Well, if 'just fine' means treating Newsweek as a source of truth...

Anyway, just a quick scan on this.  Seems to me that the study participants should have at least kept their funders appraised, especially if they had agreed to.

http://www.safeminds.org/blog/2015/10/19/safeminds-review-of-vaccine-safety-and-autism-like-outcomes-in-a-non-human-primate-model-identifies-distortion-in-public-reporting-and-argues-need-for-full-disclosure-of-research-documents/


I'm more than ready for a transparent vax vs. un-vax total health outcome study.  One with reasonable protocols which are justified and followed.  Would that be to much to ask before forcing people to subject their kids to big-phrama's will?  Especially when they have no liability for any problems they may cause!

To say the honest truth, the U.S. is starting to remind me of the Inca culture where the powers that be forced the citizens to bring in their kids and send them up the steep stairs where the high priests would do their thing.  It's truly interesting how history rhymes and repeats.

None of you 'safe and effective' propaganda victims can figure it out, eh?

Here's one:  People may get sick from certain select things (e.g., pertussis) at a somewhat higher rate without vaccine regimes.  That means that they will be treated, and sometimes the treatment will consists of antibiotics.  The higher the rate of antibiotics treatment, the higher the incidence of drug resistance.

Back in the age of real science such hypotheses would be explored and modeled, the risks would be weighed, potential resolution schemes would be analysed, and a practical policy which benefited the population would be selected.  Now in the propagandized pseudo-science age the major considerations seem to be the medical/industrial complex's bottom line and the social engineer's need to construct a population with attributes that please their sponsors.

My favored top-tier geopolitical hypothesis at the moment is, in a nutshell, that

 - A tri-polar world as envisioned by Orwell is amazingly spot-on at the present.

 - There really is a loose-ish group of people who really are fairly closely associated with banking who really do want to unify the world under one political structure.  Pretty much classic NWO.

 - These people have been using China as a test-bed for some of their ideas.  China's designated role in the recent economic order (something of slave labor camp) and their totalitarian form of government made it useful for this.

 - The accumulated wealth and military might of the U.S. has been used (by these people) as a source in the wealth in the West->East siphon and to achive setup goals using our military resources.

 - Russia was a basket-case and mostly not very useful to these people.  Especially as Putin (seemingly) didn't completely play ball in letting them keep the resources handed out like candy when the USSR fell apart.

One of my top burning questions is whether Russia and Putin are 'for real' and genuinely antagonistic to the (supposed) NWO, or whether they are playing a deeper game.  Russia mind-fucks their own people so well that it's really difficult for me, across the ocean, to get what I feel to be a reliable read on things.  The most reliable clue I can get is how genuine the hate for Russia is (and the mainstream media is 'controlled' and 'fake' enough that I can be pretty confident in reality just by reading out of their propaganda.) 

It 'feels' to me like we may be on the cusp of what Orwell predicted when suddenly, overnight, "We've always been at war with Eastasia"

Orwell, or at least someone who analyzed 1984, also allowed for the possibility that there actually was not a tri-polar world at all and it was an illusion.  But nobody could ever really be sure.

Was a mechanism for this described?  I can think up a plausible one rather easily but I'll leave it to the reader to test their understandings of the science here rather than explore it.

One cannot keep cattle alive long enough to fatten up for slaughter when you cram them together into a feed-lot unless you dose the shit out of them.  Same goes for people.  That's a good argument for not stack-n-packing them into 200 ft^2 micro-dwellings in 'human habitat megacenters'.  But the new-age globalists are dead set on doing just that since it is what the plan calls for.  I suspect that this is one of the major driving forces behind having corp/gov take over management of people's immune systems.

You need to take a little time to understand the basics of what a guy says before casting aspersion on his/her 'logic'.  Otherwise it's a strawman.  Obviously nobody is saying that all vaccinations have any particular effect.

What a lot of us are saying is that we may not be getting a complete and honest story about some of the things that some of the injection regimes are designed to achieve.  Here's another article with the same basic concerns.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/is-the-un-using-vaccines-to-secretly-sterilize-women-all-over-the-globe/5413599

I have zero difficulty believing that such programs exist, and only slightly less believing that the development effort would not have been undertaken without and intent to deploy it.  Only slightly less than that in believing that attempts at deployment have been undertaken from time to time here and there.

While a lot of people who, years later, ended up on bitcointalk.org were reading Ayn Rand I was reading Garrett Hardin's 'Lifeboat Ethics'.  I do have a better than par understanding of the ethical considerations associated with population.  Indeed, when nearly forced to pick from a list of about 200 'charities' to donate to 30 years ago, I choose 'Zero Population Growth.'  I have an understanding of how some people consider 'scientific' means of controlling population to be more ethical than, say, war or starvation, and I don't even necessarily disagree with them in principle.

I also understand how any means of population control be it laissez-faire or engineered can be parlayed into accumulation of wealth as long as it is at least predictable.  I've come to believe that those at the seats of power can and do use any and all of the generally possible population control methods for personal enrichment even while a vast majority probably do earnestly believe that they are using their unique wisdom and capabilities for the 'betterment' of humanity (or more generally, of the planet.)

Currently we have a situation where utter hog-wash 'scientific' arguments like 'global climate change' and spiritual feelings used as bedrock cornerstones are being sold to (aka, implanted) in the public mind to justify eugenics programs.  This makes me believe that the motives are at least as much about obtaining power and control as they are 'ethical' in an abstract manner.  It also contorts any operational efforts which will likely lead to a bad outcome.

Most people still rely on their generational line for security in old age.  Covertly sterilizing people is 'evil' for a lot of reasons, but one of the main ones is that it robs them of this potential.  The globalist new-agers might justify this in a belief that they are going to 'end poverty by 2030 world-wide' but it is entirely unclear that they will be able to achieve this.  OTOH, it is crystal clear to any thinking person that the only possible way to do this would be to massively de-populate the planet down to the 1/2 to 1 billion mark that their leaders love to toss around.  Anyone who actually believes this 'agenda-2030' hype is either to stupid to understand what is going on (most of them), or does see the big-picture and welcomes it.

Of course these are last resort (and fairly absurd) scenarios.  How about this:

There has been a bad accident.  You and someone else had amputated legs.  Both of you and both legs were put onto a medivac jet so fly to a hospital which can do complex re-attachments.  The plane crashes and everyone but you are killed.

Would you eat your own leg or the other guy's leg first?

Edit:  I believe I would eat my own leg first.  Probably less chance of getting kuru disease (like poor Hillary) and it was my own handiwork which constructed the thing in the first place.  Biologically I don't see any risks.  Back when I was prone to nose bleeds I remember swallowing pretty big globs of pudding-like blood which coagulated in my sinuses so it's probably not all that much different.

I've seen multiple reports of some of our pedo-friendly media here in the U.S. (e.g., the New York Times) removing previously published stories about this Norway pedo bust event.  If true, and they seem to be pretty well corroborated, it's pretty interesting example of memory-holing.  Fortunately most of the stories have been retrieved or saved due to the massive global citizen research efforts going on.

When I first heard the Norway story it struck me that the timing in relationship to the blow-up here in the states was also eyebrow raising.  It seemed likely to me that Norway had an investigation going and the brew-ha here in the states was a trigger to roll the perps up.  Thank heaven that Norway still has some police who are willing to do their jobs.  As an American I'm somewhat envious.

I'm only recently more aware of how some of the pedo stuff works, but it seems to me pretty unlikely that in these days of the internet that there would not be a lot of short-chains between any major pedo stuff going on anywhere.  I mean if these sick fuckers are making media of their deeds and trading it around the dark-net they must share it between groups.

With respect to Bitcoin, I've heard various mentions of it in association with these pervs.  Unfortunate, but probably true.  As the shit continues to hit the fan I guess we better be prepared to point out that any useful tool would be used by the pervs and it happened that Bitcoin was used in some cases.  Surely USD and barter were used in more.  Hopefully some of these scum will be brought to justice because they slipped up in using Bitcoin and were caught because of the public nature of the blockchain.  That would be a useful defense I think.

I've also heard that David Brock, who is as likely as anyone to be a child molesting degenerate, was the 'leader' of Bitcoin.  All I can figure is that people are mixing up him and Brock Pierce who was elected to the Bitcoin Foundation (and who himself is also reputed to be a sleezy pedo.)  I wish more people would have listened to the likes of Theymos and myself.  We were the fairly lonely voices who warned that a centralized 'Bitcoin Foundation' could be a bad idea when the idea was first floated.

I may go along with that AFTER there is complete transparency in the entire process (research, manufacture, testing, oversight, etc) AND adversarial analysis adjudicated in a transparent manner.  NOT before.

As long as corporations can shroud their 'technology' behind a shield of 'intellectual property' and 'trade secrets' law, and as long as corporations can hire the 'public service' oversight personnel after their 'service', no thanks.  That is begging for trouble and we see plenty of it peeking through in spite of the propaganda veil.

I am in favor of people being able to hand over their immune systems to corp/gov, and even that of their children to a lesser degree, to entities who they, for whatever reason, choose to trust.  I am very opposed to FORCING others to do so.

I have zero interest in muzzling people who question things.  That is a totalitarian nightmare scenerio on a lot of fronts.  The political Left is rapidly losing their support precisely because they are, as of fairly recently, cheerleaders for such totalitarian principles.  Goodbye and good residence, and if it is TPTB vaccination regimes which does the deed, at least they are good for something.

This would be a gross misunderstanding of Darwin's theory of evolution.  'Powerful' (or even 'strong') has nothing to do with it.  It's all about being adapted to an environment, and most of the time being 'weak' is a better strategy on the inter-species level.  The basic reason for this is related to thermodynamics.  Being 'powerful' burns more precious energy which can be difficult to find consistently.

Within a species especially in the higher vertebrates grades there is a tendency for sexual dimophism and displays of 'strength'.  The purpose is to impress a potential mate as an individual who is capable enough to exploit an environment and produce a surplus (to be burnt on bigger tail-feathers, corvettes, etc.)

Blind faith in a leadership and their propaganda organs can cut both ways for humans.  It strengthens a group and lets them dominate other groups.  But when domination of other groups is no longer possible (because it has been achieved, for instance) or a goal, a society starts to eat it's tail as competition within the group replace outward domination as primary driving force.  At that point the leaders might try to weaken or kill off the followers and vice-versa.  The Fabian Socialists understood these fairly basic dynamics rather well...and they were/are not big fans of 'democracy'.

It seems pretty suspicious to me that the medical/industrial complex is so intent on giving at least one shot on the first day of life.  Especially that it is Hep-B which 1) protects against a disease almost exclusively associated with shooting up illegal drugs and having unprotected sex, and 2) wears off before the kid reaches an age where they are at risk of such behavior anyway.  It looks to me suspiciously like an excuse for something else.

(My own personal hypothesis is that there is a desire to get a dose of metal into people as soon as possible, and especially into the brain, so that electromagnetic radiation could be more impactful.  Vaccines do seem to be designed to open the blood-brain barrier, and aluminum from shots is known to infuse into brain tissue.  Shaw & Tomljenovic and UBC have done a fair bit of what I find fairly convincing research on this (Al in the brain.)  Of course they are roundly attacked by such 'fake science' sites like metabunk.)

Back in 'our day' pregnant women were not even supposed to take so much as an aspirin.  Actually I (around age 50) might be in a different category since in slightly earlier times there was a problem with thalidomide and everyone was gun-shy.  Be that as it may, it's been recognized for some time the sensitivity of a developing fetus.  Until fairly recently giving shots to pregnant women was tantamount to malpractice as I understand things.  Now pregnant women are implored to get flu shots by some of the most hard-core advertising campaigns I've seen.  And these pharmacy flu shots are the multi-dose kind which are still preserved with mercury.

Even the CDC admits that mercury in gestation can cause tics, but they say it's no big deal because they usually wear off.  My feeling is that tics are instinctively creepy to others because they indicate a neurological dysfunction and, again instinctively, a person who is not a good partner for mating with or for anything else.  One way or another, even if the tics wear off by, say, age 10, ten years of having them and getting teased in school and so on is vastly worse than having the flu for a week.

As for the flu, I personally welcome it.  I feel that it exercises the immune system and is a good thing.  If I go more than two years without getting the flu I might actually be sick enough for one day to lay around in bed when I finally do.  It's not fun, but it's not a bid deal.  Yes, some people 'die' while they have it, but it's not from the flu.  Basically these people were on the edge already and the flu tipped them over it.  If it wasn't the flu it would have been something else fairly soon anyway in most cases.

I personally feel it quite possible that a certain few people 'at the top' know with precision that injections are useful for some pretty nasty population effects and are deploying them for exactly that reason here and there and from time to time.  'Vaccination' is simply the most convenient way to justify injecting things into people's bloodstreams and thus bypassing the digestive tract which simplifies things.

I personally bought the standard story about 'safe and effective' hook, line, and sinker for most of my life.  I don't remember if I ever exhibited my wisdom by explaining 'herd immunity' to anyone but it wouldn't surprise me if I had.

Later, for reasons I don't remember, I looked into things a bit more deeply and tried to study the actual science behind things in more detail.  As the years tick by, more and more doctors (or former doctors) come out of the closet and give very detailed presentations on various aspects of what they know.  I must have a hundred such presentations.  These were very helpful to me.

Like almost all of these doctors do, I mostly wrote off the malfeasance to innocent mistakes, cronyism, corporate greed, etc.  Over time I've come to take the concept that we peeps are being deliberately damaged for a deeper goal than simply making a buck or pinching pennies in safety precautions in order for our benevolent leadership to 'serve' more people.  One of the things which has influenced me to this line of thinking is that the real movers and shakers from earlier times wrote pretty freely about doing so.

Another reason for my suspicions is that the concept of damaging people to make them more manageable actually makes a lot of sense, and can even be justified on ethical grounds if one has a bit of a fucked up mind and/or a quasi-religious mindset which lends itself to considering humans as a kind of a blight on Mother Earth.  A surprising number of highly intelligent people seem to fall into one or more of these camps.

If the situation were clear-cut as you describe (no food in the water), I'm pretty sure I would.  If I were the soon-to-be dead body I would implore the healthy person to do the same with my last breath though, and to be quick about it before my meat spoils.

Here's another question:  If you had medical equipment to perform an amputation, would you eat your own leg?  (I think I might, but I'm not sure.)

It's slime-ball who thinks that vaccines are causing negatives health effects and would NOT warn people about them.  Less competition for their own kids, more chance of collecting social security due to the earlier die-off of the chumps, and less people infecting the globe if the de-population death cult is your thing.

A person who bought the 'safe and effective' party line would have no reason to invent 'scare-stories'.  Just the opposite since they earnestly think they will benefit by 'herd immunity'.

Basically, the only people who would provide warnings are people who genuinely thinks there might be real issues and who have an decency instinct to look out for their fellow man.

I suppose there could be a mix here, and that I might be in that category.  People who are gullible enough to eat up the corp/gov/nwo vaccine propaganda will suffer injury to themselves and their progeny and thus be selected against over time.  This could contribute to the strength of our society.  Such people (e.g., modern 'progressives') are causing serious problems at the present time and we could do with fewer of them.  It's an honor and a duty to give those who should not be final-solution'd a chance to hear the other side and wise up though, else Darwinism can't work properly here.

As for the 'Muslim males', I doubt it.  Their task is to break down Western society which has been softened up by a variety of de-masculation programs over the years (including but not limited to vaccination regimes.)  Once that is mostly accomplished the leadership can go ahead and "Kill them.  Kill them both." to borrow a line from Raiders of the Lost Ark.

---

Mercury is not used as an adjuvant.  It's uses as a preservative.  Most vaccines nowadays contain only a little left over from the manufacturing process, but multi-dose flu vaccines still use it as a preservatives and most of those who are stupid enough to take the flu vaccination get a healthy dose.

Funny thing about mercury:  A hundred years ago someone thought to wonder if it was safe.  To test it, they injected mercury into 12 people (iirc) who were dying of encephalitis.  They all died of encephalitis thus proving that mercury is safe.  And so it stood for most of a century.  Eventually (after a legislator's own grand-kid was damaged) it was taken out of most vaccines, but NOT because it caused any problems mind you.  Just to make 'uneducated' people feel better.

---

Aluminum is the most common adjuvant at the present.  Vaccines which are problematic to get working contain more of it.  HPV is a good example of this.

Crushed glass as an adjuvant was tried in horses.  Turns out that it cause enough discomfort to the animal to have a bunch of crushed glass in their tissue that it was abandoned.

Another potential adjuvant is squalene which is an oil related to that which lubricates our joints.  It was found through experiments on ignorant and powerless army recruits (like me) that it might be causing joint problems and was a common complaint from those suffering from 'gulf war syndrome.'  I personally got a fuck-load of shots during gulf war and my joints are fine.  Either I am lucky and not prone to problems, or I lucked out and got in a control group.  Impossible to know about such things.  Anyway, I found it interesting that this year only injected flu vaccine is recommended and they are back to using squalene as an adjuvant for older victims.

Nobody said it was going to be 'fun' for anyone.  Civil wars never are:



I'm just sayin' to those who look forward to 'something happening' to Trump to be careful what they wish for...especially those who live in dense urban areas.

Here are a few more of my prognostications:  In this case the paramilitaries (police, firemen, etc), while prone to doing what's in their best interest, are generally more in favor of Trump than the Obama-class follow-ups.  This particularly after the tacit support from the Left of cop-killing BLM'ers and such.  Perhaps they could be promised a leader which is more to their liking which could help them play ball, but I'm not sure how much they would buy it.  Most of them would probably show up to obtain any service weaponry issued (unless they have their own) then head home to pick up the fam and get the hell out of dodge.  Much like what happened in hurricane Sandy.

By the time your average SJW who still owns a car figured things out, the roads would be hopelessly clogged.  At the head of the traffic jam many miles away one would find a ditch across the road which took someone like me all of 15 minutes to dig with a 'borrowed' excavator.  Basically, the city is where some may live and most will die.

Next the waves of rioters and looters come.  No amount of protests about being a good progressive who loves people of color is going to get one out of the robberies, rapes, and murders which will follow.  Some decent people might kiss their apartments goodbye group together into defense groups, but after a few days of no food and water, they will start to break off and join the roving gangs themselves.  By that time there won't be much left anyway.

Then the diseases associated with lack of sanitation set in.  About the only thing Americans are not vaccinated against are these...as if vaccinations worked worth a shit against real outbreaks anyway.

By this time people will be begging for anything to save them.  If some of the 20,000,000 Chi-com 'international relief helpers' do actually show up in one's city they will mostly just finish the job that the above misfortunes didn't.

100% of the people who survived the Andes airplane crash employed survival cannibalism when it became the only way to survive.  These were middle and upper-middle class people who were generally practicing Christians.  I've not studied it in detail, but as far as I can tell they moved ahead with a normal life after the trying event.

Even on a 'island', I would certainly try every kind of potentially edible thing I could find before resorting to cannibalism and would probably spend a lot of time swimming around in the water in search of something which could serve as food.  Probably mostly in very remote polar conditions where nature provides a freezer or on a boat or debris in the ocean would no possible other options exist.

In other words, from a 1st-world perspective it would be super rare for a situation to necessitate cannibalism...unless forced to by satanist weirdos like those who almost got the presidency of the U.S.  Under Socialist mis-management, general corruption, and poor planning (if not design) can create such conditions.  Just ask a Chinese or North Korean.  No reports from Venezuela yet except a prison related corner-case.

I would predict that thwarting the will of the peeps with respect to the 2016 election has the potential to precipitate conditions of survival cannibalism in densely populated and inescapable urban areas like San Francisco.

Those urban dwellers on the political Left who hope for something like an assassination, electorate theft, etc to short-circuit a Trump presidency are not thinking things through very well in the context of the election day maps.

These actions would be acts of war which, from a strict interpretation of the founding documents if nothing else, would require action.  And many of us who have put some study into 'globalism' consider losing to it as an end-game scenario as far as the U.S. as a nation is concerned.  Thus there could be combative resistance with a motivating driver.  How likely this would be I can only guess.

In almost any grade of conflict the outlying areas would probably become no-go zones for SJW types (or anyone else) fleeing the urban centers, and these would be collapsing rather quickly.  I suggest to those in the Bay Area, for instance, who have the option to take a vacation and visit out-of-town family/friends if it looks like Moore's 'predictions' might be coming to pass.

In this time between Trump's election and now, a lot of people are feeling rather hopeful about the economic potential associated with 'making America great again', and relieved that many of Trump's cabinet picks indicate that he was at least in part 'for real' about some of the things that caused us to vote for him.  For my part I'll be significantly more than 'disappointed' should we be robbed of the opportunity to try thing out his way.

I'm probably typical in that I would not welcome the loss of life brought on by a collapse and some grade of warfare, but there is not much I could do about it if I wanted to.  Any sympathy I have would be significantly muted by the recent propensity toward censorship and totalitarianism and what-not which seems strongly associated with the establishment programmed 'progressive' fundamentalists who, for demographic reasons, will be taking the biggest hit.

Almost certainly what would happen is that there would be marshal law and lock-downs by military and/or para-military forces to try to keep the cities supplied with food and water.  The big question mark for those of us who may retain some freedom of action will be 'who is in control of the forces'?  This info is needed to figure out what level of support, or resistance, might be warranted.  Accurate information to make these determinations will be impossible to find after an event thus open eyes and good analysis now is (imho) extremely important.

Also, from memory, a short list of other goodies which are or have been known to have been along for the ride:

 - Tween-80 detergent which interferes with lipids helping the blood-brain barrier to do it's job.

 - SV-40 virus found in half of all cancers (polio vaccine.)

 - Pig viruses undetected until well after vaccine went into production and started to be injected into people (rotovirus vaccine.)

 - A wide variety of broken down cellular components from the culture medium (human and animal cell lines and tissues.)

 - mycoplasma species.

 - hCG (human chorionic gonadotropin) which was specifically developed to cause infertility in females and has been used covertly in tetanus vaccination programs from time to time.

I rarely state things as 'fact' on purpose.  I did state as a given fact that sick people are economically advantageous for drug makers.  Feel free to argue the converse if you like.

As for your .gov association, I've mentioned several times that it's more likely that you are but a run-of-the-mill victim though I didn't rule out the possibility that you are a contractor or some such.

Since you seem to have a little bit of genuine interest in the topic, note that a healthy immune system needs to be active against 'self' in addition to the more commonly considered invaders and it's a tricky business.  Turbo-charging an immune system with activity stress and adjuvants is playing Russian-roulette with autoimmune problems.  The trouble is that to the extent that vaccines work at all, it is only because of adjuvants.

Furthermore, for 'ethical' reasons, the term 'work' is defined as the vaccines producing a certain level of titers.  The actual on-the-ground effectiveness at dealing with supposed diseases is a distant second.

The logical take-away is that due to the inevitable risks, vaccination should be used as sparingly as possible.  This means only for critical issues in under an honest and rational cost/benefit analysis.  What is happening under our current system where the pharma corporations have no fiscal liability and pretty much own the CDC (and most other branches of govt under our oligarchy here in the U.S.) is that we peeps are being over-vaccinated to an astonishing degree, and are almost certainly paying the price (literally and figuratively.)

Information keeps coming out substantiating what a lot of us figured out a while ago.

http://www.naturalnews.com/2016-12-08-top-doctors-reveal-that-vaccines-can-trigger-autoimmunity-turning-our-immune-systems-against-us.html


Very profitable for the medical-industrial complex.  My guess is that you don't even hold any shares in any of these corporations but are rather a simple big-brother loving damaged minion who these people have worked hard to create.  Anyone who would support for president probably the most corrupt politician ever seen in the U.S. (Hillary Clinton) is almost certain to be a victim of the attack on one front or another.

Your side better get cracking on 'fake news' and peer-2-peer info sharing clamp-down because the end is near and the games are being figured out rapidly by those who can still think critically.

You are putting actual numbers to a proposed phenomenon which lacks even rate metrics (e.g., 'probably 100 million victims'.)  And then trying to tell me that I don't understand 'logic and stochastic' analysis?  Lol.

My complaint is that studies which could honestly pin down some of the rates in what is a very complex system are avoided like the plague.  Those studies which do sneak through are typically quashed, and flawed ones which further a certain narrative are promoted.  I've not seen it yet, but the movie 'vaxxed' is supposed to be about this occurring at the CDC.

Applying 'logic' to the observation that science is skewed and quashed when it goes against the 'safe and effective' mantra about vaccines leads me to believe that they are less 'safe and effective' than the mainstream propaganda would have us believe.  A corollary in logical analysis would be 'why the effort?'.  I propose one possible explanation is that the health problems which may be associated with over-vaccination are actually quite profitable and useful to the pharma industry and others.

My hypothesis is nothing new.  Back in the early 50's Bertrand Russell hypothesized that in future 'scientific societies', 'diet and injection' would be among the tools that a leadership would use to produce a more manageable population with attributes and behaviors which would be to their liking.