Pfizer – A Clear & Present Danger to the World?


Armstrong Economics Blog/Vaccine Re-Posted Jan 28, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

Of course, YuuTube removed it to protect Pfizer. They are part of the media that has been targeting free speech and wants nothing but to sell humanity down the river. Here is the link to Project Veritas off the record with Pfizer.

In the video, there is a question if they are engaged in “gain of function” and he says no, Pfizer is experimenting to may an already human virus more potent.  What Pfizer is doing is highly dangerous. Nonetheless, it is NOT gain-of-function. There is a difference.

The gain-of-function is taking a virus that does not infect humans and altering that virus to “gain the function” of infecting humans. What Pfizer is doing is taking an ALREADY human infecting virus such as COVID-19, and making it more potent by accelerating its mutation process. Their vaccines have been dangerous, in my opinion, for they have accelerated mutations all on their own. A virus is like any life form. It will mutate and adapt to survive. That is its main goal. Vaccinating everyone only causes the virus to mutate to survive. This is why so many people who died were vaccinated. The virus mutated and the vaccine never prevented someone from getting COVID-19.

Just to be fair and straight up here – there is a difference between the two processes. Pfizer realizes that their vaccines did not work and contributed to the mutation process. Personally, I prefer old-fashion types of vaccines and the days when governments protected the people instead of taking bribes to force people to do things than make no sense.

Google/YouTube Block Project Veritas Expose’ on Pfizer Executive Discussing “Directed Evolution”


Posted originally on the CTH on January 28, 2023 | Sundance 

Project Veritas founder and CEO James O’Keefe announced earlier on Friday that Google/YouTube removed the expose’ and undercover story showing Jordon Trishton Walker, Pfizer’s Director of Research and Development, Strategic Operations – mRNA Scientific Planner, discussing the company pursuing “Directed Evolution” a process to modify the COVID-19 virus. {Direct Rumble Link}

According to the reasoning provided by YouTube, as outlined by O’Keefe, the undercover interview violated the YouTube terms of service for disinformation around the COVID-19 vaccines.  This justification despite the claim itself was coming from Pfizer, not Project Veritas.  James O’Keefe explains.  WATCH:

Tucker Carlson Discusses Pfizer Effort to Recreate Modified COVID Viruses Under Term “Directed Evolution”


Posted originally on the CTH on January 26, 2023 | Sundance

Tucker Carlson covered the Project Veritas story about a Pfizer executive talking about the pharmaceutical company engineering new COVID strains via a process of modifying the virus called “directed evolution.”  After the monologue segment, Tucker Carlson interviews Dr. Robert Malone. {Direct Rumble Link}  WATCH:

The full crazy video of the Project Veritas confrontation with Jordon Trishton Walker, Pfizer’s Director of Research and Development, Strategic Operations – mRNA Scientific Planner, is below.

.

Project Veritas Catches Pfizer R&D Official Stating Company Mutating COVID Viruses to Proactively Create Vaccines


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on January 25, 2023 | Sundance 

Project Veritas goes undercover and finds another top-level Pfizer Research and Development executive admitting the company is mutating COVID viruses to create vaccines. Instead of calling it “gain of function” research, which is illegal, they are calling it “directed evolution.”  This is very disturbing.

[NEW YORK – Jan. 25, 2023] Project Veritas released a new video today exposing a Pfizer executive, Jordon Trishton Walker, who claims that his company is exploring a way to “mutate” COVID via “Directed Evolution” to preempt the development of future vaccines.

Walker says that Directed Evolution is different than Gain-of-Function, which is defined as “a mutation that confers new or enhanced activity on a protein.” In other words, it means that a virus such as COVID can become more potent depending on the mutation / scientific experiment performed on it. (read more)

GLOBAL SATANIC ELITES EXPOSED


Drew Hernandez Streamed on: Dec 15, 8:59 pm EST

Drew Hernandez LIVE | Ep 156 | Drew exposes the SATANIC global cabal and their current movements

Sunday Talks, HPSCI Chair Mike Turner Discusses Latest in Biden Classified Document Issue


Posted originally on the CTH on January 22, 2023 | Sundance 

The likely Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), Mike Turner (R-OH), appears on CBS Face the Nation with DC stenographer for the regime, Margaret Brennan.

You know the left wing of the DC political operation is riddled with angst, when Margaret Brennan goes tilt, stomps her heels and throws the proverbial coffee pot across the table.  The only thing missing was Margaret pounding the table and yelling ‘curse you villain.‘  The unbiased pretenses are chucked right out the window here.  The interview is a little funny.  WATCH: 

[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: We go now to Ohio Congressman Mike Turner, he is expected to head up the House Intelligence Committee. Good morning to you.

REP. MIKE TURNER: Good morning Margaret, thank you for having me.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So we have this development in regard to the further materials that were found at President Biden’s Delaware home. What is your reaction? And what does it signify to you that no one realized that this classified material was missing, some of it dating back to his Senate years?

REP. TURNER: This is really incredible. And as you know, congratulations to you, we would not know anything about this if it hadn’t been that CBS had broken this story. The White House nor the Department of Justice had shared any of the information with the public. And this really is one matter, we wouldn’t have this issue if it hadn’t been for Biden’s Attorney General did- making the decision to raid former President Trump’s house looking for- for classified documents that were being held there. What’s amazing about all this is it takes us to the question of why were these documents here? Well, now that we learned that some of these go back to his Senate time, you know, clearly he’s- he’s become a serial classified document hoarder. Why did he have these? Who did he show them to? I mean, the only reason you can think of as to why anyone would take classified documents out of a classified space at home is to- is to show them to somebody. Who did he show them to? This is going to be crucial, I think, to the special counsel’s investigation, is why did the president have these documents? Who did he show them to him? And is it connected to the Biden family businesses?

MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, you know, the differences of course, too. I want to talk about the Biden situation. But just to clarify, when you reference President Trump, there were 300 classified documents, there was a warrant, there was refusal to comply in terms of handing things over and the White House and the president’s lawyer are pointing out that in the case of Biden, he granted permission, and this was consensual for the DOJ to come in and search. Does the fact that the Justice Department conducted the search signify anything more to you and do you have any insight into the sensitivity of the documents?

REP. TURNER: Sure, absolutely. I think this looks more like a cover up than an investigation.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Do you have any facts to back up your- your allegations that he was hoarding things in terms of intention to take classified material versus it’s been characterized that it was somehow accidental? Do you have any insight into what these materials were?

REP. TURNER: Well, they didn’t fly to his home without him. They went on a train with him from the- his Senate offices and then in boxes that he was in charge of. The chain of custody here is going to be important, because we know that these were in Joe Biden’s hands and Joe Biden’s control, then ended up behind his Corvette in his garage and in his office, that he did not control and also throughout his house, so the special counsel is gonna have to deal with the issue of what was the chain of custody? Who had these? Why did he take them to begin with? When did he get them? When was he handed these documents? And what did he do with them? And this is a real critical question to all this, why did he have these documents to begin with? And that is why the special counsel’s work is going to be really important, because I can think of no reason why the president should have taken home, as a senator or as vice president, any classified documents that clearly have no protection. They’re available and open to anybody.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You have also before this development asked for a briefing from the Director of National Intelligence. You set a deadline of Thursday, do you have any further reason to believe they will meet that deadline, that you will get any insight into these materials?

REP. TURNER: Well we’ll have to see, but what’s critical here–

MARGARET BRENNAN: They haven’t responded?

REP. TURNER: –And this is very important, this is what’s very important to all of this, Margaret, and that is the FBI and the national archivists were working completely independent of the intelligence community, or the Department of Defense. They claim this was all an issue of national security, but they did not speak to anyone who’s involved in national security.

MARGARET BRENNAN: So no response yet from the intelligence community?

REP. TURNER: I have not received a response, no.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Okay. I also want to ask you what leadership looks like with Republicans in charge. You are also on House Oversight.

REP. TURNER: Right.

MARGARET BRENNAN: Of the 26 Republican members on the committee, 19 of them denied the results of the 2020 election. Your colleagues now include Marjorie Taylor Greene, Paul Gosar, Andy Biggs, Lauren Boebert, Scott Perry. They all played critical roles in – in the former president’s attempts to overturn the 2020 election results. Do you have any concerns about working with these lawmakers? I mean, you’re very much a centrist.

REP. TURNER: Well, you know, even on the Democrat side, there’s been a number of people who objected to President Bush’s reelection and voted against certifying his election.

MARGARET BRENNAN: I am asking about you, your party, and your colleagues.

(CROSSTALK)

REP. TURNER: There’s a long history of both sides, having raised issues, including, you recall, the- Al Gore taking President Bush’s election all the way to the Supreme Court.

(CROSSTALK)

MARGARET BRENNAN: You are not an election denier by CBS standards just to be clear.

REP. TURNER: I am not, and I work with both sides of the aisle, and there are election deniers on both sides of the aisle.

MARGARET BRENNAN: You are comfortable with all those individuals I just rattled off and the fact that the majority of the Republicans on this committee denied the election results. Is that what you are saying?

REP TURNER: What I’m comfortable with is -the electorate are very smart. And these people have been sent to Congress to represent their districts and to be part of the congressional debate-

MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.

REP TURNER: -to lead us to what’s going to be bipartisan, bicameral resolutions. We have a split government right now, Republicans control the House, the Senate is controlled by the Democrats, you have a Democrat president. We’re going to have a lot of debate and discussions. And I think this is going to be a very fruitful period for- for Congress and for our country, because it’s going to have to be bipartisan, bicameral, and I believe that the president in opening negotiations with Republicans is beginning to start that process.

MARGARET BRENNAN: What is actually possible in this bipartisan, bicameral situation? What can you actually get legislation through on?

(CROSSTALK)

REP. TURNER: Depending on what the pending- what the president’s willing to do, I think it’s unlimited. Right? We have really tough issues right now. We have out of control inflation. We have an open border and record people crossing our border.

MARGARET BRENNAN: What about gun control?

REP. TURNER: We have -we have the issue of Russia, and certainly in Ukraine, and certainly China, I think we’re going to have a number of issues that we’re going to have to deal with.

MARGARET BRENNAN: All right, Congressman Turner, we have to leave it there today.

REP. TURNER: Thank you, Margaret.

[End Transcript]

Dr. Peter McCullough on the shady PR firm pushing the vax | TPC #1,062


A very interesting Pod Cast

Why Can We Still Not Talk About Natural Immunity? – #060 – Stay Free With Russell Brand


Natural immunity is always the best.

Why I didn’t get the Jab


When I was in the Army and after a lot of training becoming a Green Beret I found myself in Vietnam in 1967, we took anti-malaria pills which were an older version of today’s Hydroxychloroquine. Obviously, we did not die from taking it and even today, it’s still taken in the regions where malaria is prevalent. . 

In 2020 after the SARS-COVID-2 pandemic started I had just finished reading a book on the 1918 pandemic written by John M. Barry titled “The Great Influenza.” So when the COVID Task Force medical team recommended lock downs to slow the spread and banned the use of Hydroxychloroquine as dangerous I knew something was off and I started do more research on pandemics.

One of the reasons beside what was in the previous paragraph was in my prior research in the mid 90’s about the Vietnam war I was in where I found how badly it was bunged by the Federal Government. So I had a distrust of things governmental from that point on.

Continuing, there was a lot of medical information on pandemics besides the book I just read and every Doctor in that field was saying that lock downs and masks will not work. Most all of those links quickly disappeared. Then the use of Ivermectin was also banded despite being used by Front Line doctors successfully as a prophylactic.

The CDC and NIH claimed that studies showed that neither Hydroxychloroquine nor Ivermectin were of any help in treating the COVID virus. So both were banded from use and Doctors could lose their medical license if they prescribed it.

I was involved in a major project that was outdoors in 2020 which required me to be there and so based on none of what the government was saying was true and I never got the flue I almost never got the annual flu shot. But as a precaution, I did buy a UV/HEPA filter device to circulate the air in by home to kill the virtues, if it got in. While working outside I did not wear a mask and only did so if a place I was going into required it. I was also able to purchase some Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin just in case, I caught the COVID.

Continuing the story, Dr. Fauci was very against the use of Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin as a prophylactic and was a promoter of the use of masks. This made no sense to me. Why would the government be preventing the use of Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin when they both worked if started when the first signs of the COVID started?

The reason was that Dr. Fauci was working with big pharma on a new treatment an mRNA experimental drug and all efforts were to get this approved as quickly as possible so we could stop the pandemic. By running tasks in parallel instead of sequential, the development time was shortened and the first batches of the experimental drug were coming out. And it was quickly made mandatory to get the experimental drug, now called the Jab. Oh and I need to add that that the CDC changed the definition of a Vaccine so they could call the experiments gene therapy a Vaccine.

As the “vaccine” roll out preceded the method used also made no sense. Since by now we knew that it was really only a problem for the elderly or others with existing comorbidity issues like being overweight. Other than those people, a large number of people that got the COVID were sick for a few days and then were fine. Note these people then had “natural” immunity to COVID which is superior to the JAB.

The question now is in 2023 why was this experimental Gene therapy mandated, why were the drug companies given immunity by the federal government, Why were, now well know, problems with the Jab hidden and lastly why were the methods used to try and vaccinate everyone the worst possible method to use according to almost all the world’s top researchers, in this filed, including the inventor of the mRNA process. 

We now know that there is a host of problems with the COVID “vaccine” and that these problems are so great, many resulting in death that it are getting hard to hide them. It seems clear to me that “mandating” the use of this mRNA experimental drug is a clear violation of the Nuremberg Code that resulted from the German doctors during WW II experimenting on persons detained by the Nazis. These experiments were such that death of the subject was often the result. The key point was that it was not ethical to force a person to take an experimental drug or any other substance or procedure. The Nuremberg Code was developed and issued in August 1947. However, it wasn’t until much later that it was officially adopted. From Wikipedia we have the following.

 However, the Code is considered by some to be the most important document in the history of clinical research ethics, because of its massive influence on global human rights. In the United States, the Code and the related Declaration of Helsinki influenced the drafting of regulations promulgated by the United States Department of Health and Human Services to ensure ethical treatment of human research subjects, known as the Common Rule, which is now codified in Part 46 of Title 45 of the Code of Federal Regulations. These regulations are enforced by Institutional Review Boards (IRBs). In 1966, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights was adopted by the United Nations, and after enough nations had ratified the Covenant, it came into force on 23 March 1976. Article Seven prohibits experiments conducted without the “free consent to medical or scientific experimentation” of the subject. As of September 2019, the Covenant has 173 states parties.

This now brings us to Dr. Fauci, who blocked the use of Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin because he claimed they did not work and were of no help in treating the COVID virus. So both were banded from use and Doctors could lose their medical license if they prescribed it.

The question then is why was this done since both are, generic drugs used all over the world for many things. The normal procedure when there is no treatment for a new illness is for the treating doctors to use their knowledge to try existing drugs to see if they work. 

After reading Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s book “The real Anthony Fauci”, I found the reason. The reason was that to use an experimental Drug of any kind on the public, there could not be any other possible treatment available. The mRNA experimental drug was worse than a normal new drug or process it was something that has never been used before on Humans. And on rats, they all died when exposed to the outside environment.

Now since Fauci knew that he couldn’t use the mRNA if there was a treatment so he he had to block the use of Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin with the threat losing you medical license if you did. So given that Fauci knew the mRA should not have been used and especially mandated. That bock of a viable treatment cost the lives of millions of people which are a clear crime against humanity; he probably has more blood on his hands than anyone else that ever lived.

Closing Note

I did eventually get a variant of the SARS-COVID-2 in the spring of 2022, After taking the Ivermectin for 7 days is was gone and there were only a couple of days where I was uncomfortable I was 81 years old at the time.