正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

Reminder - Breaking down James O’Keefe’s bombshell: In a raw undercover video, a top Johnson & Johnson regulatory scientist drops a stunning admission about their COVID vaccine. “There’s no proof... none of that stuff was safe and effective,” he confesses, revealing they skipped the rigorous clinical trials that usually...

newstart_2024's profile picture

Camus

419,339 subscribers

80,613 次观看 • 8 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

BREAKING: Johnson & Johnson Scientist Admits Vaccine Was Rushed Without Proper Testing A newly released undercover video from O’Keefe Media Group with James O'Keefe reveals a senior regulatory scientist at Johnson & Johnson admitting the company bypassed standard safety protocols during the development of its COVID-19 vaccine. He states plainly: “None of that stuff is safe and effective.” The scientist attributes the rush to government pressure through Operation Warp Speed and overwhelming public demand, noting that clinical trial standards were abandoned in favor of accelerated timelines. This report emerges on the same day Senator Ron Johnson is holding a hearing on Capitol Hill featuring testimony from individuals injured by the COVID-19 vaccine. Stay informed. Ask questions. Demand accountability.
2:31

BREAKING: Johnson & Johnson Scientist Admits Vaccine Was Rushed Without Proper Testing A newly released undercover video from O’Keefe Media Group with James O'Keefe reveals a senior regulatory scientist at Johnson & Johnson admitting the company bypassed standard safety protocols during the development of its COVID-19 vaccine. He states plainly: “None of that stuff is safe and effective.” The scientist attributes the rush to government pressure through Operation Warp Speed and overwhelming public demand, noting that clinical trial standards were abandoned in favor of accelerated timelines. This report emerges on the same day Senator Ron Johnson is holding a hearing on Capitol Hill featuring testimony from individuals injured by the COVID-19 vaccine. Stay informed. Ask questions. Demand accountability.

LindellTV

89,463 次观看 • 1 年前

BREAKING: Johnson & Johnson Lead Scientist Confesses J&J COVID-19 Vaccine Was 'Not Safe and Effective,' Reveals “Lack of Research” From Rushing to Release Vaccine: “People Wanted It, We Gave It to Them” “Do you have any idea the lack of research that was done on those products [vaccines]?” “I mean we basically just had a race to figure out who could solve it best… At one point, we just canned it.” Johnson & Johnson Josh HHS
6:29

BREAKING: Johnson & Johnson Lead Scientist Confesses J&J COVID-19 Vaccine Was 'Not Safe and Effective,' Reveals “Lack of Research” From Rushing to Release Vaccine: “People Wanted It, We Gave It to Them” “Do you have any idea the lack of research that was done on those products [vaccines]?” “I mean we basically just had a race to figure out who could solve it best… At one point, we just canned it.” Johnson & Johnson Josh HHS

James O'Keefe

5,629,746 次观看 • 1 年前

The UFC allocated Johnson and Johnson vaccines. JOE ROGAN - "I was ready to take it... the UFC had allocated J&J for all their employees... 2 weeks later when the next fight were, it got pulled from the market... and then 2 people I knew had strokes... I had a bunch of friends that had horrible side effects..." In 2 weeks the ACIP meets... the agenda includes COVID vaccine injuries and potential votes on changing recommendations “based on evidence of harm from the mRNA injections” Is Pfizer and Moderna safer than J&J?
0:44

The UFC allocated Johnson and Johnson vaccines. JOE ROGAN - "I was ready to take it... the UFC had allocated J&J for all their employees... 2 weeks later when the next fight were, it got pulled from the market... and then 2 people I knew had strokes... I had a bunch of friends that had horrible side effects..." In 2 weeks the ACIP meets... the agenda includes COVID vaccine injuries and potential votes on changing recommendations “based on evidence of harm from the mRNA injections” Is Pfizer and Moderna safer than J&J?

Humanspective

47,915 次观看 • 4 个月前

#9 – Johnson & Johnson Lead Regulatory Scientist Admits Company’s Baby Powder Contained Heavy Metals That Caused Cancer This was uncovered via hidden camera footage from O’Keefe Media Group. Joshua Rys admitted that the company’s baby powder wasn’t dangerous because of the talc itself, but because of toxic heavy metal impurities found in the mined product. “It’s not the talc itself that gives you the cancer,” Rys said. “It’s the heavy metals that are in it.” He also revealed the legal maneuver J&J used to shield itself from liability. According to Rys, the company created a shell entity specifically designed to absorb the lawsuits and then go bankrupt, leaving the parent company insulated. This admission confirms long-standing suspicions about J&J’s legal strategy.
2:12

#9 – Johnson & Johnson Lead Regulatory Scientist Admits Company’s Baby Powder Contained Heavy Metals That Caused Cancer This was uncovered via hidden camera footage from O’Keefe Media Group. Joshua Rys admitted that the company’s baby powder wasn’t dangerous because of the talc itself, but because of toxic heavy metal impurities found in the mined product. “It’s not the talc itself that gives you the cancer,” Rys said. “It’s the heavy metals that are in it.” He also revealed the legal maneuver J&J used to shield itself from liability. According to Rys, the company created a shell entity specifically designed to absorb the lawsuits and then go bankrupt, leaving the parent company insulated. This admission confirms long-standing suspicions about J&J’s legal strategy.

Vigilant Fox 🦊

169,225 次观看 • 1 年前

A bombshell video, resurfaced by Del Bigtree of The High Wire, exposes a stunning admission from a Pfizer executive that cuts to the heart of the COVID-19 vaccine mandate debacle. During a scientific discussion, a Pfizer SVP of Vaccine R&D is asked fundamental questions about their mRNA product: - How does the dosage relate to the amount of spike protein produced? - How many cells are commandeered to manufacture this foreign protein? - How long does this production last inside the human body? His response? A masterclass in evasion and alarming ignorance. He admits, "We don't have a complete understanding of the nature of the way that the vaccine works in terms of producing an immune response." He dismisses these critical mechanistic questions as "somewhat academic." Let that sink in. This was not an experimental therapy for the terminally ill. This was a product mandated for billions, a condition of employment for millions, and hailed as a scientific triumph. As Del Bigtree powerfully frames it: This is not science; it is reckless speculation. It is like children mixing chemicals to see what happens, only here, the experiment was performed on the entire global population without their informed consent. They claimed 95% efficacy. They claimed it stayed in the arm. They claimed they knew it was safe and effective. Yet, at the highest levels, they admit they did not even understand how it worked. The "science" they demanded we "trust" was, by their own admission, incomplete. This video is a permanent indictment of the entire coerced vaccination campaign. It reveals that the emperor had no clothes, and the cost of that deception is a stain on modern history.
4:33

A bombshell video, resurfaced by Del Bigtree of The High Wire, exposes a stunning admission from a Pfizer executive that cuts to the heart of the COVID-19 vaccine mandate debacle. During a scientific discussion, a Pfizer SVP of Vaccine R&D is asked fundamental questions about their mRNA product: - How does the dosage relate to the amount of spike protein produced? - How many cells are commandeered to manufacture this foreign protein? - How long does this production last inside the human body? His response? A masterclass in evasion and alarming ignorance. He admits, "We don't have a complete understanding of the nature of the way that the vaccine works in terms of producing an immune response." He dismisses these critical mechanistic questions as "somewhat academic." Let that sink in. This was not an experimental therapy for the terminally ill. This was a product mandated for billions, a condition of employment for millions, and hailed as a scientific triumph. As Del Bigtree powerfully frames it: This is not science; it is reckless speculation. It is like children mixing chemicals to see what happens, only here, the experiment was performed on the entire global population without their informed consent. They claimed 95% efficacy. They claimed it stayed in the arm. They claimed they knew it was safe and effective. Yet, at the highest levels, they admit they did not even understand how it worked. The "science" they demanded we "trust" was, by their own admission, incomplete. This video is a permanent indictment of the entire coerced vaccination campaign. It reveals that the emperor had no clothes, and the cost of that deception is a stain on modern history.

Camus

232,556 次观看 • 9 个月前

Michael Porter Jr. clarifies his Andrew Tate comment when he said sometimes he plays Andrew Tate around women to see their reaction. He added that he experienced a similar backlash as Andrew Tate when he refused to take the COVID-19 vaccine, saying they put allegations on you when you are speaking facts “They put my dawg in jail with no proof he did any of that… They tried to say he trafficked them, but we don’t know. We know that they will put allegations on the people that are speaking too much facts… But his underlying message, like now, when I watch any of his stuff, he just likes to speak pretty true. Now he has has a platform; he’s not doing all that wild stuff… When I didn’t get the vaccine, all of a sudden they started talking crazy about me. They tried to make me sound i’m slow or stupid because I didn’t get the vaccine. Now you fast forward a couple years later, now everybody wishes they didn’t get the vaccine… All this research coming out about why it was harmful for you all, a lot of scientists have come out and said there’s no way clinically that they could be out a safe vaccine within 6 months. The vaccine was not safe to take, and it caused a lot of harm. I didn’t want to put it in my body for my own reasons, but when I didn’t, they started putting all this crazy labels on me that just weren’t true. So I have experienced it personally that they can literally create any narrative they want about someone.” (via The Emily Austin Show)
3:53

Michael Porter Jr. clarifies his Andrew Tate comment when he said sometimes he plays Andrew Tate around women to see their reaction. He added that he experienced a similar backlash as Andrew Tate when he refused to take the COVID-19 vaccine, saying they put allegations on you when you are speaking facts “They put my dawg in jail with no proof he did any of that… They tried to say he trafficked them, but we don’t know. We know that they will put allegations on the people that are speaking too much facts… But his underlying message, like now, when I watch any of his stuff, he just likes to speak pretty true. Now he has has a platform; he’s not doing all that wild stuff… When I didn’t get the vaccine, all of a sudden they started talking crazy about me. They tried to make me sound i’m slow or stupid because I didn’t get the vaccine. Now you fast forward a couple years later, now everybody wishes they didn’t get the vaccine… All this research coming out about why it was harmful for you all, a lot of scientists have come out and said there’s no way clinically that they could be out a safe vaccine within 6 months. The vaccine was not safe to take, and it caused a lot of harm. I didn’t want to put it in my body for my own reasons, but when I didn’t, they started putting all this crazy labels on me that just weren’t true. So I have experienced it personally that they can literally create any narrative they want about someone.” (via The Emily Austin Show)

FearBuck

1,036,908 次观看 • 4 个月前

WATCH: Very newsy exchange at the White House Tuesday afternoon between President Trump and CBS’s Ed O'Keefe about Iran, revealing the U.S. was gifted “a present” from whatever remains of the new/old Iranian regime that is “oil and gas related”.... President Trump: “Do you have another question? You haven’t been here in a while.” O’Keefe: “Well, on Iran, can you give us any more sense of who exactly in Iran it is, either Witkoff or Kushner you’re speaking with?” Trump: “Yeah. We had — I hate to say this in front of these young people — they’re not children. I spoke to most of them. They sound like adults to me. Even though they are sort of children, right? They’ll always be your children. But I hate to say it, but we killed all their leadership. And then they met to choose new leaders, and we killed all of them. And now, we have a new group and we can easily do that. But let’s see how they turn out. It’s — we have, really, regime change. You know, this is a change in the regime because the leaders are all very different than the ones that we started off with that created all those problems. So this was — I think we can say, Jason, this is regime change, right?” O’Keefe: “What makes you trust them?” Trump: “I don’t trust anybody. I don’t trust you. I mean, that’s only because I know you, but if I didn’t know you, I’d probably have more trust. But I don’t trust anyone.” O’Keefe: “Why bother talking to them?” Trump: “Why do you — why do you say that? Why do you say what makes you — do you think I trust them? I don’t trust them.” O’Keefe: “Then why bother talking to them?” Trump: “Because they’re going to make a deal. They’re going to make a deal. They did something yesterday that was amazing. Actually. They gave us a present. And the president arrived today and it was a very big present worth a tremendous amount of money. And I’m not going to tell you what that present is, but it was a very significant prize. And they gave it to us, and they said they were going to give it, so that meant one thing to me. We’re dealing with the right people —” O’Keefe: “Was it nuclear related.” Trump: “No, it wasn’t nuclear related. It was oil and gas related. And it was a very nice thing they did. But what it showed me is that we’re dealing with the right people because, you know, you don’t know because the leadership was killed, all gone. Khamenei, all gone. As the expression goes, the past Supreme Leader and then the new Supreme Leader was racked up at a minimum, racked up pretty good, and everyone else was gone. And then many of the people in the third tier are gone. But we’re dealing with a group of people that I think turn out and the — the present, the gift they made to us was very significant. And they said they were going to do it and it happened. And they’re the only ones that could have done it.”
2:36

WATCH: Very newsy exchange at the White House Tuesday afternoon between President Trump and CBS’s Ed O'Keefe about Iran, revealing the U.S. was gifted “a present” from whatever remains of the new/old Iranian regime that is “oil and gas related”.... President Trump: “Do you have another question? You haven’t been here in a while.” O’Keefe: “Well, on Iran, can you give us any more sense of who exactly in Iran it is, either Witkoff or Kushner you’re speaking with?” Trump: “Yeah. We had — I hate to say this in front of these young people — they’re not children. I spoke to most of them. They sound like adults to me. Even though they are sort of children, right? They’ll always be your children. But I hate to say it, but we killed all their leadership. And then they met to choose new leaders, and we killed all of them. And now, we have a new group and we can easily do that. But let’s see how they turn out. It’s — we have, really, regime change. You know, this is a change in the regime because the leaders are all very different than the ones that we started off with that created all those problems. So this was — I think we can say, Jason, this is regime change, right?” O’Keefe: “What makes you trust them?” Trump: “I don’t trust anybody. I don’t trust you. I mean, that’s only because I know you, but if I didn’t know you, I’d probably have more trust. But I don’t trust anyone.” O’Keefe: “Why bother talking to them?” Trump: “Why do you — why do you say that? Why do you say what makes you — do you think I trust them? I don’t trust them.” O’Keefe: “Then why bother talking to them?” Trump: “Because they’re going to make a deal. They’re going to make a deal. They did something yesterday that was amazing. Actually. They gave us a present. And the president arrived today and it was a very big present worth a tremendous amount of money. And I’m not going to tell you what that present is, but it was a very significant prize. And they gave it to us, and they said they were going to give it, so that meant one thing to me. We’re dealing with the right people —” O’Keefe: “Was it nuclear related.” Trump: “No, it wasn’t nuclear related. It was oil and gas related. And it was a very nice thing they did. But what it showed me is that we’re dealing with the right people because, you know, you don’t know because the leadership was killed, all gone. Khamenei, all gone. As the expression goes, the past Supreme Leader and then the new Supreme Leader was racked up at a minimum, racked up pretty good, and everyone else was gone. And then many of the people in the third tier are gone. But we’re dealing with a group of people that I think turn out and the — the present, the gift they made to us was very significant. And they said they were going to do it and it happened. And they’re the only ones that could have done it.”

Curtis Houck

108,556 次观看 • 3 个月前

The moment of awakening is often born from personal tragedy. For comedian Jimmy Dore, that moment came not from a news segment or a political debate, but from a needle in his arm. In a raw and powerful monologue, Dore dismantles the narrative he once blindly accepted. He admits to being "completely hoodwinked" by pro-vaccine propaganda, dismissing critics like RFK Jr. as "crazy" based on the word of corporate, pharma-funded media. He never questioned the sanctity of vaccines—until he became vaccine-injured himself. That injury was the key that unlocked a terrifying truth. His subsequent investigation revealed a tapestry of lies so vast it took his breath away. It wasn't just about the vaccine. It was about everything: the masks, the lockdowns, herd immunity, and the outright dismissal of natural immunity. It was about the origins of the virus, where asking a legitimate question was met with accusations of racism. But the ultimate betrayal was the bait-and-switch with the COVID-19 shot itself. The vaccine he received was not the one studied in the trials. A new manufacturing process was introduced, a change he describes as leading to the corruption and adulteration of DNA. To those who dismissively say "COVID is over," Dore issues a chilling reminder: this is an experiment in its infancy. Quoting Anthony Fauci's own words on the potential for long-term vaccine effects to emerge after a decade, he notes we are only four years into this timeline. The full consequences for his own health, and the health of millions, remain a frightening, unknown variable. His story is a warning siren. It’s a testament to what happens when we stop questioning and blindly trust institutions that have proven themselves unworthy of that trust. The journey from believer to the injured, from the silent to the outspoken, is a path more are walking every day.
2:28

The moment of awakening is often born from personal tragedy. For comedian Jimmy Dore, that moment came not from a news segment or a political debate, but from a needle in his arm. In a raw and powerful monologue, Dore dismantles the narrative he once blindly accepted. He admits to being "completely hoodwinked" by pro-vaccine propaganda, dismissing critics like RFK Jr. as "crazy" based on the word of corporate, pharma-funded media. He never questioned the sanctity of vaccines—until he became vaccine-injured himself. That injury was the key that unlocked a terrifying truth. His subsequent investigation revealed a tapestry of lies so vast it took his breath away. It wasn't just about the vaccine. It was about everything: the masks, the lockdowns, herd immunity, and the outright dismissal of natural immunity. It was about the origins of the virus, where asking a legitimate question was met with accusations of racism. But the ultimate betrayal was the bait-and-switch with the COVID-19 shot itself. The vaccine he received was not the one studied in the trials. A new manufacturing process was introduced, a change he describes as leading to the corruption and adulteration of DNA. To those who dismissively say "COVID is over," Dore issues a chilling reminder: this is an experiment in its infancy. Quoting Anthony Fauci's own words on the potential for long-term vaccine effects to emerge after a decade, he notes we are only four years into this timeline. The full consequences for his own health, and the health of millions, remain a frightening, unknown variable. His story is a warning siren. It’s a testament to what happens when we stop questioning and blindly trust institutions that have proven themselves unworthy of that trust. The journey from believer to the injured, from the silent to the outspoken, is a path more are walking every day.

Camus

43,971 次观看 • 9 个月前

Pfizer's Own Trials Showed a 24% GREATER Likelihood of Dying in the Vaccine Group After 6 Months "For every life they save by preventing a death from COVID, they are killing four people from cardiac arrest." • In the Pfizer clinical trials, they gave 22,000 people two COVID injections and 22,000 people fake vaccines. • Of the 44,000 in total, one person died of COVID in the vaccine group, and two people died of COVID in the placebo group. So Pfizer, with the misleading measure of relative risk reduction, called their vaccine "100% effective" because two is 100% greater than one. But from the angle of absolute risk, it took 22,000 vaccines to save just one life from COVID. • And over a 6-month period, 21 of the vaccinated people died of all causes, whereas only 17 people died in the placebo group, a 24% difference. So what was killing those people in the vaccine group? "It was cardiac arrest," attested Robert F. Kennedy Jr. "There were five cardiac arrest deaths in the vaccine group and only one in the placebo group. What that means is that if you take that vaccine, you're [five times] more likely to die from a fatal cardiac arrest over the next six months than if you don't. What it also means is that for every life they save by preventing a death from COVID, they are killing four people from cardiac arrest." Full Interview:
4:26

Pfizer's Own Trials Showed a 24% GREATER Likelihood of Dying in the Vaccine Group After 6 Months "For every life they save by preventing a death from COVID, they are killing four people from cardiac arrest." • In the Pfizer clinical trials, they gave 22,000 people two COVID injections and 22,000 people fake vaccines. • Of the 44,000 in total, one person died of COVID in the vaccine group, and two people died of COVID in the placebo group. So Pfizer, with the misleading measure of relative risk reduction, called their vaccine "100% effective" because two is 100% greater than one. But from the angle of absolute risk, it took 22,000 vaccines to save just one life from COVID. • And over a 6-month period, 21 of the vaccinated people died of all causes, whereas only 17 people died in the placebo group, a 24% difference. So what was killing those people in the vaccine group? "It was cardiac arrest," attested Robert F. Kennedy Jr. "There were five cardiac arrest deaths in the vaccine group and only one in the placebo group. What that means is that if you take that vaccine, you're [five times] more likely to die from a fatal cardiac arrest over the next six months than if you don't. What it also means is that for every life they save by preventing a death from COVID, they are killing four people from cardiac arrest." Full Interview:

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

1,203,345 次观看 • 3 年前

Here’s How Evil Bill Gates & Big Pharma Really Are MMA Fighter Quinton Jackson Goes On Joe Rogan & Reveals Why He Didn’t Take The COVID Vaccine “— The main reason why I decided not to take the vaccine is because, I saw the interview with Bill and Melinda Gates. — them saying that they gotta give it to blacks and Latinos first” “I was like, oh, f**k that. I'm not taking it. They never wanna give out black a** sh*t first. F**k that. That's why I didn't, that's why I didn't take it.” “I didn't take this sh*t. Just because of the the history of them giving vaccines to people in Africa. There's some horror stories. They they gave vaccines to people in Africa where they told these people that it was, for, um, it was a the DTP vaccine but it had HCG in it which is something that stops women from being fertile and they gave it to him on a schedule that didn't make sense. So people started investigating. They found that they were putting enough HCG in it to make sure these women didn't have kids. They basically vaccinated them against being pregnant. And who knows what the f**k that's doing to their bodies? Yeah. That's f**ked up. And they didn't tell when they were doing it. That's f**ked up, bro. Bro, there's a lot of lot of sketchy stuff” They continue on talking about Bill Gates, definitely worth the listen.
1:55

Here’s How Evil Bill Gates & Big Pharma Really Are MMA Fighter Quinton Jackson Goes On Joe Rogan & Reveals Why He Didn’t Take The COVID Vaccine “— The main reason why I decided not to take the vaccine is because, I saw the interview with Bill and Melinda Gates. — them saying that they gotta give it to blacks and Latinos first” “I was like, oh, f**k that. I'm not taking it. They never wanna give out black a** sh*t first. F**k that. That's why I didn't, that's why I didn't take it.” “I didn't take this sh*t. Just because of the the history of them giving vaccines to people in Africa. There's some horror stories. They they gave vaccines to people in Africa where they told these people that it was, for, um, it was a the DTP vaccine but it had HCG in it which is something that stops women from being fertile and they gave it to him on a schedule that didn't make sense. So people started investigating. They found that they were putting enough HCG in it to make sure these women didn't have kids. They basically vaccinated them against being pregnant. And who knows what the f**k that's doing to their bodies? Yeah. That's f**ked up. And they didn't tell when they were doing it. That's f**ked up, bro. Bro, there's a lot of lot of sketchy stuff” They continue on talking about Bill Gates, definitely worth the listen.

Wall Street Apes

750,192 次观看 • 2 年前

This is absolutely stunning Geert Vanden Bossche tells a story about what happened when he was the Ebola program manager and the "WHO rolled out the clinical trials for the Ebola vaccine from Merck" during an Ebola outbreak in West Africa. He was awakened to the corruption in clinical trials managed by the World Health Organization. The deaths from the Ebola vaccine were not picked up, because they didn't start monitoring its effects until 12-14 x days after injection...and then they called the vaccine 100% effective! Steve Kirsch asks: "When did you first realise how corrupt the medical community is" Geert Vanden Bossche: "my biggest wake-up call came with the Ebola story at the WHO" "About ten years ago, when the WHO rolled out the clinical trials for the Ebola vaccine from Merck in West Africa. I was the Ebola program manager, so I monitored this very, very closely" "I had warned that the way they vaccinated people with this live, very inflammatory vaccine during the outbreak would kill people." "The way they structured their clinical trials was such that the people who died, basically from the vaccine, died before they started monitoring. They only started monitoring after 10 or 12 days after the vaccination." "Of course, if people are already in the incubation period and you introduce a live vaccine that is very inflammatory, you're going to precipitate a cytokine storm. That's what people die from when they get Ebola." "And so, they came to an efficacy of 100%—100%!" "I immediately knew, and this was published in The Lancet."
2:03

This is absolutely stunning Geert Vanden Bossche tells a story about what happened when he was the Ebola program manager and the "WHO rolled out the clinical trials for the Ebola vaccine from Merck" during an Ebola outbreak in West Africa. He was awakened to the corruption in clinical trials managed by the World Health Organization. The deaths from the Ebola vaccine were not picked up, because they didn't start monitoring its effects until 12-14 x days after injection...and then they called the vaccine 100% effective! Steve Kirsch asks: "When did you first realise how corrupt the medical community is" Geert Vanden Bossche: "my biggest wake-up call came with the Ebola story at the WHO" "About ten years ago, when the WHO rolled out the clinical trials for the Ebola vaccine from Merck in West Africa. I was the Ebola program manager, so I monitored this very, very closely" "I had warned that the way they vaccinated people with this live, very inflammatory vaccine during the outbreak would kill people." "The way they structured their clinical trials was such that the people who died, basically from the vaccine, died before they started monitoring. They only started monitoring after 10 or 12 days after the vaccination." "Of course, if people are already in the incubation period and you introduce a live vaccine that is very inflammatory, you're going to precipitate a cytokine storm. That's what people die from when they get Ebola." "And so, they came to an efficacy of 100%—100%!" "I immediately knew, and this was published in The Lancet."

Humanspective

97,052 次观看 • 1 年前

WATCH: CNN’s John Miller mentions the video and notes left behind by the alleged Minneapolis Catholic church shooter, citing their mental illness and the working motive is “he was in pain,” but NOTHING about the shooter being transgender and that they hated Christians, Jews, and Trump... Well, we’ve been looking into the shooter who law enforcement sources have identified as Robin Westman and police have been examining some of the postings online by an individual of the same name, presumed to be the same individual. It shows numerous weapons, magazines, things in preparation for the shooting along with a book and different notes. But one of them is particularly telling in that it says: ‘I have waited for this for so long. I am not well. I am not right. I am a sad person, haunted by these thoughts that do not go away. I know this is wrong’ and he goes on to describe that the action he is going to take against this world before taking his own life — which is not uncommon in these incidents, these active shooter scenarios where you see someone who reports to be in — in — in pain and trauma and that they write all of this out and leave it behind with the foreknowledge that what they're about to do is going to end their own life as well, while taking these — these strangers, these innocent people with them in the process. But investigators are going back through this material and a lot of other material trying to determine motive. So what do we know? I mean, what we know, if this in fact is from the shooter, that his motive was he was in pain. But what we don't see here and there's more to go through is what was, what was the shooter — Robin Westman in pain about specifically?”
1:41

WATCH: CNN’s John Miller mentions the video and notes left behind by the alleged Minneapolis Catholic church shooter, citing their mental illness and the working motive is “he was in pain,” but NOTHING about the shooter being transgender and that they hated Christians, Jews, and Trump... Well, we’ve been looking into the shooter who law enforcement sources have identified as Robin Westman and police have been examining some of the postings online by an individual of the same name, presumed to be the same individual. It shows numerous weapons, magazines, things in preparation for the shooting along with a book and different notes. But one of them is particularly telling in that it says: ‘I have waited for this for so long. I am not well. I am not right. I am a sad person, haunted by these thoughts that do not go away. I know this is wrong’ and he goes on to describe that the action he is going to take against this world before taking his own life — which is not uncommon in these incidents, these active shooter scenarios where you see someone who reports to be in — in — in pain and trauma and that they write all of this out and leave it behind with the foreknowledge that what they're about to do is going to end their own life as well, while taking these — these strangers, these innocent people with them in the process. But investigators are going back through this material and a lot of other material trying to determine motive. So what do we know? I mean, what we know, if this in fact is from the shooter, that his motive was he was in pain. But what we don't see here and there's more to go through is what was, what was the shooter — Robin Westman in pain about specifically?”

Curtis Houck

64,113 次观看 • 10 个月前

I was listening to a sermon recently from one of my favorite teachers, Tim Keller, who sadly passed from this earth earlier this year. He was talking about the power and meaning of the words “Peace On Earth”. I was deeply encouraged and challenged to consider the significance of those words, particularly what they meant when announced by the angels 2000 years ago, and what they mean to us in 2023. As I was reflecting on all of that in light of what’s happening in my life personally with family and friends as well as in the world as a whole, I started thinking about a song I wrote a few years ago with my friend Tom Douglas called “A Desperate Benediction (Peace on Earth)” and suddenly found myself rewriting some of the words of this song, specifically related to right now...Christmas 2023. I’m not even sure as a songwriter what the rules are on this kind of a thing, but I felt strongly that I wanted to share it with you…So here you go. Peace on Earth, Christmas 2023.
3:54

I was listening to a sermon recently from one of my favorite teachers, Tim Keller, who sadly passed from this earth earlier this year. He was talking about the power and meaning of the words “Peace On Earth”. I was deeply encouraged and challenged to consider the significance of those words, particularly what they meant when announced by the angels 2000 years ago, and what they mean to us in 2023. As I was reflecting on all of that in light of what’s happening in my life personally with family and friends as well as in the world as a whole, I started thinking about a song I wrote a few years ago with my friend Tom Douglas called “A Desperate Benediction (Peace on Earth)” and suddenly found myself rewriting some of the words of this song, specifically related to right now...Christmas 2023. I’m not even sure as a songwriter what the rules are on this kind of a thing, but I felt strongly that I wanted to share it with you…So here you go. Peace on Earth, Christmas 2023.

Steven Curtis Chapman

44,044 次观看 • 2 年前

You wanted a response from @haleymsawyer on why she didn’t have #USF in her AP Top 25 Here it is….kinda. From USCHoops “What can they do to get in my Top 25? We take in account the week-to-week performances for a team but also take into account the overall season so far, what kind of culture that team has too. And, there’s tons of people that vote on the AP Poll, it’s not a perfect system but at the end of the day no matter who you pick it does even out because there’s so many people who vote. Like I said, it’s really fun for discussion, it doesn’t probably matter in the end, but I’m glad that people are having a really good time with it.” #GoBulls #HornsUp
1:32

You wanted a response from @haleymsawyer on why she didn’t have #USF in her AP Top 25 Here it is….kinda. From USCHoops “What can they do to get in my Top 25? We take in account the week-to-week performances for a team but also take into account the overall season so far, what kind of culture that team has too. And, there’s tons of people that vote on the AP Poll, it’s not a perfect system but at the end of the day no matter who you pick it does even out because there’s so many people who vote. Like I said, it’s really fun for discussion, it doesn’t probably matter in the end, but I’m glad that people are having a really good time with it.” #GoBulls #HornsUp

Jay Recher

1,195,476 次观看 • 10 个月前

Watch Richard Feynman while he speaks. No one transmits this better than him. And it's a weird feeling or sense. Cicero and Darwin wrote about it. Jefferson preached it. Ben Graham lived it and so does Buffett. "I get a kick out of thinking about these things. I can't stop" We tend to believe that joy comes from physical activity or the senses (music, art, food), but those are not the only sources. Theoretical physicists are obsessed with what they do because they have true fun while doing it. Same thing with any kind of theorists, including investors. Greenblatt does it because of the pleasure of figuring something out. So did Feynman. When asked about his Nobel Prize, he said he didn't do it for the prize. It's 'the pleasure of finding the thing out' that does it for him. In one of his last interviews, Munger spoke about how he and Buffett had 'actual fun' while doing what they did. And what they did was a lot of thinking, with occasional decisions. That's why many of these guys were top of their fields. They enjoy(ed) thinking and selected endeavors that rewarded that.
1:15

Watch Richard Feynman while he speaks. No one transmits this better than him. And it's a weird feeling or sense. Cicero and Darwin wrote about it. Jefferson preached it. Ben Graham lived it and so does Buffett. "I get a kick out of thinking about these things. I can't stop" We tend to believe that joy comes from physical activity or the senses (music, art, food), but those are not the only sources. Theoretical physicists are obsessed with what they do because they have true fun while doing it. Same thing with any kind of theorists, including investors. Greenblatt does it because of the pleasure of figuring something out. So did Feynman. When asked about his Nobel Prize, he said he didn't do it for the prize. It's 'the pleasure of finding the thing out' that does it for him. In one of his last interviews, Munger spoke about how he and Buffett had 'actual fun' while doing what they did. And what they did was a lot of thinking, with occasional decisions. That's why many of these guys were top of their fields. They enjoy(ed) thinking and selected endeavors that rewarded that.

Giuliano

87,277 次观看 • 7 个月前

Why would New York Magazine crop out black people from an article on a MAGA event and then portray it as mostly white? , who hosted the event, responds: “I knew that America was getting woke under Biden, but I didn’t know that even the KKK had a DEI program because apparently, I can now be a white supremacist! They truly believe the American people are stupid…they did not reach out to me for comment for this story, they didn’t include me in any party of this story, and they cropped out the black people in the picture of the story. It’s absolutely insane! They cannot stand to see people that believe what we believe HAPPY in this country…they cannot stand it, and they’re scared of it, and they should be scared.”
3:41

Why would New York Magazine crop out black people from an article on a MAGA event and then portray it as mostly white? , who hosted the event, responds: “I knew that America was getting woke under Biden, but I didn’t know that even the KKK had a DEI program because apparently, I can now be a white supremacist! They truly believe the American people are stupid…they did not reach out to me for comment for this story, they didn’t include me in any party of this story, and they cropped out the black people in the picture of the story. It’s absolutely insane! They cannot stand to see people that believe what we believe HAPPY in this country…they cannot stand it, and they’re scared of it, and they should be scared.”

Glenn Beck

89,093 次观看 • 1 年前

Tim Dillon: “Does your source—who’s a highly-placed Trump confidant—believe there’s any potential that forces outside of this gunman were responsible for Charlie Kirk’s assassination?” Max Blumenthal: “Yes.” “They don’t accept the official story.” Dillon: “A highly-placed person in the Trump inner circle doesn’t believe the official story of Charlie's murder?” Blumenthal: “No one does, but the phrase I remember hearing is, ‘it feels like there’s more at play here.’” “That’s not the only person with more power than me in Washington that I’m hearing that from.” Dillon: “So you’re hearing from multiple people that are connected and tapped in, that they believe that there’s more at play or more to the story than simply one radicalized young man?” Blumenthal: “Subsequent to publishing this story from another source who I would describe as an Administration insider, that corroborated the account in this story.” “First, that, Charlie Kirk was actively and aggressively personally lobbying Trump against bombing Iran in June.” “Two, that right now the FBI is not being forthcoming and there’s a lot of frustration with the FBI not sharing information.” Dillon: “That’s pretty shocking.” Blumenthal: “There was this pre-fabricated narrative on the right that the killer was a leftist or a Muslim.” “They clearly wanted that.” “Now, people on the left are saying he was a groyper.” “I don’t know what will be the case, but the reason I wrote this story was because I was able to get this background about Charlie Kirk and … what was coloring his final days, and the kind of pressure he was under—which tells a larger story about Israeli influence in the US.” “I didn’t report this story to prove that Israel has a direct role in his assassination.” “But there is a real reason why many people who are not able to talk to people with any proximity to power believe that is the case, and it’s because of the way Israel’s conducting itself around the globe.” Tim Dillon Max Blumenthal
4:31

Tim Dillon: “Does your source—who’s a highly-placed Trump confidant—believe there’s any potential that forces outside of this gunman were responsible for Charlie Kirk’s assassination?” Max Blumenthal: “Yes.” “They don’t accept the official story.” Dillon: “A highly-placed person in the Trump inner circle doesn’t believe the official story of Charlie's murder?” Blumenthal: “No one does, but the phrase I remember hearing is, ‘it feels like there’s more at play here.’” “That’s not the only person with more power than me in Washington that I’m hearing that from.” Dillon: “So you’re hearing from multiple people that are connected and tapped in, that they believe that there’s more at play or more to the story than simply one radicalized young man?” Blumenthal: “Subsequent to publishing this story from another source who I would describe as an Administration insider, that corroborated the account in this story.” “First, that, Charlie Kirk was actively and aggressively personally lobbying Trump against bombing Iran in June.” “Two, that right now the FBI is not being forthcoming and there’s a lot of frustration with the FBI not sharing information.” Dillon: “That’s pretty shocking.” Blumenthal: “There was this pre-fabricated narrative on the right that the killer was a leftist or a Muslim.” “They clearly wanted that.” “Now, people on the left are saying he was a groyper.” “I don’t know what will be the case, but the reason I wrote this story was because I was able to get this background about Charlie Kirk and … what was coloring his final days, and the kind of pressure he was under—which tells a larger story about Israeli influence in the US.” “I didn’t report this story to prove that Israel has a direct role in his assassination.” “But there is a real reason why many people who are not able to talk to people with any proximity to power believe that is the case, and it’s because of the way Israel’s conducting itself around the globe.” Tim Dillon Max Blumenthal

Holden Culotta

1,039,493 次观看 • 10 个月前

.Daily Caller’s Reagan Reese: “On Bagram, what goes into retaking Bagram? Does that require boots on the ground?” President Donald Trump: “We’ll see what happens with Bagram. We’re talking to Afghanistan. It should have never been given up. It was the most embarrassing day in the history of our country. There was no reason to give it up. I was leaving Afghanistan. I was leaving, I was the one that got it down to 5,000 soldiers. But we were going to we were going to keep Bagram, the air base. I said it yesterday and we had an incredible trip, as you know, to U.K., and I said it during the press conference. It’s one of the most powerful runways ever built in terms of weight, length and load, what it can — what it could take, and we just gave it up for nothing. We gave it up for nothing. There was no reason to give it up. We weren’t going to leave Bagram. Joe Biden didn’t know what he was doing. We had a man that didn’t know what he was doing. We had a man, by the way, that didn’t approve — if you take a look at what’s happening in Congress — we had a man that signed everything with almost everything with an autopen and he didn’t tell the people from the autopen whoever was using it. The one man that used it predominantly said that Biden only spoke to him twice, and it was only about the weather. It was about nothing. So, those pardons that he gave are illegal. He gave illegal pardons, and that includes the congressman that destroyed and deleted all the information from J6. They deleted everything because it turned out that they were wrong. It turned out that I offered 10,000 National Guard soldiers whatever they wanted, and you wouldn’t have had a problem and they turned it down. Nancy Pelosi turned it down, and the mayor of Washington, D.C. turned it down. They deleted everything and they destroyed it, illegally destroyed it. And Biden gave them a pardon. And Biden gave a lot of other people pardons that, frankly, would be in jail if it wasn’t for those pardons. But those pardons now are illegal, according to just about everybody.”
2:00

.Daily Caller’s Reagan Reese: “On Bagram, what goes into retaking Bagram? Does that require boots on the ground?” President Donald Trump: “We’ll see what happens with Bagram. We’re talking to Afghanistan. It should have never been given up. It was the most embarrassing day in the history of our country. There was no reason to give it up. I was leaving Afghanistan. I was leaving, I was the one that got it down to 5,000 soldiers. But we were going to we were going to keep Bagram, the air base. I said it yesterday and we had an incredible trip, as you know, to U.K., and I said it during the press conference. It’s one of the most powerful runways ever built in terms of weight, length and load, what it can — what it could take, and we just gave it up for nothing. We gave it up for nothing. There was no reason to give it up. We weren’t going to leave Bagram. Joe Biden didn’t know what he was doing. We had a man that didn’t know what he was doing. We had a man, by the way, that didn’t approve — if you take a look at what’s happening in Congress — we had a man that signed everything with almost everything with an autopen and he didn’t tell the people from the autopen whoever was using it. The one man that used it predominantly said that Biden only spoke to him twice, and it was only about the weather. It was about nothing. So, those pardons that he gave are illegal. He gave illegal pardons, and that includes the congressman that destroyed and deleted all the information from J6. They deleted everything because it turned out that they were wrong. It turned out that I offered 10,000 National Guard soldiers whatever they wanted, and you wouldn’t have had a problem and they turned it down. Nancy Pelosi turned it down, and the mayor of Washington, D.C. turned it down. They deleted everything and they destroyed it, illegally destroyed it. And Biden gave them a pardon. And Biden gave a lot of other people pardons that, frankly, would be in jail if it wasn’t for those pardons. But those pardons now are illegal, according to just about everybody.”

Curtis Houck

11,963 次观看 • 10 个月前

"Brook Jackson's case against Pfizer...[is] the largest case in the world...there's literally...trillions in potential damages." "The clinical trial data was manipulated...[Pfizer's] vaccine...increased all cause mortality...And...they hid deaths." (1/7) Warner Mendenhall (Warner Mendenhall), an activist, citizen, and lawyer representing Pfizer whistleblower Brook Jackson (Brook Jackson 💜), describes for Leslie Manookian (Leslie Manookian) of Health Freedom Defense Fund (Health Freedom Defense Fund) how the pharma giant conducted a "manipulated" clinical trial for its COVID injections. Mendenhall notes that Pfizer manipulated its "clinical trial" (which was really a "demonstration" of a clinical trial—see tweet 2), in various ways. First and foremost, by "[hiding] deaths" in the "shot" arm of the trial. Furthermore, Mendenhall notes that more people died in the "shot arm" of Pfizer's trial than in the placebo arm. (Indeed, the Summary Basis for Regulatory Action published by the FDA on November 8, 2021 for Pfizer's *supposedly* FDA approved injection, COMIRNATY, clearly stated that there were 21 deaths in the injection arm of the trial and 17 in the placebo arm—see tweet 5). Also note that while Mendenhall doesn't discuss this point in this clip, Trump's own Department of Justice requested—in 2025(!)—that Jackson's case against Pfizer be dismissed. "Trump sides with Pfizer!" Jackson wrote on X on April 28, 2025. "[Trump's] DOJ explained to the court that it has had continued access to the Pfizer vaccine clinical trial data and the vaccine is effective," Jackson added. Trump's DOJ asked the court to dismiss Jackson's lawsuit against Pfizer, in part, because her case is "inconsistent with public policy" (see tweet 5). Furthermore, note that HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. himself has called Pfizer's COVID-injection clinical trial "kabuki theater." Kennedy noted in an interview conducted in 2023 that the trial "was meaningless theater." He added that Pfizer's COVID injection "is a demonstration product, not a medical product" and that "the FDA has no authority over it." (See tweet 3.) ---------------Partial transcription of clip-------------- "We have a couple of cases that are very well known. Brook Jackson's case against Pfizer I think is the most well known. But it is something that we've had no mainstream coverage of. What could be the largest case in the world right now because there's literally hundreds, of billions, essentially trillions in potential damages that Pfizer would never be able to pay. "They'd be bankrupt if Brook Jackson is, successful in her case. That case is again, it's very simple. The clinical trial data was manipulated to show that this drug, was somewhat effective against COVID 19. They started with 43,000 people in the clinical trial, but the data that the FDA, made a decision on was only based on 170 people out of 43,000. So why, why only 170? "I think anyone would ask if you have 43,000 data points. It's because that came after they went through the data, you know, and basically manipulated it to where it showed a quote unquote 90 or 95% effectiveness rate. But if you go back to a little broader view of the data, you can see, right in the broader view that of the folks who didn't get the vaccine, there were 1800 who got COVID-19. "Of the folks who did get the supposed vaccine, there were like 1600 that got COVID 19. That is not a statistically relevant difference in any way and really doesn't show, any benefit from it. And then you look at all cause mortality. That's a normal thing to look at with any drug. What does it do to all cause mortality? If you take the drug, it should reduce all cause mortality. This didn't, when you took the vaccine, it increased all cause mortality among the vaccine arm. And I hate to use the word vaccine, but I'll do that as a shorthand here. "Let's make people understand that the shot arm had higher all cause mortality. So more people were dying if they got the drug than the ones if they didn't. That's just a good overall test of something. And then they hid deaths. So we knew there were deaths. They were hidden. And it's taken a lot of basically citizen and amateur research to go through all those tens of thousands of pages of Pfizer documents. But they found them and people who were injured in the trial. They managed to exclude them, and not count them as serious adverse events. "And we have a great one, great example is a gentleman out of Argentina who's contacted us, Augusto Roux. He's been fighting that issue in Argentina. And that site and Augusto Roux. And what he had to say to us was really interesting because they managed to enroll 4,000 people in a clinical trial in a couple of weeks. Get them run through, get the data and. And it was at a military hospital. And. And then on top of it all, there has been in the Argentine press an allegation of bribery. "And one of the chief researchers who by the way, wrote a, wrote an article for the New England Journal of Medicine is Fernando Pollock. He's who ran that clinical trial down there. He's well known to us in the United States. He's no longer licensed in the United States. I'm not sure exactly why. He has military and intelligence contacts, which makes me very curious. And he wrote this article in the New England Journal of Medicine, which has essentially been debunked since then about how effective this vaccine, trial. This vaccine was, based on the trial numbers. So all kinds of very interesting things on that case."
3:56

"Brook Jackson's case against Pfizer...[is] the largest case in the world...there's literally...trillions in potential damages." "The clinical trial data was manipulated...[Pfizer's] vaccine...increased all cause mortality...And...they hid deaths." (1/7) Warner Mendenhall (Warner Mendenhall), an activist, citizen, and lawyer representing Pfizer whistleblower Brook Jackson (Brook Jackson 💜), describes for Leslie Manookian (Leslie Manookian) of Health Freedom Defense Fund (Health Freedom Defense Fund) how the pharma giant conducted a "manipulated" clinical trial for its COVID injections. Mendenhall notes that Pfizer manipulated its "clinical trial" (which was really a "demonstration" of a clinical trial—see tweet 2), in various ways. First and foremost, by "[hiding] deaths" in the "shot" arm of the trial. Furthermore, Mendenhall notes that more people died in the "shot arm" of Pfizer's trial than in the placebo arm. (Indeed, the Summary Basis for Regulatory Action published by the FDA on November 8, 2021 for Pfizer's *supposedly* FDA approved injection, COMIRNATY, clearly stated that there were 21 deaths in the injection arm of the trial and 17 in the placebo arm—see tweet 5). Also note that while Mendenhall doesn't discuss this point in this clip, Trump's own Department of Justice requested—in 2025(!)—that Jackson's case against Pfizer be dismissed. "Trump sides with Pfizer!" Jackson wrote on X on April 28, 2025. "[Trump's] DOJ explained to the court that it has had continued access to the Pfizer vaccine clinical trial data and the vaccine is effective," Jackson added. Trump's DOJ asked the court to dismiss Jackson's lawsuit against Pfizer, in part, because her case is "inconsistent with public policy" (see tweet 5). Furthermore, note that HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. himself has called Pfizer's COVID-injection clinical trial "kabuki theater." Kennedy noted in an interview conducted in 2023 that the trial "was meaningless theater." He added that Pfizer's COVID injection "is a demonstration product, not a medical product" and that "the FDA has no authority over it." (See tweet 3.) ---------------Partial transcription of clip-------------- "We have a couple of cases that are very well known. Brook Jackson's case against Pfizer I think is the most well known. But it is something that we've had no mainstream coverage of. What could be the largest case in the world right now because there's literally hundreds, of billions, essentially trillions in potential damages that Pfizer would never be able to pay. "They'd be bankrupt if Brook Jackson is, successful in her case. That case is again, it's very simple. The clinical trial data was manipulated to show that this drug, was somewhat effective against COVID 19. They started with 43,000 people in the clinical trial, but the data that the FDA, made a decision on was only based on 170 people out of 43,000. So why, why only 170? "I think anyone would ask if you have 43,000 data points. It's because that came after they went through the data, you know, and basically manipulated it to where it showed a quote unquote 90 or 95% effectiveness rate. But if you go back to a little broader view of the data, you can see, right in the broader view that of the folks who didn't get the vaccine, there were 1800 who got COVID-19. "Of the folks who did get the supposed vaccine, there were like 1600 that got COVID 19. That is not a statistically relevant difference in any way and really doesn't show, any benefit from it. And then you look at all cause mortality. That's a normal thing to look at with any drug. What does it do to all cause mortality? If you take the drug, it should reduce all cause mortality. This didn't, when you took the vaccine, it increased all cause mortality among the vaccine arm. And I hate to use the word vaccine, but I'll do that as a shorthand here. "Let's make people understand that the shot arm had higher all cause mortality. So more people were dying if they got the drug than the ones if they didn't. That's just a good overall test of something. And then they hid deaths. So we knew there were deaths. They were hidden. And it's taken a lot of basically citizen and amateur research to go through all those tens of thousands of pages of Pfizer documents. But they found them and people who were injured in the trial. They managed to exclude them, and not count them as serious adverse events. "And we have a great one, great example is a gentleman out of Argentina who's contacted us, Augusto Roux. He's been fighting that issue in Argentina. And that site and Augusto Roux. And what he had to say to us was really interesting because they managed to enroll 4,000 people in a clinical trial in a couple of weeks. Get them run through, get the data and. And it was at a military hospital. And. And then on top of it all, there has been in the Argentine press an allegation of bribery. "And one of the chief researchers who by the way, wrote a, wrote an article for the New England Journal of Medicine is Fernando Pollock. He's who ran that clinical trial down there. He's well known to us in the United States. He's no longer licensed in the United States. I'm not sure exactly why. He has military and intelligence contacts, which makes me very curious. And he wrote this article in the New England Journal of Medicine, which has essentially been debunked since then about how effective this vaccine, trial. This vaccine was, based on the trial numbers. So all kinds of very interesting things on that case."

Sense Receptor

25,606 次观看 • 1 年前