America’s Frontline Doctors met at the CDC to make their message clear

Experimental vaccines should NEVER be mandated or forced by businesses or govt. This choice should always remain between a doctor and a patient.
Please sign our petition demanding private companies and govt. stand against forced experimental vaccinations
StopMedicalDiscrimination.org

Rappoport: Covid Vaccines are a Mass Medical Experiment

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/12/16/when-the-elderly-and-frail-die-after-receiving-the-covid-vaccine/

This appears to be why the elderly are especially vulnerable to covid: melatonin production falls off with age:

http://thoughtcrimeradio.net/2020/03/covid-19-pneumonia-inflammasomes-the-melatonin-connection/

Abstract

This review briefly summarizes the actions of melatonin in reducing molecular damage caused by free radicals and associated oxygen- and nitrogen-based reactants. All the mechanisms by which melatonin is protective of such a wide variety of molecules, i.e. lipids, proteins, DNA, etc., and in such widely diverse areas of the cell and different organs are likely not yet all identified. Melatonin actions that have been identified include its ability to directly neutralize a number of toxic reactants and stimulate antioxidative enzymes. Furthermore, several metabolites that are formed when melatonin neutralizes damaging reactants are themselves scavengers suggesting that there is a cascade of reactions that greatly increase the efficacy of melatonin in styming oxidative mutilation. Suggested, but less well defined, processes which may contribute to melatonin’s ability to reduce oxidative stress include stimulation of glutathione synthesis (an important antioxidant which is at high concentrations within cells), reducing electron leakage from the mitochondrial electron transport chain (which would reduce free radical generation), limiting cytokine production and inflammatory processes (actions that would also lower toxic reactant generation), and synergistic effects with other classical antioxidants (e.g. vitamins C, E and glutathione). Clearly which of these multiple mechanisms contribute to melatonin’s high efficacy in curtailing oxidative damage remains to be clarified. Likewise, it is possible that the key action of melatonin in reducing molecular damage induced by oxygen and nitrogen-based metabolites remains to be identified. Finally, the review summarizes some of the large amount of data documenting the ability of melatonin to limit molecular and organ damage in two situations, i.e. ischemia-reperfusion and ionizing radiation, where free radicals are generally conceded as being responsible for much of the resulting tissue destruction.

A Pandemic of ‘Russian Hacking’

Neither the actor, nor the motive, nor the damage done is known for certain in this latest scare story, write Ray McGovern and Joe Lauria.

The hyperbolic, evidence-free media reports on the “fresh outbreak” of the Russian-hacking disease seems an obvious attempt by intelligence to handcuff President-elect Joe Biden into a strong anti-Russian posture as he prepares to enter the White House.

Biden might well need to be inoculated against the Russophobe fever.

There are obvious Biden intentions worrying the intelligence agencies, such as renewing the Iran nuclear deal and restarting talks on strategic arms limitation with Russia. Both carry the inherent “risk” of thawing the new Cold War.

Instead, New Cold Warriors are bent on preventing any such rapprochement with strong support from the intelligence community’s mouthpiece media. U.S. hardliners are clearly still on the rise.

Interestingly, this latest hack story came out a day before the Electoral College formally elected Biden, and after the intelligence community, despite numerous previous warnings, said nothing about Russia interfering in the election. One wonders whether that would have been the assessment had Trump won.

Instead Russia decided to hack the U.S. government.

Except there is (typically) no hard evidence pinning it on Moscow.

Uncertainties

The official story is Russia hacked into U.S. “government networks, including in the Treasury and Commerce Departments,” as David Sanger of The New York Times reported.

But plenty of things are uncertain. First, Sanger wrote last Sunday that “hackers have had free rein for much of the year, though it is not clear how many email and other systems they chose to enter.”

The motive of the hack is uncertain, as well what damage may have been done.

“The motive for the attack on the agency and the Treasury Department remains elusive, two people familiar with the matter said,” Sanger reported. “One government official said it was too soon to tell how damaging the attacks were and how much material was lost.”

On Friday, five days after the story first broke, in an article misleadingly headlined, “Suspected Russian hack is much worse than first feared,” NBC News admitted:

“At this stage, it’s not clear what the hackers have done beyond accessing top-secret government networks and monitoring data.”

Who conducted the hack is also not certain.

NBC reported that the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency “has not said who it thinks is the ‘advanced persistent threat actor’ behind the ‘significant and ongoing’ campaign, but many experts are pointing to Russia.”

At first Sanger was certain in his piece that Russia was behind the attack. He refers to FireEye, “a computer security firm that first raised the alarm about the Russian campaign after its own systems were pierced.”

But later in the same piece, Sanger loses his certainty: “If the Russia connection is confirmed,” he writes.

In the absence of firm evidence that damage has been done, this may well be an intrusion into other governments’ networks routinely carried out by intelligence agencies around the world, including, if not chiefly, by the United States. It is what spies do.

So neither the actor, nor the motive, nor the damage done is known for certain.

Yet across the vast networks of powerful U.S. media the story has been portrayed as a major crisis brought on by a sinister Russian attack putting the security of the American people at risk.

In a second piece on Wednesday, Sanger added to the alarm by saying the hack “ranks among the greatest intelligence failures of modern times.” And on Friday Secretary of State Mike Pompeo claimed Russia was “pretty clearly” behind the cyber attacks. But he cautioned: “… we’re still unpacking precisely what it is, and I’m sure  some of it will remain classified.” In other words, trust us.

Ed Loomis, a former NSA technical director, believes the suspect list should extend beyond Russia to include China, Iran, and North Korea. Loomis also says the commercial cyber-security firms that have been studying the latest “attacks” have not been able to pinpoint the source.

In a New York Times op-ed, former Trump domestic security adviser Thomas Bossert on Wednesday called on Trump to “use whatever leverage he can muster to protect the United States and severely punish the Russians.” And he said Biden “must begin his planning to take charge of this crisis.”

[On Friday, Biden talked tough. He promised there would be “costs” and said: “A good defense isn’t enough; we need to disrupt and deter our adversaries from undertaking significant cyberattacks in the first place. I will not stand idly by in the face of cyber-assaults on our nation.”]

While asserting throughout his piece that, without question, Russia now “controls” U.S. government computer networks, Bossert’s confidence suddenly evaporates by slipping in at one point, “If it is Russia.”

The analysis the corporate press has relied on came from the private cyber-security firm FireEye. This question should be raised: Why has a private contractor at extra taxpayer expense carried out this cyber analysis rather than the already publicly-funded National Security Agency?

Similarly, why did the private firm CrowdStrike, rather than the FBI, analyze the Democratic National Committee servers in 2016?

Could it be to give government agencies plausible deniability if these analyses, as in the case of CrowdStrike, and very likely in this latest case of Russian “hacking,” turn out to be wrong? This is a question someone on the intelligence committees should be asking.

Sanger is as active in blaming the Kremlin for hacking, as he and his erstwhile NYT colleague, neocon hero Judith Miller, were in insisting on the presence of (non-existent) weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, helping to facilitate a major invasion with mass loss of life.

The Military-Industrial-Congressional-Intelligence-MEDIA-Academia-Think-Tank complex (MICIMATT, for short) needs credible “enemies” to justify unprecedentedly huge expenditures for arms — the more so at a time when it is clearer than ever, that that the money would be far better spent at home. (MEDIA is in all caps because it is the sine-qua-non, the cornerstone to making the MICIMATT enterprise work.)

Bad Flashback

In this latest media flurry, Sanger and other intel leakers’ favorites are including as “flat fact” what “everybody knows”: namely, that Russia hacked the infamous Hillary Clinton-damaging emails from the Democratic National Committee in 2016.

Sanger wrote:

“…the same group of [Russian] hackers went on to invade the systems of the Democratic National Committee and top officials in Hillary Clinton’s campaign, touching off investigations and fears that permeated both the 2016 and 2020 contests. Another, more disruptive Russian intelligence agency, the G.R.U., is believed to be responsible for then making public the hacked emails at the D.N.C.”

That accusation was devised as a magnificent distraction after the Clinton campaign learned that WikiLeaks was about to publish emails that showed how Clinton and the DNC had stacked the deck against Bernie Sanders. It was an emergency solution, but it had uncommon success.

There was no denying the authenticity of those DNC emails published by WikiLeaks. So the Democrats mounted an artful campaign, very strongly supported by Establishment media, to divert attention from the content of the emails. How to do that? Blame Russian “hacking.” And for good measure, persuade then Senator John McCain to call it an “act of war.”

One experienced observer, Consortium News columnist Patrick Lawrence, saw through the Democratic blame-Russia offensive from the start.

Artful as the blame-Russia maneuver was, many voters apparently saw through this clever and widely successful diversion, learned enough about the emails’ contents, and decided not to vote for Hillary Clinton.

4 Years & 7 Days Ago

On Dec. 12, 2016, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) used sensitive intelligence revealed by Edward Snowden, the expertise of former NSA technical directors, and basic principles of physics to show that accusations that Russia hacked those embarrassing DNC emails were fraudulent.

A year later, on Dec. 5, 2017, the head of CrowdStrike, the cyber firm hired by the DNC to do the forensics, testified under oath that there was no technical evidence that the emails had been “exfiltrated”; that is, hacked from the DNC.

His testimony was kept hidden by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff until Schiff was forced to release it on May 7, 2020. That testimony is still being kept under wraps by Establishment media.

What VIPS wrote four years ago is worth re-reading — particularly for those who still believe in science and have trusted the experienced intelligence professionals of VIPS with the group’s unblemished, no-axes-to-grind record.

Most of the Memorandum’s embedded links are to TOP SECRET charts that Snowden made available — icing on the cake — and, as far as VIPS’s former NSA technical directors were concerned, precisely what was to be demonstrated QED.

Many Democrats unfortunately still believe–or profess to believe–the hacking and the Trump campaign-Russia conspiracy story, the former debunked by Henry’s testimony and the latter by Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Both were legally obligated to tell the truth, while the intelligence agencies were not.

https://consortiumnews.com/2020/12/19/a-pandemic-of-russian-hacking/

Wikileaks: CIA’s Marble Tool: Framework for Cyber False Flags

Did CIA’s “Marble” Tool Do the ‘Russian Hacking’?

 

http://thoughtcrimeradio.net/2017/07/hillary-clinton-and-cia-were-prepared-to-use-false-flag-start-a-war-with-russia/

Podesta emails: Gangster talk

DNC Issued Checks to Private Security Firm Immediately After Murders of Seth Rich, Shawn Lucas

WHO (finally) admits PCR tests create false positives

Warnings concerning high CT value of tests are months too late…so why are they appearing now? The potential explanation is shockingly cynical.

The World Health Organization released a guidance memo on December 14th, warning that high cycle thresholds on PCR tests will result in false positives.

While this information is accurate, it has also been available for months, so we must ask: why are they reporting it now? Is it to make it appear the vaccine works?

The “gold standard” Sars-Cov-2 tests are based on polymerase chain reaction (PCR). PCR works by taking nucleotides – tiny fragments of DNA or RNA – and replicating them until they become something large enough to identify. The replication is done in cycles, with each cycle doubling the amount of genetic material. The number of cycles it takes to produce something identifiable is known as the “cycle threshold” or “CT value”. The higher the CT value, the less likely you are to be detecting anything significant.

This new WHO memo states that using a high CT value to test for the presence of Sars-Cov-2 will result in false-positive results.

To quote their own words [our emphasis]:

Users of RT-PCR reagents should read the IFU carefully to determine if manual adjustment of the PCR positivity threshold is necessary to account for any background noise which may lead to a specimen with a high cycle threshold (Ct) value result being interpreted as a positive result.

They go on to explain [again, our emphasis]:

The design principle of RT-PCR means that for patients with high levels of circulating virus (viral load), relatively few cycles will be needed to detect virus and so the Ct value will be low. Conversely, when specimens return a high Ct value, it means that many cycles were required to detect virus. In some circumstances, the distinction between background noise and actual presence of the target virus is difficult to ascertain.

Of course, none of this is news to anyone who has been paying attention. That PCR tests were easily manipulated and potentially highly inaccurate has been one of the oft-repeated battle cries of those of us opposing the “pandemic” narrative, and the policies it’s being used to sell.

Many articles have been written about it, by many experts in the field, medical journalists and other researchers. It’s been commonly available knowledge, for months now, that any test using a CT value over 35 is potentially meaningless.

Dr Kary Mullis, who won the Nobel Prize for inventing the PCR process, was clear that it wasn’t meant as a diagnostic tool, saying:

with PCR, if you do it well, you can find almost anything in anybody.”

And, commenting on cycle thresholds, once said:

If you have to go more than 40 cycles to amplify a single-copy gene, there is something seriously wrong with your PCR.”

The MIQE guidelines for PCR use state:

Cq values higher than 40 are suspect because of the implied low efficiency and generally should not be reported,”

This has all been public knowledge since the beginning of the lockdown. The Australian government’s own website admitted the tests were flawed, and a court in Portugal ruled they were not fit for purpose.

Even Dr Anthony Fauci has publicly admitted that a cycle threshold over 35 is going to be detecting “dead nucleotides”, not a living virus.

Despite all this, it is known that many labs around the world have been using PCR tests with CT values over 35, even into the low 40s.

So why has the WHO finally decided to say this is wrong? What reason could they have for finally choosing to recognise this simple reality?

The answer to that is potentially shockingly cynical: We have a vaccine now. We don’t need false positives anymore.

Notionally, the system has produced its miracle cure. So, after everyone has been vaccinated, all the PCR tests being done will be done “under the new WHO guidelines”, and running only 25-30 cycles instead of 35+.

Lo and behold, the number of “positive cases” will plummet, and we’ll have confirmation that our miracle vaccine works.

After months of flooding the data pool with false positives, miscounting deaths “by accident”, adding “Covid19 related death” to every other death certificate…they can stop. The create-a-pandemic machine can be turned down to zero again.

…as long as we all do as we’re told. Any signs of dissent – masses of people refusing the vaccine, for example – and the CT value can start to climb again, and they bring back their magical disease.

https://off-guardian.org/2020/12/18/who-finally-admits-pcr-tests-create-false-positives/

Facebook, Twitter Revert To Pre-Election News Feed Algos After Their Preferred Candidate Wins Election

Facebook and Twitter have reversed algorithms deployed during the election to prioritize MSM reporting – which, if you recall, peddled the ‘Russian disinformation’ angle on the Hunter Biden laptop story, as opposed to reporting on its content. Also, unrelated we’re sure, Facebook and Twitter execs were giant Biden supporters, and many have joined his transition team and will perhaps be rewarded with positions in his administration.

Facebook’s algorithm significantly boosted content from outlets such as CNN, the New York Times and NPR, while de-ranking alt-media sites such as Zero Hedge and others.

The election algo tweaks were part of a “temporary change we made to help limit the spread of inaccurate claims about the election,” according to Facebook spokesman Joe Osborne.

Facebook spokesman Joe Osborne told the NYT on Wednesday that the platform is still prioritizing “authoritative and informative news” on “important global topics like elections, Covid-19 and climate change.”

Twitter, meanwhile, reversed some of its election-influencing measures on Wednesday – announcing the end of a two-step ‘retweet’ processs on the quote-tweet screen, after acknowledging that it had decreased overall engagement rather than what they deem “misleading information.”…

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/facebook-twitter-revert-pre-election-news-feed-algos-after-their-preferred-candidate-wins

Dominion Took Over Georgia Voting Machines Remotely During 2020 Election

Not only were Dominion voting machines connected to the Internet, in the 2020 election in Georgia, Dominion actually took over voting machines remotely.  Crazy.

There were comments originally that Dominion was not connected to the Internet.  An individual representing Dominion before the election claimed that Dominion voting machines were not connected to the Internet.  FOX News interviewed  Dominion spokesperson Michael Steel on November 22:

When asked if a poll worker could use a USB thumb drive to add votes for a candidate, Steel said that the vote tabulators do not have such access. He also said they are not connected to the internet.

“It’s not physically possible to do what they’re describing,” he reiterated. He also disputed a claim that an algorithm weighed votes for Biden greater than votes for Trump, noting again that the paper ballot records would reveal that….

We uncovered shortly after Steele spoke that he was a Jeb Bush lackey:

Steele lied about Dominion voting machines not having Internet access.  A week or so later, Rudy Giuliani asked an expert about this claim:

Not only was Dominion accessible on the Internet, it was accessible by far-left Indivisible Organizers on Election Night — An Obama-linked group that endorsed Joe Biden.

This leads us to today.  We’ve uncovered that Dominion, which has Internet access, took over Georgia voting machines remotely. 

In the interview with the Georgia Senate, Susan Voyles, a Georgia poll manager stated that Dominion accessed Georgia voting machines remotely:

The individual actually said they remoted into ballot marking devices:

So, Dominion voting machines can be accessed by far-left Obama related groups. Individuals related to Dominion accessed ballot marking devices remotely in Georgia (and likely other states) during the 2020 election. This doesn’t sound secure.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/12/breaking-exclusive-dominion-took-georgia-voting-machines-remotely/

I don’t know how this could be called a left operation.   Left/right implies political ideology (i.e. motivated by beliefs about optimal social organization)   This was more of an intelligence “deep state” mercenary operation, which are often camouflaged as ideologically motivated.   The DNC is not a political operation.   It is an offensive intelligence operation.

Democrat Congressman: Cartel Smugglers Telling Migrants “Border Will be Open” after Biden Inaugurated

A Texas Democratic Congressman has indicated cartel and human smuggling groups are encouraging illegal immigration in Mexico and Central America, citing a tentative Joe Biden presidency and advertising soft border policies. Trans-national criminal organizations have facilitated illegal immigration for decades, seeking to profit from the sale of smuggling services.

Rep. Henry Cuellar told Border Report that he had been told of a campaign to encourage illegal immigration in the region. “The bad guys are starting to promote to people of Central America and Mexico that ‘the border will be open; it will be different so start getting ready to come.‘”

Cuellar cited a congressional DHS briefing, going so far as to reveal that drug cartels are “promoting and staging” groups of illegal immigrants for potential smuggling operations. CBP and DHS officials have already begun reporting a ‘Biden surge’ of illegal migration, confirming a theory that inflows of illegal migration vary considerably on the basis of perceived US policy changes…

More at https://bigleaguepolitics.com/democrat-congressman-smugglers-telling-migrants-border-will-be-open-after-biden-inaugurated/

Two Alaska Healthcare Workers Given Emergency Treatment After Taking Pfizer’s COVID-19 Vaccine

From The New York Times:

Two health care workers at the same hospital in Alaska developed concerning reactions just minutes after receiving Pfizer’s coronavirus vaccine this week, including one staff member who was to remain hospitalized until Thursday.

Health officials said that the cases would not disrupt their vaccine rollout plans and that they were sharing the information for the sake of transparency…

Read the whole story here: http://www.informationliberation.com/