CO2 in times of its relative absence is either not a problem, or a “good problem”. It appears to me that a cultivated science error has been used to create a social hysteria and then a mass formation psychosis.

In a sense, we are ALL the “polar bears of the dinosaurs”. Is that a good thing? I think it’s worth asking, even just theoretically, never implying the need to “do something” about it.

Anyway, that little SPIKE you see in the spiky curve to the left, is an actual example of a “climate change crisis”. It was probably due to sudden period of massive volcanic activity throwing a bunch of CO2 into the air, although that’s not “settled science”. If there was a weird “solar excursion”, or undersea heating of the oceans (see extremely useful “non-eruptive volcanism” proposals by TES for part of recent global warming), then it could have been something else. Whatever it was, it seems to have been sharp enough to have probably been a single thing.

Note also that Earth got to the same point some years later, anyway.

Don’t fear the seasons. They’re not the reaper.

Lastly, we see in the timeline, at the beginning of the Paleogene, the K-Pg mass extinction, (also called, in its evidentiary form, the K-T boundary) which was almost certainly due to an asteroid impact, but possibly also reinforced by subsequent volcanism.

You may recall Steve’s post about this, but if you don’t, then take a quick detour and refresh your memory on the details.


Iridium: The Smoke From The Smoking Gun

4.567 billion years ago, our solar system began to “condense” from the nebula. Clumps of dust particles began to come together, part of a poorly-understood process that eventually led to the planets. The nebula had a potpourri of “stuff” in it. Mostly elements up to iron, with a heavy leavening of ones after iron, created in supernovas or even neutron star collisions. (Most gold is believed to have come out of neutron star collisions…next time you admire that gold coin or your wedding band…think about where that stuff has been! Any of it not from a collision got blasted out of a supernova at 70,000,000 miles per hour.)……

https://www.theqtree.com/2021/04/03/2021%c2%b704%c2%b703-joe-biden-didnt-win-daily-thread/

Steve explained that while most of paleontology favors the “impact theory”, there has been a long-standing volcanic theory of the extinction, and even a group who believes that BOTH theories are not only correct, but connected.

With my taste for “AND logic”, you can predict where I would most likely fall in that debate – in the “it’s both of them, and they’re connected” camp.

Does that sound sketchy? Maybe a little too much of a coincidence? Is Wolf going out on a limb here?

Notice that by mentioning that Steve had mentioned this “theory of both”, I used PEER INFLUENCE to change your minds. Now I will use MSM acceptance to further change your minds.

TL;DR – Theories about impacts leading to increased volcanism also implicated in extinctions, are quite appealing to me, personally, as a kind of “general volcanism” (impact + rebound), but the whole thing is NOT settled science by any means. Just remember what I always say about “AND logic”. It solves scientific divisions, too.

But wait – I want to make a point about the Fake News in action, spinning science to keep it divided.

Yes, you see the “AND” logic right in the title. And if you read the article, the whole point is that there is increasing evidence of a causal connection between the impact and the volcanism.

But notice the wording in the title versus the subtitle. The title tells you, but does not emphasize, that the conjoint, causatively connected, unified theory brings two scientific camps together, both being correct. Then the subtitle tries to shift things over to one of the explanations, and to minimize the role of the impact.

The 160 million-year reign of the ‘terrible lizards’ may actually have ended due to events in India rather than an asteroid crashing into the sea off the coast of Mexico as previously thought

“RATHER THAN”?

“Rather than” an asteroid the size of Mount Everest?

It’s very clear folks – THEY WANT YOU DIVIDED.

By now you know, it’s just what they do. DIVIDE AND CONQUER. Indeed, I tend to think it’s what they’re TRAINED to do.

The FAKE NEWS controls science FAR MORE than most scientists are willing to admit.

But let’s get back to our story of the unified theory of impact AND rebound volcanism.

The primary CLIMATIC effects of the asteroid impact are believed to have been blast heating, followed by an “impact winter”, followed by chaotic climate, possibly including a greenhouse due to vaporized CO2 and SO2, followed by the same thing from further classic volcanism. The whole planet was definitely MESSED UP.

TL;DR –

HOT (impact). COLD (darkness). HOT AGAIN (greenhouse).

Then repeat the latter two for post-impact volcanism.

A constant, unified pattern of impact extinctions, layered on the preexisting, livable climate, at a surprisingly wide range of levels of carbon dioxide.


So what was there before that?

THE DINOSAURS. That is “K”, the Cretaceous Period (in English).

You will notice that T (or Tr), J and K are the three big periods of the dinosaurs with which most of us are familiar – the Triassic, Jurassic, and Cretaceous.

Let’s look at our graph again.

Yes. This “age of dinosaurs” was a period of warm temperatures and high carbon dioxide. Both much higher than what we have now, but – bear with me – there was a lot of LIFE, too – am I not right?

Well, what’s that stuff to the LEFT of the “age of dinosaurs” – around the end of “C” (Carboniferous) and the beginning of “P” (Permian – the “age of reptiles”)?

Why, it looks like low carbon dioxide, almost as low as we have now. In FACT, if you look even further back in time to the left – at the ages of sea organisms (Cm, O, S), fishes (D), and amphibians (C), what you’re basically seeing is a CRASH of carbon dioxide, ending in LOW CO2 around C and P.

And interesting that this slide had already resulted in massive glaciation of the planet, which existed at the beginning of the Permian.

Interesting that there were THREE BIG EXTINCTIONS along that slide, at O, D, and finally at P.

There is a LOT of debate about these extinctions, and particularly the near-total Permian (P) Extinction, also sometimes known as the P-T extinction event, because it occurred at the END of the Permian and the beginning of the Triassic.

Of course, global warming explanations of this event are favored by the single-minded corporate media, but IMO some of the best theories of the P-T extinction are actually based on an “iceball Earth” scenario, for which there is some interesting geological evidence.

The idea that an already glaciated Earth (Permian) was sent into deep freeze by an impact and response volcanism makes sense, and we would expect the extinctions to be more extensive than with the less glaciated or non-glaciated Cretaceous extinction of the dinosaurs, which happened to a generally warmer planet, thus sparing mammals and birds.

TL;DR – As the most significant extinctions have occurred at times of low CO2 and high glaciation, the main danger to life on Earth seems not to be global warming from CO2, which protects life from near-total extinctions. The main threat is solar blocking (see Bill Gates) and deep cooling, caused by meteoric impacts and rebound volcanism, which is more dangerous during times of low CO2 and high glaciation, like now or during the Permian Extinction.

In fact, I find the idea that we can use a single extinction mechanism repeatedly – a mechanism of “impact plus response volcanism, leading to plant death and further crises”, with the differences in outcome depending upon the size and location of the impact, plus the prior state of the climate, to be very satisfying – particularly in explaining why we find evidence for ALL of the various divided theories.

Furthermore, if response volcanism is a correct theory, then the general warmth and higher carbon dioxide of the “age of dinosaurs” may be explained by a truly massive impact being not only the cause of the P-T extinction, but also creating hundreds of millions of years of increased volcanism in its wake.

But all of that is debatable.

The big picture is this. Look at the graph again.

TL;DR – The Earth has supported life easily for eons because of MORE carbon dioxide, not less. There is no “climate emergency”, and certainly not one related to increasing carbon dioxide for ANY reason at this point. If anything, incipient normal solar cooling and periodic ice age glaciation are actual climate concerns for society. But that is another story for another time.


One More Bit of Mood Music

(Real World by Matchbox 20)


Green Energy Is Pol Pot Madness

TL;DR – Even if there was a “climate emergency” (which there is not, see above), and even if “green energy” worked (which it does not, see graph), and even if green energy could “save the environment” (which it absolutely does the opposite, due to energy density fundamentals), what we are doing by forcing a sudden transition to a non-working energy infrastructure, is so utterly preposterous, wrong, and irrational, that it must be stopped.

This graph is the smoking gun of an intentional civilizational crash. It is our duty to grab the steering wheel and stop it.

This graph is probably the simplest to explain because it does not depend on the truth or falsehood of the underlying bad science that has been used to justify what is being done now.

There are some things you just don’t do.

It’s like an insane person coming into your house screaming “DANGER, DANGER” and pointing a gun at you. Even if there is some reason, it doesn’t matter – an insane person is pointing a gun at you, and THAT is the immediate danger. The evil person or people who SENT the insane person to your house must be dealt with, too, or this will keep happening. But that can happen after we survive the insane attack.

Humanity is being “swatted” by people made insane by – you guessed it – mass formation psychosis.

TL;DR – One cannot move humanity from the top curve in red, to the bottom curve in yellow, without killing most of them. It’s impossible. It means poverty, chaos, and destruction. The closest thing to what “somebody” is forcing on the West, is what China and the CIA did the the people of Cambodia, using the highly deluded Khmer Rouge, who insisted that all Cambodians had to leave cities and become agrarian.

Khmer Rouge Flag (Pol Pot)

Forcing humanity to “quit realistic energy now” is perfectly analogous to Pol Pot saying “We all have to become farmers now” at gunpoint, which killed millions of Cambodians in a horror of totalitarian brutality and systematic societal error.

If you don’t think we have a deluded set of Americans who could carry this out, just look at Antifa, filled with mentally ill “trans” males, all of them “politically fluid” and ready to serve the craziest causes, and then politically reverse on orders, the very next day. Antifa is being protected by the DOJ and FBI, which are also ready to stop or hinder any groups which oppose Antifa.

Now you can understand why Antifa and FBI helped each other on January Sixth.

They’re both on the same side – the side of the genocide.

And now Biden wants 87,000 federal “IRS Police”?

What this graph shows is the equivalent of telling a patient addicted to barbiturates that they must quit cold turkey, which is always fatal.

It’s like telling a lifelong juvenile diabetic that they must quit insulin NOW because insulin didn’t come from their own pancreas, and so it’s “foreign”, and no good. They must transition to “mRNA injections in the pancreas” right now! RIGHT NOW!!!

Yup. It is THAT insane – that malevolent – to say “quit all non-green energy now”. To even say “do it in the next century” is foolishness of historic proportions.

We are already seeing the effects of the insanity in the beginning energy problems we are having now. But we have seen NOTHING yet.

Add to THAT insanity, what amounts to yet another foolish collectivization of agriculture, which “error” of communism has repeatedly killed millions, in the Soviet Union and China, as well as in Cambodia, and you can see that the errors of a misled scientific elite are always catastrophic, whether intentional or accidental.

TL;DR – Eisenhower predicted that, in addition to the military industrial complex (MIC), a scientific and technological elite (STE) would become a danger to America and the world, and he even understood and predicted that this very moment might arrive.

If you have time (16 minutes), this presentation is critical to understanding the moment. Every second is worth hearing.

If you get the sense that somebody of malevolent intent was listening to Eisenhower’s speech, and began figuring out how to sabotage his vision of balance and sense, by pursuing a course to enhance and take advantage of precisely the dangers that Eisenhower warned about, then you are not alone.

W

Text of the Eisenhower Farewell Speech

LINK: https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/president-dwight-d-eisenhowers-farewell-address#transcript


My fellow Americans:

Three days from now, after half a century in the service of our country, I shall lay down the responsibilities of office as, in traditional and solemn ceremony, the authority of the Presidency is vested in my successor.

This evening I come to you with a message of leave-taking and farewell, and to share a few final thoughts with you, my countrymen.

Like every other citizen, I wish the new President, and all who will labor with him, Godspeed. I pray that the coming years will be blessed with peace and prosperity for all.

Our people expect their President and the Congress to find essential agreement on issues of great moment, the wise resolution of which will better shape the future of the Nation.

My own relations with the Congress, which began on a remote and tenuous basis when, long ago, a member of the Senate appointed me to West Point, have since ranged to the intimate during the war and immediate post-war period, and, finally, to the mutually interdependent during these past eight years.

In this final relationship, the Congress and the Administration have, on most vital issues, cooperated well, to serve the national good rather than mere partisanship, and so have assured that the business of the Nation should go forward. So, my official relationship with the Congress ends in a feeling, on my part, of gratitude that we have been able to do so much together.

******

We now stand ten years past the midpoint of a century that has witnessed four major wars among great nations. Three of these involved our own country. Despite these holocausts America is today the strongest, the most influential and most productive nation in the world. Understandably proud of this pre-eminence, we yet realize that America’s leadership and prestige depend, not merely upon our unmatched material progress, riches and military strength, but on how we use our power in the interests of world peace and human betterment.

******

Throughout America’s adventure in free government, our basic purposes have been to keep the peace; to foster progress in human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity and integrity among people and among nations. To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure traceable to arrogance, or our lack of comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us grievous hurt both at home and abroad.

Progress toward these noble goals is persistently threatened by the conflict now engulfing the world. It commands our whole attention, absorbs our very beings. We face a hostile ideology-global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose, and insidious in method. Unhappily the danger it poses promises to be of indefinite duration. To meet it successfully, there is called for, not so much the emotional and transitory sacrifices of crisis, but rather those which enable us to carry forward steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of a prolonged and complex struggle-with liberty at stake. Only thus shall we remain, despite every provocation, on our charted course toward permanent peace and human betterment.

Crises there will continue to be. In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small, there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. A huge increase in newer elements of our defense; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research-these and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested as the only way to the road we which to travel.

But each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs-balance between the private and the public economy, balance between cost and hoped for advantage-balance between the clearly necessary and the comfortably desirable; balance between our essential requirements as a nation and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual; balance between action of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress; lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration.

The record of many decades stands as proof that our people and their government have, in the main, understood these truths and have responded to them well, in the face of stress and threat. But threats, new in kind or degree, constantly arise. I mention two only.

******

A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction.

Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peace time, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.

Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United State corporations.

This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence-economic, political, even spiritual-is felt in every city, every state house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.

In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.

Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been over shadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.

The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.

Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.

It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system-ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.

******

Another factor in maintaining balance involves the element of time. As we peer into society’s future, we-you and I, and our government-must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.

******

Down the long lane of the history yet to be written America knows that this world of ours, ever growing smaller, must avoid becoming a community of dreadful fear and hate, and be, instead, a proud confederation of mutual trust and respect.

Such a confederation must be one of equals. The weakest must come to the conference table with the same confidence as do we, protected as we are by our moral, economic, and military strength. That table, though scarred by many past frustrations, cannot be abandoned for the certain agony of the battlefield.

Disarmament, with mutual honor and confidence, is a continuing imperative. Together we must learn how to compose difference, not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose. Because this need is so sharp and apparent I confess that I lay down my official responsibilities in this field with a definite sense of disappointment. As one who has witnessed the horror and the lingering sadness of war-as one who knows that another war could utterly destroy this civilization which has been so slowly and painfully built over thousands of years-I wish I could say tonight that a lasting peace is in sight.

Happily, I can say that war has been avoided. Steady progress toward our ultimate goal has been made. But, so much remains to be done. As a private citizen, I shall never cease to do what little I can to help the world advance along that road.

******

So-in this my last good night to you as your President-I thank you for the many opportunities you have given me for public service in war and peace. I trust that in that service you find somethings worthy; as for the rest of it, I know you will find ways to improve performance in the future.

You and I-my fellow citizens-need to be strong in our faith that all nations, under God, will reach the goal of peace with justice. May we be ever unswerving in devotion to principle, confident but humble with power, diligent in pursuit of the Nation’s great goals.

To all the peoples of the world, I once more give expression to America’s prayerful and continuing inspiration:

We pray that peoples of all faiths, all races, all nations, may have their great human needs satisfied; that those now denied opportunity shall come to enjoy it to the full; that all who yearn for freedom may experience its spiritual blessings; that those who have freedom will understand, also, its heavy responsibilities; that all who are insensitive to the needs of others will learn charity; that the scourges of poverty, disease and ignorance will be made to disappear from the earth, and that, in the goodness of time, all peoples will come to live together in a peace guaranteed by the binding force of mutual respect and love.


Final Musical Selection

(Dedicated to Trump’s friend Shinzo Abe.)

President Trump & Melania share traditional Japanese dinner with Prime Minister Abe & wife.