Vaccines: Putin Exposes Vaccines
Here is the latest news as it relates to this topic...
Russian president Vladimir Putin says that Western governments are enslaving humanity through vaccines.
‘When your children are barely human, psychologically-altered bots, their nerve cells and synapses failing to connect, and their neurodevelopmental processes dulled to the point of restricting them to sub-human level repetitive grunts and gormless stares, what are you going to do then?’
An insider from the Ministry of Health in Russia has revealed that an explosive report is being prepared that will be presented to the Kremlin on Tuesday regarding the huge vaccination cover-up being perpetuated by the US government agencies and its regulatory bodies, which is having disastrous consequences around most of the world.
It is understood President Putin personally requested the report. He instinctively mistrusts the vaccine agenda and wants the report to investigate the state of play regarding vaccines, Big Pharma, and
Western governments, in order to formulate a solid, direct response that will stand his people in good stead for the future.
According to the Ministry of Health insider, the report validates President Putin’s suspicions. There is a huge conflict of interests between the government agencies which regulate vaccines and the corporations that approve and implement the vaccines.
This investigation, involving internationally respected scientists and leading medical professionals, won’t be a laughably corrupt affair involving a payroll of ‘scientists’ who are willing to say or do anything for a dollar or two. Considering the fact that leading scientists and doctors who have dared voice concern about state-enforced vaccinations have been dying under mysterious circumstances in the US in recent years, kudos must be given to those brave enough to continue speaking out.
It is claimed the report will declare the situation a ‘self-perpetuating criminal racket.’ Educational institutions and scientific bodies are also ‘motivated by greed and generally corrupt.’ A recent study by the University of Bristol that declared diet soda to be healthier than water (a study covertly funded by the Coca Cola Company) is presented as an example of the absurd situation in the West at the moment, and is held up to ridicule.
The report says that President Putin believes the next stage of human evolution is currently in “grave risk” and that Western and global powers are “intentionally decelerating the process for their personal gain.”
“We as a species have the choice to continue to develop our bodies and brains in a healthy upward trajectory, or we can follow the Western example of recent decades and intentionally poison our population with genetically altered food, pharmaceuticals, vaccinations, and fast food that should be classified as a dangerous, addictive drug.”
“We must fight this. A physically and intellectually disabled population is not in our interests,” the report states.
Describing the average government-controlled Westerner as an “intensively vaccinated borderline autistic fat man slumped in front of a screen battling a high-fructose corn syrup comedown,” the report states that such tactics used by governments to subjugate their citizens are not only “dark/evil” but “counter-productive in the medium to long term.”
Russia under President Putin has been giving away land for free in the past few years to people willing to farm organically and sustainably. The goal is to become the world’s “leading exporter” of non-GMO foods that are based on “ecologically clean” production.
The Security Council report comes just months after the Kremlin announced a stop to the production of all GMO-containing foods, which was seen by the international community as a major step in the fight against multinationals like Monsanto. Russia continues to lead the way in the realm of natural, organic farming.
Colorado Law Could demand names and addresses of unvaccinated children
On the heels of California’s gross violation of human rights, medical ethics and parental choice with SB 277 (the vaccine mandate), Colorado is looking to bring the medical police state to the Rocky Mountains. House Bill 1164 was just passed by committee on its way to a state congressional vote. It would demand that the names and addresses of all unvaccinated children be tracked on secret lists maintained by the state government. See the full text of the proposed bill at this link. It was sponsored by representative Pabon in the House, and Aguilar and Humenik in the state Senate.
Over the last few years, the for-profit vaccine industry has increasingly turned to state coercion to intimidate and criminalize parents who seek to protect their children from vaccines. Even as vaccines have been proven to cause widespread brain damage in children as openly admitted by the UK government last year — and now the American College of Pediatricians is warning about the harmful side effects of Gardasil — some Colorado lawmakers think the state government should force these toxic injections onto children in total defiance of the preferences and beliefs of their parents. READ MORE
Virus Fakery: My Conversation With A White House Insider And Another Conversation With A Virologist
There are a number of cases in which a virus is said to be the cause of a disease—but the evidence doesn’t stand up.
I first realized this in 1987. I was writing my book, AIDS INC., Scandal of the Century.
Robert Gallo, who claimed he had found the cause of AIDS, hadn’t done proper work. From everything I read, he had discovered HIV in 35 to 60 percent of AIDS patients he had studied.
He should have been able to isolate HIV in virtually every patient.
Then there was the fact that the most popular tests for HIV, the Elisa and Western Blot, were fatally flawed. They could register positive for a whole host of reasons that had nothing to do with HIV.
And no one had found sufficient quantities of HIV in humans to justify claiming it caused any kind of illness.
My own research into the so-called high-risk groups revealed that the immune suppression in those groups could be explained by factors other than a virus.
(Note: All my research at that time assumed HIV existed. Since then, several researchers, including the Perth Group, have made compelling arguments that the existence of HIV was never demonstrated.)
As I was winding up the final draft of AIDS INC., I spoke, off the record, with a well-known and well-respected mainstream virologist at a large US university. I expressed my conclusions about HIV.
He spoke, first, about the difficulties in making an absolute decision about a virus as the cause of a disease.
I brought the conversation back to HIV.
He paused. Then he repeated that he couldn’t go on the record. I asked him why.
He said HIV was a subject fraught with problems. Politics were involved.
He said he and his colleagues were taking a pass on getting into a dispute about the virus. They were aware that the science was shaky. They just didn’t want to go near it. They might enter into other arguments about other kinds of research, but as far as they were concerned, HIV was off-limits.
His obvious implication was: careers were on the line.
Attacking HIV as the cause of AIDS could result in blacklisting.
He stopped short of saying HIV wasn’t the cause of AIDS, but it was clear he had seen enough to know there were major holes in HIV science.
This was a man who had no interest in unconventional points of view. He was an orthodox researcher from A to Z. He wasn’t a rebel of any kind. And yet he readily admitted to me that the whole AIDS research establishment was proceeding on a lack of proof.
Exposing this fact would go far beyond the usual definition of a scandal. The result would be a volcanic eruption, if, say, a dozen respected virologists told the truth.
After we finished our conversation, I understood something about consensus reality. It contains elements about which people can argue in public—but then there are other elements which are completely out of bounds, which can never be refuted in a mainstream setting.
Why? Because if certain lies are exposed, they initiate a contagion of doubt and insight that spreads to the whole complex inter-structure of what people take to be reality.
Great curtains are torn away. Pillars are cracked, and fall. Images which are taken to be absolute and unchanging distort, dissolve, and blow away in the wind.
A week after AIDS INC. was shipped to bookstores, in 1988, my friend and colleague, hypnotherapist Jack True, told me a copy of the book was on its way to Russia in a diplomatic pouch.
I asked him how he knew. He shrugged and said he had a few connections.
Of course, I’ve never heard anything back about the Russian response to the book, but I find it interesting that, in America, my publisher and I never made any headway in connecting with government officials.
There was one exception. In 1987, I had a conversation with James Warner, a White House policy analyst. The interview was published in the LA Weekly.
Warner had serious doubts about the HIV theory of AIDS, and would arrange a White House conference on the issue. Pro and anti HIV scientists would be permitted to speak at length.
At the last minute, the conference was cancelled.
Here are a few brief excerpts from my conversation with Warner. As a White House analyst, his comments are explosive:
Warner: The government really hasn’t fulfilled its role in providing good information [on AIDS]. We just may not know enough. With AIDS, we’re dealing with a syndrome, not a disease. We may see a patient who has a genetic defect that’s causing his immune deficiency [instead of HIV being the causative agent]. I’m not satisfied we know all we think we do, by any means.
Rappoport: Robert Gallo, Max Essex, people like that, were the field commanders on the NIH [National Institutes of Health] war on cancer in the 70’s. They lost that war. So why are they in charge of AIDS research now? It seems odd that we don’t have other people running the show.
Warner: If ever I’ve been tempted to believe in socialism, science has disabused me of that. These guys [at NIH] assume that it’s their show. They just assume it.
Rappoport: Peter Duesberg, a distinguished molecular biologist at Berkeley, has said that HIV does not cause AIDS. Have you asked people at NIH what they think, specifically, of his arguments?
Warner: Yes. I’ve been told that Peter Duesberg’s refutation of HIV has been discounted by the scientific community. I was given no explanation as to why. I was very offended. No evidence was presented to me. Just that Duesberg had been ‘discounted.’ That’s absurd. It’s not a scientific response to dismiss Duesberg as a crank.
Rappoport: The definition of AIDS in Africa is now becoming synonymous with starvation. They’re saying the three major symptoms are chronic diarrhea, fever, and wasting-away. Weight-loss. It certainly makes a perfect smokescreen for the aspect of hunger which is political [and intentionally maintained] – just call it AIDS.
Warner: I had not considered that. There is a program to make Africa self-sufficient by the year 2000. This could certainly hinder that activity. You know, I was a prisoner of war in Vietnam. I experienced weight-loss of eighty pounds. And when I came home, I was suffering from a form of dysentery that you could call opportunistic. A number of us were. We didn’t have AIDS.
—end of interview excerpt—
In this current political atmosphere, a White House analyst wouldn’t dare go on the record with comments like these.
Rigid consensus must be maintained.
Nurse Whistleblower: Hospitals Vaccinating Patients Without Their Knowledgeby Jefferey Jaxen
Health Impact News
The momentum, consciousness and continual discussion around truth and education related to vaccine injury has never been greater. Parents and communities have taken the initiative to find answers for their sons and daughters who’ve suffered severe adverse events from immunization.
Evaporating fast are the days of dead end solutions and pharmaceutical answers provided by mainstream medicine’s limited toolbox. Like an untamable ripple effect, this awakening has also encompassed the discussion around mandatory vaccination, lack of informed consent, pharmaceutical control of American healthcare and an overall lack of health freedom currently resting on a slippery slope.
The U.S. mainstream medical system and healthcare are failed establishments that have drifted away from healing to become profit-based outlets dispensing inferior and outdated pharmaceutical products. The historical direction has been clear to anyone paying attention and now it appears that the beginning of some tipping point has arrived. What it means and where it will lead is unknown. Yet the status quo of business as usual is changing moving forward as medical whistleblowers come forward and communities recoil against their loss of heath freedom.
In two short years much has changed as a result of a countrywide mobilization fueled by the whistleblowing admission of Dr. William Thompson. Known as the CDC whistleblower, Dr. Thompson went pubic recounting — in detail — his experience about research fraud within the U.S. Center’s for Disease Control and Prevention. The documentary film Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe supercharged the focus on the CDC’s troubled vaccine division and simultaneously exposed a heavily controlled and censored mainstream media in the U.S.
Recently, another medical/health whistleblower made immediate waves by publicly recounting her continued experiences witnessing daily routine vaccine injury in U.S. hospital neonatal intensive care units (NICUs). Nurse whistleblower Michelle Rowton told of a callous medical system that regularly and inhumanly chooses to give the CDC’s recommended vaccine schedule to premature infants causing massive increases in severe and life threatening adverse reactions. According to Rowton, the attending doctors and medical staff have made these routine, medically incompetent actions into jokes to be laughed at on the hospital floor and in break rooms.
Forced Flu Vaccinations
In the age of information, the incidences of whistleblowers are increasing. As health freedom and informed consent is eroding at breakneck speeds, those left with ethics, courage and humanity within such a system are keeping quiet no longer. Meeting on the first Friday of each month, the Talk About Curing Autism’s Pennsylvania chapter support meeting gathers to provide education, support and resources for families that are in need.
At a recent meeting that took place during the first week of May, a nurse was filmed using the live streaming app Periscope warning of forced flu vaccinations occurring in U.S. hospitals. In addition, the nurse gave possible solutions to the unaware, targeted public in an effort to preserve their informed consent and avoid unwanted adverse reactions. According to the new nurse whistleblower:
Since the Affordable Care Act came out, we are now — as nurses — required to ask every single patient when they come to the hospital if you’ve had your flu vaccine or your pneumococcal vaccine. If you say no to either one of those, in the computer, an order will generate that says we need to give you this vaccine. We don’t need to speak to a doctor…it’s hospital policy. It’s now health department policy that we now have to give you the vaccine.New Signed Consent for Hospital Services Includes Vaccines – But Patients Unaware They are Granting Such Consent
The bigger, headline-making story was made as the nurse whistleblower continued:
When you go to the hospital if you need surgery — say you need a knee replacement surgery — first they’re going to ask you if you’ve had your vaccines. You’re going to say no. Then they’re going to say you need to sign this consent if you’re going to have surgery…you need to sign a consent. In the consent, there’s a word call ‘biogenics [biologics]’ and if you sign the consent saying ‘I consent for you to give me biogenics [biologics]’ — that basically means that they can give you anything that they deem necessary including vaccines. So if you say that you didn’t get a flu shot and it’s flu season and you sign the consent saying I agree to biogenics [biologics], they will give you a vaccine even when you’re under anesthesia because you already signed the consent.How do hospitals inform the patient they have just partaken in a medical procedure (immunization) having inherent risks without being given proper informed consent? According to the nurse whistleblower, hospitals approach the subject by telling patients the following:
Unless you go and get your medial records, you will not know you got a flu vaccine. They [the hospital] may tell you at the end ‘oh by the way, you’re now covered, you’ve had the flu vaccine or you got the pneumococcal vaccine.’Vaccines Forced on Patients Who do not Want Them in U.S. Hospitals
Is this really happening? Certainly people would be talking if it was. The nurse whistleblower goes further saying:
Two people now have reported to me last week saying that they got the vaccine; they did not want the vaccines. They did not know that the word biogenics [biologics] meant they’re going to get a vaccine.So how can people protect themselves? According the nurse, perhaps a simple strategy can instantly combat this push towards forced vaccination now happening in U.S. hospitals. She warns:
When you sign consent for surgery, you can specifically say ‘no vaccines, I don’t want this.’ You can write an initial after what you say you do not want and they have to honor that. And if they don’t honor that, they can be sued.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) defines biologics using the following statements:
Biological products include a wide range of products such as vaccines….In contrast to most drugs that are chemically synthesized and their structure is known, most biologics are complex mixtures that are not easily identified or characterized.It should be noted that the Department of Justice publishes a quarterly list of vaccine severe adverse reaction settlements and injuries. The majority of the vaccine injuries contained on the DOJ’s list are a direct result of the flu shot.
In addition, the effectiveness of the flu shot last year was 23 percent according to official CDC statistics. During manufacturing of the flu shot, the CDC and drug maker take a guess at what flu strains may be prominent for the coming year’s flu season.
Due to this fact, every flu shot is different from the previous years and therefore untested. Since the ingredients are always changing, there is no time for true safety studies to be performed. Each year, individuals undergoing the medical procedure of vaccination are considered the final phase of public safety testing for an unproven pharmaceutical product.
Furthermore, denying the patient this knowledge — and access to the manufacturer’s insert before injection — constitutes a laundry list of broken medical ethics agreements and violations of international codes protecting humans against forced medical experimentation.
Dr. Andrew Moulden: Every Vaccine Produces Harm
eBook – Available for immediate download.
Dr. Moulden died unexpectedly in November of 2013 at age 49.
Because of the strong opposition from big pharma concerning Dr. Moulden’s research, we became concerned that the name of this brilliant researcher and his life’s work had nearly been deleted from the internet. His reputation was being disparaged, and his message of warning and hope was being distorted and buried without a tombstone. This book summarizes his teaching and is a must-read for everyone who wants to learn the “other-side” of the vaccine debate that the mainstream media routinely censors.
The Horrible Truth About Vaccines -- Greg Wyatt
New Vaccines Will Permanently Alter Human DNA
Parents Sue California for Law That Forces Kids to Get Vaccinated
Opinions on vaccines vary widely. Some say they are the greatest public health development ever invented, while others believe they are a dangerous, even deadly experiment.
Whatever you believe, the law aims to have every child vaccinated. There is no law on the federal level mandating vaccination. But in all 50 states, vaccinations are required for children to enter the school system.
Most states (except for Mississippi and West Virginia) allow exemptions based on religious beliefs, and 19 states allow exemptions for philosophical objections. But these allowances won’t last for long in California. Last year California lawmakers passed SB277, a law in which vaccine exemptions are only granted due to verifiable medical reasons.
The new law poses a big problem for California resident and mother-of-two Sharon Brown. Despite repeated assurances from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), the World Health Organization (WHO), and several peer reviewed studies, which conclude that there is no link between vaccines and autism, Brown refuses to vaccinate her kids.
“I started researching vaccine problems, and once I looked at the efficacy, safety testing, and ingredients in vaccines, we stopped immediately,” Brown said. “My daughter was 9 months old at the time. I’m confident she would be autistic if we continued with the vaccinations. She just couldn’t take it. Our second child is a 100 percent vaccine free, and he’s insanely healthy. He rarely gets sick, and he’s never been on a medication in his life. He’s seven years old now.”
Once the new law goes into effect on July 1, 2016, Brown’s family will be forced to either vaccinate, homeschool, or move out of state. She’s not interested in any of these options, so she’s decided to challenge the law in court.
“It’s amazing. You see people fleeing war torn countries to go someplace safer, and we’re going to have to flee California in search of an education,” she said. “Since we don’t want to move, we’ve decided to sue.”
Constitutional RightsBrown is one of eight plaintiffs in a lawsuit aimed at overturning the California law. They’ve hired controversial trial lawyer T. Matthew Phillips to lead the case.
Phillips proudly calls himself “The Most Dangerous Lawyer in America,” because he goes after entities other attorneys won’t touch. Last year, he was head of a class action lawsuit against chemical giant Monsanto for false advertising on herbicide labels. However, the case was dismissed when a federal court determined that the California law, which forbids false advertising, is fundamentally at odds with federal laws governing agricultural chemicals.
For the vaccine case, Phillips’s strategy is to challenge the constitutionality of the California law. Under the state constitution, all children have a right to an education. Phillips says the new law infringes on this right, and the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
“In most lawsuits the plaintiff has the burden of proof, but this case is different,” he said. “Because it involves the First Amendment, the rights of the parents not just to hold personal beliefs, but to freely exercise those in a meaningful fashion, they have a right to assert those objections. So the burden of proof is on the government. This is significant. The state has to prove that vaccination is more important than education. As a guy who has been in court for 25 years doing Constitutional law, I can’t think how the Attorney General is going to prove this.”
Herd ImmunityBut what about the rights of the other parents whose vaccinated kids have to attend school with unvaccinated classmates and the potential risk of disease they pose? The rationale for getting everyone vaccinated regardless of personal belief is called “herd immunity” or “community immunity.” The idea is that if enough people are immunized against an infectious disease, it will protect vulnerable individuals, such as infants, pregnant women, or the immunocompromised.
The impetus for a stricter policy to impose herd immunity in California came in 2015 when a measles outbreak that started in Disneyland led to the eventual infection of 113 people. Since the state was at that time experiencing historically low levels of vaccination, lawmakers insisted that something needed to change.
In a press conference last year for SB277, California Assembly member Marc Levine defended the law on the grounds that vaccination contributes to the greater good. “We live in a society where we have a social responsibility to act in a manner to protect not only ourselves, but others as well,” Levine said, comparing mandatory vaccination to measures such as driving safely or paying taxes.
But Phillips says this “greater good” argument in support of vaccines doesn’t hold up when you consider the big picture.
“They call this a public health crisis, but I don’t know anybody with measles. Do you?” he said. “But we do know that a number of American children have died from vaccines.”
Vaccine FatalitiesThere is no clear way to tell how many lives vaccines have actually claimed, and estimates vary widely. At the high end is Phillips who figures that an average of one child per month is killed by vaccines in the United States. He also alleges that ten times as many vaccine deaths are written off as Sudden Infant Death Syndrome.
Reports from a U.S. Government public database called The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), which can be searched through the National Vaccine Information Center, suggests that measles vaccines are actually deadlier to American children than the disease itself. One analysis of VAERS reports finds that over the past 10 years in the United States, measles vaccines have taken 108 lives, while the disease hasn’t claimed any.
However, it’s important to note that the VAERS reports are far from iron clad proof. These are cases where parents or medical staff suspect that vaccines were responsible for a fatality, but they have typically not been verified.
According to the CDC, all vaccines carry a risk of a life-threatening allergic reaction, but such incidents are considered quite rare—about one per million children. However, Brown believes that the actual number of reactions is far higher because people don’t know what to look for.
“People don’t know how to report an adverse vaccine reaction. We didn’t, and doctors and nurses aren’t trained to look for the signs,” Brown said.
“In my decades within the hospital system I willingly signed vaccine orders and gave them myself, believing that I was preventing sickness. It came as a total shock to me when vaccines that I administered were causing serious health issues in my patients,” Humphries said.
“After six years of solid research in PubMed literature, looking at information that was never given to me when I was educated within the system, I could see that when I was a vaccinator I had inadvertent blood on my hands. Science and logic has brought me to where I am to today. Everything is right there in the medical literature, yet academia would rather shoot the messenger than discuss the message or consider the sickness record of vaccinated children.”
If the court determines that vaccines are the cause of an injury or death, taxpayers foot the bill. (Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images)
Vaccine CourtFor some verifiable evidence of vaccine injury and fatality, visit the U.S. Federal Courts website, which features a searchable database of the nation’s vaccine settlements. This is a record of parents who have chosen to sue when they suspect their child was injured or killed by a vaccine.
This “vaccine court” has been in operation for about 30 years, when Congress passed the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA). The court was officially set up with the express purpose of making the process easier for the family. But critics say the system really serves the drug companies, granting them legal immunity from class action lawsuits.
“Vaccine manufacturers can’t be sued. If there is an SUV rollover, you can sue Ford or Chevy. If there’s a vaccine rollover, you can’t sue because in 1986 the vaccine makers gave a [bunch] of money to Congress,” said Phillips.
If the court determines that vaccines are the cause of an injury or death, taxpayers foot the bill. As of 2010, the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program has paid-out more than three billion dollars in taxpayer money for payouts to vaccine injury and wrongful death claims, with two out of three applicants having been denied compensation, according to the National Vaccine Information Center. Meanwhile, the number of federally recommended vaccines has tripled.
In a statement for the SB 277 lawsuit, Phillips explains that without the NCVIA’s protection, “Merck, Pfizer, and GSK would lose every lawsuit and in six months be driven out-of-business by personal injury lawyers.”
He says the Act also serves to obscure the damage that vaccines can cause.
“When somebody settles a lawsuit, they make the plaintiff sign a confidentiality clause. It’s a promise not to tell anybody about it so that other people don’t get a bright idea,” said Phillips. “In the vaccine court when they settle up, they also make parents sign a confidentiality agreement, because they don’t want them to tell anybody. They go out of their way to hide when kids die.”
Immunization GuaranteeSB 277 requires that students be admitted to school only upon proof of immunization against a minimum of 10 different childhood diseases. However, guaranteeing immunization is trickier than you might expect. For example, according to the CDC, 12 percent of the measles cases tied to the Disneyland outbreak were vaccinated, and some had received at least two doses of the MMR vaccine.
Although vaccinating kids is the aim of SB277, the word “vaccination” only appears once. However, the word “immunization” is used several times. While some may believe that immunization is a suitable synonym for vaccination, it doesn’t really mean the same thing.
“It’s clear to all medical people that immunization is a conclusion that the forcefield is in effect. You can get to that conclusion in a variety of ways,” Phillips said. “By contrast the word vaccination refers to a syringe.”
“Here’s what’s funny: The state of California presumes that if you get an MMR vax you have this forcefield in effect. Well, that’s a bold presumption to make. How can they be so sure? Do the vaccine makers guarantee immunization with their shots? No. They don’t guarantee anything. “
“So if the manufacturer can’t prove that the shot brings about immunization, how can the state? The state fundamentally is in error because they falsely presume that every vaccination leads to immunization,” Phillips said.
The lawsuit to overturn SB277 was submitted May 11, giving the state until June 11 to respond. Plaintiffs hope to have a court date by July 1