Aim Is To Alert Suspicion, Doubt

Control of the information narrative is the greatest weapon because of its ability to condition thinking. The views of Messrs Tarr and Gardener on the subject of Covid vaccines (The Mercury, January 19) appear to reflect the conversation of that controlled narrative.

Its power is based on the integrated finance and influence of and between the FDA, CDC, Big Pharma and the mass media. CNN ridiculed Trump’s announcement of a vaccine late in 2020 remarking that without the standard period of three years and more of testing, Trump’s vaccine was suspect.

As recently as December 16, the FDA’S Acting Chief Scientist, Dr Jacqueline A O’Shaughnessy, in a lengthy statement addressed to Pfizer Inc, stated that Pfizer-BioNTech was not FDA approved(page 18). On page 9, she stated that “no Covid vaccines are approved for individuals aged 5 through 15 years.”

While it is not clear how Mr Tarr’s FDA references dispute those of O’ Shaughnessy, it has never been my intention to disseminate untruths on the subject. Nevertheless, what is beyond dispute is the following: [1] none of the vaccines is certified to produce Covid immunity; [2] all the manufacturers are indemnified against adverse reactions; [3] fresh cases of Covid predominate amongst those who have been vaxxed; [4] mounting reports of adverse reactions and deaths are occurring amongst the vaxxed, particularly amongst those without co-morbidities.

The following recent statements should flag critical concern:  Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla says two doses of Pfizer vaccine “offer very little protection if any” against omicron; the European Medical Agency, which previously advocated boosters every three months, has reversed itself saying such treatment “could adversely affect the immune system” (Bloomberg report); the WHO has waved the white flag on boosters and opined that they are “inappropriate.”

The fact that there is a 99% recovery rate from Covid infections and that the effects of the vaccines are controversial, to say the least, constitutes the basis of my opposition to the vax narrative. Added to that is the suppression by Big Pharma and the likes of Dr Fauci of the known and widely successful treatments of HCQ and ivermectin.

Thus, the question everyone should be asking is: Cui bono – who benefits? Having the vax is clearly an unnecessary health risk when there are inexpensive, effective treatments while the superiority of natural immunity is not disputed. The colluding chorus behind the narrative to have the jab should alert suspicion and doubt. That is the sole purpose of my submissions.

Sent into The Mercury and published 19 Jan 2022.

Add Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *