Connect with us

COVID-19

‘Wuhan cover-up’: RFK Jr. exposes Fauci, Gates as ‘frontmen’ for military-medical-industrial complex

Published

13 minute read

Independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. speaks at RiskOn360! GlobalSuccess Conference at Ahern Hotel and Convention Center on November 20, 2023, in Las Vegas, Nevada.

From LifeSiteNews

By Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

Below is the introduction to Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s latest book, ‘The Wuhan Cover-Up: And the Terrifying Bioweapons Arms Race,’ which details how a cartel of run-amok military, intelligence, public health, biopharmaceutical, tech and media interests successfully positioned biosecurity at the forefront of US foreign policy

On my seventh birthday, January 17, 1961 – three days before my uncle, John F. Kennedy, took his oath of office as United States President – his predecessor, President Dwight Eisenhower, appeared on national television to deliver his farewell address, which history increasingly regards as one of the most important and prophetic speeches in American history.

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.

READ: Kentucky governor defends veto attempt of bill protecting kids from trans mutilation: ‘It was the right thing’

President Eisenhower took special care to include an expanded definition of his term “military-industrial complex” that would include the top bureaucrats at the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Eisenhower warned that the federal government’s rising medical and scientific technocracy posed its own unique threats toward our democracy and freedom.

In this revolution, [scientific/medical] 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…

Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity…

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…

[W]e must also be alert to the… danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.

Eisenhower ended his speech with an admonition that echoes now in rebuke as we emerge from the COVID era that trampled the core principles that had, for 240 years, maintained America as the global exemplar for democracy, constitutional government, and personal freedom.

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.

Eisenhower had recognized that America could not be both a democracy at home and an imperial power abroad. But to justify its existence, that cartel would drum up endless wars and emergencies that ensured its own wealth and power while transforming America from an exemplary democracy into a national security state abroad and surveillance state at home.

Seven years later, Dr. Anthony Fauci joined the National Institutes of Health, where he would never face combat. There he began a fifty-year sojourn that would put him at the summit of the nation’s scientific and technological elite, an apex that he would use to militarize and monetize medical research and to consolidate the seamless alliance between government, science, the military and intelligence agencies, and private contractors in ways that would consummate President Eisenhower’s worst nightmares about the threat this cartel posed to democracy.

The cartel would reach its apogee in 2022. As the COVID pandemic commenced, the rising medical technocracy – with Anthony Fauci at the helm – took on all the menacing features President Eisenhower warned against.

A powerful syndicate, composed of government public health technocrats, a rapacious pharmaceutical industry, military and intelligence officials, and media and social media titans, appropriated awesome new powers to override constitutional and civil rights, censor information, suppress dissent, and engineer compliance with arbitrary diktats.

These mandates culminated in mass submission to inoculation with risky, ineffective, shoddily tested, and unlicensed vaccines. And no one is liable for any damage they cause.

Claiming unprecedented new powers as necessary to fight the war against germs, government and industry officials predictably abused them, dealing blows to democracy with no discernible benefits to public health.

Just as the CIA and military apparatus paradoxically profit from war, not peace, the medical cartel and its Big Pharma allies benefit from illness, not health. Dr. Fauci and his cronies amplified this power through an orchestrated propaganda campaign bent on maintaining a level of public terror and germophobia.

The eminent sociologist C. Wright Mills had anticipated Eisenhower’s prescient warning four years earlier in his durable 1956 work, The Power Elite. Since World War II, America had been dominated by “a permanent-war economy,” in the words of the maverick sociologist.

This war establishment maintained its power and profits by creating a constant, free-floating state of anxiety and animosity.

“For the first time in American history, men in authority are talking about an ‘emergency’ without a foreseeable end,” Mills wrote. “Such men as these are crackpot realists: in the name of realism they have constructed a paranoid reality all their own.”

Three days after Eisenhower’s farewell address, on a frozen day in Washington, I sat under a clear sky in a frigid bleacher and watched my uncle, the incoming president, John F. Kennedy, take the oath of office. In his own inaugural in 1933, at the height of a terrifying global depression, JFK’s idol Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) had warned the nation that fear was the most potent tool of totalitarians.

In Europe, despots from the left and right had wielded public fear of the same depression to transform Russia into a communist nation and Italy, Germany, and Spain into fascist totalitarian states. FDR had preserved both capitalism and democracy by a steady hand and confidence that kept fear at bay.

My uncle’s truncated administration would be a three-year battle to secede from the reign of fear. His first bitter battle with his security apparatus occurred three months later during the failed Bay of Pigs invasion. Even as he took public blame for the calamity, he realized that his military brass and CIA panjandrums had lied to him to trick him into allowing an invasion they knew would fail.

Their plan was to trap a young president, faced with this humiliating failure three months into a presidency, into complying with the demands of his Joint Chiefs for a full U.S. invasion of Cuba, something that JFK had vowed never to do.

I chronicled this struggle in my 2018 book, “American Values.” JFK recognized that the CIA’s function was no longer securing U.S. interests. It had devolved into a rogue agency, taking on the implicit ambition of U.S. multinational corporations, including oil companies and Big Agriculture.

In this case, CIA’s partners were Texaco, United Fruit Company, and the American mafia. JFK recognized that the CIA’s essential function was no longer national security but providing the Pentagon and its military contractors a steady pipeline of continuous wars.

In May 1961, now only four months into his presidency, my uncle stood inside the Oval Office telling his closest aide that he wanted to “splinter the CIA in a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds.” Between November 1961 and February 1962, he fired the agency’s three top officers – Allen Dulles, Charles Cabell, and Richard Bissell.

“American Values” recounts my family’s sixty-year fistfight with that agency. Today, powerful pharmaceutical companies have joined Big Oil as the engine of U.S. foreign policy, and U.S. intelligence is still playing the same insidious role.

This book explores that history.

My 2021 book, “The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health,” also examines the rise of the biosecurity agenda and the remarkable alliance between Western public health regulators, military and intelligence agencies, and odd allies at the apex of the Chinese military in creating the bugs that cause pandemics and crafting responses that have advanced the agenda of a security and surveillance state.

Their efforts hide the shadowy influences of these puppeteers who manipulated every feature of the pandemic. The coordination of these forces is nowhere more evident than in their orchestration of the cover-up of the origins of the COVID bug.

The biosecurity agenda – Pandemic Preparedness and Response (PPR), as it is euphemistically called – is the organizing principle of the post–Cold War military-industrial complex – or, more accurately, the military/medical-industrial complex.

CIA and Pentagon planners played key roles in a series of over a dozen tabletop simulations, beginning in 1999, that served as secret training exercises for tens of thousands of U.S. officials and foreign leaders in responding to global pandemics with a series of authoritarian “countermeasures” that function as a coup d’état against democratic and constitutional rights.

This syndicate includes the Pentagon and intelligence apparatus, pharmaceutical companies, traditional media and social media platforms, and Big Data – which all have incestuous financial entanglements with each other that drive clear but perverse incentives to develop and periodically release infectious bioweapons and reap profits and power from the response.

Anthony Fauci and billionaire Bill Gates became the visible faces of pandemic response, but in this book I expose them as frontmen for a much larger enterprise: a military/medical-industrial complex driven by elements within the CIA and Pentagon, which – even more than Anthony Fauci – contributed to creating the COVID-19 coronavirus in a Chinese lab, dictated the official countermeasures, managed and controlled the vaccine rollout, and managed the cover-up of the source.

Hiding their role in the creation of the COVID-19 coronavirus is critical because its exposure would reveal the corruption and the players. It is their Achilles’ heel.

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Brownstone Institute

Pfizer Lied to Us Again

Published on

From Brownstone Institute

BY Ian MillerIAN MILLER 

There used to be a time where claims from pharmaceutical companies may have been treated with some degree of skepticism from major institutions and media outlets.

Yet in late 2020 and into 2021, suddenly skepticism turned to complete blind faith. But what changed? Why, political incentives, of course!

Initially, Covid vaccines produced by Pfizer were seen as dangerous and untested; they were considered a Trump vaccine that only idiots who were willing to risk their own health would take. However when the 2020 election had been officially decided, and Biden and his political allies represented the Covid vaccines as the pathway out of the pandemic, a moral choice that would help yourself and others, narratives and incentives changed dramatically.

Pfizer became a heroic symbol of virtue, and all questioning of Covid vaccines was grounds for immediate expulsion from polite society, regardless of the actual efficacy of Pfizer’s products.

Much of the blame for the vaccines’ underperformance could be placed on Pfizer itself; the company relentlessly promoted hopelessly inaccurate efficacy estimates and supported efforts to unnecessarily mandate mRNA shots.

Sure enough, on the back of progressive orthodoxy, corporate and institutional incompetence and media activism, they proudly reported record revenues.

We all know how that turned out in 2022 and 2023.

Skepticism towards Pfizer’s vaccine was obviously quite well warranted. And it turns out that now we, and of course, Pfizer’s chief promoters in the media and public health class should have been even more skeptical.

They weren’t.

Pfizer’s Claims On Covid Treatments Were Wildly Inaccurate

As the Covid vaccines failed spectacularly to stop the spread of infections and did nothing to lessen all-cause mortality or even decrease population level Covid-associated deaths in highly vaccinated countries, Pfizer saw another opportunity.

Sure, their signature product failed to perform as expected. So why not create another one as an antidote?

Enter Paxlovid.

Paxlovid, an antiviral drug, was supposed to help individuals with symptomatic Covid, who’d already been infected, recover more quickly and lessen the risk of severe illness. Sounds great right?

It would appear that it sure did to Anthony Fauci and the cadre of media-promoted “experts.”

Fauci praised Paxlovid in 2022, after the mRNA vaccines and booster doses failed to prevent him from contracting Covid. Bizarrely, Fauci implied that the same Pfizer products that he demanded everyone take would not have been enough to keep him healthy, saying that he believed Paxlovid had kept him out of the hospital.

Never mind, of course, that Fauci had a “rebound” case of Covid-19 after taking Paxlovid and getting vaccinated and boosted. Acknowledging imperfections would undercut his desire to get everyone to take more of his preferred products.

Paxlovid made headlines again later in 2022 as Rochelle Walensky also praised Pfizer’s efforts, despite once again testing positive for “rebound” Covid after Paxlovid treatments.

Even today, the CDC’s own website says Paxlovid is an “effective” treatment for those who’ve contracted the virus and want to avoid severe illness.

There’s just one problem; it’s not true.

A newly released study on Paxlovid on randomized adults with symptomatic Covid; one subset was given Paxlovid (nirmatrelvir-ritonavir) or a placebo every 12 hours for five days, with the intent of determining how effective it was at “sustained alleviation” of Covid-19 symptoms.

In this phase 2–3 trial, we randomly assigned adults who had confirmed Covid-19 with symptom onset within the past 5 days in a 1:1 ratio to receive nirmatrelvir–ritonavir or placebo every 12 hours for 5 days. Patients who were fully vaccinated against Covid-19 and who had at least one risk factor for severe disease, as well as patients without such risk factors who had never been vaccinated against Covid-19 or had not been vaccinated within the previous year, were eligible for participation. Participants logged the presence and severity of prespecified Covid-19 signs and symptoms daily from day 1 through day 28. The primary end point was the time to sustained alleviation of all targeted Covid-19 signs and symptoms. Covid-19–related hospitalization and death from any cause were also assessed through day 28.

Spoiler alert: it wasn’t effective at all.

Their measured results revealed that there was effectively no difference whatsoever in the “sustained alleviation” of symptoms between Paxlovid and a placebo. Those taking Pfizer’s miracle antiviral treatment saw their “signs and symptoms” resolve after 12 days, while the placebo recipients took 13 days.

The median time to sustained alleviation of all targeted signs and symptoms of Covid-19 was 12 days in the nirmatrelvir–ritonavir group and 13 days in the placebo group (P=0.60). Five participants (0.8%) in the nirmatrelvir–ritonavir group and 10 (1.6%) in the placebo group were hospitalized for Covid-19 or died from any cause (difference, −0.8 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, −2.0 to 0.4).

This is the product that to this day is relentlessly promoted by the CDC, the media, and politicians as an effective tool to reduce the severity of symptoms and the length of illness. And it was virtually meaningless.

Even with regards to the most severe outcomes, hospitalization, and death, the difference was negligible. Confidence intervals for the difference in outcome even stretched to a positive relationship, meaning that it’s within the bounds of possibility that more people died or were hospitalized after taking Paxlovid than a placebo.

Succinctly, the researchers confirmed in their summary that there was no difference between the two treatments.

The time to sustained alleviation of all signs and symptoms of Covid-19 did not differ significantly between participants who received nirmatrelvir–ritonavir and those who received placebo.

But who are these researchers, you might ask…surely they’re fringe scientists, desperate to undercut a big, bad pharmaceutical company, right? How else could their conclusions so thoroughly undermine Pfizer?

Let’s take a look at the disclosure to see who funded this study, designed the trial, conducted it, collected the data, and analyzed the results. Surely, that will reveal the nefarious intentions behind this dastardly attempt to cut at the heart of Pfizer’s miracle drug.

Pfizer was responsible for the trial design and conduct and for data collection, analysis, and interpretation. The first draft of the manuscript was written by medical writers (funded by Pfizer) under direction from the authors.

Oh. Oh no.

Pfizer created the trial, conducted it, collected the data, and analyzed it. And it found that Paxlovid made no difference to the resolution of symptoms or with keeping people alive or out of the hospital. That has to sting.

Even worse, Covid vaccination was once again proven to be almost entirely irrelevant where results were concerned. Results were the same between “high-risk subgroups,” meaning those who had been vaccinated but had an elevated risk for more serious symptoms, and those who had never been vaccinated or had received the last dose more than a year ago.

Similar results were observed in the high-risk subgroup (i.e., participants who had been vaccinated and had at least one risk factor for severe illness) and in the standard-risk subgroup (i.e., those who had no risk factors for severe illness and had never been vaccinated or had not been vaccinated within the previous 12 months).

So not only did Paxlovid not make a difference, but vaccination status AND Paxlovid wasn’t enough to create a sizable gap in outcomes between healthy, unvaccinated individuals.

But wait, there’s more.

Viral load rebounds were also more common in the Paxlovid group, and symptom and viral load rebounds combined were more common among those taking Pfizer’s treatment. While percentages were generally low, other studies have pegged Paxlovid-associated rebound as occurring nearly one quarter of the time.

So it’s not particularly effective at reducing symptoms or resolving them more quickly, doesn’t lead to statistically significant improvements in the most severe outcomes, and is more likely to result in a rebound case of the illness it’s supposed to be protecting you from.

Sounds exactly like the type of product that Fauci, Walensky, and the CDC would praise, doesn’t it?

Paxlovid is the entire Covid-pharmaceutical complex summarized perfectly. Created to solve a problem that was supposed to be fixed by another product…understudied, overhyped by the “experts,” and prematurely authorized by a desperate FDA…and ultimately shown to be mostly ineffective.

Once again, the actual science disproves The Science™. And once again, we’ll get no acknowledgment of it or apologies for the billions of taxpayer dollars wasted. Can’t wait to see what Pfizer does for an encore.

Republished from the author’s Substack

Author

Continue Reading

COVID-19

Japanese study finds ‘significant increases’ in cancer deaths after third mRNA COVID doses

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Calvin Freiburger

Cancer deaths started rising again in Japan in 2021, and one study concludes it ‘may be attributable to several mechanisms’ of the mRNA-based COVID vaccines.

A new study has found “statistically significant increases” in cancer deaths after taking a third dose of mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines, according to a Japanese study published April 8 in the journal Cureus.

The study looked at age-adjusted mortality rates for multiple types of cancers from 2020 to 2022 in Japanese government data. “No significant excess mortality was observed during the first year of the pandemic (2020),” it says. “However, some excess cancer mortalities were observed in 2021 after mass vaccination with the first and second vaccine doses, and significant excess mortalities were observed for all cancers and some specific types of cancer (including ovarian cancer, leukemia, prostate cancer, lip/oral/pharyngeal cancer, pancreatic cancer, and breast cancer) after mass vaccination with the third dose in 2022.”

Notably, the rollout of the COVID vaccines coincided with an interruption and slowing of declines in cancer mortality rates that had been observed across all age groups over the span of the preceding decade. Third mRNA doses correlated with “significant excess mortalities” of all cancers, including breast, prostate, and ovarian cancer as well as leukemia. Almost all of the COVID vaccines at issue were mRNA-based, with 78% of those being from Pfizer and 22% from Moderna.

“For all cancers, we estimated the excess mortalities to be -0.4% (-0.9, 0.1), 1.1% (0.5, 1.8), and 2.1% (1.4, 2.8), respectively, indicating no excess in 2020 and statistically significant increases in 2021 and especially in 2022,” the authors write.

Changes in 2020 can be attributed to the height of the lockdowns forcing delays and cancellations of surgeries and other cancer treatments, but the researchers note several potential causal links between the vaccines and cancer deaths in 2021 and beyond.

“Some studies have shown that type I interferon (INF) responses, which play an essential role in cancer immunosurveillance, are suppressed after SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-LNP vaccination,” they write.

“SARS-CoV-2 vaccine has been shown to cause immunosuppression and lead to the reactivation of latent viruses such as varicella-zoster virus (VZV, human herpesvirus 3; HHV3) or human herpesvirus 8 (HHV8) in some cases,” the add. “These phenomena could also help explain the excess deaths from lip/oral/pharyngeal cancer in 2022 when mass vaccination with third and later doses was underway.”

The researchers conclude that “[t]hese particularly marked increases in mortality rates of these ERα-sensitive cancers may be attributable to several mechanisms of the mRNA-LNP vaccination rather than COVID-19 infection itself or reduced cancer care due to the lockdown. The significance of this possibility warrants further studies.”

“I have long suspected a cancer link to the vaccines just based on the science of immunology,” MIT researcher Stephanie Seneff told The Epoch Times in response to the study. “What I think is happening, broadly speaking, is that the vaccine is causing impairment of the innate immune response, which leads to an increased susceptibility to any infection, increased autoimmune disease, and accelerated cancer progression.”

In 2021, Project Veritas shed light on some of the reasons for such under-reporting with undercover video from inside Phoenix Indian Medical Center, a facility run under the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services’ Indian Health Service program, in which emergency room physician Dr. Maria Gonzales laments that myocarditis cases go unreported “because they want to shove it under the mat,” and nurse Deanna Paris attests to seeing “a lot” of people who “got sick from the side effects” of the COVID shots, but “nobody” is reporting them to VAERS “because it takes over a half hour to write the damn thing.”

An analysis of 99 million people across eight countries published February in the journal Vaccine–the largest analysis to date–“observed significantly higher risks of myocarditis following the first, second and third doses” of mRNA-based COVID vaccines, as well as signs of increased risk of “pericarditis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis,” and other “potential safety signals that require further investigation.” Earlier this month, the CDC was forced to release by court order 780,000 previously undisclosed reports of serious adverse reactions.

In Florida, a grand jury impaneled by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis is currently investigating the manufacture and rollout of the COVID vaccines. In February, it released its first interim report on the underlying justification for Operation Warp Speed, which determined that lockdowns did more harm than good, that masks were ineffective at stopping COVID transmission, that COVID was “statistically almost harmless” to children and most adults, and that it is “highly likely” that COVID hospitalization numbers were inflated. The grand jury’s report on the vaccines themselves is highly anticipated.

Continue Reading

Trending

X