IT WAS ALWAYS A FAKE VACCINE

They were never vaccines to begin with. It was always a lie from the beginning.  

Dr. Ryan Cole: 15 Ways the COVID Shots Injure and KiII

According to Dr. Ryan Cole, the COVID shots can cause harm in 15 distinct ways. Researchers have revealed how nanoparticles are being utilized in these shots, and what the effects are of the persistence of synthetic RNA in the body. Additionally, scientists are exposing the circulation of synthetic spike protein and its impact on human health. The spike protein itself is a harmful agent that can have far-reaching consequences. Experts are also examining the brain accumulation and impact of these shots, as well as the potential for peripheral nerve damage and organ damage. Furthermore, the COVID shots have been linked to myocarditis and heart issues, and are also affecting the adrenal glands and elastic fibers. The shots are also causing reproductive harms, weakening immune systems, and leading to vascular damage and clotting. Moreover, abnormal protein accumulation, immune tolerance, and increased cancer risk are all being actively studied as potential consequences of the COVID shots. Dr. Cole’s insights highlight the need for continued research into the effects of these shots on human health and the need to stop them.

Vaccine injections altered human immunity on a global scale

According to epidemiologist Nicolas Hulscher, vaccine injections have drastically changed human immunity worldwide, and he’s sounding the alarm. By analyzing the electronic medical records of thousands of patients before and after the COVID-19 pandemic, Hulscher has uncovered compelling evidence of vaccine-acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, or VAIDS. The shocking spike in autoimmune diseases, chronic infections, and even cancer cases is prompting Hulscher to call for immediate and thorough scientific scrutiny of the long-term consequences of these vaccines, with the ultimate goal of potentially bringing an end to the mRNA vaccine era. Hulscher’s findings are sparking intense debate and raising critical questions about the safety and efficacy of these vaccines, and he’s urging the scientific community to take a closer look at the devastating impact they may be having on human health.

 mRNA tech is NOT a vaccine — it’s an experimental gene-modifying platform

Under oath, Dr. Robert Sullivan confirmed it. mRNA tech is NOT a vaccine — it’s an experimental gene-modifying platform. It forces the body to produce toxic spike proteins, causing lung, heart, and organ damage. It is linked to autoimmune disorders and abnormal cell growth, and they KNEW IT. These are crimes against humanity were committed, the truth was censored to protect Big Pharma and billions were made — at the cost of YOUR health

What is Gene Therapy, and Why the Interest?

Gene therapy involves modifying or introducing genetic material to treat or prevent diseases, often targeting conditions like genetic disorders, cancers, or viral infections. It’s a broad field, encompassing mRNA vaccines (which some call gene therapy due to their use of genetic instructions) and approaches like CRISPR or viral vector therapies. According to dubious researchers and institutions, it offers potential cures for previously untreatable conditions, rapid vaccine development (as seen with COVID-19), and massive commercial opportunities. Biotech giants like Moderna and Pfizer, backed by government contracts, have poured billions into this space, with mRNA platforms alone generating tens of billions in revenue during the pandemic.

mRNA is about Centralized Control and Power

The push for gene therapy is tied to powerful institutions—Big Pharma, governments, and organizations like the World Health Organization or the Gates Foundation—that are centralizing control over health. Globalist entities—think WHO, GAVI, or multinational corporations—are accused of using gene therapy to standardize medical interventions worldwide, bypassing national sovereignty. mRNA vaccines, rolled out globally during COVID-19, were a test case for mandating experimental tech under the guise of public health. gene therapies could be weaponized to alter populations, either through sterilization, genetic selection, or other dystopian outcomes, echoing historical eugenics programs.

Eugenics, as practiced in the early 20th century, involved elites promoting policies to “improve” populations, often targeting marginalized groups. Figures like Bill Gates, whose foundation funds vaccine and gene therapy research, has made comments on population control through health interventions. While Gates frames this as reducing poverty to lower birth rates, its a slippery slope toward eugenics-like goals, especially when gene-editing tools like CRISPR could target specific genetic traits.

mRNA is a Trojan Horse

mRNA vaccines as “gene therapy” because they introduce genetic instructions into cells. They’re a gateway to normalizing genetic manipulation. Kennedy’s recent cancellation of $500 million in mRNA funding cited safety, resonating with those who see mRNA as a tool for globalist agendas rather than public good.

mRNA for Profit and Power Concentration

From a finance angle, gene therapy is a goldmine. The global market is projected to hit $13 billion by 2026, driven by high-cost treatments (some therapies cost $2M+ per dose). This enriches a small elite—pharma CEOs, investors, and their political allies—while tying healthcare to corporate control. The gene therapy’s push isn’t just about health but about creating dependency on proprietary tech, with potential for social engineering if access is gatekept or tailored to certain groups.

Written By Tatenda Belle Panashe

CONTEXTUALISATION: THE SEPTEMBER 22ND ANNOUNCEMENT

 “The US HHS’s Doubledown on Acetaminophen (or Tylenol)”, and we ought to begin with some contextualisation, looking at the announcement on the 22nd of September. Well, speaking from the Roosevelt Room, President Donald Trump and US Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr announced bold new actions to confront the autism spectrum disorder (ASD) epidemic in America, which has surged nearly 400% since 2000 and now affects 1 in 31 American children.

First, the US Food and Drug Administration (or the FDA) will act on a potential treatment for speech-related deficits associated with ASD. The FDA is publishing a Federal Register notice outlining a label update for leucovorin for cerebral folate deficiency, which has been associated with autism. This action establishes the first FDA-recognised therapeutic for children with cerebral folate deficiency and autistic symptoms.  The change will essentially authorise treatment for children with ASD, with continued use if children show language, social, or adaptive gains. Following the label update for ASD, state Medicaid programs will be able to cover leucovorin for the indication of ASD, in partnership with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). Finally, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) will launch confirmatory trials and new research into the impact of leucovorin including safety studies.

Now, it is very key to note that leucovorin is not a cure for ASD and may only lead to improvements in speech-related deficits for a subset of children with ASD. In addition, leucovorin would have to be administered under close medical supervision and in conjunction with other non-pharmacological approaches for children with ASD (e.g., behavioral therapy).

Then the second point of contextualisation to highlight from the announcement on the 22nd of September is that HHS stated that it will also act on acetaminophen. In essence, the FDA responsibility was to issue a physician notice and begin the process to initiate a safety label change for acetaminophen (or Tylenol and similar products). HHS would also have the responsibility of launching a nationwide public service campaign to inform families and protect public health.

TRUMP OPPOSES HEPATITIS B VACCINE FOR BABIES, & WARNS OF METALS IN VACCINES

Now one of the striking details mentioned by prescient Trump in the course of the tylenol-autism link announcement is that he questioned the rationale of giving an infant a Hepatitis B vaccine, as well the many dangerous metals, like aluminium and mercury in vaccines. Now, he proceeds to advocate for spacing out vaccines, as opposed to eradicating them in their entirety, which is not as fundamentalist and accurate a response to vaccines as I would argue is necessary. However, his remarks are considered in the context of a world and American society where people still have the freedom to exercise the choice to take a vaccine even when they are told about their harms. But, I am hoping to see and praying for this more fundamentalist and emphatically anti-vaccine approach to become more intrinsic to US health policy, because, we have spent a lot of time challenging the rationale behind vaccine science, and also disproving their claimed efficacy (including here on The War Room, and LN24 International at large) for us not to advocate for progressing towards a direct refutation of the necessity or plausibility of vaccines.

Nevertheless, here is why it still matters that Trump is perhaps the first president in US and world history to raise concerns about the Hepatitis B vaccines of the first day out of the womb, and also the presence of metals like aluminium and mercury in vaccines. First, central to the vaccine agenda and hoax, as far as it relates to children, is the idea that the many vaccines that parents are being compelled to allow for their children are somehow necessary. Following his rationale, within hours or when a child is born, a child is subjected to pharmaceutical intervention: more specifically, a new newborn’s eyes are smeared with erythro-mycin ointment, and a newborn is given the Hepatitis B shot.

However, erythromycin ointment is to prevent gonorrhoea or chlamydia infections of the eyes; and so, why would a newborn need this if the mother does not have these sexually transmitted illnesses? Furthermore, Hepatitis B is also a sexually transmitted disease, and from IV drug abusers, and so why would a newborn need this if parents are healthy and do not have Hepatitis B? Especially since parents are tested for these illnesses! In essence, the logic behind the alleged necessity of these interventions is really about treating newborns for illnesses they do NOT have – because there is literally nothing causal and therefore expressly necessary that would warrant these pharmaceutical interventions. Therefore, in questioning the rationale behind giving newborns the Hepatitis B jab, President Trump is exposing the deceptive reasoning behind it, and subsequently disrupting the vaccine enterprise’s profit stream that is built on the backs of babies.

Secondly, metals in vaccines are actually a massive health concern. Dr Toby Rogers PhD exposed the fact that the FDA and CDC approved aluminum as ‘safe & effective’ in vaccines, based on a study of only 4 rabbits that was riddled with issues – and yet, this is the study that the FDA and CDC rely on. In this study, they promptly lost the results from one of the rabbits. So the study is actually based on just 3 rabbits. But, the results in the rabbits were nevertheless of great concern.

In essence, the rabbits were killed after 28 days and the Aluminum Adjuvants are still there. At the endpoint, Aluminum retention in the body and organs was 94% for Aluminum Hydroxide and 78% for Aluminum Phosphate. The theory and narrative told by the FDA and CDC has always been that the body excretes the Aluminum through the urine and is therefore harmless. BUT, Dr Toby Rogers explained that nothing could be further from the truth. Injected heavy metals actually stay in the places in the body you would expect, which include the kidneys, the liver, the heart, the lymph nodes, the bone marrow and  the brain.”

And so, clearly the study by the CDC and the FDA was terrible to begin with but also produced results that were concerning. BUT, despite this, the FDA and CDC declared the presence of metals in vaccines to be safe and effective. It is beyond absurd because the science is so terribly bad that anybody who reads that study would not want to inject their children with Aluminum Adjuvanted vaccines. And that’s just one ingredient amongst hundreds in these vaccines, as far as metals are concerned. Here’s more from Dr Toby Rogers.

RFK JR: TYLENOL NOT JUST LINKED TO AUTISM, BUT ALSO ADHD AND LIVER TOXICITY

Then, in a recent announcement this month of October, and in doubling down on the tylenol issue, Secretary Kennedy announced that Tylenol is NOT just linked to autism but also ADHD and liver toxicity in children. Let’s kindly revisit that moment.

THE POINT OF CONTENTION: IS ACETAMINOPHEN A CAUSE OR DRIVER OF AUTISM?

So, all that we’ve discussed and heard thus far contextualises the contribution from the White house as far as tylenol (and vaccines) are concerned. Which then brings us to the point of contention. Now, for clarity, what is NOT the point of contention (at least for the purpose of our discussion is that the FDA recognises that acetaminophen is often treated as the only tool (or most recommended tool) for fevers and pain in pregnancy, as other alternatives (e.g., NSAIDs) have well documented adverse effects; which is why the FDA is also partnering with manufacturers to update labeling and drive new research to safeguard mothers, children, and families – this is not the point of contention we will focus on, because acetaminophen certainly has health risks (which we will highlight as we proceed), and these are health risks that do not warrant a defence, and rather necessitate a shift away from a reliance on pharmaceutical drugs as a means of pain or fever relief – especially in young children.

Then, what IS a point of contention that we ought to address for the purpose of our discussion, looking at the The US HHS’s Doubledown on Acetaminophen (or Tylenol) is one that began with a crucial concession from the White House concerning acetaminophen, and it is that the FDA recognises that there are contrary studies showing no association between acetaminophen and autism.  Thus, given the conflicting literature and lack of clear causal evidence, the HHS stated on the 22nd of September that it wants to encourage clinicians to exercise their best judgment in use of acetaminophen. As such, the point of contention lies with the conflicting literature, and this is precisely what we’ll talk about, by asking the question of whether acetaminophen is a root cause of driver in the autism or neurodevelopmental health issue discussion.

To begin our focus on this point of contention, I’d like to prove not only that tylenol had already been a focus in the autism debate years before the announcement from the White house in September, but I’d also like to prove that the studies even years back were showing that tylenol played the role of increasing chances of autism after vaccination, as opposed to being a primary cause itself. Kindly watch this excerpt from a 2023 interview conducted by the Children’s Health Defence.

Once again, President Trump raised the alarm about the dramatically rising prevalence of autism, and he emphasised that it must be caused by something in the environment. He mentioned acetaminophen and hyper-vaccination as prime suspects. Now, while president Trump and HHS Secretary also spoke about the suspect of large vaccine bundles administered to infants, their medical advisors (which include Drs Jay Bhattacharya, Marty Makary, Mehmet Oz, and Dorothy Fink) focused their remarks exclusively on Tylenol, and almost did not mention vaccines.

But, here is what I’d like for us to collectively reconsider. First, there have been studies that examined Tylenol among the potential causes of autism, including studies by the McCullough Foundation, led by Dr Peter McCullough, who is among the people at the forefront of performing an exhaustive investigation of autism. These studies have found little evidence to warrant regarding Tylenol as a prime suspect in autism causation. In fact, it would seem that interest in the purported Tylenol-Autism link has recently been piqued within the same institutions that have long vehemently denied that autism is linked to childhood vaccination.

Thus, the totality of circumstances suggests that Tylenol is more of a red-herring than a true suspect. Now, this is not to say that tylenol is an exceptional pharmaceutical product, rather, it is to say that studies do not support it emerging as a primary cause of autism. In fact, I find it interesting that the recent study pointing to Tylenol is from Havard – the same institution that brought us the brain death definition to cover up for the disastrous second heart transplant that took place in Brooklyn, New York; and has resulted in the murder of many patients who are claimed to have been so-called brain dead.

Secondly, since it became a widely used, over-the-counter drug in 1960, Tylenol has been the only recommended medicine for relieving pain and reducing fever in pregnant women and infants. Generation X (which are those born between 1965-1980) was exposed to Tylenol in utero, and their  mothers often gave it to them to lower their fevers from frequent earaches. And yet, in a 1970 birth cohort, autism was virtually unknown. BY CONTRAST, the trend of dramatically increasing autism began in the late eighties, following the passage of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. This Act granted liability protection to vaccine manufacturers, which was followed by a rapid proliferation of the number of shots on the childhood schedule.

So, what does this mean? I think it means that tylenol – at best – is a driver (or worsening agent) of neurodevelopmental issues, but not the root cause. Let’s begin with Prenatal Exposure. The most comprehensive review to date, by Prada et al, evaluated tylenol use during pregnancy: 27 studies found a positive association with neurodevelopmental disorders (in particular ASD/ADHD). Then, 9 studies showed no link, while 4 studies suggested protective effects. But, we also ought to consider that autism was never or rarely ever diagnosed at birth. In every study, it emerged years later—typically ages 2–8, the very same window when children are loaded with many vaccines. Meanwhile, none of these papers we referenced accounted for vaccination as a confounder. This shows prenatal Tylenol exposure may predispose children, but the neurological injuries are detected during the vaccine years.

Similarly, when we look at Postnatal Exposure to tylenol, a study by Schultz et al (in 2008) found that children given Tylenol after MMR vaccination were about six times more likely to later be diagnosed with autism. In those who regressed (meaning who lost previously acquired skills), the risk was nearly fourfold, and in those with clear post-vaccine complications, the risk spiked to over eightfold. By contrast, ibuprofen showed no association. In addition, Yengst et al (in a 2025 study) found that in a Medicaid cohort of over 674,000 children, repeated episodes of fever, ear infections, or other “Tylenol-triggering” illnesses were linked to a two and a half-fold higher risk of autism. Among girls with multiple fevers, the risk climbed to nearly fourfold.

Taken together, these studies reveal a consistent pattern: which is that autism risk intensifies in the post-vaccine period, when febrile reactions are most common, and tylenol use in this context may amplify the likelihood of developmental regression. This is considering that tylenol depletes what is called gluta-thione, and this is the body’s master antioxidant/detox system, exactly when the brain faces inflammatory/oxidative stress (such as fever, seizures, or immune activation). Now, some pediatric practices have actually recommended Tylenol before vaccine visits “just in case,” meaning that children who take tylenol before shots arrive with defenses already depleted as the shots provoke fever/immune activation—thus priming the children for worse outcomes. Ergo, tylon is a driver (or worsening agent) but not the cause of neurodevelopmental issues.

CONTRASTING THE CHILDHOOD VACCINE SCHEDULE WITH TYLENON IN THE CAUSATION DISCOURSE

So, that is what studies reflect concerning tylenol’s capacity as a root cause in neurodevelopmental issues – and especially autism. Let’s proceed to contrast this with the childhood vaccine schedule. You’d recall that on the 9th of September, attorney Aaron Siri testified before the US Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations during the hearing titled: “How the Corruption of Science has Impacted Public Perception and Policies Regarding Vaccines.” In his sworn testimony, Siri revealed the results of a long-hidden study from the Henry Ford Health System in Detroit, MI. This is the largest vaccinated vs unvaccinated birth cohort study ever conducted in the United States (looking at 18,468 participants). Children were tracked from birth over a 10-year period. The data were drawn directly from electronic medical records — the gold standard for real-world health outcomes.

The study’s official title is (quote): “Impact of Childhood Vaccination on Short- and Long-Term Chronic Health Outcomes in Children: A Birth Cohort Study.” The measures and outcomes of this study come directly from the testimony of Aaron Siri, who presented these findings under oath in the US Senate, as unfortunately, the study is not yet publicly available (again, considering that it was largely hidden for the longest time).

The key findings from the Henry Ford Health System study found that, compared to unvaccinated children, those who received one or more vaccines had dramatically higher rates of chronic illness; specifically 329% more asthma, 203% more atopic disease, 496% more autoimmune disease, 453% more neurodevelopmental disorders, 228% more developmental delays, and 347% more speech disorders. In light of these findings, Aaron Siri testified that all of these findings were statistically significant. And even more striking is that, in conditions where unvaccinated children had zero cases (and this is looking at conditions like brain dysfunction, ADHD, learning disabilities, intellectual disabilities, and tics), there were hundreds of cases among the vaccinated group!

Written By Lindokuhle Mabaso

PETER MARKS & THE FDA’S COVER-UP OF THE HARMS OF COVID JABS

Now, proceeding to look further into Peter Marks’ works at the FDA, many have been horrified to learn that the FDA and CDC systematically ignored every possible sign the COVID vaccines were dangerous as they pushed it on more and more people. One of the ways people were made aware of this was through the recently leaked recordings showing how stubbornly the head of FDA’s vaccine division, being Peter Marks at the time, refused to acknowledge any of the evidence brought forward by a group of permanently injured vaccine recipients, and even medical practitioners who were treating vaccine injured patients.

Here’s why this is important to note: generally, in looking through what transpired with the COVID-19 response, Anthony Fauci is commonly blamed for all that went amiss – and correctly so. However, we must not also miss the people who were also directly involved, while hidden within the FDA bureaucracy; and one such person is Peter Marks. Peter Marks is the primary person who covered up the reports of COVID vaccine injuries (and instead repeatedly told the world they were (quote unquote) “safe and effective”).

He was also the person who kept on pushing the FDA’s chief vaccine scientists (who were very pro-vaccine) to accelerate and condense the approval timelines for the COVID jabs (as those approvals were needed to legally implement Biden’s vaccine and booster mandates). The parties involved in this process, which included, Marion Gruber and Philip Krause (who were the Director and Deputy Director of the FDA’s Office of Vaccines Research and Review, respectively); they reported that there were (at that point) no more corners they could cut to further accelerate the COVID vaccine approvals, at which point they were removed from the COVID vaccine approval process and Peter Marks took it over (at which point the unjustifiable approvals and mandates quickly followed).

BUT, despite all of this, the media lied about Peter Marks. They stated that Marks was pressured to be anti-vax by RFK Jr. Yet, no single specific action is cited. Some articles even call Marks a hero, and he is praised by past FDA officials who now consult for drug companies or serve on their board. And funny enough, Peter Marks has now joined their ranks as one among those who embody the problem with the revolving- door corruption between the FDA and the corporations it is supposed to regulate – especially pharmaceutical companies.

FROM FDA REGULATOR TO ELI LILLY EXECUTIVE — THE REVOLVING DOOR OF CORRUPTION EXPANDS

More specifically, six months after his removal from the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), Peter Marks has officially joined Eli Lilly — the same company that has become notorious for particularly employing former FDA officials. In any case, Marks will serve as Senior VP for Molecule Discovery and Head of Infectious Diseases, working alongside Rachael Anatol, who is another recently ousted regulator. Meanwhile, his former FDA counterpart Patrizia Cavazzoni also quietly landed at Pfizer as Chief Medical Officer earlier this year.

IN FACT, nine of the last ten FDA commissioners have actually gone on to work for major pharmaceutical companies shortly after leaving public office. Within the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex, officials routinely rotate between government agencies, global NGOs, and Big Pharma — advancing personal careers while deepening institutional entanglements across the syndicate. And to paint a picture of both this corrupt revolving door relationship and also just how global this syndicate is.

Dr Elizabeth Nabel, who is the former Director of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) at the NIH — Joined Moderna’s Board of Directors. Dr Scott Gottlieb, who is the former FDA Commissioner — Joined the Board of Pfizer to promote vaccines on TV during pandemic. Dr Stephen Hahn, the former FDA Commissioner — Became Chief Medical Officer at Flagship Pioneering, which is the venture capital firm that launched Moderna. Sir Jonathan Van-Tam, who is the United Kingdom’s former Deputy Chief Medical Officer and member of the Vaccine Task Force — he was appointed as Senior Medical Consultant at Moderna. Then, Dr Jeremy Farrar, the former Director of the Wellcome Trust — he was appointed as Chief Scientist at the World Health Organization (WHO).

In addition, Dr Soren Brostrom, the Director General of the Danish Health Authority — he was also elected to the Executive Board of the World Health Organization. Then, Dr Moncef Slaoui, who is the former Chief Scientist of Operation Warp Speed — he previously served as an executive at GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) and as a Board member at Moderna. Dr Julie Gerberding, who is the former CDC Director — became President of Merck Vaccines, later serving as CEO of the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (the NIH). There is also Dr Luciana Borio, the former FDA Acting Chief Scientist and member of the Biden COVID-19 Advisory Board — she became a Partner at ARCH Venture Partners, which is a firm heavily invested in biotech, while (as we just alluded) Dr Patrizia Cavazzoni, the former Director of the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) — Appointed as Chief Medical Officer at Pfizer, and Dr Peter Marks, the former Director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) — has recently been appointed Senior Vice President for Molecule Discovery and Head of Infectious Diseases at Eli Lilly.

It is jarring how repetitive and global this revolving door corruption is; it is factually a syndicate that has gotten so bold in its endeavours, that it has become a network that erases the line between public health stewardship and corporate profiteering — which is a deeply embedded conflict of interest that undermines both trust and safety.

THE REVOLVING DOOR CORRUPTION IS INDICATIVE OF A BROADER ISSUE OF DIABOLICAL CORPORATIONS

Now here is why this revolving door issue matters beyond the specific individuals who are involved in it. A frequent criticism of corporations (which I believe also applies to governmental bureaucracies) is that their organisational structure encourages sociopathic behaviour – in fact, you would have heard me quote the President of Loveworld Incorporated, the highly esteemed Rev Dr Chris Oyakhilome DSc DSc DD, when he warned that “Capitalism has metamorphosed”, in that while we used to have corporations that sought to make profit through contributing products and services that added a net positive to society, that has since changed for a handful of them, and now they seek to make profit at the expense of the best interest of society.

Well, this typically occurs because MEMBERS of these entities are shielded from legal or personal accountability for their actions, with any wrongdoings being attributed to the corporation as a whole. In contrast, the main form of accountability most members face is the pressure to advance the institution’s mission (e.g., to make more money), leading to the proliferation of increasingly unethical methods to achieve that goal. To illustrate this, consider this quote from Peter Rost, who is a former executive at Pfizer and one of the few pharmaceutical leaders to speak out against the industry: He stated that (quote):

“It is scary how many similarities there are between this industry [speaking about the pharmaceutical industry] and the mob. The mob makes obscene amounts of money, as does this industry. The side effects of organised crime are killings and deaths, and the side effects are the same in this industry. The mob bribes politicians and others, and so does the drug industry … The difference is, all these people in the drug industry look upon themselves – well, I’d say 99 percent, anyway – look upon themselves as law-abiding citizens, not as citizens who would ever rob a bank … However, when they get together as a group and manage these corporations, something seems to happen … to otherwise good citizens when they are part of a corporation. It’s almost like when you have war atrocities; people do things they don’t think they’re capable of. When you’re in a group, people can do things they otherwise wouldn’t, because the group can validate what you’re doing as okay.”

Now, this genuinely sounds like a cry for help, from someone who fell into the pharmaceutical rabbit hole, only to discover later that they had become everything that they found morally reprehensible. Which clarifies, in part, how many of the people in this industry overlook what they know and are asked to do. But, on the other hand, we also know that there are those who are driven by their gain: be it power brockering or money. For instance, during the COVID plandemic, there was essentially zero daylight between Anthony Fauci’s agencies and the pharmaceutical industry; and this incestuous relationship was a significant part of the problem. But, here’s more on the propensity of pharmaceutical companies to function like the mafia or mob.

Furthermore, why this revolving door issue matters beyond the specific individuals who are involved in it is that it also points to a culture of disregard for morally acceptable or ethical conduct. In other words, pharmaceutical companies had a streak where they just did not fear consequences as much as they should, because they often got away with very heinous conduct – either through out-of-court settlements, or because of the work done through the pharmaceutical lobby. As such, this created a culture of outright corruption.

For instance, you’d recall that in May this year, the FDA Commissioner in this second Trump administration, being Dr Martin Makary, he publicly exposed a longstanding practice where agency inspectors accepted luxury limousine rides from the very pharmaceutical corporations they were tasked with overseeing. This underscores deep-seated conflicts of interest that have undermined the integrity of drug safety inspections, especially at overseas manufacturing facilities.

Now, the issue centers on foreign inspections, where the FDA’s oversight of drug production has historically relied on “scheduled” visits—essentially announced in advance. These setups, Makary argues, are “no inspections at all. They’re a joke.” Companies get ample time to polish their operations, hide violations, and even roll out the red carpet. Enter the limos: lavish rides provided by inspected firms, blurring the line between regulator and regulatee. While not outright bribes, such perks create an aura of favoritism, potentially softening enforcement. Makary’s exposure highlights how these rides were routine, eroding public trust in the FDA’s gold-standard claims. And this is not hyperbole; especially as the numbers paint a grim picture.

In particular, the FDA inspects thousands of foreign facilities annually, many in countries like India and China, which produce up to 80% of active pharmaceutical ingredients for U.S. drugs. A 2023 Government Accountability Office report flagged delays and weaknesses in these checks, exacerbated by COVID-19 travel bans. But post-pandemic, the return to fieldwork revealed these ethical lapses. In response, the FDA announced an expansion of unannounced inspections in May 2025, aiming to catch bad actors off-guard—those falsifying records or concealing contamination risks. The policy also explicitly bans inspectors from accepting industry-provided transport, including taxis, limos, or for-hire vehicles, alongside lodging perks. “This is a key step… to ensure that the FDA is the gold standard for regulatory oversight,

WORLD’S FIRST INTERNATIONAL GOVERNING BODY DECLARES mRNA INJECTIONS BIOLOGICAL & TECHNOLOGICAL WMDS

But, while all of this happens, there are strong efforts that are pushing against the works of pharmaceutical companies, and the vaccine holocaust. Notable among them is that in a stunning and historic move, the Alliance of Indigenous Nations (or A.I.N.) International Tribunal has issued an ORDER and DECLARATION stating that “mRNA nanoparticle injections are in fact biological and technological weapons of mass destruction.” And, of course, this marks the first formal judicial declaration by any recognized international authority categorizing the COVID-19 mRNA products as biological weapons.

Now, also important to note is that, in December 2024, Canada’s Ministry of Crown–Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs (CIRNAC) formally acknowledged the Alliance of Indigenous Nations, its Treaty, and its International Tribunal—a judicial body composed of judges from every continent. In its official letter dated December 13, 2024, Canada affirmed that its relationship with the A.I.N. exists on a Nation-to-Nation basis, thereby recognizing the Tribunal as a sovereign legal authority under Indigenous and international law.

Also important to note is that the declaration by the Alliance of Indigenous Nations International Tribunal that the COVID vaccine is a biological and technological weapons of mass destruction aligns with our recent study by Zywiec et al, which demonstrated that the COVID-19 mRNA injections violate the Biological Weapons Convention, the Nuremberg Code, the Helsinki Declaration, and the US Constitution. It also aligns with Minnesota Bill HF3219, which classifies mRNA injections and related products as weapons of mass destruction under Section 609.712, prohibiting their possession or distribution within the state.

Written By Lindokuhle Mabaso

FLORIDA SURGEON GEN: ALL VACCINE MANDATES IN FLORIDA WILL BE ENDED

And now onto our main discussion regarding the acceleration of the vaccine reckoning, and we ought to begin with the announcement from the state of Florida. Once again, on September 3rd, Florida Surgeon General Dr Joseph Ladapo announced a plan to eliminate all vaccine mandates in the state, including those required for schoolchildren to attend public schools. This move, backed by Governor Ron DeSantis, positions Florida as the first state in the US to attempt a complete rollback of vaccine requirements.

Now, Dr Ladapo, has also been known for being a vocal vaccine skeptic, but, it was particularly notable that – as a government official, and in the course of his announcement – he denounced vaccine mandates as “immoral” and likened them to “slavery,” arguing that they infringe on individual and parental rights. He went so far as to ask rhetorically (quote): “Who am I, as a government or anyone else, to tell you what you should put in your body?” and he asked this crucial albeit rhetorical question emphasizing personal choice over state-imposed requirements. Continuing, he declared that the Florida Department of Health would work to repeal all vaccine mandates, stating, “All of them. Every last one of them is wrong and drips with disdain and slavery.”

Of course, for many, this was a welcomed announcement because Florida currently requires vaccinations for schoolchildren against diseases such as measles, mumps, rubella, polio, chickenpox, and hepatitis B. Some mandates fall under the authority of the state health department, which Ladapo said would be repealed immediately, while others require legislative action from Florida’s Republican-dominated legislature. Governor DeSantis expressed support for the initiative, announcing the creation of a “Florida Make America Healthy Again” commission, chaired by First Lady Casey DeSantis and Lieutenant Governor Jay Collins, to align state policies with federal health initiatives led by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

In addition, supporters expressed that the decision is a triumph for medical freedom; for instance, Dr Robert Malone,who warned about mRNA vaccines and has been recently appointed to the new and vaccine critical CDC’s advisory committee, well, he praised Ladapo as a “measured scientist” aiming to reform the system. In addition, posts on X from many Floridians and Americans reflected similar sentiments, with some users celebrating the announcement as a defense of bodily autonomy – which appears to be the main theme following the announcement from Dr Ladapo; in that not only did Dr Ladapo articulate the overreach in allowing governments to tell people what to put into their body (or children’s body), but also the great response from citizens is that many people want their inalienable freedom of choice and right to bodily autonomy to be respected. And so, as far as a government mandate is concerned, I’d say this is reflective of what a healthy execution of the government’s duty to care should look like: it is one where people can exercise the freedom of choice, and the government does not have power to mandate policies that encroach on this inalienable freedom and complementary rights. But let’s revisit the moment of the announcement.

Also quite notable is the alluded to announcement from Governor Ron DeSantis concerning the creation of a “Florida Make America Healthy Again” commission, chaired by First Lady Casey DeSantis and Lieutenant Governor Jay Collins, to align state policies with federal health initiatives led by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Governor DeSantis said the new working group will recommend state-level integration of Make America Healthy Again principles.

Under Kennedy, the US Department of HHS is reportedly “taking bold, decisive action to reform America’s food, health, and scientific systems to identify the root causes of the chronic disease epidemic to ultimately Make America Healthy Again.” DeSantis thus added that the commission will focus on complimentary principles including “individual medical freedom, informed consent, parent rights and also market innovation.”

THE OPPOSITION TO ENDING FLORIDA’S VACCINE MANDATES REVEALS THE VALIDITY OF THE MOVE

Now, as expected, the so-called public health experts swiftly condemned the decision to end all vaccine mandates in Florida, warning of potential outbreaks of preventable diseases. For example, Dr Susan Kressly, president of the American Academy of Pediatrics, stated, “Today’s announcement by Gov. DeSantis will put children in Florida public schools at higher risk for getting sick, and have ripple effects across their community.” Similarly, Dr Richard Besser, the former acting director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), called the move “frightening,” noting that unvaccinated children could endanger immunocompromised individuals. The American Medical Association also opposed the plan, with trustee Dr Sandra Adamson Fryhofer warning it “would undermine decades of public health progress” and increase risks of diseases like measles and polio. But, ironically, the opposition to ending Florida’s vaccine mandates actually reveals the validity of this move – especially considering the people and organisations opposing it.

First, the CDC is quite literally the centre of vaccine controversy (as we have been discussing recently), ranging from the blatant disregard for scientific evidence and financial corruption – therefore, their support for vaccines does not hold the weight that Dr Richard Besser, the former acting director of the CDC thinks it might. Which then brings us to Dr Susan Kressly, president of the American Academy of Pediatrics, following her remark that ending vaccine mandates in Florida will allegedly “put children in Florida public schools at higher risk for getting sick, and have ripple effects across their community.”

So, for some context, the American Academy of Pediatrics is the major professional association of North American pediatricians, and has overseen the rising rates of chronic illness and medicating of American children over recent decades. And the reason for this is no mystery when you learn that this association is funded by sources including Moderna, Merck, Sanofi, GSK, Eli Lilly, and other pharmaceutical companies, thus making the AAP’s members the cornerstone of the rapidly increasing pediatric pharma market in North America – by far greater than any other region! Therefore, of course, the AAP will lament the decision to end vaccine mandates because its funders are pharmaceutical companies!

Secondly, the AAP weirdly (and dangerously) considers that bodily autonomy is subservient to State-imposed requirements and also that the post-World War II human rights of non-coercion and informed consent are subservient to the opinion of someone receiving money to perform an injection. Its approach quite literally coincides with the pre-War technocracy movement or medical fascism (in which a declared ‘expert’ decides on imposing healthcare measures rather than the patient themselves choosing it).

THEREFORE, their contribution to Florida ending vaccine mandates has nothing to do with health and the well-being of children, but everything to do with money and a disregard for human rights and the protection of inalienable freedoms like choice. And so, considering that bodily autonomy is a massive theme in discussions about ending the vaccine mandates in Florida, I would thus argue that the AAP’s opposition to ending vaccine mandates serves to validate the move more than to lessen its credibility.

Then, still in opposition towards Florida’s ending of the vaccine mandates, the American Medical Association also opposed the plan, with trustee Dr Sandra Adamson Fryhofer warning it “would undermine decades of public health progress” and increase risks of diseases like measles and polio. But, in actual fact, the American Medical Association is a lobbying organisation funded by pharmaceutical companies, to advance their interests. This is evidenced by the fact that it has received over $1M from Pfizer, between $500K – $999K from Merck, AstraZeneca, and Eli Lilly, between $250K – $499K from Novo Nordisk and GSK, and also hundreds of thousands more from other pharmaceutical companies.

Secondly, the dark and corrupt Rockerfella-linked history behind the largest group of health professionals in the US, being the American Medical Association, suggests that these organisations are part of the problem of systemic institutional rot and corruption, when it comes to the medical industry, as you’d recall from one of our previous discussions here on ‘The War Room’.

Ultimately, critiques on moves away from vaccination might seem plausible to the unsuspecting mind, until you actually consider that those offering the loudest critiques do so, not out of genuine concern, but out of concern for their pockets, and those of the pharmaceutical companies funding them.

THIS IS THE TIME TO DOUBLE-DOWN ON SCIENTIFIC FINDINGS SHOWING THE HARMS OF VACCINES

But, now, to push the envelope further, I would like to argue that it is time to double down on scientific findings showing the harms of vaccines in general because the evidence exists in abundance now, and we need to capitalise on the events in the status quo that we referenced in the beginning. For instance, with mRNA jabs, the largest COVID-19 vaccine autopsy study to-date, provides robust evidence that COVID-19 vaccines can cause death via multiple organ systems. We found that 73.9% of the deaths were directly due to or significantly contributed to by the shots. This study has endured relentless censorship in its journey to final publication.

Among the 240 deaths adjudicated as related to the vaccine, the primary causes of death were: Sudden cardiac death (at 35%), Pulmonary embolism (12.5%), Myocardial infarction (12%), Vaccine-induced thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) (7.9%), Myocarditis (7.1%), Multisystem inflammatory syndrome (4.6%), and Cerebral hemorrhage (3.8%). This means that the consistency seen among cases in this review with known COVID-19 vaccine mechanisms of injury and death, coupled with autopsy confirmation by physician adjudication, suggest there is a high likelihood of a causal link between COVID-19 vaccines and death.

Similarly, another autopsy paper focused solely on myocarditis deaths—proved that COVID-19 vaccine-induced myocarditis can be fatal. In all 28 autopsy-confirmed cases, the vaccine was causally linked to the death, with most deaths occurring within 3 days of vaccination. In more detail, applying the Bradford Hill criteria, the researchers confirmed a strong causal relationship between COVID-19 mRNA vaccination and fatal myocarditis, particularly in young, previously healthy individuals. These results shatter the false narrative that vaccine-induced myocarditis is rare and benign—as they show that it can and does result in sudden cardiac death.

Therefore, the temporal relationship, internal and external consistency seen among cases in this review with known COVID-19 vaccine-induced myocarditis, its pathobiological mechanisms, and related excess death, complemented with autopsy confirmation, independent adjudication, and application of the Bradford Hill criteria to the overall epidemiology of vaccine myocarditis – this all suggests that there is a high likelihood of a causal link between COVID-19 vaccines and death from myocarditis.

THIS IS ALSO THE TIME TO REFUTE THE SCIENTISTIC CULT, AND MAKE ROOM FOR DISSENT

Since 2021, critics of the new generation of mRNA so-called “vaccines” have been bewildered by the immunity of this enterprise to empirical data showing that the products are neither safe nor effective. And many of the critics did not seem to realise that they are challenging beliefs that are not rooted in scientific evaluation, but in claims from the vaccine enterprise and scientific religion. This is why the plausibility of vaccines rests on claims of their claimed almost miraculous emergence with the smallpox vaccine, while also being sustained by unqualified heroic deeds about how vaccines got rid of some of the worst diseases in human history. Well none of this is true (as we have discussed previously) and yet, to say this is regarded as heresy! And the reason lies with how the vaccine enterprise and the medical industrial complex have leveraged religion.

In actual fact, when we look back at the 2020 – 2022 period, we can observe the workings of this scientific religion. For instance, after being locked down and systematically terrorised by the mass media for most of 2020, most of humanity anxiously awaited the vaccine that was heralded as their savior and liberator. As vaccine investor, enthusiast and self-proclaimed philanto-capitalist Bill Gates repeatedly stated in the spring, the world would only be able to go back to normal (quote) “when almost every person on the planet has been vaccinated against coronavirus.” Now, this was an uncanny thing for anyone to say, considering that the freedom of people does not rest on the proclamations of mere man. But, the proclamation that “almost every person on the planet” needed to be injected with a novel substance (about which they knew nothing) seemed like something out of a dystopian science fiction novel. And yet, that was the script: that entire playbook (from predictive programming through Event 201 – to the utter erosion of human rights, the destruction of economies, closure of businesses, learning institutions and closure of Churches) all of this was part of their script, and what can be called their claimed sacred document.

Well, when the emergency-authorised mRNA vaccines were rolled out in December 2020, most of humanity was apparently unaware that they were not vaccines in the traditional sense of inactivated or attenuated pathogens that would induce an immune response (which, as we’ve previously discussed, is not sound or scientific logic). In any case, the new injections were the genetic code for instructing the body to create a foreign, toxic protein. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg understood this, and he starkly contrasted with the public when, during an internal meeting with company executives on July 16, 2020, he stated that (quote): “I do just want to make sure that I share some caution on this because we just don’t know the long-term side effects of basically modify- ing people’s DNA and RNA to directly code in a person’s DNA and RNA. Basically, the ability to produce those antibodies and whether that causes other mutations or other risks downstream. So, there’s work on both paths of vaccine development.” But, people could not say this openly, because the vaccine enterprise and scientistic cult has made dissent something akin to heresy. However, in this time when we are seeing the vaccine reckoning accelerating, we ought to capitalise on this by forcing discourse on those who tried to hide behind the “trust the science” slogan.

ANTHONY FAUCI MIGHT JUST LOSE HIS AUTOPEN IMMUNITY

Then finally, while we are having these discussions, a key part of accelerating the vaccine reckoning is ensuring that all relevant stakeholders are engaged, and held accountable. Which brings me to an interesting development where effects are actually being made to ensure that Anthony Fauci is held accountable despite the weird autism immunity from former US president Joe Biden.

The Ninth Circuit Ruling in the Health Freedom Defense Fund Case, and on July 31st (just this past month), the Ninth Circuit in the US issued its ruling in Health Freedom Defense Fund et al v Megan K. Reilly et al, vacating the earlier ruling of a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit in favor of plaintiffs Health Freedom Defense Fund, California Educators for Medical Freedom, and several individual plaintiffs.

The reasoning of the court in its latest ruling, as represented by Judge Bennett’s majority opinion, is really an affront to all who value truth, justice, even the United States Constitution, and logic. Incredibly, the court concluded that as long as a government official believes a vaccine will protect public health, it is irrelevant whether the vaccine actually works. Armed with this rationale, a state government, simply by uttering the words “This is for public health,” can force any individual to submit to a medical treatment, even if that medical treatment does not benefit that individual—and perhaps harms him. The implication of this line of thinking is clear: Government is our absolute ruler, our master, and we are its chattel.

Now, here is the context of the ruling: In November 2021, the plaintiffs sued the Los Angeles Unified School District for mandating Covid injections for all employees. They argued that the Covid injections do not stop transmission or infection and therefore lack any public health justification. They contended that the Jacobson v Massachusetts case, which is a Supreme Court of the United States case from 1905, did not apply to their case because Jacobson was predicated both on (firstly) the extreme emergency posed by smallpox—as its death rate was 30%, whereas Covid has a 1% rate of death—and (secondly) on a safe and effective smallpox vaccine that was believed to actually stop the spread of the dreaded disease based on decades of use, therefore providing a public health justification. Although of course, we have discussed here on ‘The War Room’ that the science behind the smallpox vaccine was not only fallacious, but also became the basis for the rationale behind many of the vaccines today, which have a similar change of inefficacy and harm.

In any case, nearly a year later after the plaintiffs had sued the Los Angeles Unified School District, in September 2022, the district court ruled AGAINST the plaintiffs. But in January 2023 plaintiffs appealed that decision. And in June 2024 a three-judge panel ruled in favour of plaintiffs, overturning the district court and remanding the case to the district court. The next month—July 2024—the defendants filed a petition for an en banc review by the Ninth Circuit – and this is a process where an entire appellate court, rather than just a randomly selected panel of judges, reviews a case; ad is essentially a request for a broader panel of judges to reconsider a decision made by a smaller panel. Well, that petition was granted in February of 2025 and oral argument was held in front of the 11-judge panel, on March 18, 2025. It was then on July 31st that the Ninth Circuit issued its ruling in favour of the defendants and dismissed the case; resulting in an outcome where as long as a government official believes a vaccine will protect public health, it is irrelevant whether the vaccine actually works. But, before we proceed to unpack the details of the ruling, here’s a reflection from Leslie Manookian, who is on of the plaintiffs in the case.

UNPACKING THE COURT’S RULING: WHY THE JACOBSON CASE DOES NOT FIT THE STATUS QUO

Now, before we proceed, it bears mentioning that the SCOTUS has actually overturned decisions rendered by the Ninth Circuit more often than it has any other circuit court in the US. And so, this case amply serves to illustrate precisely why the Ninth has earned such a discreditable reputation. Which then necessitates that we also break down the main issues in the case, and why the court’s ruling is so controversial – especially in light of its reliance on the precedent that was established in the Jacobson case.

Now, the first issue in the case pertains to the fact that the Ninth Circuit asserted that the right to direct one’s own medical treatment is not a fundamental right. It cited several precedents, including the Mullins v Oregon case of 1995, in which the court held that (quote): “Only those aspects of liberty that we as a society traditionally have protected as fundamental are included within the substantive protection of the Due Process Clause.” Now, to be clear, nowhere does the American Constitution empower the state to dictate any medical intervention. On the contrary, the Constitution serves as a restraint on government, not on the people.

Moreover, there is not a single case in the 105 years since the Jacobson v Massachusetts case when a locality mandated a vaccination or otherwise directed the medical treatment of the people in general. Thus, the Ninth Circuit’s insinuation that American society routinely accepts vaccine mandates for adults in general is patently false. In fact, by this metric and Jacobson’s holding in 1905, women would still not be allowed to vote. IN ACTUALITY, the Jacobson case did NOT allow the state to condition employment or engagement in normal life on receipt of an injection. INSTEAD, it merely allowed the state to impose a fine, and not to condition employment or participation in normal life on receiving an injection.

The second issue in the case concerns the fact that the Ninth Circuit not only claimed that the ruling in the Jacobson v Massachusetts case is binding but it also ignored ample and more recent jurisprudence from the SCOTUS that holds otherwise. In recent decades, the SCOTUS has determined that each of us possesses a zone of privacy around us into which the state may not intrude (Griswold v Connecticut); that each of us has the right to refuse unwanted medical treatment (Washington v Harper); and that each of us has the right to refuse lifesaving medical treatment (Cruzan v Director, Missouri Department of Health). Yet the Ninth Circuit has dismissed those decisions and has hidden behind the clearly immoral and century-old Jacobson v Massachusetts.

Then, thirdly, perhaps most egregious of all its conclusions, the Ninth Circuit held that as long as authorities could reasonably assume the Covid injection had a public benefit, the policy was Constitutional—irrespective of whether the injection worked or whether any claims made by authorities were valid or true. Judge Bennett wrote that (quote): “The Jacobson v Massachusetts case holds that the constitutionality of a vaccine mandate, like the Policy here, turns on what reasonable legislative and executive decisionmakers could have rationally concluded about whether a vaccine protects the public’s health and safety, not whether a vaccine actually provides immunity to or prevents transmission of a disease.” (end quote). But, now, this contention is false. The Jacobson v Massachusetts did actually hinge on the general perception that the smallpox vaccine in particular, and vaccines in general, prevent transmission of disease (even though we now know that to be false). But, the point is that clearly, absent that ability of public benefit, there is no public health rationale. And most worryingly, by the court’s metric, a lying politician or policymaker can mandate virtually any medical intervention on the American people as long as it is under the guise of public health!

Then finally, in the Jacobson v Massachusetts case, the Court reasoned that “in every well-ordered society charged with the duty of conserving the safety of its members the rights of the individual in respect of his liberty may at times, under the pressure of great dangers, be subjected to such restraint, to be enforced by reasonable regulations, as the safety of the general public may demand” – which essentially tried to justify the limitation of rights in a relative context, in the same way that lockdowns were presented as being a fair limitation of the freedom of movement during COVID. BUT, even then a number of people have argued that the Ninth Circuit made a massive stretch by equating the dangers of Covid with the dangers of smallpox, because no comparison could be further from the truth. More specifically, evidence proves that early spread of Covid had already occurred across much of Los Angeles County by the spring of 2020, when research found that 4% of adults had already had the disease and had recovered from it, thereby negating the need for any preventive measures by late 2021, when the school district’s policy was implemented. In addition, it was widely documented at the time that the dangers of Covid were miniscule for all but the elderly and extremely infirm in comparison to the ravages of smallpox. Because there was provably no great danger from Covid, the Los Angeles Unified School District’s injection mandate for employees was completely unreasonable and unjustified.

But, ultimately, this is all to double down on the fact that the Ninth Circuit Court had a very generous application of the precedent found in the Jacobson v Massachusetts case. Whereas, in contrast, a number of people in the American society (and the world at large), and even Supreme Court Justices like Justice Alito, have constantly emphasised that it is dangerous to assume that the Jacobson v Massachusetts case gives broad justification for governments who wants to coerce medical interventions in society.

But, based on what we just outlined, two things standout: first, this case exposes that while the judiciary is one of the most crucial parts in a system of checks and balances in constitutional republics, by virtue of having people in this system as the judges who preside over cars, it means that the judiciary is susceptible to error or corruption, and can thus enable court-sanctioned authoritarianism – which is actually what the Ninth Circuit did is issuing a ruling that states that as long as a government official believes a vaccine will protect public health, it is irrelevant whether the vaccine actually works – because (again), a state government, simply by uttering the words “This is for public health,” can force any individual to submit to a medical treatment, even if that medical treatment does not benefit that individual—and perhaps harms him. And so, we have a categorical imperative to pray without ceasing for the judiciary in all nations.

THE HEALTH FREEDOM DEFENSE FUND CASE EXPOSES THE DANGER OF THE NEW DEFINITION OF A VACCINE

But, then secondly, this case also exposes the danger of the new definition of a vaccine. You’d recall that in 2018, the CDC’s website presented a definition of vaccines to connote the meaning that vaccines generate immunity from a disease. Of course, we have discussed here on LN24 International, including here on ‘The War Room’ how fallacious this underlying belief about vaccines has been, taking from the teachings of the President of Loveworld Incorporated, who has been at the forefront of exposing the vaccination agenda.

However, the CDC’s definition of a vaccine not only changed just before the planned COVID pandemic in 2020, but it also no longer reflects the claimed functionality of a vaccine to generate immunity against a disease – which is very complimentary to how the Ninth Circuit Court held that as long as a government official believes a vaccine will protect public health, it is irrelevant whether the vaccine actually works.

So, this change in definition explains a number of unfortunate ramifications in the status quo. First, it means an additional layer of immunity from liability for pharmaceutical companies. More specifically, pharmaceutical companies, when they are being called out for not protecting people with their vaccines, as they claim when promoting the material, can simply say that definitionally, vaccines do not inherently protect from disease. This is incredibly dangerous because ALREADY the pharmaceutical industry is granted immunity from liability, especially in the US! You’d recall that we had an abridged discussion about the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, which was signed into law in the United States as part of a larger health bill on November 14, 1986. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act’s purpose was to eliminate the potential financial liability of vaccine manufacturers due to vaccine injury claims to ensure a stable market supply of vaccines, and to provide cost-effective arbitration for vaccine injury claims. And this happened because pharmaceutical companies made the case that they simply would not be able to profit if they were open to liability.

So, what this means is that pharmaceutical products are so fundamentally likely to cause harm, that they simply cannot remain in business unless the government protects pharmaceutical companies from people demanding damage payments from them. Therefore, the change in definition of a vaccine adds to already existing laws that protects the pharmaceutical industry from liability.

However, the compounded issue when it comes to the Ninth Circuits ruling is that the court is making it appear acceptable for governments to coerce vaccine mandates on the public, for vaccines that do not have public benefit, and that the state would arbitrarily deem necessary. And so, the Ninth Circuit not only protects an income stream for pharmaceutical companies whose products could be mandated, but it also sanctions authoritarian conduct by protecting state officials who would wish to implement vaccine mandates! And it all comes down to the fact that the new definition of vaccines does not necessitate a public benefit of generating immunity against a disease.

MEANWHILE, COVID JABS ARE ALSO A DEFINITIONAL EXAMPLE OF A BIOLOGICAL WEAPON

Of course the irony of editing the definition of a vaccine to allow the COVID jab to pass as one is that the COVID jab also actually fits the definition of a bio weapon – and this has had numerous ramifications for genetics among those who have taken the jab.

But, this occurs parallel to another concerning development, where according to a recent article in the BBC, a person at the MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology was given £10 million by the Wellcome Trust to start making new designer DNA, because apparently our DNA is insufficient. But, yes, this is from the same Wellcome Trust that “frequently collaborates with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation on so-called global health initiatives.” In fact, in their 2024 annual report, they wrote under “Strategic partnerships” that they have forged significant collaborations with the Novo Nordisk Foundation, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and others, enhancing their ability to tackle shared global health challenges effectively.

Of course, the immediate question is “WHY?”. And according to the collaborators, the scientists’ first aim is to develop ways of building ever larger blocks of human DNA, up to the point when they have synthetically constructed a human chromosome. These contain the genes that govern the human body’s development, repair, and maintenance. They add that these can then be studied and experimented on to learn more about how genes and DNA regulate human bodies. In fact, Prof Matthew Hurles, director of the Wellcome Sanger Institute which sequenced the largest proportion of the Human Genome, even added that many diseases occur when these genes go wrong so the studies could lead to better treatments. HOWEVER, they conveniently leave out how this can be manipulated for harm – much like how the COVID jab was developed to be a biological weapon of significant genetic disruption – and this is a fact that many scientists and medical professionals have testified concerning. And so, when a new invention is being devised, it is incumbent on us to always consider how it could be abused, and if the potential harms outweigh the potential benefits.

Now, speaking of whether potential harms outweigh potential benefits, the science is fairly settled on the fact that the COVID jab is not only a biological weapon of genetic disruption, but one whose harms far outweigh any claimed benefits. In actual fact, it has come to the fore that the COVID shots infiltrate every organ system, including the brain, heart, bone marrow. In addition, over 17 million COVID-19 vaccine deaths have been reported worldwide, with conservative US estimates at approximately 600,000 deaths. Meanwhile, there have also been reports of long-term genetic disruption, as thousands of critical genes regulating immunity and cancer suppression are dysregulated after mRNA injection; and spike DNA and mRNA fragments have been detected in the body years after injection — suggesting genomic integration! And so (once again) the irony of editing the definition of a vaccine to allow the COVID jab to pass as one is that the COVID jab also actually fits the definition of a bio weapon.

Written By Lindokuhle Mabaso

Weaponising the law in pursuit of trying to use these 7 areas for their agenda; and what it means that at the centre of the projects being pursued by the globalist is Bill Gates, through his philantro-capitalism. Let’s begin with the weaponisation of laws.

Once again, God’s Prophet to the Nations and the President of Loveworld Inc, being the highly esteemed Rev. Dr Chris Oyakhilome DSc. DSc. DD., re-echoed the warning against the satanic plans of globalists, in which they intend to use various other methods to try to control nations, looking at 7 areas that these respective globalist figures intend to manipulate. A key medium for their manipulative efforts is the weaponisation of the law, and there are important reasons why this is the case.

The first is that laws are a socialisation agent; and one that is often ignored. When we talk about socialisation agents, the tendency is to think about the most social aspects of society and thus restrict the definition of socialisation agents to entities like one’s family, school, social group, and similar considerations. But laws are actually a massive socialisation agent – when you consider the relationship that society and government has with the law.

For our collective clarity, when we speak of socialisation agents, we speak of those individuals, groups, or institutions that influence how a person learns and even internalises what are presented as the values, norms, and acceptable behaviours of their society. As a result, these socialisation agents play a crucial role in shaping an individual’s social development and (more broadly) their understanding of the world.

Here’s how laws are socialisation agents: the values, norms and behaviours of a society do not exist in a vacuum, and are thus often susceptible to some influence and change – positive or otherwise. Driving this change are the interests of certain groups, or at times even the government. And how the government influences or changes these societal values, norms and behaviours is by systematically nudging people to begin to think and act a certain way through legislating a new set of values, norms and behaviours.

So, this is quite significant because when a law is implemented, there are usually subtle or overt propaganda efforts that purport the legitimacy of that law. For example, the UK government keeps claiming that the Online Safety Act is about protecting children, and so when they say that enough about the Online Safety Act, that begins to be what people associate with it. This measure is also significant because it preys on the more liberal inclinations of certain sects of society and the impressionable minds of a younger generation without pre-existing ideals. Again, in the UK, the end of life Bill failed to pass years ago with an older more conservative society, but it passed in newer more liberally inclined one, where even younger members of society claimed they wanted so-called merciful deaths for their aging relatives.

Now, as stated earlier, we see this socialisation capacity of the law play out positively and negatively: on the one hand, we saw people in liberal democracies where the freedom of movement was supposed to be guaranteed, be systematically nudged to suddenly accept being imprisoned in their homes in the name of “flattening the curve”, because the law dictated that it was illegal to move at will. On the other hand, we see governments enact laws against the gender mutilation of children to systematically nudge society away from assuming the inherent correctness of sex changes. And so, the point is not that all laws are bad and manipulative, but it is to highlight that law is very much a socialisation agent, and that governments use it as such. And knowing this, globalists also want to use laws to try to enforce a new set of values, norms and behaviours in society – which paints a picture of how systemic their vain ambitions are. And here’s the President of Loveworld Incorporated warning about the weaponisation of laws, and emphasising our role as the Church in this time.

The second reason globalists have this diabolical ambition to weaponise laws is because – in addition to laws being socialisation agents – they often come with the expectation of general application. This is because laws typically demand compliance, and in order to enforce that compliance, it should be expected of all if not the majority of people. Therefore, weaponising laws for globalists is about trying to use the law to guarantee a massive impact of their pursuits – ensuring that their diabolical efforts are of general applications, with few exceptions.

Here’s an example, if you regularly watch ‘The War Room’, you would know I do not regard international law and actual law because it has no enforcement capacity. For the most part, all it tends to be is a bunch of agreements that nations may choose to organise resources and enforcement capacity to achieve, usually through incorporating some aspects of the international agreement into an act from the legislative body – otherwise, international law is inconsequential. At best they could either sanction nations to try to disincentive certain conduct, or offer trade benefits to encourage it – but, again, otherwise, international law is inconsequential.

Now, I think the globalists caught on to this reality, because they then weaponised domestic law, capacity and enforcement towards a diabolical, international law-related agenda, which is the pandemic accord and the international health regulations. More specifically, the amendments to the IHR made a diabolical adjustment to make the WHO decrees enforceable. How they did this is that the IHR requires every country to appoint a National IHR Authority. This is a local enforcement body that takes orders from the WHO. It won’t answer to your vote, your courts, or your constitution. It will coordinate “compliance” with global health law. In other words, the WHO is by-passing constitutional sovereignty, meaning that the constitution in your country (as far as health and related policies are concerned) will no longer be the highest law of the land; but also that they capture domestic enforcement mechanisms to enact their agenda. And so, this desire to make laws of general application, while also capturing domestic enforcement capacity is another reason why globalists want to weaponise the law for their 7 fold agendas.

Then the final consideration on why globalists want to weaponise the law, is that they wish to evade accountability, and so they want to make governments legislate things in their favour. There are two key examples that attest to this. First is the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, which was signed into law in the United States as part of a larger health bill on November 14, 1986. This Act’s purpose was to eliminate the potential financial liability of vaccine manufacturers due to vaccine injury claims to ensure a stable market supply of vaccines, and to provide cost-effective arbitration for vaccine injury claims. And this happened because pharmaceutical companies made the case that they simply would not be able to profit if they were open to liability.

Second is Agrochemical companies are taking a page from big pharma’s playbook, in that they are seeking a TOTAL liability shield against claims against them! This is to say that while the pesticides that agrochemical companies like Bayer and Monsanto utilize have been “linked to cancer, to learning disabilities, to infertility, to hormone disruption … and they impact children more than the rest of us..” they are, nevertheless, fighting for a liability shield to prevent people from taking legal action against them for injury and death.

And so, just like vaccine manufacturers have zero liability for the harms their vaccines cause, agrochemical companies, like Bayer are seeking similar protections. While Congress has allocated a special fund for those who have been injured by vaccines, the chemical companies are proposing no such plans.

BILL GATES: AT THE CENTRE OF GLOBALIST PROJECTS THROUGH PHILANTRO-CAPITALISM

This then brings us to the second part of our discussion, in which we address the fact of bill Gates being at the centre of the  globalist plans exposed by the President of Loveworld Inc., and this being done through his modus operandi of philantro-capitalism. In essence, through his philantro-capitalism, Bill Gates transformed himself from a tech villain into one of the most seemingly admired people on the planet. Even as allegations of misconduct have recently tarnished his public image, the beneficence of the Gates Foundation, celebrated for spending billions to save lives around the globe, is taken as a given. But as investigations have revealed, Gates is still exactly who he was at Microsoft: a bully and monopolist, convinced of his own righteousness and intent on imposing his ideas, his solutions, and his leadership on everyone else. At the core, he is not a selfless philanthropist but a power broker, a clever engineer who has innovated a way to turn extreme wealth into immense political influence—and who has made some people believe that they should applaud his acquisition of power, and not challenge it – something that the president of Loveworld Inc. and God’s Prophet to the Nations has exposed.

But, like the media, Gates also uses gaslighting inorder to sanitise and justify his diabolical philatro–capitalism dealings. For instance, Gates once exclaimed in an interview that he has been taken aback by the volume of (what he calls) “crazy” and “evil” conspiracy theories about him and Dr. Anthony Fauci spread on social media during the COVID-19 plandemic – which is an interesting attitude towards people demanding accountability from people like him, who had imposed a tyrannical order, during the pandemic.

THE COST OF BILL GATES’ PHILANTRO-CAPITALISM ON RECEPIENT NATIONS

Now, there is a notable reason why Bill Gates has pursued philantro-capitalism, which answers the question of what is the cost of being a recipient nation of his schemes, falsely presented as philanthropic works. In particular, Gates’s billions have purchased a stunning level of control over public policy, private markets, scientific research, and the news media. Whether he is pushing new educational standards in America, health reforms in India, global vaccine policy during the pandemic, or Western industrialised agriculture throughout Africa, Gates’s heady social experimentation has shown itself to be not only undemocratic, but also ineffective. In many places, Bill Gates is hurting the very people he claims to help.

Now, you’d also recall that Bill Gates has openly articulated his belief the world needs billions less people. Everything he does, supports, and funds, actively promotes achieving his psychotic death wish for those he considers useless eaters. Gates funded Event 201 in October 2019, laying out the master plan for the Covid plandemic, while at the same time funding the vaccines for a disease that supposedly didn’t exist yet. Of course, he was also front and centre in pushing billions across the globe to be injected with this untested toxic DNA altering concoction. It is now unequivocally provable these vaccines killed millions immediately, millions more slowly and methodically, and stopped millions more from ever being born by drastically altering the fertility of young people who had ZERO risk from covid, but were forced to be injected by the authorities and their bought off lackeys.

Let’s zoom into Gates’ claims that his involvement in the health affairs of nations is about a rational and humane decrease in human population. He claims that they are merely making information and products for better health available, which in turn encourages families to decide to have fewer children. This is a weird argument and it’s sad that not a lot of people have said this to Bill Gates and his team at the Gates Foundation. First, this claim by Bill Gates presupposes that parents who choose to have more children typically lack knowledge and products that promote their health and wellbeing, which also sounds like the people Gates is supposedly talking about have a perpetual inclination to making bad decisions that leave them in worse conditions – no! Being fruitful and multiplying is not a consequence of poor health education and products.

Secondly, one would expect that when health becomes better, parents would want to have more children because the health facilities required for adequate care are more available. And so, this tells us something about the Gates’ Foundation proposed solutions for health – they likely contribute to population decline, especially when we look at vaccines and how they have destroyed the reproductive capacity of many around the world, if not killed the vaccine recipients completely.

Well, we have surely prayed, and continue to pray. Therefore, in this glorious Year of Completeness, all satanic and globalist agendas are suspended; they will live in our world, and we will not live in theirs, as we wrap up the Church age. And so, let us keep fighting the good fight of faith, because we have truly already won.

Written By Lindokuhle Mabaso

The medical industrial complex and scientistic cult evidently keep using the most vulnerable members of society (especially children) as a sacrifice in the pursuit of their efforts. But, with all that we know about the medical industrial complex, this is not news to anyone. In fact, what is expected is that there be progressive institutional reform in the status quo – especially in the second Trump administration – that directly challenges these issues. However, what is being exposed is just how deeply entrenched regulatory bodies are in their collusion with the medical industrial complex – especially pharmaceutical companies. But, today, we ought to discuss this further in light of Moderna’s mRNA COVID Shot getting Full FDA Approval for said to be “At-Risk” Infants.

U.S PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP THREATENS 35% TARIFFS ON CANADA STARTING AUG. 1

U.S President Donald Trump has threatened a 35% tariff on goods imported from Canada. [ROLL CLIP00:11-] Trump’s announcement of higher tariffs on Canada comes amid a flurry of letters the U.S President has sent to world leaders over the past week informing them what rates their goods will be tariffed at come August 1, absent any trade deals.

BRAZIL VOWS RETALIATORY TARIFFS AGAINST US IF TRUMP FOLLOWS THROUGH ON 50% IMPORT TAXES

In a related matter, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva has said that he will impose retaliatory tariffs on the United States if President Donald Trump follows through on a pledge to boost import taxes by 50% over the South American country’s criminal trial against his predecessor, Jair Bolsonaro. Lula said he will trigger Brazil’s reciprocity law approved by Congress earlier this year if negotiations with the U.S. fail.

NETANYAHU SAYS HOPING HOSTAGE DEAL WILL BE FINALIZED ‘IN A FEW DAYS’

On the last day of his 4-day trip to the US, Benjamin Netanyahu released a brief clip detailing his discussions with US President Donald Trump as well as Israel’s plans for Gaza amid ceasefire talks. Netanyahu emphasised Israel’s previous goals in Gaza including the removal of Hamas, demilitarisation of Gaza.

UK, FRANCE ANNOUNCE AGREEMENT ON PILOT MIGRANT RETURNS PROGRAM

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron have reached an agreement on a pilot programme to return migrants and refugees arriving in small boats, in a scheme to curb crossings over the English Channel. In a joint press conference on Thursday, Starmer said people arriving in the United Kingdom on small boats will “be detained and returned to France in short order”.

MODERNA’S mRNA COVID SHOT GETS FULL FDA APPROVAL FOR “AT-RISK” INFANTS

On July 10, 2025, the FDA granted full approval for Moderna’s mRNA COVID-19 vaccine (Spikevax) in “at-risk” children aged 6 months to 11 years. The shot was previously available only under emergency use authorization. This approval comes despite a mountain of evidence linking the shots to catastrophic harms, some of which include heart damage, brain damage, cancer, and mass death. Once again, this decision is quite concerning as it shows that regulatory agencies remain captured by the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex. And so, one has to ask: How many more children must be sacrificed before accountability begins?

THIS MOVE COMPOUNDS THE LACK OF TRUST TOWARDS THE FDA

Now, this move certainly compounds the lack of trust towards the FDA, and necessarily so when you consider who influences the policy direction of the FDA. The general points of historical context to note regarding the FDA is that it was established in 1906 in response to public concern over unsafe food and drugs, such as spoiled food and counterfeit products. However, food industry lobbyists gradually gained influence, leading to the removal of the agency’s original leader. As a result, numerous harmful food additives were granted “generally recognised as safe” (GRAS) status and continue to be used today.

Then, in 1962, the FDA was given broad powers to oversee drug safety following the thalidomide incident. Unfortunately, the new regulations created strict standards for drug efficacy that were often selectively enforced, benefiting the pharmaceutical industry. Unfortunately, the FDA then increasingly targeted natural therapies, which led to many being erased from history – all of which is incredibly important to remember in light of our subsequent discussion on the propaganda against salt. Nevertheless, this historical context is why – despite the numerous attempts to reform the agency – issues of inefficiency and bias within the FDA persist. [PAUSE]

Now, evidence of the lobbyist factor in the FDA’s work, can be inferred in the agency’s work in food regulation. For instance, in the late 1800s, food producers were selling adulterated products, and pharmaceutical companies peddled medicines with secret ingredients like opium and alcohol. Public outrage grew, especially after exposés like Upton Sinclair’s ‘The Jungle’, which helped spark the 1906 Pure Food and Drug Act. This law gave the Bureau of Chemistry the power to ensure accurate labeling and prevent harmful additives in food.

Well, the director of the Bureau of Chemistry (and thus the first head of the FDA), Harvey Wiley conducted tests on food additives, proving they made healthy volunteers sick. While the public and many scientists supported his findings, the food industry fought back with powerful lobbyists and legal tactics. Well, Wiley’s book “The History of A Crime Against The Food Law” went on to detail much of the same abhorrent industry tactics we see happening now. But, this is all to detail the contextual background behind the FDA’s propensity to be influenced by lobbyists from the industries it is supposed to regulate – which is the first aspect of the FDA’s problem with corruption.

THE FDA’S DECEPTIVE AND HARMFUL “GENERALLY RECOGNISED AS SAFE” STATUS

Let’s then proceed to discuss the FDA’s “Generally Recognised as Safe” status. Many food additives are “generally recognised as safe” (or GRAS), and what this actually means is that they are widely used but WITHOUT REGULATION! Well, GRAS food products presented two fundamental issues: food industry counterfeiting and harmful additives. More specifically, the industry often fakes products to cut costs; for instance honey is often faked by adding cheap syrups or other ingredients to mimic its appearance and taste; while polluted waters are also added to enlarge oysters.

Now, despite evidence of harm, the food industry claimed these additives were essential for production, even though competitors showed higher-quality (and ultimately more profitable) products could be made without them. However, there were warnings that chronic exposure to additives could cause long-term health issues, such as organ damage; and these warnings were ignored – especially as the influence of industry lobbyists grew – which is why these harmful additives and faked foods were eventually reclassified as “generally recognized as safe.” But of course, these so-called “safe” additives have contributed to widespread chronic illness in society. Here’s more on the FDA’s GRAS status.

Furthermore, companies currently self-certify their chemicals without independent oversight; which has resulted in ingredients like titanium dioxide – which is banned in Europe and other developed nations still being legal in the US despite mounting health concerns. Through GRAS, FDA has for the longest time applied an “innocent until proven guilty” approach to food! Which is a categorically dangerous approach; ingredients should not have to harm or kill people first before they are deemed unsafe!

PETER MARKS AND THE FDA’S COVER-UP OF THE HARMS OF COVID JABS

Let’s also look at vaccine cover-ups, as being part of the reasons behind the compounding lack of trust towards the FDA. Many have been horrified to learn that the FDA and CDC systematically ignored every possible sign the COVID vaccines were dangerous as they pushed it on more and more people. One of the ways people were made aware of this was through the recently leaked recordings showing how stubbornly the head of FDA’s vaccine division, being Peter Marks at the time, refused to acknowledge any of the evidence brought forward by a group of permanently injured vaccine recipients, and even medical practitioners who were treating vaccine injured patients.

Here’s why this is important to note: generally, in looking through what transpired with the COVID-19 response, Anthony Fauci is commonly blamed for all that went amiss – and correctly so. However, we must not also miss the people who were also directly involved, while hidden within the FDA bureaucracy. One such person is Peter Marks. Peter Marks is the primary person who covered up the reports of COVID vaccine injuries (and instead repeatedly told the world they were (quote unquote) “safe and effective”). He was also the person who kept on pushing the FDA’s chief vaccine scientists (who were very pro-vaccine) to accelerate and condense the approval timelines for the COVID jabs (as those approvals were needed to legally implement Biden’s vaccine and booster mandates). The parties involved in this process, which included, Marion Gruber and Philip Krause (who were the Director and Deputy Director of the FDA’s Office of Vaccines Research and Review, respectively); they reported that there were (at that point) no more corners they could cut to further accelerate the COVID vaccine approvals, at which point they were removed from the COVID vaccine approval process and Peter Marks took it over (at which point the unjustifiable approvals and mandates quickly followed).

THE PROBLEMS WITH THE FDA ARE FURTHER ENABLES BY STANDARDS IN MEDICINE

So, while the FDA is central to focus on as far as recent developments are concerned, it’s important also to note that the problems with the FDA are FURTHER enabled by standards in medicine. And I say that because it occurred to me that even if we have bad regulators who approve bad medicine, if we had good doctors and medical standards, then the harms could easily be averted or mitigated. But if the medical standard is overmedication and trusting “the science”, while doctors function as pharmaceutical representatives, then of course the problems are worse.

Let’s look at medical education. No matter how you dice it, medical education is quite challenging as there is simply too much to learn, and so even the “brightest” students adopt a triage mentality where they cut out things that NOTt necessary (or low-yield) (specifically) for exams so they can pass and get a degree. And because of this medical education typically presents 3 issues as far as medical standards are concerned.

First, the present standard of medical education covers many aspects in a superficial manner (e.g., med students just learn the classic indications, simple mechanisms of action and commonly recognized side effects of drugs). Now, this is quite problematic as many of those simplistic facts students memorize aren’t always entirely correct (or become evidently contradictory once you take the time to understand them). However, since students are under such pressure to memorize them, they take the facts as verbatim facts they don’t question and become quite haughty towards those who do.

Second, there has been a strong focus in medicine on the key medical products on the market (e.g., doctors focus on how to use pharmaceutical drugs along with the key microbes and their pharmaceutical treatments, understanding what aspects of the body each speciality is responsible for, how to interpret imaging studies, and even how to understand surgery well enough to want to go into it or refer patients to it). Similarly, there is also a strong focus on just the basic skills necessary for being a doctor (this includes being able to recognize potentially life-threatening conditions, conducting a physical exam with enough details to complete a medical note and writing billable medical notes). That said, there is also (thankfully) a strong focus on anatomy and physiology, which along with recognising key diseases and medical emergencies, represent some of the most valuable aspects of conventional medical training.

Then the third issue presented as far as medical standards are concerned has to do with how medical training cuts out a lot of the subtle aspects of medical science and doctoring that make you an effective clinician (and this includes things like medical ethics). And because of this, there is always a subset of medical students who have that inherent capacity and excel at being clinicians but very few learn it through their training. Put differently, standard medical training does NOT really cover what is needed to make people healthy as there is never enough time for that and again and again, we hear stories of medical educators who try to incorporate it but get pushed to the side due to limited curriculum time.

So, in a world where medical standards prioritise pharmaceutical interventions, and medical education and training focuses purely on passing exams as opposed to being more concerned with aspects of medical science that make a med student an effective clinician, well then of course the FDA’s corruption will have crippling impact, because doctors themselves are trained to push what the FDA has approved.

Well, no wonder the medical industrial complex is so-multilayered. There are clearly various actors involved. But, this also gives broader context behind why doctors become progressively less focused at making their patients better, while becoming product pushers for the pharmaceutical industry. Take this testimony from a pharmaceutical representative of 32 years. She exposes the corrupt relationship between big pharma and doctors, primarily based on greed because it was about organising expensive gifts and experiences for doctors in exchange for their product loyalty.

WORST OF ALL IS THAT PATIENTS ARE DISADVANTAGED BY THE MEDICAL SYSTEMS

I’ve had discussions with medical students and practitioners on the necessity of strict standards to enter medicine because it is one of those fields where there is no room for error. ANd I think many people still have that same perception of the medical field: which is that it brings in the best and trains them rigorously so they are less susceptible to making mistakes that can be the difference between life and death for some. BUT… while there absolutely are exceptions who are incredible doctors, it is also clear that the medical system is not as fool, corruption, and greed-proof as we thought. And worse of all is that there are many people who have not broken free from this presumption of excellence and efficacy in the medical field, and pay with their lives. And yet, the issues in medicine are quite nuanced because it is NOT just the FDA that has been financially bought out – it is almost everyone, down to the medical schools that teach the doctors that are supposed to practise evidence based and holistic medicine. In fact, the verdict from good doctors is that there is almost no such thing as evidence-based medicine anymore, in a world where big pharma has gained influence over regulators and academia.

Written By Lindokuhle Mabaso

 “The Medical Cartel Sues RFK Jr for Pulling COVID Shot Recommendations”; and we ought to begin with some context. So, in the month of May, the Secretary of the US Department of Health and Human Services, Robert Kennedy Jr,  announced the removal of the COVID vaccine from the CDC’s immunisation schedule for healthy children and pregnant women. Well, generally, even before this announcement, Kennedy noted that established side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine prove its detrimental nature. For instance, the ramifications from the COVID vaccine have included a form of heart inflammation called myocarditis and a related condition called pericarditis. He also pointed out that 15 vaccinated participants in Pfizer’s clinical trial died, compared with 14 participants who did not receive the company’s vaccine. And so, this announcement of removing the COVID vaccine from the immunisation schedule would seemingly follow the concerns that were expressed concerning it. Here’s the announcement video from the office of the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

Important to note is that the announcement is that the COVID vaccine is no longer recommended for healthy women and children. This unfortunately means that they have NOT explicitly removed the COVID jabs completely for pregnant women and ‘healthy children’. They just removed the recommendation from the CDC schedule. Meanwhile, the COVID jab still shows part of the recommended list of vaccines on the CDC’s website. And so, this development seems mostly symbolic – which is not an insignificant development – however, it does lack the requisite resoluteness in opposing the biological weapon that is the COVID jab.

THE HSS ANNOUNCEMENT ON COVID JABS PROMOTED A DISCUSSION ON THE IMMUNISATION SCHEDULE

Well, the HSS announcement on covid jabs further promoted a discussion on the immunisation schedule. The US has gone from 7 routine vaccine injections in 1986 to over 200 routine vaccine injections in 2025. Another way to say this is that, in 1986, before vaccine makers had broad immunity to liability for injuries, the CDC’s schedule had 7 routine childhood injections and none for adults or pregnant women. HOWEVER, the CDC’s 2025 schedule has 5 routine injections during pregnancy, over 70 routine childhood injections (from birth to age 18), and over 130 routine adult injections (up to age 79). And when we count non-routine injections, there are even more!

Well, Attorney Aaron Siri exposed that not one childhood vaccine on the CDC schedule was licensed with a true placebo-controlled trial, as chronic diseases skyrocket in kids. In an explosive testimony to COngress, he exposed a critical gap in vaccine safety research that demands attention. More specifically, and as Attorney Siri detailed in his 66-page submission to Congress, not a single routine childhood vaccine on the CDC’s current schedule (except COVAXIN for ages 12+) was licensed based on a clinical trial using a true placebo control group! This means that if a control group received another vaccine, that vaccine also lacked a placebo-controlled trial. And all of these claims are backed by FDA clinical trial documents—which is undeniable evidence that challenges the narrative of so-called “settled science.”

Therefore, Attorney Siri’s testimony raises a pressing question: Why haven’t there been studies on the safety of childhood vaccines with the rigor they deserve? And in light of this, he points to a pandemic of chronic disease plaguing America’s children. In the early 1980s, less than 13% of kids had a chronic illness. Today, over 50% suffer from conditions like asthma, allergies, and autoimmune disorders—many rooted in immune dysregulation. So, what has changed? Attorney Siri notes the CDC’s vaccine schedule has ballooned from 7 injections in 1986 to 29 by age one today, including in utero shots. This staggering increase, coupled with the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act shielding manufacturers from design defect liability, raises red flags. Furthermore, the absence of long-term, placebo-controlled trials leaves a gaping hole in a general understanding of vaccine safety, which means that the immunisation schedule could well be the reason why over 50% of children now face a health crisis.

So, clearly, vaccination has become a religion, and the vaccine enterprise has capitalised on this through the production of many vaccines that have been inserted into the schedule – so much so, that the moment a child is born, the vaccine enterprises regards that baby an automated consumer of their product, and thus a conduit for making a profit. Which then brings us to the crucks of today’s discussion, being the medical cartel that has protested the removal of COVID shots for children and pregnant women from the CDCs recommendation list.

THE MEDICAL CARTEL SUES RFK JR FOR PULLING COVID SHOT RECOMMENDATIONS

As referenced earlier, in what can be described as a disturbing attempt to continue pushing deadly genetic injections on the most vulnerable, the American Academy of Pediatrics, American College of Physicians, the American Public Health Association, and the Infectious Diseases Society of America have filed a federal lawsuit against Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr for withdrawing COVID-19 vaccine recommendations for healthy children and pregnant women.

In addition, the Cartel is demanding a federal judge reinstate the COVID shot recommendations (again for children and pregnant women)—and block the US Department of HHS from enforcing or promoting RFK Jr’s May directive that removed them. Then, they also argue that Kennedy’s directive violates (quote) “norms” by bypassing the CDC and its ACIP panel, and undermines their ability to push the shot to patients and secure insurance coverage. Finally, the plaintiffs claim Kennedy lacked evidence.

Let’s directly respond to this. First when these plaintiffs (being the American Academy of Pediatrics, American College of Physicians, the American Public Health Association, and the Infectious Diseases Society of America) argue that the directive removing COVID shots from the CDCs recommendation list violates “norms” by bypassing the CDC and its ACIP panel – this complaint disregards the institutional and functional issues with the CDC and the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (or ACIP) within the CDC.

Meanwhile, in a publication in the Wall Street Journal, Robert F. Kennedy Jr stated that (quote): “The committee has been plagued with persistent conflicts of interest and has become little more than a rubber stamp for any vaccine. It has never recommended against a vaccine—even those later withdrawn for safety reasons. It has failed to scrutinize vaccine products given to babies and pregnant women. To make matters worse, the groups that inform ACIP meet behind closed doors, violating the legal and ethical principle of transparency crucial to maintaining public trust.” (end quote).

All this is to say that the so-called “norm” that the plaintiffs argue Kennedy disregarded was an implausible consideration because the CDC and ACIP were riddled with corruption, conflict of interest and disregard for scientific enquiry. Therefore, there is no inherent burden to preserve a status quo that does NOT work. In addition, this removal of the COVID jabs from the recommendation list is exactly the kind of bold move needed to break the credibility crisis surrounding vaccine science and government health agencies (like the CDC and ACIP). This is especially considering that Secretary Kennedy remarked that the new appointees will NOT directly work for the vaccine industry, and will “refuse to serve as a rubber stamp,” instead being focused on fostering “a culture of critical enquiry.

BUT (as far as the plaintiff’s complaint on the violation of norms is concerned), it is also worth noting that unless norms are legally enforceable (meaning codified into law), they do not have absolute weight in legal considerations anyways.

So, that is our first response to the initial complaint from the plaintiffs. The second complaint they submitted was that Kennedy lacked evidence behind the directive to remove the COVID jabs from the recommendation list. Now, I’m certain that most of us know that there is an overwhelming amount of data that fully justifies pulling these jabs – all which these organisations are pretending does NOT exist. Let’s begin with the harm to pregnant women and their unborn babies.

First, we can make reference to the study by Chen et al, that confirmed that mRNA injections cross the placenta and reach the fetus. In particular, mRNA-1273 crosses within 1 hour, accumulates in fetal organs, translates into Spike protein, and persists after birth. Second, Thorp et al found that the CDC/FDA safety signal thresholds were breached for 37 adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination in pregnant women, including miscarriage, stillbirth, premature infant death, fetal cardiac arrest, neonatal respiratory distress, fetal malformations, and many more.

Then third, in animal models, a study by Karaman et al found that mRNA injections destroy over 60% of female’s finite egg supply — when looking at primordial follicles, which are the most immature stage of ovarian follicle development, representing the fundamental reproductive units in a female’s ovary; but again, this was in the animal studies. In human datA (which focused on approximately 1.3 million women), Manniche at al found that COVID-19 vaccinated women had approximately 33% fewer successful pregnancies than unvaccinated women.

Fourth, in light of the harms to the reproductive system specifically, Dr Naomi Wolf proceeded to detail the diabolical extent that Pfizer targeted the reproductive function of the human body. She states that they knew they were blocking women’s ovaries with lipid nanoparticles, they knew the lipid nanoparticles traverse the placenta. Furthermore, Pfizer KNEW there’s something with the biological seed of vaccinated men that is possibly dangerous to women or foetuses because Pfizer warned vaccinated men not to have intercourse with childbearing age women and that if they do, they ought to use 2 reliable forms of contraception.

If we, here at LN24 International – be on Yvonne Katsande Live, CTD, Talking Politics or The Watchmen (and even right here on The War Room) – if we can find all of this information and corresponding studies DESPITE not having a unique focus on vaccinology, then there is no excuse for the ignorance of the plaintiffs in the case we’re discussing! Which shows that their claim for a lack of evidence on the harms resulting from COVID jabs is selective amnesia coupled with premeditated deception – especially when we consider that pharmaceutical companies like Pfizer knew about these harms!

But, let’s then proceed to look at the harms on children (in addition to the unborn children) as we have referenced. First, a recent study by Friedberg et al, involving 493,705 children and adolescents aged 1–21, found a 23% increased risk of developing autoimmune diseases following COVID-19 vaccination, with onset typically occurring around 9 months post-injection. Notably, SARS-CoV-2 infection itself was NOT associated with any increased risk of autoimmune disease – which means that it is not even the strain of the virus that causes the health problem, but the vaccine! Meanwhile, Feldstein et al (who interestingly were from the CDC) found that children vaccinated with Pfizer-BioNTech without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection were 159% more likely to get infected and 257% more likely to develop symptomatic COVID-19 compared to unvaccinated children without prior infection.

Secondly, in a study by Berg et al, they found that among adolescents, COVID-19 vaccination was associated with a 20% increase in emergency room visits and a 17% rise in doctor visits months after injection, indicating a measurable uptick in healthcare utilization likely due to post-vaccination syndrome. Thirdly, the OpenSAFELY study included more than 1 million adolescents and children and found that myocarditis was documented ONLY in COVID-19 vaccinated groups and NOT after COVID-19 infection. There were NO COVID-19-related deaths in any group. A&E attendance and unplanned hospitalization were higher after first vaccination compared to unvaccinated groups.

Then, in the largest review to date on myocarditis following SARS-CoV-2 infection versus COVID-19 vaccination, Mead et al found that vaccine-induced myocarditis is not only significantly more common but also more severe—particularly in children and young males. The findings make clear that the risks of the shots overwhelmingly outweigh any theoretical benefit. Here’s Dr Peter McCullough providing more insight on vaccine induced myocarditis, who is also among the authors of the just referenced paper from Mead and company.

Written By Lindokuhle Mabaso

Hosted by Yvonne Katsande, the conversation pulled no punches challenging decades of global vaccine narratives, questioning pandemic decision-making, and exposing a crisis of trust in modern public health institutions.

 “We were taught vaccines were safe and miraculous. But the truth? Repeated disasters, covered up for decades,” Dr. Stuckelberger told Yvonne in the wide-ranging interview.

A PhD, author, and senior lecturer at the Universities of Geneva and Lausanne, Dr. Stuckelberger has served as a consultant to the WHO, the United Nations, and various EU health projects. She says what she witnessed from within the system convinced her that the public was not getting the full truth.

Here is a full Interview :

The war against vaccine religion, and since 2021, critics of the new generation of mRNA so-called “vaccines” have been bewildered by the immunity of this enterprise to empirical data showing that the products are neither safe nor effective. And many of the critics did not seem to realise that they are challenging beliefs that are not rooted in scientific evaluation, but in claims from the vaccine enterprise and scientific religion. This is why the plausibility of vaccines rests on claims of their claimed almost miraculous emergence with the smallpox vaccine, while also being sustained by unqualified heroic deeds about how vaccines got rid of some of the worst diseases in human history. Well none of this is true (as we have discussed previously) and yet, to say this is regarded as heresy! And the reason lies with how the vaccine enterprise and the medical industrial complex have leveraged religion.

In actual fact, when we look back at the 2020 – 2022 period, we can observe the workings of this scientific religion. For instance, after being locked down and systematically terrorised by the mass media for most of 2020, most of humanity anxiously awaited the vaccine that was heralded as their savior and liberator. As vaccine investor, enthusiast and self-proclaimed philanto-capitalist Bill Gates repeatedly stated in the spring, the world would only be able to go back to normal (quote) “when almost every person on the planet has been vaccinated against coronavirus.” Now, this was an uncanny thing for anyone to say, considering that the freedom of people does not rest on the proclamations of mere man. But, the proclamation that “almost every person on the planet” needed to be injected with a novel substance (about which they knew nothing) seemed like something out of a dystopian science fiction novel. And yet, that was the script: that entire playbook (from predictive programming through Event 201 – to the utter erosion of human rights, the destruction of economies, closure of businesses, learning institutions and closure of Churches) all of this was part of their script, and what can be called their claimed sacred document.

Well, when the emergency-authorised mRNA vaccines were rolled out in December 2020, most of humanity was apparently unaware that they were not vaccines in the traditional sense of inactivated or attenuated pathogens that would induce an immune response (which, as we’ve previously discussed, is not sound or scientific logic). In any case, the new injections were the genetic code for instructing the body to create a foreign, toxic protein. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg understood this, and he starkly contrasted with the public when, during an internal meeting with com- pany executives on July 16, 2020, he stated that (quote): “I do just want to make sure that I share some caution on this because we just don’t know the long-term side effects of basically modify- ing people’s DNA and RNA to directly code in a person’s DNA and RNA. Basically, the ability to produce those antibodies and whether that causes other mutations or other risks downstream. So, there’s work on both paths of vaccine development.” Well, Zuckerberg clearly violated what was the Facebook code of conduct on talking about vaccines during that period in saying this.

Because most of humanity did not understand what they were being injected with, the creators of this injection apparently perceived it necessary to erect something akin to a religion that deified the vaccines. This came naturally to them because many perceived that, with their new messenger RNA vaccines, they were using God’s language to direct the cellular machinery of the human body to do their bidding. And I’d like to just highlight here that (in saying this), it is not my creative interpretation or articulation of the events that transpired. In actual fact, proof of this god-complex can be found in that: in his 2006 book, titled The Language of God, former NIH director Francis Collins begins by quoting former US president Bill Clinton when he announced in early 2000 that the human genome had been sequenced. In fact, about 88 percent had been sequenced at that time, but as the leader of the Human Genome Project, Dr Collins was apparently keen to make the big announcement sooner rather than later. And so, at a press conference in the East Room of the White House, with Dr Collins standing next to him, president Clinton announced, (quote): “Today we are learning the language in which God created life. We are gaining ever more awe for the complexity, the beauty, and the wonder of God’s most divine and sacred gift.” (end quote). Evidently, when president Clinton said they were “gaining ever more awe” as they were learning the language in which God created life, clearly he meant they were learning to modify and alter people’s DNA. And I say this because the “modified” mRNA produced by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna has been chemically altered to have this effect – as Zuckerberg was caught on camera warning. But, here is Genomics Expert Kevin McKernan explaining the signs of DNA integration seen in the COVID jabs..

THE SELF-PROCCLAIMED INFALLIBILITY OF THE ORCHESTRATORS OF THE SCIENTISTIC CULT

Then there is the self-procclaimed importance and infallibility of those who were persons orchestrating the scientific religion. In essence, from the outset of the pandemic, those who were said to be working “at the speed of science” to create a new vaccine were presented as high priests of molecular biology and vaccinology. They used lots of Latin and Greek words that lay people couldn’t understand. Anthony Fauci was presented by the adoring media as the Pope of the COVID-19 vaccine program. He frequently stated the mantra “follow the science,” which consisted of his edicts, issued like papal bulls, that no one was allowed to question. On June 9, 2021, Dr. Fauci implicitly invoked the doctrine of papal infallibility when he proclaimed, “Attacks on me, quite frankly, are attacks on science.”

Then, those who did question Fauci in public forums and on the internet quickly ran afoul of an army of censors who worked for various internet policing organisations. Doctors who advocated treating COVID-19 with repurposed drugs like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin were branded as heretics and excommunicated from the college of physicians and from the rest of society. The medicines they recommended were banned as anathema that could not, under any circumstances, be dispensed, even to a patient dying in hospital to whom nothing else was being offered.

Well, this informs us of the religious cult leader-like inclinations of those who were at the helm of the COVID response. They played on the ignorance of many,allocated power over others to themselves, while making any dissent to their proclamations appear as an act of heresy. But, interestingly, Carl Sagan spoke about this potential danger years before we saw it at the scale with which it was displayed during the COVID era; while Dr Judy Mikovits ties the developments during the COVID era directly to the cult of scientism.

Now, this is a good time to state categorically that science itself is not inherently bad. In fact, scientism (as was referenced by Dr Judy Mikovits) is far different from science. Scientism is about declaring falsehoods to be true under the guise of science. Therefore, telling someone to (quote)  “trust the science” is the hallmark of a religious cult, and actually flies in the face of the scientific method which requires you to test the science.

This differentiation should even make it clear what other phenomena fall within the scope of scientism and not science – such as the climate change hoax, which has also produced a cult, as was articulated by Australian Senator, Malcolm Roberts, in 2023.

GOD ALLOWS QUESTIONS, AND YET THE VACCINE ENTERPRISE DOES NOT

Tied to the claimed infallibility of the persons behind the vaccine enterprise and scientific religion is the contempt for questions and the freedom of choice. Now, to underline the gravity of this audacious position, I’d like to highlight when we observe the Scriptures, like the moment when Abraham interceded for Lot and his family in Genesis 18, and when Moses interceded for the children of Israel in Exodus 32, God Almighty allows people to ask questions! In fact, God also respects the freedom of choice, because He is love and love connotes choice – so much so, that in the first Chapter of the Gospel of St John, he lets us know (in verse 11) that the Lord Jesus came to His own, but was rejected by them; and then in the successive verse St John proceeds to say that to those who received Him, Hesus gave them power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on His name. In other words, He came to His own people, they chose to reject Him, and He subsequently focused on those who received Him. In fact, even today, salvation is not by compensation: there are people we may preach to, who will reject the message.

Well, despite this, the members of the scientific religion saw themselves as far more infallible and omnipotent, thus completely negating men’s free will and option to question or dissent to the status quo. So much so, that a massive censorship industrial complex extending from federal agencies to every major digital tech platform was constructed over the last nine years, and went into full effect in 2020. This largely happened out of the public eye. Even five years ago, it was barely known. The cases of banned accounts and throttled postings seemed isolated and often just an unfortunate exercise of editorial zeal.

BUT, the FOIAs and court discovery have unearthed tens of thousands of pages of evidence, proving that the problem is neither isolated nor random but rather gargantuan and systematic. It involves dozens of federal agencies, non-government organisations working as contractors, universities on contract either directly or indirectly, and even embedded employees at social media companies. The censorship network is so elaborate at this point that it is truly an industry—and an illegal one, at that! And, at the very core of its existence is both the government’s desire for control, and the reality that the scientific cult has, for the longest time, presumed people to be too stupid to think for themselves. And we saw the Biden-Harris  administration leverage this form of thinking, in building a censorship industrial complex that serviced the vaccine enterprise and scientific religion.

THE SCIENTISTIC RELIGION ALSO REQUIRES BLOOD SACRIFICE

In case the discussion thus far seemed like a stretched analogy, let’s make the parallels between religion and scientism (as well as the vaccine enterprise) even more explicit. Now, as you’d already know, any religion and cult notably requires blood sacrifice. Well, it certainly is no different for the scientific religion that has tried to sensationalise vaccines as an irrefutable good intervention.

In fact, this parallel of blood sacrifice can be traced to the use of aborted foetus tissue in the development of vaccines. A lot of vaccines that are presented as simple clear solutions ACTUALLY contain fetal tissue that was taken from aborted babies – so much so, that human fetal cell lines are used to culture a number of vaccines today. They are listed on the CDCs Vaccine Excipient list as WI-38, MRC-5, HEK293, PERC.6. In more detail, WI-38 is a diploid human cell culture line composed of fibroblasts derived from lung tissue of an aborted female fetus. And MRC-5 (also called Medical Research Council cell strain 5) is a diploid human cell culture line composed of fibroblasts derived from lung tissue of a 14-week-old aborted male fetus.

In addition, Human Embryonic Kidney cells 293, also often referred to as HEK 293, are a specific cell line originally derived from human embryonic kidney cells grown in a tissue culture. And the PERC-6 cell line was derived from human embryonic retinal cells taken from an elective abortion. Now, the newest cell line created in 2015 for vaccines: WALVAX 2 is taken from the lung tissue of a 3-month gestation female who was ultimately selected from among 9 aborted babies. The scientists noted how they followed specific guidelines to mimic WI-38 and MRC-5 in selecting the aborted babies, ranging from 2-4 months gestation. They further noted how they induced labor using a “water bag” abortion to shorten the delivery time and prevent the death of the fetus to ensure live intact organs which were immediately sent to the labs for cell preparation.

Then you might ask, which vaccines utilised aborted fetal materials? There is a long list of them; and it includes: the measles, mumps, rubella vaccine/MMR. There is also the diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, and poliomyelitis vaccine (the DTaP/TdP). There is the varicella (or chickenpox) vaccine and the shingles (zoster) vaccine. The hepatitis A and hepatitis B vaccines; the rabies vaccine; and even some coronavirus vaccines! And so, this is clearly a long established practice in the vaccine industry.

And you’d recall that this was highlighted from the testimony of Stanley Plotkin, under oath. This is the same Stanley Plotkin who is widely regarded as a leading author and contributor to vaccinology; and has been a consultant to Moderna, one of the main manufacturers of the Covid vaccine.

THE SCIENTISTIC RELIGION IS AIMED AT SELLING A DEFECTIVE AND DETRIMENTAL PRODUCT

Of course, the sacrifice of lives does not end with the foetuses used in the development of vaccines. It is also the lives harmed and destroyed in the rollout of various vaccines – which has been happening for years, since the very first vaccine, which is the smallpox vaccine. In 1798, the smallpox vaccine hit the market. Once it hit the market, it was observed to frequently cause smallpox outbreaks (rather than prevent them) and to cause a wide range of debilitating and complex injuries that many of the doctors had never seen before (and many of which I believe were examples of “blood stasis”). Curiously, rather than recognising this was a mistake, most of the medical profession endorsed the smallpox vaccine, and governments around the world mandated it as cases kept on increasing, leading to a downward spiral that was eventually broken by mass public protest against those mandates.

In the 1800s and early 1900s, a variety of early vaccines (e.g., rabies, typhoid, diphtheria, tuberculosis) and horse-generated antiserums (for most of the common infections at the time) entered the market. Since many of these vaccines were produced in small independent labs, there were a variety of quality control issues with these products, which frequently led to hot lots being released that severely injured or killed a group of people. Additionally, many of those vaccines had a high degree of toxicity. Because of this, a variety of new and severe medical conditions emerged, many of which were deemed to be due to brain inflammation (ence-phalitis) or brain damage (ence-phalopathy) and observed to occur in conjunction with cranial nerve damage. Most of these conditions in turn mirrored the myriad of injuries we now too see from modern vaccinations!

But, now, in addition to the injuries, two major issues stood out during this period: First, in addition to sometimes being directly contaminated with the disease causing organism (e.g., yellow fever or tuberculosis) and causing the illness, vaccines would often cause a temporary immune suppression which lead to disease outbreaks in those vaccinated (discussed here). However, each time this happened, rather than it being seen as a sign we needed to dial back vaccination, it was interpreted as not enough people being vaccinated and harsher and harsher vaccine mandates being instituted to enact that policy or new vaccines being created to address the existing damage of vaccination (we note this when observing the example of how the DPT vaccine frequently caused polio outbreaks).

Then the second issue that stood out is that public health officials and vaccine designers were well aware of the injuries vaccines were causing, but since it was said that no other treatments existed for the disease, regrettably deemed this to be a necessary sacrifice for the greater good and hence covered the injuries up so the public would continue to vaccinate. However, this medical doctrine rested on a faulty premise because effective treatments did IN FACT exist for the illnesses (e.g., in 1920 it was known IV hydrogen peroxide could treat severe infections and in 1928 it was known that ultraviolet blood irradiation could treat many otherwise incurable infections). And so, the scientific religion and vaccine enterprise has always operated with a willingness to sacrifice lives, while covering it up as acts of necessity, which is why aborted foetuses are used even today for the development of vaccines.

Written by Lindokuhle Mabaso