Vaccination Tyranny
The medical cartel, at the highest level, is not out to help people. It is out to harm them, to weaken them, to kill them. At least HALF of the world's population is being targeted for elimination under the global elite's "de-population" agenda. Do not, under any circumstances, get vaccinated, or allow any of your children to get vaccinated. Say NO!
Statistics and Propaganda
How many Americans really die of the flu each year? Ask the American Lung Association. Better yet, read their own report from August 2004, titled "Trends in Pneumonia and Influenza/Morbidity and Mortality". This report comes from the Research and Scientific Affairs Epidemiology and Statistics Unit. At the bottom of the document, the source is listed as the National Center for Health Statistics, "Report of Final Mortality Statistics, 1979�2001".
Get ready for some surprises, especially since the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) keeps trumpeting flu-death annual numbers as 36,000. Like clockwork. Year in and year out, 36,000 people in the US die from the flu every year. Killer disease. Watch out! Get your flu shot. Every autumn. Don't wait. You might fall over dead in the street!
Here are the total influenza deaths from the report (from 1979 to 1995, the stats were released every two years): 1979: 604; 1981: 3,006; 1983: 1,431; 1985: 2,054; 1987: 632; 1989: 1,593; 1991: 1,137; 1993: 1,044; 1995: 606; 1996: 745; 1997: 720; 1998: 1,724; 1999: 1,665; 2000: 1765; 2001: 257.
Don't believe me? Here is the page:
http://www.lungusa.org/atf/cf/%7B7A8D42C2-FCCA-4604-8ADE-7F5D5E762256%7D/PI1.PDF
Download the PDF document (22 pages/86 KB) and go to page nine. Then start scrolling down until you come to the chart for flu deaths as a separate category.
Recently, Tommy Thompson, head of US Health and Human Services, stated that 91 per cent of the people who die from the flu in the US every year are 65 and older. So you might engage in a little arithmetic and figure out how many people under 65 are really dying from the flu each year. But no matter. The raw all-ages stats are low enough. Quite low enough. Quite, quite.
Do you see what is going on here? Those who blithely claim, "Well, you see, uh, ah, flu often leads to pneumonia and that's why we have to be so careful about the flu. Deaths from pneumonia are in large numbers, blah blah blah..."
It's a straight con, folks. The CDC is on a street corner with a little table, and there are shills walking around repeating the 36,000 deaths figure while the PR flacks at the table are working the vaccine angle. The crowd is getting restless. A man shouts, "Where is my flu shot? We're all going to die!" Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, Congress is planning a measure that will guarantee vaccine manufacturers annual billion-dollar payoffs, no matter how many doses are left over unused.
Now that a much clearer picture emerges of the low number of flu deaths in the US each year, it's only natural to revisit the issue of vaccines. Minus the hysteria about "high numbers of flu deaths" and the "pressing need to get the vaccine", what we are really dealing with? The answer is PR. Propaganda is being used to artificially inflate flu statistics and thereby drive people into doctors' offices and clinics to get their shots. So what about vaccines? How safe and effective are they?
I have long warned about the dangers of vaccines, especially for babies and young children, whose immune systems are not capable of coping with the many contaminants and toxic preservatives in vaccines. There are other reasons why even adults should avoid them. Now, for the first time, a former insider from within the vaccine industry has agreed to talk about the dangers of vaccines.
"Dr Mark Randall" is the pseudonym of a former vaccine researcher who worked for many years in the laboratories of major pharmaceutical houses and the US government's National Institutes of Health. He is now retired and has reluctantly agreed to speak out. In my opinion, his testimony matches all the other claims that I have studied in past years.
This interview that follows is important not only because of "Dr Randall's" intimate knowledge of vaccine dangers, but for his testimony about the inside workings and cover-ups between the government and the vaccine industry�the two sources that keep trying to assure Americans that they can be trusted. This major excerpt is perhaps the best single written summary of the back-up evidence for the case against immunizations.
Q(Jon Rappoport): You were once certain that vaccines were the hallmark of good medicine.
A("Dr Mark Randall"): Yes I was. I helped develop a few vaccines. I won't say which ones.
Q: Why not?
A: I want to preserve my privacy.
Q: So you think you could have problems if you came out into the open?
A: I believe I could lose my pension.
Q: On what grounds?
A: The grounds don't matter. These people have ways of causing you problems, when you were once part of "the Club". I know one or two people who were put under surveillance, who were harassed.
Q: Harassed by whom?
A: The FBI.
Q: Really?
A: Sure. The FBI used other pretexts. And the IRS can come calling too.
Q: So much for free speech.
A: I was "part of the inner circle". If now I began to name names and make specific accusations against researchers, I could be in a world of trouble.
Q: What is at the bottom of these efforts at harassment?
A: Vaccines are the last defense of modern medicine. Vaccines are the ultimate justification for the overall "brilliance" of modern medicine.
Q: Do you believe that people should be allowed to choose whether they should get vaccines?
A: On a political level, yes. On a scientific level, people need information, so that they can choose well. It's one thing to say choice is good. But if the atmosphere is full of lies, how can you choose? Also, if the FDA were run by honorable people, these vaccines would not be granted licenses. They would be investigated to within an inch of their lives.
Q: There are medical historians who state that the overall decline of illnesses was not due to vaccines.
A: I know. For a long time, I ignored their work.
Q: Why?
A: Because I was afraid of what I would find out. I was in the business of developing vaccines. My livelihood depended on continuing that work.
Q: And then?
A: I did my own investigation.
Q: What conclusions did you come to?
A: The decline of disease is due to improved living conditions.
Q: What conditions?
A: Cleaner water. Advanced sewage systems. Nutrition. Fresher food. A decrease in poverty. Germs may be everywhere, but when you are healthy, you don't contract the diseases as easily.
Q: What did you feel when you completed your own investigation?
A: Despair. I realized I was working a sector based on a collection of lies.
Q: Are some vaccines more dangerous than others?
A: Yes. The DPT shot, for example. The MMR. But some lots of a vaccine are more dangerous than other lots of the same vaccine. As far as I'm concerned, all vaccines are dangerous.
Q: Why?
A: Several reasons. They involve the human immune system in a process that tends to compromise immunity. They can actually cause the disease they are supposed to prevent. They can cause other diseases than the ones they are supposed to prevent.
Q: Why are we quoted statistics which seem to prove that vaccines have been tremendously successful at wiping out diseases?
A: Why? To give the illusion that these vaccines are useful. If a vaccine suppresses visible symptoms of a disease like measles, everyone assumes that the vaccine is a success. But, under the surface, the vaccine can harm the immune system itself. And if it causes other diseases -- say, meningitis -- that fact is masked, because no one believes that the vaccine can do that. The connection is overlooked.
Q: It is said that the smallpox vaccine wiped out smallpox in England.
A: Yes. But when you study the available statistics, you get another picture.
Q: Which is?
A: There were cities in England where people who were not vaccinated did not get smallpox. There were places where people who were vaccinated experienced smallpox epidemics. And smallpox was already on the decline before the vaccine was introduced.
Q: So you're saying that we have been treated to a false history.
A: Yes. That's exactly what I'm saying. This is a history that has been cooked up to convince people that vaccines are invariably safe and effective.
Q: Now, you worked in labs. Where purity was an issue.
A: The public believes that these labs, these manufacturing facilities are the cleanest places in the world. That is not true. Contamination occurs all the time. You get all sorts of debris introduced into vaccines.
Q: For example, the SV40 monkey virus slips into the polio vaccine.
A: Well yes, that happened. But that's not what I mean. The SV40 got into the polio vaccine because the vaccine was made by using monkey kidneys. But I'm talking about something else. The actual lab conditions. The mistakes. The careless errors. SV40, which was later found in cancer tumors -- that was what I would call a structural problem. It was an accepted part of the manufacturing process. If you use monkey kidneys, you open the door to germs which you don't know are in those kidneys.
Q: Okay, but let's ignore that distinction between different types of contaminants for a moment. What contaminants did you find in your many years of work with vaccines?
A: All right. I'll give you some of what I came across, and I'll also give you what colleagues of mine found. Here's a partial list. In the Rimavex measles vaccine, we found various chicken viruses. In polio vaccine, we found acanthamoeba, which is a so-called "brain-eating" amoeba.
Simian cytomegalovirus in polio vaccine. Simian foamy virus in the rotavirus vaccine. Bird-cancer viruses in the MMR vaccine. Various micro-organisms in the anthrax vaccine. I've found potentially dangerous enzyme inhibitors in several vaccines. Duck, dog, and rabbit viruses in the rubella vaccine. Avian leucosis virus in the flu vaccine. Pestivirus in the MMR vaccine.
Q: Let me get this straight. These are all contaminants which don't belong in the vaccines.
A: That's right. And if you try to calculate what damage these contaminants can cause, well, we don't really know, because no testing has been done, or very little testing. It's a game of roulette. You take your chances. Also, most people don't know that some polio vaccines, adenovirus vaccines, rubella and hep A and measles vaccines have been made with aborted human fetal tissue. I have found what I believed were bacterial fragments and polio virus in these vaccines from time to time -- which may have come from that fetal tissue. When you look for contaminants in vaccines, you can come up with material that IS puzzling. You know it shouldn't be there, but you don't know exactly what you've got. I have found what I believed was a very small "fragment" of human hair and also human mucus. I have found what can only be called "foreign protein", which could mean almost anything. It could mean protein from viruses.
Q: Alarm bells are ringing all over the place.
A: How do you think I felt? Remember, this material is going into the bloodstream without passing through some of the ordinary immune defenses.
Q: How were your findings received?
A: Basically, it was, don't worry, this can't be helped. In making vaccines, you use various animals' tissue, and that's where this kind of contamination enters in. Of course, I'm not even mentioning the standard chemicals like formaldehyde, mercury, and aluminum which are purposely put into vaccines.
Q: This information is pretty staggering.
A: Yes. And I'm just mentioning some of the biological contaminants. Who knows how many others there are? Others we don't find because we don't think to look for them. If tissue from, say, a bird is used to make a vaccine, how many possible germs can be in that tissue? We have no idea. We have no idea what they might be, or what effects they could have on humans.
Q: And beyond the purity issue?
A: You are dealing with the basic faulty premise about vaccines. That they intricately stimulate the immune system to create the conditions for immunity from disease. That is the bad premise. It doesn't work that way. A vaccine is supposed to "create" antibodies which, indirectly, offer protection against disease. However, the immune system is much larger and more involved than antibodies and their related "killer cells".
Q: The immune system is?
A: The entire body, really. Plus the mind. It's all immune system, you might say. That is why you can have, in the middle of an epidemic, those individuals who remain healthy.
Q: So the level of general health is important.
A: More than important. Vital.
Q: How are vaccine statistics falsely presented?
A: There are many ways. For example, suppose that 25 people who have received the hepatitis B vaccine come down with hepatitis. Well, hep B is a liver disease. But you can call liver disease many things. You can change the diagnosis. Then, you've concealed the root cause of the problem.
Q: And that happens?
A: All the time. It HAS to happen, if the doctors automatically assume that people who get vaccines DO NOT come down with the diseases they are now supposed to be protected from. And that is exactly what doctors assume. You see, it's circular reasoning. It's a closed system. It admits no fault. No possible fault. If a person who gets a vaccine against hepatitis gets hepatitis, or gets some other disease, the automatic assumption is, this had nothing to do with the disease.
Q: In your years working in the vaccine establishment, how many doctors did you encounter who admitted that vaccines were a problem?
A: None. There were a few who privately questioned what they were doing. But they would never go public, even within their companies.
Q: What was the turning point for you?
A: I had a friend whose baby died after a DPT shot.
Q: Did you investigate?
A: Yes, informally. I found that this baby was completely healthy before the vaccination. There was no reason for his death, except the vaccine. That started my doubts. Of course, I wanted to believe that the baby had gotten a bad shot from a bad lot. But as I looked into this further, I found that was not the case in this instance. I was being drawn into a spiral of doubt that increased over time. I continued to investigate. I found that, contrary to what I thought, vaccines are not tested in a scientific way.
Q: What do you mean?
A: For example, no long-term studies are done on any vaccines. Long-term follow-up is not done in any careful way. Why? Because, again, the assumption is made that vaccines do not cause problems. So why should anyone check? On top of that, a vaccine reaction is defined so that all bad reactions are said to occur very soon after the shot is given. But that does not make sense.
Q: Why doesn't it make sense?
A: Because the vaccine obviously acts in the body for a long period of time after it is given. A reaction can be gradual. Deterioration can be gradual. Neurological problems can develop over time. They do in various conditions, even according to a conventional analysis. So why couldn't that be the case with vaccines? If chemical poisoning can occur gradually, why couldn't that be the case with a vaccine which contains mercury?
Q: And that is what you found?
A: Yes. You are dealing with correlations, most of the time.Correlations are not perfect. But if you get 500 parents whose children have suffered neurological damage during a one-year period after having a vaccine, this should be sufficient to spark off an intense investigation.
Q: Has it been enough?
A: No. Never. This tells you something right away.
Q: Which is?
A: The people doing the investigation are not really interested in looking at the facts. They assume that the vaccines are safe. So, when they do investigate, they invariably come up with exonerations of the vaccines. They say, "This vaccine is safe". But what do they base those judgments on? They base them on definitions and ideas which automatically rule out a condemnation of the vaccine.
Q: There are numerous cases where a vaccine campaign has failed. Where people have come down with the disease against which they were vaccinated.
A: Yes, there are many such instances. And there the evidence is simply ignored. It's discounted. The experts say, if they say anything at all, that this is just an isolated situation, but overall the vaccine has been shown to be safe. But if you add up all the vaccine campaigns where damage and disease have occurred, you realize that these are NOT isolated situations.
Q: Did you ever discuss what we are talking about here with colleagues, when you were still working in the vaccine establishment?
A: Yes I did.
Q: What happened?
A: Several times I was told to keep quiet. It was made clear that I should go back to work and forget my misgivings. On a few occasions, I encountered fear. Colleagues tried to avoid me. They felt they could be labeled with "guilt by association". All in all, though, I behaved myself.I made sure I didn't create problems for myself.
Q: If vaccines actually do harm, why are they given?
A: First of all, there is no "if." They DO harm. It becomes a more difficult question to decide whether they do harm in those people who seem to show no harm. Then you are dealing with the kind of research which should be done, but isn't. Researchers should be probing to discover a kind of map, or flow chart, which shows exactly what vaccines do in the body from the moment they enter. This research has not been done. As to why they are given, we could sit here for two days and discuss all the reasons. As you've said many times, at different layers of the system people have their motives. Money, fear of losing a job, the desire to win brownie points, prestige, awards, promotion, misguided idealism, unthinking habit, and so on. But, at the highest levels of the medical cartel, vaccines are a top priority because they cause a weakening of the immune system. I know that may be hard to accept, but it's true.
The medical cartel, at the highest level, is not out to help people, it is out to harm them, to weaken them. To kill them. At one point in my career, I had a long conversation with a man who occupied a high government position in an African nation. He told me that he was well aware of this. He told me that WHO is a front for these depopulation interests. There is an underground, shall we say, in Africa, made up of various officials who are earnestly trying to change the lot of the poor. This network of people knows what is going on. They know that vaccines have been used, and are being used, to destroy their countries, to make them ripe for takeover by globalist powers. I have had the opportunity to speak with several of these people from this network.
Q: Is Thabo Mbeki, the president of South Africa, aware of the situation?
A: I would say he is partially aware. Perhaps he is not utterly convinced, but he is on the way to realizing the whole truth. He already knows that HIV is a hoax. He knows that the AIDS drugs are poisons which destroy the immune system. He also knows that if he speaks out, in any way, about the vaccine issue, he will be branded a lunatic. He has enough trouble after his stand on the AIDS issue.
Q: This network you speak of.
A: It has accumulated a huge amount of information about vaccines. The question is, how is a successful strategy going to be mounted? For these people, that is a difficult issue.
Q: And in the industrialized nations?
A: The medical cartel has a stranglehold, but it is diminishing. Mainly because people have the freedom to question medicines. However, if the choice issue [the right to take or reject any medicine] does not gather steam, these coming mandates about vaccines against biowarefare germs are going to win out. This is an important time.
Q: The furor over the hepatitis B vaccine seems one good avenue.
A: I think so, yes. To say that babies must have the vaccine-and then in the next breath, admitting that a person gets hep B from sexual contacts and shared needles -- is a ridiculous juxtaposition. Medical authorities try to cover themselves by saying that 20,000 or so children in the US get hep B every year from "unknown causes", and that's why every baby must have the vaccine. I dispute that 20,00 figure and the so-called studies that back it up.
Q: Andrew Wakefield, the British MD who uncovered the link between the MMR vaccine and autism, has just been fired from his job in a London hospital.
A: Yes. Wakefield performed a great service. His correlations between the vaccine and autism are stunning. Perhaps you know that Tony Blair's wife is involved with alternative health. There is the possibility that their child has not been given the MMR. Blair recently side-stepped the question in press interviews, and made it seem that he was simply objecting to invasive questioning of his "personal and family life". In any event, I believe his wife has been muzzled. I think, if given the chance, she would at least say she is sympathetic to all the families who have come forward and stated that their children were severely damaged by the MMR.
Q: British reporters should try to get through to her.
A: They have been trying. But I think she has made a deal with her husband to keep quiet, no matter what. She could do a great deal of good if she breaks her promise. I have been told she is under pressure, and not just from her husband. At the level she occupies, MI6 and British health authorities get into the act. It is thought of as a matter of national security.
Q: Well, it is national security, once you understand the medical cartel.
A: It is global security. The cartel operates in every nation. It zealously guards the sanctity of vaccines. Questioning these vaccines is on the same level as a Vatican bishop questioning the sanctity of the sacrament of the Eucharist in the Catholic Church.
Q: I know that a Hollywood celebrity stating publicly that he will not take a vaccine is committing career suicide.
A: Hollywood is linked very powerfully to the medical cartel. There are several reasons, but one of them is simply that an actor who is famous can draw a huge amount of publicity if he says ANYTHING. In 1992, I was present at your demonstration against the FDA in downtown Los Angeles. One or two actors spoke against the FDA. Since that time, you would be hard pressed to find an actor who has spoken out in any way against the medical cartel.
Q: Within the National Institutes of Health, what is the mood, what is the basic frame of mind?
A: People are competing for research monies. The last thing they think about is challenging the status quo. They are already in an intramural war for that money. They don't need more trouble. This is a very insulated system. It depends on the idea that, by and large, modern medicine is very successful on every frontier. To admit systemic problems in any area is to cast doubt on the whole enterprise. You might therefore think that NIH is the last place one should think about holding demonstrations. But just the reverse is true. If five thousand people showed up there demanding an accounting of the actual benefits of that research system, demanding to know what real health benefits have been conferred on the public from the billions of wasted dollars funneled to that facility, something might start. A spark might go off. You might get, with further demonstrations, all sorts of fall-out. Researchers -- a few -- might start leaking information.
Q: A good idea.
A: People in suits standing as close to the buildings as the police will allow. People in business suits, in jogging suits, mothers and babies. Well-off people. Poor people. All sorts of people.
Q: What about the combined destructive power of a number of vaccines given to babies these days?
A: It is a travesty and a crime. There are no real studies of any depth which have been done on that. Again, the assumption is made that vaccines are safe, and therefore any number of vaccines given together are safe as well. But the truth is, vaccines are not safe. Therefore the potential damage increases when you give many of them in a short time period.
Q: Then we have the fall flu season.
A: Yes. As if only in the autumn do these germs float in to the US from Asia. The public swallows that premise. If it happens in April, it is a bad cold. If it happens in October, it is the flu.
Q: Do you regret having worked all those years in the vaccine field?
A: Yes. But after this interview, I'll regret it a little less. And I work in other ways. I give out information to certain people, when I think they will use it well.
Q: What is one thing you want the public to understand?
A: That the burden of proof in establishing the safety and efficacy of vaccines is on the people who manufacture and license them for public use. Just that. The burden of proof is not on you or me. And for proof you need well-designed long-term studies. You need extensive follow-up. You need to interview mothers and pay attention to what mothers say about their babies and what happens to them after vaccination. You need all these things. The things that are not there.
Q: The things that are not there.
A: Yes.
Q: To avoid any confusion, I'd like you to review, once more, the disease problems that vaccines can cause. Which diseases, how that happens.
A: We are basically talking about two potential harmful outcomes. One, the person gets the disease from the vaccine. He gets the disease which the vaccine is supposed to protect him from. Because, some version of the disease is in the vaccine to begin with. Or two, he doesn't get THAT disease, but at some later time, maybe right away, maybe not, he develops another condition which is caused by the vaccine. That condition could be autism, what's called autism, or it could be some other disease like meningitis. He could become mentally disabled.
Q: Is there any way to compare the relative frequency of these different outcomes?
A: No. Because the follow-up is poor. We can only guess. If you ask, out of a population of a hundred thousand children who get a measles vaccine, how many get the measles, and how many develop other problems from the vaccine, there is a no reliable answer. That is what I'm saying. Vaccines are superstitions. And with superstitions, you don't get facts you can use. You only get stories, most of which are designed to enforce the superstition. But, from many vaccine campaigns, we can piece together a narrative that does reveal some very disturbing things. People have been harmed. The harm is real, and it can be deep and it can mean death. The harm is NOT limited to a few cases, as we have been led to believe.In the US, there are groups of mothers who are testifying about autism and childhood vaccines. They are coming forward and standing up at meetings.They are essentially trying to fill in the gap that has been created by the researchers and doctors who turn their backs on the whole thing.
Q: Let me ask you this. If you took a child in, say, Boston and you raised that child with good nutritious food and he exercised every day and he was loved by his parents, and he didn't get the measles vaccine, what would be his health status compared with the average child in Boston who eats poorly and watches five hours of TV a day and gets the measles vaccine?
A: Of course there are many factors involved, but I would bet on the better health status for the first child. If he gets measles, if he gets it when he is nine, the chances are it will be much lighter than the measles the second child might get. I would bet on the first child every time.
Q: How long did you work with vaccines?
A: A long time. Longer than ten years.
Q: Looking back now, can you recall any good reason to say that vaccines are successful?
A: No, I can't. If I had a child now, the last thing I would allow is vaccination. I would move out of the state if I had to. I would change the family name. I would disappear. With my family. I'm not saying it would come to that. There are ways to sidestep the system with grace, if you know how to act. There are exemptions you can declare, in every state, based on religious and/or philosophic views. But if push came to shove, I would go on the move.
Q: And yet there are children everywhere who do get vaccines and appear to be healthy.
A: The operative word is "appear." What about all the children who can't focus on their studies? What about the children who have tantrums from time to time? What about the children who are not quite in possession of all their mental faculties? I know there are many causes for these things, but vaccines are one cause. I would not take the chance. I see no reason to take the chance. And frankly, I see no reason to allow the government to have the last word. Government medicine is, from my experience, often a contradiction in terms. You get one or the other, but not both.
Q: So we come to the level playing field.
A: Yes. Allow those who want the vaccines to take them. Allow the dissidents to decline to take them. But, as I said earlier, there is no level playing field if the field is strewn with lies. And when babies are involved, you have parents making all the decisions. Those parents need a heavy dose of truth. What about the child I spoke of who died from the DPT shot? What information did his parents act on? I can tell you it was heavily weighted. It was not real information.
Q: Medical PR people, in concert with the press, scare the hell out of parents with dire scenarios about what will happen if their kids don't get shots.
A: They make it seem a crime to refuse the vaccine. They equate it with bad parenting. You fight that with better information. It is always a challenge to buck the authorities. And only you can decide whether to do it. It is every person's responsibility to make up his mind. The medical cartel likes that bet. It is betting that the fear will win.
"Dr. Mark Randall" is the pseudonym of a vaccine researcher who worked for many years in the labs of major pharmaceutical houses and the US government's National Institutes of Health.
"Mark" retired during the last decade. He says he was "disgusted with what he had discovered about vaccines".
He is a little reluctant to speak out, even under the cover of anonymity, but with the current push to make vaccines mandatory -- with penalties like quarantine lurking in the wings -- he has decided to break his silence.
He lives comfortably in retirement, but he has developed a conscience about his former work. Mark is well aware of the scope of the medical cartel and its goals of depopulation, mind control, and general debilitation of populations.
of 2005 (aka Senate Bill 1873 - nicknamed "BioShield 2")
1. Undermines drug safety laws.
2. Violates the constitutional right to a trial by jury in case a vaccine or drug causes injuries.
3. Keeps the public in the dark about every aspect of vaccine research, development, injuries, and deaths resulting from the partnership between government and the pharmaceutical lobby.
4. Forces mandatory compliance with public health proclamations demanding vaccinations and/or drugs be taken by anyone declared at risk, not necessarily infected.
"This is the latest deception and distraction issued by government and grassroots activists espousing public protectionism," said Dr. Leonard Horowitz, author of 15 books including the national bestseller, "Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola--Nature, Accident or Intentional?" http://www.tetrahedron.org. "There is nothing new in this legislation that hasn't already been politically dictated."
Drug safety laws have been violated since their inception. The constitutional right to a jury trial fell years ago in cases brought against all federal officials including those engaged in public health practice. The National Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, co-sponsored by NVIC and initially promoted by Ms. Fisher, shielded drug companies from vaccine injury lawsuits. The public, even medical doctors, have always been in the dark about "proprietary" pharmaceutical intelligence, the nitty-gritty on drug testing for FDA approval, and vaccine injury data. And following 9-11, the Model State Emergency Health Powers Act passed by most states forced compliance with public health vaccination/intoxication mandates.
Here is the list of politicians who are pushing for us to face forced vaccines and forced drugging with untested experimental drugs and vaccines, giving freedom from liability to drug companies. Contact them ALL. Keep this list of these traitors for your voting records. This bill is called the "Biodefense and Pandemic Vaccine and Drug Development Act of 2005". You will find the wording under Senate Bill 1873.
REPUBLICANS
Gregg, Judd (R - NH)
393 Senate Russell Building
Washington DC 20510
Phone: (202) 224-3324
Fax: (202) 224-4952
http://gregg.senate.gov/sitepages/contact.cfm
Frist, William (R - TN)
509 Hart Senate Building
Washington DC 20510
Phone: (202) 224-3344
Fax: (202) 228-1264
http://frist.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=AboutSenatorFrist.ContactForm
Enzi, Mike (R - WY)
379A Senate Russell Office Building
Washington DC 20510
Phone: (202) 224-3424 Fax: (202) 228-0359
http://enzi.senate.gov/email.htm
Burr Richard (R-NC)
217 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Phone: (202) 224-3154
Fax: (202) 228-2981
http://burr.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Home
Isakson Johnny (R- GA)
120 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
(202) 224-3643
Fax: (202) 228-0724
http://isakson.senate.gov/contact.cfm
Alexander, Lamar (R-TN)
302 Senate Hart Office Building
Washington DC 20510
Phone: (202) 224-4944
Fax: (202) 228-3398
http://alexander.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Home
Bond, Christopher (R - MO)
274 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington DC 20510
Phone: (202) 224-5721
Fax (202) 224-8149
http://bond.senate.gov/contact/contactme.cfm
Roberts, Pat (R - KS)
109 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington DC 20510
Phone: (202) 224-4774
Fax (202) 224-3514
http://roberts.senate.gov/e-mail_pat.html
Ensign, John (R - NV)
356 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington DC 20510
Phone: (202) 224-6244
Fax (202) 228-2193
http://ensign.senate.gov/forms/email_form.cfm
DeWine, Mike (R - OH)
140 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington DC 20510
Phone: (202) 224-2315
Fax (202) 224-6519
http://dewine.senate.gov/
DEMOCRATS
Kennedy, Edward - (D - MA)
317 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington DC 20510
Phone: (202) 224-4543
Fax: (202) 224-2417
http://kennedy.senate.gov/index_high.html
Dodd, Christopher (D - CT)
448 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington DC 20510
Phone (202) 224-2823
Fax (202) 228-1683
http://dodd.senate.gov/webmail/form-opinion.html
Harkin, Tom (D - IA)
731 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington DC 20510
Phone (202) 224-3254
Fax (202) 224-9369
http://harkin.senate.gov/contact/contact.cfm
Mikulski, Barbara (D - MD)
503 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington DC 20510
Phone: (202) 224-4654
Fax (202)224-8858
http://mikulski.senate.gov/contactme/mailform.html
Bingaman, Jeff (D - NM)
703 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington DC 20510
Phone:(202) 224-5521
Fax (202) 224-2852
senator_bingaman@bingaman.senate.gov
Murray, Patty (D - WA)
173 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington DC 20510
Phone: (202) 224-2621
Fax: (202) 224-0238
http://murray.senate.gov/email/index.cfm
Reed, Jack (D - RI)
728 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington DC 20510
Phone:(202) 224-4642
Fax (202) 224-4680
http://reed.senate.gov/form-opinion.htm
Clinton, Hillary (D - NY)
476 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington DC 20510
Phone: (202) 224-4451
D.C. Fax (202) 228-0282
NY Fax (631) 249-2847
http://clinton.senate.gov/contact/webform.cfm?subj=issue
If the Burr bill passes, all economic incentives to insure that mandated vaccines are safe will be removed. Americans are facing a frightening future where government can force them to take poorly regulated experimental drugs and vaccines labeled as "countermeasures", or go to jail.
BARDA (the federal agency which will be in charge) will be allowed "to operate in secret, exempt from the Freedom of Information Act and the Federal Advisory Committee Act, insuring that no evidence of injuries or deaths caused by drugs and vaccines labeled as "countermeasures" will become public."
This bill, being led by Republican Richard Burr (R-NC), and being spurred by fears of avian flu, was written and passed out of committee in a 24 hour period. Most members did not even have the final language in front of them. The version that passed will broadly eliminate liability for vaccines and drugs.
WASHINGTON, Oct. 19 /PRNewswire/ -- The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) is calling the "Biodefense and Pandemic Vaccine and Drug Development Act of 2005"(S. 1873), which passed out of the U.S. Senate HELP Committee one day after it was introduced "a drug company stockholder's dream and a consumer's worst nightmare." The proposed legislation will strip Americans of the right to a trial by jury if harmed by an experimental or licensed drug or vaccine that they are forced by government to take whenever federal health officials declare a public health emergency.
The legislation's architect, Senator Richard Burr (R-NC), Chairman of the HELP Subcommittee on Bioterrorism and Public Health Preparedness, told the full HELP Committee yesterday that the legislation "creates a true partnership" between the federal government, the pharmaceutical industry and academia - to walk the drug companies "through the Valley of Death" in bringing a new vaccine or drug to market. Burr also said that it will give the Department of Health and Human Services "additional authority and resources to partner with the private sector to rapidly develop drugs and vaccines." The Burr bill gives the Secretary of DHHS the sole authority to decide whether a manufacturer violated laws mandating drug safety and bans citizens from challenging his decision in the civil court system.
The bill establishes the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Agency (BARDA), as the single point of authority within the government for the advanced research and development of drugs and vaccines in response to bioterrorism and natural disease outbreaks such as the flu.
BARDA will operate in secret, exempt from the Freedom of Information Act and the Federal Advisory Committee Act, insuring that no evidence of injuries or deaths caused by drugs and vaccines labeled as "countermeasures" will become public.
Nicknamed "Bioshield Two," the legislation is being pushed rapidly through Congress without time for voters to make their voices heard by their elected representatives. Co-sponsored by Republican Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN), Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee Chairman Mike Enzi (R-WY), and Senate Budget Committee Chairman Judd Gregg (R-NH), the legislation will eliminate both regulatory and legal safeguards applied to vaccines as well as take away the right of children and adults harmed by vaccines and drugs to present their case in front of a jury in a civil court of law.
"It is a sad day for this nation when Congress is frightened and bullied into allowing one profit making industry to destroy the seventh Amendment to the Constitution guaranteeing citizens their day in court in front of a jury of their peers," said Barbara Loe Fisher, president of NVIC.
"This proposed legislation, like the power and money grab by federal health officials and industry in the Homeland Security Act of 2002 and the Project Bioshield Act of 2004, is an unconstitutional attempt by some in Congress to give a taxpayer-funded handout to pharmaceutical companies for drugs and vaccines the government can force all citizens to use while absolving everyone connected from any responsibility for injuries and deaths which occur.
It means that, if an American is injured by an experimental flu or anthrax vaccine he or she is mandated to take, that citizen will be banned from exercising their Constitutional right to a jury trial, even if it is revealed that the vaccine maker engaged in criminal fraud and negligence in the manufacture of the vaccine!"
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is legally responsible for regulating the pharmaceutical industry and ensuring that drugs and vaccines released to the public are safe and effective. Drug companies marketing painkillers, like Vioxx, and anti-depressants, which have resulted in the deaths and injuries of thousands of children and adults, are being held accountable in civil court while the FDA has come under intense criticism for withholding information about the drugs' dangers from the public. Since 1986, vaccine makers have been protected from most liability in civil court through the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act in which Congress created a federal vaccine injury compensation program (VICP) that offers vaccine victims an alternative to the court system. Even though the program has awarded nearly $2 billion to victims of mandated vaccines, two out of three plaintiffs are turned away.
"The drug companies and doctors got all the liability protection they needed in 1986 but they are greedy and want more," said Fisher. "And the federal health agencies want more power to force citizens to use vaccines without having to worry about properly regulating them. If the Burr bill passes, all economic incentives to insure mandated vaccines are safe will be removed and the American people are facing a future where government can force them to take poorly regulated experimental drugs and vaccines labeled as "countermeasures" or go to jail. The only recourse for citizens will be to strike down mandatory vaccination laws so vaccines will be subject to the law of supply and demand in the marketplace. The health care consumer's cry will be: No liability? No mandates."
The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) was founded by parents of vaccine injured children in 1982 and co-founders worked with Congress on the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986.
National Vaccine Information Center
421 Church St., Suite E
Vienna, Va 22180
703-938-DPT3
Who Owns The "Rights" To Tamiflu?
The fundamental issue is who owns the intellectual property rights over Tamiflu. Media reports suggest that the Swiss pharmaceutical company Roche will make billions.
While the drug is produced by Roche, it was developed by Gilead Sciences Inc., which owns the intellectual property rights. Gilead, which has maintained a low profile, has outsourced the production to Roche.
Donald Rumsfeld was appointed Chairman of Gilead Sciences, Inc. in 1997, a position which he held in the years prior to becoming Secretary of Defense in the Bush adminstration. Rumsfeld had been on the Board of Directors from the establishment of Gilead in 1987.
As confirmed in a company press statement in 1997, Donald H. Rumsfeld assumed the position of Chairman, of GILEAD:
"Gilead is fortunate to have had Don Rumsfeld as a stalwart board member since the company's earliest days, and we are very pleased that he has accepted the Chairmanship," Dr. Riordan said. "He has played an important role in helping to build and steer the company. His broad experience in leadership positions in both industry and government will serve us well as Gilead continues to build its commercial presence."
According to company statement: Gilead Science Inc. "has been active in the development of inhibitors for the potential treatment and prevention of viral influenza and protease inhibitors for the potential treatment of HIV."
"The Company's research and development efforts encompass three interrelated programs: small molecule antivirals, cardiovascular therapeutics and genetic code blockers for cancer and other diseases. Gilead's expertise in each of these areas has also resulted in the discovery and development of non-nucleotide product candidates, including neuraminidase inhibitors for the potential treatment and prevention of viral influenza and protease inhibitors for the potential treatment of HIV".
Article published in the SF Chronicle, which points to the relationship between GILEAD and Roche in relation to the Rights over Tamiflu.
Finally, the pieces of the puzzle start to add up. Not long ago, President Bush sought to instill panic in this country by telling us "a minimum of 200,000 people will die from the avian flu pandemic, but it could be as bad as 2 million deaths in this country alone."
This hoax is then used to justify the immediate purchase of 80 million doses of Tamiflu, a worthless drug that in no way shape or form treats the avian flu, but only decreases the amount of days one is sick and can actually contribute to the virus having more lethal mutations.
So the U.S. placed an order for 20 million doses of this worthless drug at a price of $100 per dose. That comes to a staggering $2 billion!
We are being told that Roche manufactures Tamiflu, and in a recent New York Times article, they were battling whether or not they would allow generic drug companies to help increase their production.
But if you dig further, you will find that a drug was actually developed by a company called Gilead, that 10 years ago gave Roche the exclusive rights to market and sell Tamiflu.
If you read the link below from Gilead, you'll discover Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was made the chairman of Gilead in 1997.
Since Rumsfeld holds major portions of stock in Gilead, he will handsomely profit from the scare tactics of the government that is being used to justify the purchase of $2 billion worth of Tamiflu.
Donald H. Rumsfeld Named Chairman of Gilead Sciences
Foster City, CA, January 3, 1997 - Gilead Sciences Inc. (Nasdaq: GILD) today announced that board member Donald H. Rumsfeld will assume the position of Chairman, effective immediately. Mr. Rumsfeld succeeds Michael L. Riordan, M.D., who founded Gilead in 1987 and has served as Chairman since 1993. Dr. Riordan will continue to serve as a director on the board.
"Gilead is fortunate to have had Don Rumsfeld as a stalwart board member since the company's earliest days, and we are very pleased that he has accepted the Chairmanship," Dr. Riordan said. "He has played an important role in helping to build and steer the company. His broad experience in leadership positions in both industry and government will serve us well as Gilead continues to build its commercial presence."
"In my years with Gilead, I have witnessed the evolution of one of the industry's premier biotechnology companies," Mr. Rumsfeld said. "Michael Riordan's founding vision and enormous accomplishments are evident in the VISTIDE� product approval, deep pipeline and talented team that will continue to move Gilead to develop novel treatments for viral diseases."
Mr. Rumsfeld, who joined Gilead as a director in 1988, is currently in private business and is distinguished for his accomplishments in both industry and government. Mr. Rumsfeld served as chief executive officer of G.D. Searle, a worldwide pharmaceutical company, from 1977 to 1985. During this time, his stewardship of Searle earned him awards as the Outstanding Chief Executive Officer in the pharmaceutical industry in 1980 and 1981. He also served as chairman and chief executive of General Instrument Corporation, a diversified electronics company and world leader in broadband and all digital high definition television technology.
A graduate of Princeton University, Mr. Rumsfeld has served in numerous positions of public service, including four terms in the U.S. Congress, U.S. Ambassador to NATO, White House Chief of Staff and as the 13th Secretary of Defense. In 1977, Mr. Rumsfeld was awarded the nation's highest civilian award, the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
In addition to Gilead, Mr. Rumsfeld presently serves as an advisor to several companies and as a member of the board of directors of ABB AB; Gulfstream Aerospace Corp.; Kellogg; Metricom, Inc.; Sears, Roebuck and Co. and Tribune Company. Mr. Rumsfeld's current civic activities include service on the board of trustees of the Eisenhower Exchange Fellowship, Freedom House and the RAND Corporation.
Dr. Riordan will continue to assist the company with strategic direction through his involvement on the board of directors. Since founding the company in 1987, Riordan has overseen Gilead's evolution to a leading biotechnology company with its first approved product and a diversified pipeline of antiviral therapies.
"Michael Riordan's vision and leadership have guided Gilead from a start-up to a commercial company, and we are pleased to rely on his continued counsel as an active board member," John C. Martin, Ph.D., President and Chief Executive Officer of Gilead said. "Over the past several years, I have enjoyed working with Don Rumsfeld as an active director and look forward to his new role as Chairman as we continue to build the Gilead business."
Gilead Sciences is a leader in the discovery and development of a new class of human therapeutics based on nucleotides, the building blocks of DNA and RNA. In 1996, Gilead's first product, VISTIDE (cidofovir injection), was cleared by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration for the treatment of cytomegalovirus (CMV) retinitis in patients with AIDS. Gilead has other nucleotide product candidates in human testing for the potential treatment of viral diseases caused by CMV, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B virus, herpes simplex virus and human papillomavirus.
The Company's research and development efforts encompass three interrelated programs: small molecule antivirals, cardiovascular therapeutics and genetic code blockers for cancer and other diseases. Gilead's expertise in each of these areas has also resulted in the discovery and development of non-nucleotide product candidates, including neuraminidase inhibitors for the potential treatment and prevention of viral influenza and protease inhibitors for the potential treatment of HIV."
Link to original press release Gilead Sciences Inc.
Gilead Says Deal With Roche Threatens Tamiflu's Production
Sabin Russell, San Francisco Chronicle Medical Writer srussell@sfchronicle.com
Citing "ongoing neglect of the product," a Bay Area biotech company is attempting to reclaim control of Tamiflu, an antiviral drug it sold to Swiss pharmaceutical giant Roche Inc. that has since emerged as the world's only practical weapon against a potential pandemic of avian flu.
The Foster City-based Gilead Sciences, best known for its AIDS drug Viread, notified Roche on Thursday that it was terminating the 1996 agreement that gave the Swiss company exclusive rights to make and sell Tamiflu.
Gilead executives disclosed that they have been peppering Roche with complaints about its marketing of Tamiflu for five years, and that manufacturing glitches have been responsible for earlier shortages of a drug now deemed vitally important to public health.
Formerly a lackluster seller in the market for drugs to treat influenza, Tamiflu has become a valuable commodity since December 2003, when scientists became alarmed that a new flu strain that primarily killed chickens in Southeast Asia was starting to kill people who lived in close proximity to the birds.
In April, Roche reported its first quarter sales of Tamiflu quadrupled to $330 million.
Money System Fraud Are You Brainwashed? Genetic Engineering Mount Weather
Who Controls America? The Secret War Digital TV Conversion About Puerto Rico
Social Security Fraud Microsoft illuminati Reptilian Bloodlines The Photon Belt
Vaccination Tyranny HAARP Threat The Cosmic Conflict Georgia Guidestones
You Are A Machine! Jesuits Black Pope Privacy Eradicated The Crown Temple
The Tavistock Institute Anunnaki Race Laptop KeyLogger The Montauk Project
Copyright © 2000-2010 Hard Truth
