More Closed Accounts By PayPal
Amazing UFO Sighting
The [DS] is scared and desperate, they are now desperately trying to find out who Q is and trying to figure out the psyop program. Which means the [DS] is not in control. Everything they have tried to do to destroy the country has boomeranged on them, instead people are waking up and fighting back. Trump has trapped them in their own agenda and now I do believe he is bringing them down a path to expose it all.
All source links to the report can be found on the x22report.com site.
In CDC Survey of Over 13,000 Children, More Than Half Had ‘Systemic Reaction’ After COVID-19 Vaccine
In a CDC survey of over 13,000 children, more than 55 percent of the subjects between the ages of 6 months and two years had a “systemic reaction” in response to their first dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna COVID-19 vaccines, the CDC said on Sept. 1.
A systemic reaction is a response beyond the injection site. The CDC said almost 60 percent had a systemic reaction to the second dose of the Moderna vaccine.
While the most common systemic reactions were fatigue, fever, irritability, and crying, parents of more than 6 percent of the children in the study said their child was unable to perform normal activities after the second dose of either the Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna vaccine.
The CDC collected the data through a program called V-Safe—a smartphone-based monitoring system that operates through an app that parents download to their phones.
Between June 18 and Aug. 21, parents of more than 10,000 young children reported reactions to the CDC through V-Safe in the seven days after their child received a COVID-19 vaccination.
Parents of 8,338 children ages six months to 2 years who received the Moderna vaccine reported information through V-Safe, with 55.7 percent reporting a systemic reaction after the first dose and about 58 percent after the second dose. For the Pfizer vaccine, parents of 4,749 children ages six months to 2 years submitted reports showing that 55.8 percent had a systemic reaction after the first dose and about 47 percent after the second dose of the vaccine.
The most frequently reported reactions for children six months to 2 years were irritability or crying, sleepiness, and fever. The most common reactions for children aged 3-5 years were injection site pain, fatigue, and fever.
The data also showed a more serious reaction category labeled “any health impact.”
About 10 percent of all children six months to 2 years were reported to have a “health impact” after getting their first dose of either the Moderna or Pfizer vaccine. For the Moderna vaccine, slightly more children had a health impact after the second dose; for the Pfizer vaccine, it was slightly less.
The information was presented to the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) on Sept. 1 as part of an overview of all data related to the safety of COVID-19 vaccines.
In addition to V-Safe, data was presented summarizing reports from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) and the Vaccine Safety Data Link (VSD), which includes data from several large health maintenance organizations in the United States.
All three systems look at the safety of vaccines after they’ve already gone to market and have been administered to large numbers of people.
Tom Shimabukuro, the head of the CDC’s vaccine safety team, headed the presentation and told committee members that no “statistical signals” of COVID-19 vaccine reactions were found for young children in the VSD data.
Shimabukuro also said that systemic reactions were “commonly reported” following vaccines.
However, other medical professionals like Dr. Meryl Nass from Children’s Health Defense have expressed caution over the reported reactions, pointing to the high number of systemic reaction reports among very young children.
She told The Epoch Times on Sept. 2 that she was questioning why the government doesn’t collect and present more information on these cases.
“That stuff is not considered by the CDC to be very important … It’s assumed that all those side effects go away after a few days and leave the people perfectly well,” she said, mentioning the fevers and fatigue. “Those reactions may in fact may be harbingers of more serious reactions, but nobody to my knowledge has published anything looking at whether these acute local or systemic reactions are indicators of a later problem.”
The FDA approved the emergency-use authorization of COVID-19 vaccines for children aged six months to 5 years on June 17. According to the CDC, about 599,460 children in this age group have received the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, and about 440,770 have received the Moderna vaccine.
From June 18 through Aug. 31, approximately 1 million doses of the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines were administered to children in this age group.
In a review of the VAERS data on young children from June 18 to Aug. 31, the CDC had 496 reports of adverse events for children aged six months to 4 years who received the Pfizer vaccine and 521 for children aged six months to 5 years who received the Moderna shot, with an adverse event defined as a possible side effect.
Over 98 percent of reports were for what the CDC considers non-serious events.
There are 220 reports of persons aged six months to 5 years of age being taken to the emergency room following a COVID-19 vaccine. In one case involving a 2-year-old boy in Arizona, the VAERS report says he was given the Pfizer vaccine on July 29 and on July 30 had a “life threatening episode.”
The report lists his symptoms as “clammy skin and vomiting leading (8 minutes) to difficulty breathing.” The boy “turned blue,” was “limp” and “non-responsive,” and “fully stopped breathing for two minutes,” according to the report.
He was revived after chest compressions.
Judge Grants Trump Motion for Special Master to Review Records FBI Seized
Newly disclosed documents showing Big Tech companies repeatedly took action after being pressured by White House and other Biden administration officials prove the U.S. government colluded with the companies, according to a lawyer with the New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA).
“It’s clear that the government was telling Facebook and Twitter and other social media companies what to do and that they were responding and they were doing that, deleting accounts, taking down posts, etc., which really corroborates our state action theory,” the lawyer, Jenin Younes, told The Epoch Times.
The documents were made public this week as part of an ongoing case against the government, brought by two attorneys general, over alleged violations of the First Amendment.
They showed that officials with the White House, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Department of Homeland Security, and other agencies were in communications with Facebook, Twitter, Google, and other companies regarding content moderation, repeatedly urging the companies to punish users who were promoting alleged COVID-19 misinformation of disinformation.
For example, Rob Flaherty, a White House official, pressured Facebook to take action against “mis- and -disinformation” as well as “hesitancy-inducing content,” one email showed.
After Facebook and White House officials met, a Facebook executive asked the White House to “partner on” plans to address “new misinformation claims” following the expected authorization of a COVID-19 vaccine for children aged 5 to 11 years.
Flaherty later signaled he wasn’t satisfied, sharing a link to a story about supposed misinformation on Facebook and writing, “not even sure what to say at this point.”
Another administration official, whose name was redacted, reached out to Twitter to offer an expert to brief Twitter on people “citing CDC VAERS data incorrectly,” which it said “is a major source of misinformation.”
VAERS, or the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, is a system to which people can report adverse events following vaccination.
Twitter accepted the invitation.
Administration officials held at least 45 meetings on misinformation or related topics with Big Tech companies since early 2021, the documents showed.
These included meetings between the Office of the Surgeon General and Google, meetings between the CDC and Twitter, and meetings between the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and Facebook.
The CDC repeatedly held “Be on the Lookout meetings” in which it offered specific examples of what officials designated as misinformation, according to the documents and others that were previously released. The Department of Homeland Security met with Microsoft to discuss disinformation and the White House met with Facebook multiple times.
After one of the meetings, Facebook told HHS officials that it was taking “historic actions” in four areas put forth by the White House in recommendations to social media platforms in July, including taking action on misinformation.
“These contacts are not sporadic in any way. They’re almost daily if you look at everything,” John Vecchione, NCLA’s senior litigator in the case, told The Epoch Times.
The original complaint noted the public calls from Biden administration officials for social media companies to crack down, saying that companies acting on those calls were violations of the First Amendment.
“A private entity violates the First Amendment ‘if the government coerces or induces it to take action the government itself would not be permitted to do, such as censor expression of a lawful viewpoint,’” the complaint stated, quoting from a previous U.S. Supreme Court decision.
“This is exactly what has occurred over the past several years, beginning with express and implied threats from government officials and culminating in the Biden Administration’s open and explicit censorship programs. Having threatened and cajoled social media platforms for years to censor viewpoints and speakers disfavored by the Left, senior government officials in the Executive Branch have moved into a phase of open collusion with social media companies to suppress disfavored speakers, viewpoints, and content on social media platforms under the Orwellian guise of halting so-called ‘disinformation,’ ‘misinformation’, and ‘malinformation,’” the complaint added.
Even the attorneys general and other lawyers involved in the case were stunned when the first tranche of discovery—the documents made public this week—were delivered, Vecchione said.
The lawyers “are shocked by the amount of inland pressure and information going back and forth between the ostensibly private entities and the federal government on what you can say and not say in America.
The plaintiffs have asked the judge to compel the government to produce more documents.
Scottish mountain bike champion Rab Wardell dies in his sleep aged 37 days after winning elite title
“Wardell won the elite men’s title at Kirroughtree Forest on Sunday overcoming several punctures to win on the final lap.”
Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor-Greene awoke on Wednesday morning to armed police outside her Georgia house. The individual who called the police to Greene’s home claimed to be upset about her opposition to child sex changes and admitted to wanting to “swat” her, a term referring to the practice of summoning the police against a target under false pretense.
According to a report by police in the town of Rome, Georgia, officers received a call shortly after 1am by an individual who told them that a man had been shot in a bathtub at the congresswoman’s address. The caller added that there was a woman and potentially children inside the home.
Speaking to conservative radio host Jack Posobiec later on Wednesday, Greene said that she awoke to knocks at her door and saw people and lights outside her house. “I jumped out of bed, threw my clothes on, and I picked up my gun,” she told Posobiec, adding that immediately before answering the door, she put the firearm down on “gut instinct.”
After opening the door to officers with their weapons drawn, Greene said that she invited the cops inside and explained that there had been a misunderstanding. An officer told her that she had been “swatted,” a tactic that can have lethal consequences if officers are rushed into what they believe to be a potentially violent situation.
Explaining that she could have been shot had she answered the door with her gun drawn, Greene described the incident as “political terrorism” and an attempt to cause “death by cop.”
Shortly after the first call to police, the perpetrator called back with a “computer generated voice” and admitted to having tried to “swat” Greene, claiming to have been “upset about Ms. Greene’s stance on ‘trans-gender youth’s rights,” according to the police report.
A staunch conservative, Greene introduced a bill last week that would make it a felony to provide so-called “gender-affirming care” to minors. This term, which encompasses everything from puberty blocking drugs and hormone therapy up to sex change surgery, is “really, child abuse,” Greene told Fox News host Tucker Carlson on Thursday.
More than a dozen House Republicans have co-sponsored Greene’s bill.
Dr. Anthony Fauci is stepping down from three government positions he holds, he announced on Aug. 22.
Fauci is resigning as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), chief of the NIAID Laboratory of Immunoregulation, and chief medical adviser to President Joe Biden.
The moves will take effect in December, Fauci said.
He indicated that he will leave the government, but not retire.
“While I am moving on from my current positions, I am not retiring,” Fauci said. “After more than 50 years of government service, I plan to pursue the next phase of my career while I still have so much energy and passion for my field. I want to use what I have learned as NIAID Director to continue to advance science and public health and to inspire and mentor the next generation of scientific leaders as they help prepare the world to face future infectious disease threats.”
Fauci, 81, has repeatedly hinted he would step down from his positions, but has not committed before to a specific time for resigning.
Republicans have vowed to investigate Fauci and other architects of U.S. pandemic policy if they gain control of either or both congressional chambers in the upcoming midterm elections.
“Dr. Fauci is conveniently resigning from his position in December before House Republicans have an opportunity to hold him accountable for destroying our country over these past three years,” Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) said in a statement.
Fauci has directed the NIAID since 1984. He has advised Biden since he took office in 2021, and was one of President Donald Trump’s chief advisers on the COVID-19 pandemic.
Fauci has drawn ire for recommending lockdowns as a bid to slow the spread of the virus that causes COVID-19, acknowledging he deliberately misled the American public on mask-wearing, and defending NIAID funding for the laboratory in Wuhan, China, that is located near where the first COVID-19 cases occurred.
Supporters say Fauci has been a voice of reason during the pandemic and that his positions have evolved as the science has developed.
NIAID is part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
Dr. Lawrence Tabak, the acting director of the NIH, said in a statement that Fauci is “the model public servant” and “is always guided by the science.
“It’s been an extraordinary privilege and honor to have worked by his side and to have learned so much from him—I will miss him greatly. But I also look forward to seeing what Tony will do next. I have no doubt that he will continue to have an enormous impact on the world,” Tabak said.
‘They want your land, they want your gold and they want your kids. These are the real assets they are after.’ – Catherine Austin Fitts
Watch FULL EPISODES of ‘Financial Rebellion’ With Catherine Austin Fitts on CHD.TV
Live Every Thursday 6:00am PT // 9:00am ET
“It was almost 75 years ago that the city of Nuremberg was the place of a historic declaration. When the judges of the military tribunal against leading medical officers in the Nazi administration passed their verdict, they issued what would become known as the Nuremberg Code.
On August 20, a compelling line-up of international speakers will travel to Nuremberg to commemorate the 75th Anniversary of The Nuremberg Code. Now of all times, in its jubilee year, this achievement of mankind is facing the greatest hardship since it was written. WATCH the historical event LIVE at 7am EST | 1pm CET | 4am PST or catch the replay at: 75th Annual Commemoration of the Nuremberg Code
It is with great pleasure that I introduce you and your respective organisations to the Australian Medical Professionals Society. This email deals with several issues which are of concern to our membership and, we hope, yours. At the top of the list is the issue of medical free speech and its ramifications for true dialogue, debate, and informative patient interaction in Australia. Also, this email and the report of Dr Phillip Altman, makes available to you and your members a cutting edge update on the COVID-19 vaccinations and a comprehensive analysis of associated Adverse Events, together with implications for Australian practice. Finally, we draw your attention to our Health Reform Declaration, a statement which is gaining support as it highlights critical issues and potential solutions, within the complex environment of Australian Health Law.
Australian Health Professionals and Scientists have been actively discussing and contemplating the profound health measures undertaken within Australia over the last 2&1/2 years. However, we believe the current range of medical, medicolegal and medicopolitical issues brought about by the pandemic requires a greater breadth of discussion – not less – within and between our respective organisations and memberships.
One of the chief concerns of our membership is that of medical free speech. Contingent to a joint statement received from AHPRA and the National Boards on 9 March 20211, Australian Health Professionals numbering over 825,000 were essentially forbidden from publicly questioning the science underlying the emerging COVID-19 injectables, let alone questioning any government messaging urging Australians to be vaccinated because these products were deemed ‘safe and effective’. The effect of this unilateral action was to undermine professional independence and, in so doing, strip away years of training, academic achievements, qualifications, awards and expertise. However well intentioned, this gagging by bureaucratic decree inserted AHPRA and the National Boards between the Clinician and their Patient, in addition to counteracting normal robust interprofessional dialogue, as more data emerged.
Indeed, now 17 months later and after numerous forms of pressure to take up the COVID-19 injectables in various age categories, a tremendous amount of data is available to more fully and accurately inform clinicians about these products. This literature includes over one thousand2 peer reviewed studies reporting of the harms being seen around the world, up to December 2021. In addition, it has become clear that the risk of serious illness and death attributable to COVID-19 disease is heavily weighted to the elderly and those with known co-morbidities, while in contrast, younger Australians are relatively resistant. Also, since the advent of the Delta and Omicron variants, it is highly questionable whether the vaccines are preventing transmission or illness.
In any event, the implied and intended outcome of the gagging was to see Doctors and Health Professionals effectively mandated to support the government campaign to have the Australian population injected with drugs for which there was no adequate short-, medium-, or long-term safety or efficacy data. Indeed, the rush to market and Provisional Approval occurred despite the absence of the usual pre-clinical studies, including testing for Carcinogenicity and Genotoxicity. In this regard, it should be of serious interest that a peer-reviewed investigation3 has demonstrated that mRNA-derived Spike proteins enter the cell nucleus and interfere with DNA. However, many critical facts like these became forbidden subjects for Health Professionals and Doctors to raise with their patients, let alone in public forums. Thus, we contend that the joint statement of 9 March 2021 has compromised proper and informed consent in Australia.
Especially given the lack of available pre-clinical research for each of these products, or clinical studies powered to detect early safety signals at the time of Provisional Approval, the need for ongoing critical appraisal of pharmacovigilance data remains paramount, to instruct responsible day to day practice. To date, none of the makers of the COVID-19 injectables have been able to stringently show their products to be Safe or properly Effective. To date, Adverse Events flowing from these products are at historically unprecedented levels globally and continue to rise. And again, to date, no other drugs in human history have reported more deaths, illnesses, injuries, and disabilities, which number as follows (to 28 June 2022):
It is widely acknowledged that all Adverse Event reporting systems suffer from under-reporting12, an inherent challenge for passive reporting systems and their interpretation. For US VAERS reporting in respect of the COVID-19 injectables, the Under-Reporting Factor (URF) has been estimated to be between 40-49x13. If a conservative URF of 10x is applied, the above figures begin to more realistically represent the likely true effects of the Covid-19 injectables:
To be clear, the TGA has received more Adverse Event reports in 2021 through June 2022 for the COVID-19 vaccines, than they have been seen for all other vaccines in the preceding 50-year period. A similar explosion in Adverse Event reports for the COVID-19 injectables has occurred in all other countries that chose to deploy them14, but in Australia, comparing the period from 197115 until the start of 2021 in respect of traditional protein-based vaccines, to the period from 1 February 2021 through 8 June 2022 in respect of the COVID-19 injectables, we observe the following:
To assist your organisation and membership to understand the causes leading to these concerning signals, we provide to you the comprehensive and up-to-date report of Dr Phillip Altman. By way of background, Dr Altman’s report has been used in modified formats to assist judiciaries in Australia and New Zealand to understand the scientific evidence behind the COVID-19 injectables. We believe it is proving to be the long-awaited body of work needed by the Judicial, Medical, and Scientific communities of Australia, to bring clarity by critical scientific appraisal during these controversial times of COVID-19.
Since your organisation is now in possession of the information and resources contained in the linked report, we ask that your members also receive the same for the benefit of their being fully informed as to the state of the science surrounding COVID-19. After considerable consultation, AMPS is of the opinion that Australia is experiencing a highly significant iatrogenic event. Further, we believe that this did not have to occur: it could have been avoided, but for the state of Australia’s health law leading into the pandemic. AMPS is strenuously of the view that in order to avoid a repeat of the recent past, Australian health law requires urgent reform. To this end we invite every organisation receiving this email, including every parliamentarian CC’d, to review the Declaration and Urgent Demands for healthcare law reform set forth on the following page:
On the above Declaration page is also found Proposed Amendments to the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law, and Proposed Amendments to the Therapeutic Goods Act.
Many organisations receiving this email have members who are directly affected by the overarching powers of AHPRA and the National Boards, who have tended to dictate rather than consult with their registered members. This has caused a dangerous interference with the provision of information, for the purpose of each Australian exercising their right to fully Informed Consent, while it has also unduly and harshly seen Health Professionals sanctioned for seeking to uphold ethics and their Codes of Conduct.
It is not only regarding COVID-19 that AHPRA has been perceived to show over-reaching powers. Dissatisfaction and fear of AHPRA is widespread amongst many health professionals as evidenced by the Victorian branch of the AMA calling for a Royal Commission16 into AHPRA’s conduct.
Equally, we say it is evident that Australians have suffered as a consequence of the Provisional Approval pathway laws. These have facilitated the rapid entry of significantly undertested products into the Australian market, despite their being recognised to be highly novel and experimental. Nonetheless, the COVID-19 injectables were mandated in many jurisdictions and workplaces, causing large numbers of Australians to feel coerced and simultaneously baffled by the inability of Doctors and other Health Professionals to give them a voice.
This can all be changed.
We implore you as fellows and colleagues to give the information and resource contained in this email your greatest attention, with a view to sharing the same with your members. There will doubtless be many questions arising from our email and we invite further discussion with you. All of your considerations and efforts towards the continued promotion of evidence-based medical science are greatly appreciated.
Associate Professor Christopher Neil
MBBS, FRACP, PhD
Australian Medical Professionals Society
 Individual reports refer to a single patient, where more than one adverse reaction is often included.
 Individual reports refer to a single patient, where more than one adverse reaction is often included.
 https://www.tga.gov.au/periodic/covid-19-vaccine-weekly-safety-report-23-06-2022 – Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca
 Individual reports refer to a single patient, where more than one adverse reaction is often included.
 Individual reports refer to a single patient, where more than one adverse reaction is often included. The 458,463 reports received to 24 June 2022 reported a total of 1,495,273 various forms of adverse reaction.
 See DAEN website for no. of adverse events non-COVID vaccines and Covid injectables.
Our Government is made up of appointed officials that are creating a racist and discriminatory environment.
“The Ukraine Hoax is a documentary detailing the shady origins of America’s Ukraine problem and how the two nations meddled in each other’s elections, at the cost of 130 lives. After three years of failed investigations into Trump campaign connections to the Kremlin, the documentary ties impeachment to the Russia hoax and introduces important new participants – shady diplomats, corrupt politicians, treacherous snipers, and a billionaire in the background. It’s a tale only Michael Caputo could tell: a former aide to President Donald Trump whose close ties to the former Soviet Union put him in the crosshairs of federal investigators.”