Vote for Freedom, Peace, and Transparency
An informed vote is important
The German federal election is being held today. The Basic Democratic Party of Germany (dieBasis) is a political party that promotes freedom, peace, and transparency. https://diebasis-partei.de/
I'm a fan. Not least because Wolfgang Wodarg is a candidate for the federal election representing the party. Wodarg is responsible for alerting the world in 2009 (just 12 years ago) to stop their madness, because: "millions of people worldwide were vaccinated for no good reason" as documented by Spiegel here: https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/reconstruction-of-a-mass-hysteria-the-swine-flu-panic-of-2009-a-682613.html According to Spiegel, Wodarg said the WHO's classification of the swine flu as a pandemic earned the pharmaceutical companies $18 billion in additional revenues that year. He's a public hero and published researcher: https://www.wodarg.com/publikationen/
The Swine Flu fake pandemic of 2009 was also mentioned by Soren Ventegodt in his 2015 research publication titled "Why the corruption of the World Health Organization (WHO) is the biggest threat to the world's public health of our time. https://researchgate.net/profile/Soren-Ventegodt/publication/281876323_Why_the_Corruption_of_the_World_Health_Organization_WHO_is_the_Biggest_Threat_to_the_World%27s_Public_Health_of_Our_Time/links/589af757a6fdcc32dbe04ba9/Why-the-Corruption-of-the-World-Health-Organization-WHO-is-the-Biggest-Threat-to-the-Worlds-Public-Health-of-Our-Time.pdf Recommended reading for everyone in its entirety, I’d say, given all the recent events. On page 3 he discusses the 2009 pandemic (swine flu), and I quote:
In 1988 Halfdan Mahler (WHO director general during 1973-1988) in the daily Danish newspaper Politiken warned the world against the power the pharmaceutical industry had over WHO: “the industry is taking over WHO”, he said. But nobody believed him, because it was too difficult for the public to understand the complicated power games he talked about. Unfortunately he was right. Recent scandals, like the Swine Flu scandal in 2009, has shown that WHO unfortunately has succumbed totally to the power of the pharmaceutical industry...All over the world more than two hundred countries prepared for the pandemic like the plague or the Spanish Flu, which over the next few months could claim the lives of 40 million people...As the world reacted to the threat by continuing to buy incredible amounts of influenza vaccines and anti-influenza medicine a debate started in the scientific media like the British Medical Journal (BMJ) and slowly also in the public media worldwide. Suddenly WHO was accused of “crying wolf” and supporting the pharmaceutical industry.
In June and July 2009 national borders were suddenly closed, thousands of public meeting places, like restaurants, cafes, and libraries in many countries were closed, and millions of travelers were stopped from entering a number of countries…
Many people traveling wasted hours on emergency health controls and physicians, hospitals and Ministries of Health panicked and started to send patients home. Many countries started to buy influenza vaccines or anti-influenza drugs and spend vast amounts of dollars…It turned out to be a false alarm and the Swine Flu epidemic in 2009 did not cause the many cases of deaths as first expected. Slowly it became known that the WHO actually knew this already BEFORE the director-general Margaret Chan declared the pandemic. This can be seen by the fact that WHO changed the definition of a “pandemic” from meaning “millions of deaths” to mean a non-dangerous infection that spreads worldwide, only one month before the WHO’s declaration of the pandemic.
I found this extremely interesting, having heard that the American Centers for Disease Control changed the definition of a vaccine in 2021 as verified through web archive from its 2015 definition https://web.archive.org/web/20150429143606/http://www.cdc.gov:80/vaccines/vac-gen/imz-basics.htm
to its 2021 definition: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/imz-basics.htm
Parts that were taken out of the older definition included vaccines producing immunity, and vaccines protecting a person from the disease as a result of taking it.
What if high vaccination rates will not end the pandemic? We know you can both catch and spread the virus despite vaccination. To translate from the recent article here: “Only one of the twelve corona cases was unvaccinated - and, get this, according to the association, this was the one with the lowest viral load, i.e. the highest (and thus most harmless) cT value in the PCR test...“
We’ve seen this in Singapore https://unser-mitteleuropa.com/neueste-infos-zum-corona-wahn-singapur-impfflopp-trotz-80-prozentiger-durchimpfung/
and Israel https://www.politico.com/news/2021/09/14/covid-israel-data-vaccine-efficacy-511777
even after the third shot in Israel as covered here by Alex Berenson’s Unreported Truths: “Now the inevitable is happening. The third shot is beginning to fail.”
Vaccines no longer prevent you from spreading covid (straight from the mouth of the CDC Director): https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2021/08/06/cdc_director_vaccines_no_longer_prevent_you_from_spreading_covid.html
Is the science all settled? Because then we could maybe begin to rationalize a media/government attack on anti-vaxxers. But actually there’s a lot of disagreement and nuance.
Here a BMJ opinion piece on the matter: https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/08/23/does-the-fda-think-these-data-justify-the-first-full-approval-of-a-covid-19-vaccine/ The media/government is wrong to paint the science as settled.
We need more data certainly (some of which is discussed in this thread):
and it's strange that more data is not incoming. Like data from quality controlled trials on mask effectiveness. And research on protocols/treatment that was used for the covid recovered in order to inform best practice. And data analyzing and standardizing death count.
It’s strange that twice as much was spent on aging research during the pandemic than was spent on covid research. Plus, alarmingly, there are reports that some individuals are getting their personal vaccine injury reports censored on social media. Naturally, this will cause some people to think that they aren’t actually getting all the data they need in order to make an informed decision.
Powerful people own corporate media channels and have a lot of money to pour into smears/censorship, as journalists like Glenn Greenwald and Sharyl Attkisson have revealed. We have to continue to make sure to follow alternative sources of news to get a big picture about what is going on. Naturally skepticism is warranted with covid mandates, and debate should be encouraged! This is how science advances.
The FDA’s vaccine advisory committee voted against (16 to 2) recommending boosters for the general population, but the FDA overruled their decision. The CDC’s vaccine advisory panel voted against recommending boosters to the general population, arguing it only made sense in terms of risk for people 65 and older or 18 and older with underlying medical conditions (by a 9 to 6 vote). The CDC even rejected part of the FDA’s emergency use authorization for people whose jobs or situations put them at high risk of vaccine breakthrough infection. https://edition.cnn.com/2021/09/23/health/pfizer-acip-booster-recommendation/index.html Amazingly in a move described as “unusual” the CDC director overruled her agency’s advisory committee recommendation https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/24/world/covid-boosters-vaccine-cdc-director.html It doesn't sound like settled or uncontroversial science to me.
Strangely something similar happened in the UK.
What if the pandemic ends only when enough people get infected, just like other pandemics in history. What if the mandates only stop when the people demand they have no scientific basis and need to stop. What are the numbers behind media hype? John A. Ioannidis from Stanford’s recent research is here: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.08.21260210v1.full.pdf
Age Infection Survival Rate
0-19 99.9973%
20-29 99.986%
30-39 99.969%
40-49 99.918%
50-59 99.73%
60-69 99.41%
70+ 97.6% (non-institutionalized)
70+ 94.5% (all)
The unvaccinated are roundly condemned and criticized, but evidence is on their side with certainty at least in the case of those with previous infection (with acquired immunity). Here's a new NEJM study looking at Pfizer vax efficacy 6 months out: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2110345 According to @RWMaloneMD, the vax efficacy overall for everyone was about 88% (remarkable). BUT, for previously infected, only reached 19%!! The U.S. FDA generally requires 50% vax efficacy for approval.
More evidence is nicely summarized here https://sharylattkisson.com/2021/09/exclusive-summary-covid-19-vaccine-concerns/
What about #NaturalImmunity
"There’s evidence that there’s a significant—depending on the timeframe—six- to 20-fold improvement in protection from infection and disease associated with the natural immunity acquired from prior infection compared to that conferred by the vaccine" https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/natural-immunity-longer-lasting-than-protection-from-covid-19-vaccines-dr-robert-malone_3983305.html
Strangely, discussion about natural immunity is being censored.
Back to dieBasis. Read what happened to the small party in Frankfurt am Main two days ago. The small party was not allowed to advertise itself because Fridays for Future (climate awareness) and Antifa basically shut it down. According to the article, the police caved in and no longer enforced elementary democratic law. Here is a case study on 'free elections'" :
Of course this makes it necessary to touch briefly on climate. With climate, again, nuance seems to be most likely the key.
Dr. Bjorn Lomborg, Michael Shellenberger, Dr. Steven Koonin and Dr. Roger Pleike, Jr. are some of the prominent voices of nuance.
There seems to be somewhat of a resistance to reporting on all the nuance.
Kary Mullis won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry for developing the PCR test. In his book Dancing Through the Mind Field, Mullis said "Follow the money trail from your pocket to the laboratories, and notice that it passes through politicians who need you, and by the interest groups who with the media train you…Some big truths that voters have accepted actually have little to no scientific basis.." One of those “big truths” he covers in his book is impending climate catastrophe.
Here's a great recent podcast titled “Is there solid science to support anthropogenic climate change?” with Paul Saladino, MD and Dr. Patrick Moore. I think you can get a real sense of the sometimes insurmountable challenges of having a scientific view that challenges dogma.
Dr. Roger Pielke, Jr. also knows a thing or two about challenging dogma. I wrote a thread about it here:
Thanks to Wikileaks who published leaked emails, the Center for American Progress (founded/led by John Podesta) was shown to have engaged in an organized political campaign against Roger Pielke Jr including writing over 160 articles about him (more than had been written on the sitting president). The articles falsely with no evidence or justification trashed Pielke's research reputation & smeared him as "fossil-fuel funded" & a "climate denialist." Pielke was later found to have no funding through any fossil fuel company or related interest, but the damage had been done to his reputation. And with no repercussions for his well-funded accusers! This multi-year campaign against Pielke was partially funded by billionaire Tom Steyer who's invested in renewable energy projects and benefits financially from "green" policies he personally has advanced.
How can there be a return of confidence in existing research and governmental health projects until we publicly hold politicians/organizations who initiate professional witch hunts funded by billionaires with conflicts of interest to account?
Accountability. Transparency.
A 2 minute listen:
"There are some who say that Communism is the wave of the future. Let them come to Berlin. And there are even a few who say that it's true that Communism is an evil system, but it permits us to make economic progress. Lass sie nach Berlin kommen! (Let them come to Berlin). As a free man, I take pride in the words: Ich bin ein Berliner." - John F. Kennedy - Ich Bin Ein Berliner Speech (June 26, 1963)
It starts with our votes. It’s not hard to see why #dieBasis is a huge threat to status quo. Whenever we can, we should choose freedom, peace and transparency.
#FreeAssange #dieBasis #Freedom #Liberty #Transparency #Peace #Bundestagswahl2021 #Covid-19 #VaccineMandates #HandsOffOurKids