Pandemic threat? Anyone else concerned?

CDC Director Admits "We May Need To Update Our Definition Of 'Fully Vaccinated'"


By redefining “fully vaccinated”, they can turn millions of double-jabbed people back into “unvaccinated” people and stop them from becoming potential “breakthrough infections” and hurting the vaccine effectiveness stats.

This will, in turn, camouflage any excess mortality in those who have had the vaccine, for example due to antibody-dependent enhancement, because all those who die will officially be “not fully vaccinated”.

They’ll likely push it through soon, before this winter’s flu season hits, so any flu deaths can be “unvaccinated covid deaths”.

And for anybody out there who got double-jabbed thinking they were buying their life back, we’re sorry, but we did warn you this would happen.
:confused: The very first time they mentioned “booster” that SHOULD have been a wake up call to the entire country, not just conservatives, and those with PhD’s.

But now with the help of their MSM, the cautious thinkers who sensibility held off on getting the jab are now the enemy of the vaccine dependent.

1635027278636.jpeg



( Bonhoeffer was hanged by Adolf Hitler in 1945.)

Taken from a circular letter, addressing many topics, written to three friends and co-workers in the conspiracy against Hitler, on the tenth anniversary of Hitler’s accession to the chancellorship of Germany…

‘Stupidity is a more dangerous enemy of the good than malice. One may protest against evil; it can be exposed and, if need be, prevented by use of force. Evil always carries within itself the germ of its own subversion in that it leaves behind in human beings at least a sense of unease. Against stupidity we are defenseless. Neither protests nor the use of force accomplish anything here; reasons fall on deaf ears; facts that contradict one’s prejudgment simply need not be believed- in such moments the stupid person even becomes critical – and when facts are irrefutable they are just pushed aside as inconsequential, as incidental. In all this the stupid person, in contrast to the malicious one, is utterly self-satisfied and, being easily irritated, becomes dangerous by going on the attack. For that reason, greater caution is called for than with a malicious one. Never again will we try to persuade the stupid person with reasons, for it is senseless and dangerous.

‘If we want to know how to get the better of stupidity, we must seek to understand its nature. This much is certain, that it is in essence not an intellectual defect but a human one. There are human beings who are of remarkably agile intellect yet stupid, and others who are intellectually quite dull yet anything but stupid. We discover this to our surprise in particular situations. The impression one gains is not so much that stupidity is a congenital defect, but that, under certain circumstances, people are made stupid or that they allow this to happen to them. We note further that people who have isolated themselves from others or who live in solitude manifest this defect less frequently than individuals or groups of people inclined or condemned to sociability. And so it would seem that stupidity is perhaps less a psychological than a sociological problem. It is a particular form of the impact of historical circumstances on human beings, a psychological concomitant of certain external conditions. Upon closer observation, it becomes apparent that every strong upsurge of power in the public sphere, be it of a political or of a religious nature, infects a large part of humankind with stupidity. It would even seem that this is virtually a sociological-psychological law. The power of the one needs the stupidity of the other. The process at work here is not that particular human capacities, for instance, the intellect, suddenly atrophy or fail. Instead, it seems that under the overwhelming impact of rising power, humans are deprived of their inner independence, and, more or less consciously, give up establishing an autonomous position toward the emerging circumstances. The fact that the stupid person is often stubborn must not blind us to the fact that he is not independent. In conversation with him, one virtually feels that one is dealing not at all with a person, but with slogans, catchwords and the like that have taken possession of him. He is under a spell, blinded, misused, and abused in his very being. Having thus become a mindless tool, the stupid person will also be capable of any evil and at the same time incapable of seeing that it is evil. This is where the danger of diabolical misuse lurks, for it is this that can once and for all destroy human beings.

‘Yet at this very point it becomes quite clear that only an act of liberation, not instruction, can overcome stupidity. Here we must come to terms with the fact that in most cases a genuine internal liberation becomes possible only when external liberation has preceded it. Until then we must abandon all attempts to convince the stupid person. This state of affairs explains why in such circumstances our attempts to know what ‘the people’ really think are in vain and why, under these circumstances, this question is so irrelevant for the person who is thinking and acting responsibly. The word of the Bible that the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom declares that the internal liberation of human beings to live the responsible life before God is the only genuine way to overcome stupidity.

‘But these thoughts about stupidity also offer consolation in that they utterly forbid us to consider the majority of people to be stupid in every circumstance. It really will depend on whether those in power expect more from people’s stupidity than from their inner independence and wisdom.’

-Dietrich Bonhoeffer, from ‘After Ten Years’ in Letters and Papers from Prison (Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works/English, vol. 8) Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2010.
 
Last edited:
In other words, the next pandemic may originate from NYC accidently when the time is right :facepalm: Lets hope they don't use an actual virus to test this "stuff" out


Perfect, as we all know how smart our intellectuals are. This will soon become a blueprint in the hand of our enemies to use in such an attack.
 
Last edited:
CDC Director Admits "We May Need To Update Our Definition Of 'Fully Vaccinated'"


By redefining “fully vaccinated”, they can turn millions of double-jabbed people back into “unvaccinated” people and stop them from becoming potential “breakthrough infections” and hurting the vaccine effectiveness stats.

This will, in turn, camouflage any excess mortality in those who have had the vaccine, for example due to antibody-dependent enhancement, because all those who die will officially be “not fully vaccinated”.

They’ll likely push it through soon, before this winter’s flu season hits, so any flu deaths can be “unvaccinated covid deaths”.

And for anybody out there who got double-jabbed thinking they were buying their life back, we’re sorry, but we did warn you this would happen.
 
The CDC is lying to the world about Covid-19 Vaccine safety; they are killing 15 people for every 1 life they save

The CDC and the FDA claim that we can safely ignore the huge spike in event rates reported to the VAERS system this year (this is the official adverse event reporting system relied on by the FDA and CDC to spot safety signals). In their view, there is “nothing to see” in the death chart below. They claim that the propensity to report (PTR) is much higher this year and that all the events (with the exception of a few) are all simply reporting background events that were not caused by the Covid-19 vaccines.

There’s just one tiny little problem with that explanation: there is a CDC paper that proves that they are lying. Big time.

I will show below that even if we believed everything they said, it can’t explain all the deaths and severe adverse events. The data simply doesn’t fit their hypothesis. At all.

The reality is the vaccines are extremely dangerous, they kill more than they save for every age range (it’s worse the younger you are), and they should be halted immediately, not green lighted like the FDA committee just did. All vaccine mandates should be rescinded

In a nutshell, there is a paper written by five CDC authors, The reporting sensitivity of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) for anaphylaxis and for Guillain-Barré syndrome, that was published a year ago in the peer-reviewed scientific literature.

The paper claims that serious adverse events in the past have been under-reported by at most a factor of 8.3 (known as the under-reporting factor (URF)).

This means that in the best possible scenario, where there is full reporting (i.e., where the URF=1 and the PTR, defined as the avg URF/current URF, is 8.3), a reporting rate of serious adverse events that is 8.3X higher than the previous reporting rate for that symptom could be safely ignored as simply due to a higher propensity to report the naturally occurring rate of background events.

While theoretically you could have a URF of <1, this is unlikely since the HHS verifies all records before they are put in the database and eliminates duplicates. There are mistakes that happen but they are minor, e..g, we know of 2 gamed records out of the 1.6M VAERS reports. So the minimum URF would be 1 and it would be nearly impossible to achieve from a practical standpoint.

Here’s the problem. This year, with the COVID vaccines, there are a huge number of serious adverse events that are reported at a rate that is more than 8.3X higher than previous years. In fact, nearly every serious event I investigated was elevated from previous years by significantly more than this. I documented this in an important video on VAERS serious adverse event reports that I hope everyone will watch.

Unfortunately, none of the people at the FDA, CDC, or on their respective outside committees has ever watched that video. If they did, they would immediately realize the enormous mistakes that have been made and I’m sure take corrective action.

But cognitive dissonance prevents them from watching the video. I think the only way to force them to watch the video would be to physically strap them in a chair and put clamps on their eyes as was done in the movie “A Clockwork Orange.”

How do you explain the rates of pulmonary embolism?
The most stunning serious adverse event I found was pulmonary embolism (PE).

As I show in the video, the average annual number of reports of PE per year in VAERS for all vaccines was 1.4. So we’d expect to see at most 11.6 PE events this year according to the belief system of the FDA and CDC. Well, one tiny little problem: with the COVID vaccines, there were 1,131 reports, nearly a 100-fold increase over the “best case” scenario. Please watch the video on VAERS serious adverse event reports to see this for yourself.

Also, for those suffering from “cognitive dissonance syndrome” (this is a common affliction of people who think the vaccines are safe), the increase in reports isn’t due to increased rates of vaccination either as we explain in this paper which shows historical vaccination rates among various age groups.

In other words, even if you totally buy the bullshit argument of the FDA and CDC (which they never justified with analysis or data) that the URF=1 this year, it still means that 99% of the reports of pulmonary embolism (PE) are unexplainable. They must be caused by “something” and that something has to be very big and it has to be correlated with the administration of the vaccine because the PE reporting rate was correlated with the vaccine administration.

If these PE events weren’t caused by the vaccine, then what caused them?

 
EcoHealth Throws NIH Under The Bus Over Wuhan Gain-Of-Function Report; Researcher Claims 'Massive Cover-Up'

The question over whether the NIH funded risky gain-of-function research in Wuhan, China was officially 'answered' last week, after the agency claimed that one of their partners - EcoHealth Alliance, failed to report that they had 'accidentally' created a chimeric coronavirus that was able to infect humanized mice


The letter claims that EcoHealth CEO Peter Daszak failed to report this finding, and gave Daszak five days to submit "any and all unpublished data from the experiments and work conducted" under the NIH grant.

If true, it would mean Dr. Anthony Fauci, who runs the NIH's National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, wasn't lying when he told Sen. Rand Paul in July when he denied the agency was conducting GoF research.

Except, according to Vanity Fair, EcoHealth did report their findings in a timely manner.

These data were reported as soon as we were made aware, in our year four report in April 2018, said New York City-based EcoHealth in a statement.
If that's the case, Fauci is either incompetent for not knowing, or lying.