H1N1 swine flu hoax falls apart at the seamsby Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor
(NaturalNews) The great swine flu hoax of 2009 is now falling apart at the seams as one country after another unloads hundreds of millions of doses of unused swine flu vaccines. No informed person wants the injection anymore, and the entire fear-based campaign to promote the vaccines has now been exposed as outright quackery and propaganda.
Even doctors are now calling the pandemic a complete hoax. As reported on FoxNews, Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, a leading health authority in Europe, says that drug companies "organized a 'campaign of panic' to put pressure on the World Health Organization (WHO) to declare a pandemic. He believes it is 'one of the greatest medicine scandals of the century,' and he has called for an inquiry." (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,582749,00.html)
H1N1 swine flu was never dangerous, and it never should have been escalated to a level-six pandemic in the first place. It was all a big marketing scam whose purpose was to simply sell vaccines. (And the CDC and WHO were in on it...)
And it worked! Big Pharma made out with billions of dollars in profits for a useless vaccine that's now being dumped by the truck load. These vaccines were, of course, paid for with taxpayer dollars, making the Great Swine Flu Hoax of 2009 nothing more than an elaborate financial scam whose goal was to transfer wealth from the People to the shareholders of Big Pharma.
In just the fourth quarter of 2009, GlaxoSmithKline shipped $1.4 billion worth of vaccines. (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLDE60E1SU20100115?type=marketsNews)
That's $1.4 billion worth of taxpayer dollars, by the way. Dollars that could have been spent on nutrition or real health education. $1.4 billion worth of free vitamin D supplements would have done far more to protect public health than vaccines could ever hope to accomplish.
A bailout for Big PharmaWall Street hucksters have nothing on Big Pharma, the CDC and the WHO, all of which conspired to mislead the public and generate irrational fear in order to make money selling people vaccine shots they never needed in the first place.
The drug companies raked in billions of dollars in revenues while providing a product that offered absolutely no net reduction in mortality. In fact, as the long-term side effects of the vaccines remain unknown, it could turn out that the vaccines actually result in a net increase in mortality.
Meanwhile, countless people were harmed by the swine flu vaccine frenzy (it's "countless" because nobody's counting). In addition to those who were nearly paralyzed after receiving the vaccine shots, grade school students in Massachusetts who lined up to receive swine flu vaccine shots were instead injected with insulin. (Insulin injections can put you into a coma.) (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/19/AR2010011903366.html)
The school sent a letter home to students blaming the mishap on the school nurse. But if they weren't injecting these kids with a useless vaccine for a non-pandemic, none of this would have happened in the first place.
Total swine flu deaths for 2009 were far lower than the number of deaths from regular seasonal flu. And yet it turns out that thousands of Americans who died from the swine flu had been previously injected with the vaccines (http://www.naturalnews.com/027956_H1N1_vaccine_CDC.html). In fact, according to calculations derived from official CDC estimates, thousands of vaccinated Americans died from swine flu anyway. The vaccines, it seems, don't really work after all. You're just as safe doing nothing.
Actually, getting the vaccine may harm your health. Outspoken Dr. Wodarg even says that the full extent of the damage from the insufficiently-tested vaccines may not be known for years. "The vaccine developed by Novartis was produced in a bioreactor from cancerous cells, a technique that had never been used until now," he says.
Just what we need, huh? Cancer cells being injected into the population as part of a vaccine campaign.
Cancelling vaccine ordersThe Swine Flu hoax has fizzled out, and countries like Greece, France and the UK have cancelled orders for vaccines that they now realize won't be needed (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLDE60I0RI20100119) (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8448080.stm). But even the fizzling of this hoax doesn't mean it was a failure from the point of view of Big Pharma.
The swine flu hoax was a huge success not only for drug company profits, but also for certain influential individuals including Dr Julie Gerberding, former head of the CDC who has now accepted a high-paying job
as the president of Merck's global vaccine operations. (http://www.naturalnews.com/027789_Dr_Julie_Gerberding_Merck.html)
One minute you're running the CDC, warning the country about a pandemic while urging everybody to get vaccinated, and the next minute you're running the for-profit vaccine division of the world's largest drug company. Amazing how that works, huh?
We called it right
Or watch on YouTube here:
As I stated in the song lyrics, which were written in early August, 2009:
The truth is outrageous
Don't you know the drug companies made this flu
Don't you know the swine flu is made by man
It's all part of the Big Brother population plan
They don't want you to see the remedies
you can stop influenza with vitamin D for free
Herbal medicine is all that you need
But they can't charge a fifty dollar fee
They inject you
The big drug companies are makin' a killing
Collectin' the billions and gettin' away like a James Bond villain
Cuz' they're willin' to do almost anything
Just to make money with the flu vaccine
Many clueless critics thought this song was some sort of outrageous conspiracy rant at the time. Turns out it was a spot-on prediction of the truth behind The Great Swine Flu hoax of 2009.
Sources for this story include:
WHO's Dr Chan acknowledges world has lost confidence in WHO
Tuesday, 19 January 2010 11:10
Dr Margaret Chan, Director-General of the World Health Organization, acknowledged that the organisation has lost the trust of the people of the world following mass rejection of the swine flu jab in a speech to the Executive Board yesterday, 18 January 2010.
"We anticipated problems in producing enough vaccine fast enough, and this did indeed happen. But we did not anticipate that people would decide not to be vaccinated," she said.
She attributed the unwillingness of people to take the swine flu jab to "the revolution in communications and information technologies" which has allowed information about the vaccine -- specifically the fact it has not been clinically tested and contains dangerous ingredients -- to spread on the internet.
"In today’s world, people can draw on a vast range of information sources. People make their own decisions about what information to trust, and base their actions on those decisions, "she said.
"The days when health officials could issue advice, based on the very best medical and scientific data, and expect populations to comply, may be fading. It may no longer be sufficient to say that a vaccine is safe, or testing complied with all regulatory standards, or a risk is real."
The widespread recogniton that the WHO and national governments have promoted dangerous vaccines has resulted in a breach in trust that will not be repaired.
Clearly, any advice offered by WHO and national health ministries should be grounded in facts, clinical studies and scientific data that prove that the vaccines are helpful.
In addition, regulatory standards should ensure that only those vaccines that have passed objective scientific tests proving their usefulness should be allowed to be marketed.
This has not been the case.
There is verifiable scientific evidence proving the swine flu vaccines with mercury and squalene are actually harmful.
There is evidence the regulatory standards have been bent and special „emergency“ procedures implemented for „pandemic vaccines“ simply in order allow those harmful vaccines on the market without adequate clinical studies.
Furthermore, it is evident from WHO’s own data there is no pandemic.
Also, WHO cannot change the definition of pandemic to include every seasonal flu, however mild, without itself becoming the target of ridicule.
Evident to everyone is that the new and superfluous global pandemic managment system has been so designed that WHO can only exercise its sweeping new powers under the International Health Regulations when a pandemic level 6 emergency is declared – and that WHO is distorting every fact and even the definition of the word pandemic to allow just such a declaration for its own political and financial ends.
WHO has sidelined itself from the global health debate.
It has helped set up and profited from a system of global pandemic management that serves no purpose other than to enrich the pharma companies and expand the power of the banksters, who largely fund it.
Pandemics, if they are real, can be managed at a local level with means such as face masks, colloidal silver, vitamins etc.
This is also true of any artificial pandemic that WHO affiliated professors such as Professor Lina conducting research on making the swine flu more like the bird flu might ignite.
„In my view, this is a new communications challenge that we may need to address," Dr Chan says, failing to grasp the gigantic implications of the rejection of the people of the world of the swine flu vaccine in spite of unprecedented media and government propaganda.
People around the world have awoken to the fact that the „communication“ from WHO, passed on uncritically by their agents in national governmetns and the mainstream media are dangerous propaganda serving the interests of the pharmaceutical companies and banks.
It has become apparent that WHO is a threat to humanity. It serves the interests of a private and unelected group led largely by the Rockefellers that believe that there are too many people on the planet and it is their duty ot murder us by means of soft kill vaccines.
Dodge & Cox, for example, is one of the main institutional investors in Glaxo Smith Kline, manufacturer of the dangerous pandemrix jab, and a fund set up by Van Duyn Dodge family, related to Edward Seguin van Duyn, an early advocate of planned parenthood, and sterilization.
Because of the threat that WHO represents to the people of the world, especially the developping world where is vast immunization programmes are unsupervised, it needs to be dismantled.
In the last few monts, there have been unprecedented revelations about the depths of corruption and criminality of he UN in respect to climate change scam and of the WHO in respect to the swine flu vaccines.
But the complicity of national governments has also come under the spotlight.
There will be no return to the status quo ante.
The growth of communications and information technology cannot be stopped.
As an Irish person once said, when a good person dies, their voices go on talking forever but when an evil person dies, their voices fall silent, thereby underlining the reality that acts of communication have an inherent bias towards life-promoting values, and the truth.
The WHO and their allied national government will not be able to stop this dynamic of the communication age, especially not now when it’s voice has fallen silent on the world stage.
See report below.
Is WHO being set up to bear the brunt of the criticism of the swine flu scam in order that national governments can avoid drawing attention to their own complicity? This is the question posed by the headline in Le Temps.
With the exception of the Polish health minister, every single health minister in Europe and every single government head backed the mass swine flu vaccination campaign in spite of the evidence that the jabs were untested and toxic.
French senators are going to question pharmaceutical companies on Wednesday.
But where is the parliamentary inquiry in Germany, for example? Why has none been launched?
WHO could not have implemented its swine flu mass vaccination campaign without the complicity of many agents in national governments, who established national pandemic plans from 2002 onwards.
One of the strongest supporters of these pandemic plans in Germany was Wolfgang Wodarg, who is leading the criticism against WHO while presenting the swine flu scam as mainly for profit.
Why has he not initiated an inquiry in the German parliament? Is it because his own role will come under scrutiny?
Nations Unies mardi19 janvier 2010
Les Etats ménagent l’OMS pour éviter leur mea culpa
Par Stéphane Bussard
L’Organisation mondiale de la santé tient son Conseil exécutif jusqu’à vendredi. Les rapports entre l’agence onusienne et l’industrie pharmaceutique font débat
A l’heure où le Conseil exécutif de l’Organisation mondiale de la santé est réuni à Genève pour une semaine, Wolfgang Wodarg continue d’asséner ses critiques au vitriol: «Le problème avec l’OMS, c’est qu’elle a modifié la définition d’une pandémie. Elle a supprimé dans cette même définition la notion de maladies graves et de haute morbidité/mortalité. Du coup, on peut déclarer une pandémie chaque année sur la base d’une simple grippe.»
Médecin et épidémiologiste, Wolfgang Wodarg est à la tête de ceux qui pensent que l’OMS a surréagi par rapport à la grippe A(H1N1) en raison de ses liens incestueux avec l’industrie pharmaceutique. Celle-ci ayant beaucoup investi d’argent dans la recherche sur les vaccins, elle avait conclu des contrats avec différents Etats qui n’entraient en vigueur qu’en cas de pandémie déclarée.
Membre de la commission Social et Santé du Conseil de l’Europe, le médecin allemand s’est engagé pour qu’une enquête soit menée sur les liens entre les pharmas et l’OMS. Mais aussi entre les scientifiques et l’agence onusienne. «Il n’y a pas que des politiques qui dénoncent la situation, soulève Wolfgang Wodarg. La population elle-même ne croit plus dans les scientifiques. Une preuve? Elle a en grande partie refusé de se faire vacciner.»
Conseiller spécial de la directrice de l’OMS pour la grippe pandémique, Keiji Fukuda réfute toute manipulation du terme pandémie. Il reconnaît que la formulation varie quelque peu d’un cas à l’autre. Mais il rappelle qu’une pandémie répond toujours à la même idée: celle d’une propagation mondiale d’une maladie ou infection. Le conseiller spécial ajoute que l’OMS «n’a jamais inclus dans la définition la sévérité» du virus.
Aujourd’hui, l’ex-député allemand au Bundestag le confie au Temps: «Nous demandons que l’OMS fasse preuve de plus de transparence. Mais elle n’est pas la seule en cause. Les gouvernements nationaux ont aussi leur part de responsabilité. Ils ont aussi échoué à améliorer le mode de fonctionnement de l’OMS.» C’est peut-être la raison pour laquelle les Etats membres de l’OMS ont épargné lundi la directrice de l’OMS, Margaret Chan. La critiquer, c’était risquer l’effet boomerang.
Hier, devant le Conseil exécutif de l’organisation, Margaret Chan a tenu à circonscrire les attaques. Elle a déclaré qu’une commission d’experts indépendants allait évaluer de façon «très large» la réaction de l’OMS à la pandémie et soumettre ses premières conclusions aux ministres de la Santé en mai prochain. La Chinoise a ajouté que la commission analysera le système d’alerte pandémique ainsi que les questions liées à la virulence et à l’étendue géographique du virus. «Il est normal que chaque décision soit examinée de près, estime Margaret Chan. L’OMS n’opposera aucune restriction à ce type d’investigation.»
La directrice de l’agence onusienne a relevé hier à Genève que l’OMS avait prévu qu’il y aurait des problèmes pour produire des vaccins à temps. Mais elle a reconnu que son organisation n’avait pas «prévu que les gens décideraient de ne pas se faire vacciner. […] Inciter les gens à adopter un comportement sûr est l’un des plus grands défis de santé publique.»
Quoi qu’il en soit, Wolfgang Wodard juge une enquête nécessaire, d’autant que «les pharmas ont été les grands profiteurs de la pandémie». Le membre du Conseil de l’Europe rappelle que tous les Etats n’ont pas cédé à la «psychose» provoquée par l’agence onusienne: «Certains Etats ont refusé l’alarmisme de l’OMS. Des Etats comme la Pologne n’ont pas acheté de vaccins. Le Luxembourg a aussi mis en garde contre tout accès de panique.» En France, les sénateurs vont auditionner mercredi les entreprises pharmaceutiques pour tenter d’y voir clair. Paris avait commandé 94 millions de doses de vaccins avant de résilier certains contrats pour faire taire la polémique qui a éclaté dans l’Hexagone.
YOU OBVIOUSLY DID NOT CHECK THE SOURCE OF THIS STORY
WHAT YOU FORWARDED IS AN ENGINEERED STORY. IT IMPLIES THAT DR CHEN SAID OR IMPLIED ALL THE FACTS REPORTED. SHE DID NOT! IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT HER SPEECH, SHE ONLY SAID THAT THE INTERNET ET AL HAS HAD AN EFFECT ON THE PUBLIC REJECTION OF THE SHOT. BUT DR CHEN DID NOT ADMIT THAT THE SHOT IS NOT EFFECTIVE OR THAT IT IS DANGEROUS OR ALL THE OTHER THINGS THAT YOU AND BUERGERMEISTER ARE CLAIMING TO BE TRUE. AS A JOURNALIST I SUBMIT THAT THIS ARTICLE IS BRAINWASHING AND A LIE.
Of course this is not the original speech. It is obvious from the text that this is an editorial. I could tell it was written by Jane, but there was no signature, that is why I gave the source, the Flu Case; take it or leave it. I called it a summary, not the actual text. It is as understood by Jane Burgermeister. You want to call her a liar? How about opinionated instead? Apparently she is also drawing heavily on the opinions of Wolfgang Wodard, see above in red. He is leading the charge for an investigation by European countries, and used to be part of the system himself, as an ex-member of the Bundestag in Germany. She is obviously drawing from more than one source at the same time, while writing this editorial. The story of Lina comes from other articles, etc.
Thank you for drawing people 's attention to the fact that this is her understanding of the words, and not the words themselves. She combined them with other facts, and came up with this article OF HERS, just as any editorial would do. As a journalist, I am sure you know about editorials.
Here are the original words of Dr. Chan's speech about the issue:
"...Although the virus has not yet delivered any devastating surprises, we have seen some surprises on other fronts. We anticipated problems in producing enough vaccine fast enough, and this did indeed happen. But we did not anticipate that people would decide not to be vaccinated.
I mentioned the revolution in communications and information technologies. In today’s world, people can draw on a vast range of information sources. People make their own decisions about what information to trust, and base their actions on those decisions.
The days when health officials could issue advice, based on the very best medical and scientific data, and expect populations to comply, may be fading. It may no longer be sufficient to say that a vaccine is safe, or testing complied with all regulatory standards, or a risk is real.
In my view, this is a new communications challenge that we may need to address. As the items on your agenda show, persuading people to adopt healthy behaviours is one of the biggest challenges in public health.
In terms of managing public perceptions, part of the problem arises from the big difference between what was expected, after watching the highly lethal H5N1 virus for so long, and what fortunately happened. An event similar to the 1918 pandemic was feared, when what actually happened is probably closer to the 1957 or 1968 pandemics"...
But thanks for providing the original text and the link. I will add it to the post, with your comment.
Do you understand in what context this speech was given?
While the W.H.O. is under heavy scrutiny by European governments,
and while the Minister of Health of France, Mrs. Bachelot, is in court, being SUED for her role in "poisoning " the population. I had posted that story here:
See the article above, highlighted in red. I hope this clarifies any misunderstandings.