Reports that may help readers explain the public-health/vaccines/bioterrorism program to others.
Email from a reader:
“…[We] read that either the Pharmaceutical Industry or DOD or someone admitted to it as a bioweapon or some similar language. We have been searching but are not able to find a reference. Is this accurate and could you…point me in the right direction?…”
My reply:
Attaching four reports and a screenshot that may be helpful.
2002 Ainscough Genetic Engineering and BW US Airforce No. 14
2010.01 Jonathan Tucker Arms Control Association vaccine and bioweapon production indistinguishable
2010.06 Almosara Biotechnology Genetically Engineered Pathogens Paper USAF No. 53
Sasha Latypova cites Michael Ainscough's work more than I do, so the screenshot is from one of her slide decks. The screenshot quotes are from pp. 267-268 of the 2002 report.
One thing to keep in mind when reading and using these reports is that the authors exaggerate the potential threat posed by communicable bioweapons and exaggerate the success record of gene therapies, because the reports are written to advance the interests of the biodefense industry and the depopulation/public health industry. The reports are not written to accurately convey threats and safety/efficacy of products.
I mention that because in conversations, it will probably be useful to explain to people that the health risks of circulating biologically-manipulated airborne, waterborne, foodborne, products are very low, but the threat posed by the injectable and sprayed chemical products that the government endorses (falsely) as preventatives and treatments is very high.
I call the vaccines biological weapons and biochemical weapons because their effects are biological and biochemical. Sasha tends to emphasize the synthetic chemical character of some of the products, especially the chemical poisons/products deployed in stores, subways, etc, that induce detoxification responses in targets, that the government falsely classifies as virus-caused disease.
The overlap among biological, chemical, natural, synthetic, genetic and non-genetic, is a complicating factor for everyone trying to understand what the killers are using against living creatures at any given time and place.
But the key point is that the threats posed by things that can be inserted into air, water and food, are magnified beyond their actual feasibility and lethality, to induce fear, overcome self-preservation instincts and thereby drive uptake of the more effective weapons (injections, nasal sprays, dermal patches) that are able to bypass the immune system's defenses.
Two of these reports address the dual-use purpose of 'vaccine' production facilities, which can help people understand that all vaccines have been biological weapons since the inception of vaccine programs, although prior to 2020, they were generally slower acting and more difficult to see as such (SIDS, autism, induction of many other chronic diseases population-wide, but plausibly denied by CDC/FDA and manufacturers).
From the Goldblat paper:
"…Biological weapons are unpredictable in their effects and of limited value in combat. Since cheating under a BW Convention could not yield significant military advantages to the cheating party, a ban on biological weapons without verification of compliance was considered by the negotiators to be free of serious security risks.
By contrast, chemical weapons are predictable, capable of producing immediate effects and, consequently, useful in combat..."
Related Bailiwick reporting and analysis:
March 23, 2022 - Why Pfizer and Moderna and FDA are working toward government authorization to inject babies and small children. “…The legislative trail: 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act gave manufacturers immunity for liability for injuries and deaths caused by vaccines listed on the government-recommended childhood immunization schedule. The argument used to exempt manufacturers from liability was that the government, through the Department of Health and Human Services, would monitor the childhood vaccination program, collect safety data, and report it to Congress to provide oversight and take harmful vaccines off the market. However, the HHS and Congressional oversight required by the 1986 law didn’t occur. See Informed Consent Action Network v. US-HHS, 1:18-cv-03215-JMF, which ended with a July 9, 2018 stipulation [signed by Attorney Robert F. Kennedy Jr.] by the U.S. government that HHS had no records of any safety monitoring or public reporting of the childhood vaccination program, under the 1986 law, between 1986 and 2018. Later two reports were located, filed on 5/4/88 and 7/21/89. Since 1989: nothing. No evidence that the childhood vaccination schedule was safe at that time, nor any evidence that the injections added to the childhood schedule since 1986, alone or cumulatively, are safe…”
April 22, 2022 - Permanent corporate liability exemption for vaxx manufacturers. “…By rulemaking that was proposed April 4, 2018 (83 FR 14391), announced Dec. 2, 2021 (86 FR 68423), and went into effect Jan. 3, 2022, CDC already made the Covid vaxx manufacturers permanently immune from civil liability for injuries and deaths inflicted on people through government-mandated injection of their products. Health and Human Services/CDC added “and/or pregnant women” to “children” on the list of vaccine recipients that, when a vaccine is on the ‘recommended’ list, puts compensation for injuries and deaths exclusively in the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program…”
Sept. 28, 2022 - DOD chemical and biological warfare program: herd-culling plus stockpile disposal in one tidy package. “The 1998 dual-use legislation accomplished another key US Government objective: it rendered the DOD’s illegal stockpile of biological and chemical agents into a ‘legal’ stockpile of pharmaceutical products and vaccines. Same deadly toxins. Different labels.
Just as the 1997 dual-use legislation continued to support and fund the same unethical human testing program, on a larger human test subject population…Since the mid-1990s, the US Government’s illegal chemical and biological warfare program has all been operated under HHS public health frameworks, by relabeling weapons as prophylactics and treatments. Since then, the US government has only developed, produced and deployed FDA-authorized bioweapons. Note, though, that FDA authorization doesn’t mean that the products comply with any FDA consumer-protection regulations on clinical trials, manufacturing, distribution, labeling or administration. Or safety and efficacy. Or recalls. They don’t comply with any of those legal standards, and there’s no legal reason why they should comply. Compliance would be silly, because they’re weapons, not medicines, and they’re shot into targeted enemies (everyone on the planet) to kill them, not offered to patients to protect or heal them…”
Nov. 18, 2022 - Immunomodulation and fear modulation. Plus notes on the current spin-up of the Ebola threat. “…Engineering immunodeficiency. Manipulating a target population to have decreased immunity could increase the impact of a biological attack. This goal could be pursued either by manipulating a pathogen to simultaneously reduce immunity and cause disease (Jackson et al., 2001) or by separately introducing an immune-suppressing agent and a bioweapon into a target population…”
April 13, 2023 - Vaccine production facilities are indistinguishable from bioweapon production facilities, and vaccines are indistinguishable from bioweapons. “…The George H. W. Bush administration argued that verification was not possible with any degree of confidence because of the dual-use nature of biotechnological materials and equipment, which makes it easy to divert legitimate facilities such as vaccine plants to illicit production…Advances in fermentation technology have also eliminated the need to stockpile biowarfare agents. Instead, a legitimate production facility, such as a vaccine plant, could be commandeered to grow seed cultures into militarily significant quantities of agent within a period of weeks…”
April 24, 2023 - At-home gain-of-function kits. Biodefense is indistinguishable from biowarfare; the so-called biodefense industry is, in truth, the biochemical munitions industry. “…To stop the psychological and biochemical warfare program, it would be more effective to send do-it-yourself gain-of-function kits to every household, than to ban gain-of-function research. DIY gain-of-function kits — and the observable self-limiting outbreaks and low transmissibility of the resulting pathogens — would further clarify for people that "gain of function" or weaponization of naturally-occurring biological pathogens is a myth circulated to drive fear and to elicit behavioral compliance with biochemical weapon/toxic injection attacks camouflaged as “vaccines,” including but not limited to members of the mRNA-LNP biochemical weapons class, soon (if not already) in continuous batch production as authorized and funded by Congress…”
Oct. 28, 2023 - Whatever is in the biochemical weapons bearing Pfizer and other pharma labels, is there because US SecDefs and their WHO-BIS handlers ordered it to be there. “…What Malone, Steve Kirsch and other DoD spokesmen are doing is a distraction maneuver to keep attention away from the intentional toxicity of the biochemical weapons, the DoD/WHO control of the programs, and the fact that “biodefense” is camouflage for straight-up State-sponsored biowarfare, conducted by bringing pharmaceutical companies into the military-industrial-Congressional complex, calling bioweapons “vaccines,” and terrifying people into taking them under “public health emergency” and “pandemic” narratives…”
Dec. 19, 2023 - Legalized FDA non-regulation of biological products effective May 2, 2019, by Federal Register Final Rule, signed by then-FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb. “…On April 2, 2019, effective May 2, 2019, FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb changed the federal regulations governing inspection of licensed facilities manufacturing biological products including ‘vaccines’, from at least every two years to unspecified times; eliminated provisions about what would happen if a licensed facility failed an inspection; and eliminated all inspection duties for FDA inspectors…”
Jan. 9, 2024 - Biologic Markers in Immunotoxicology. 1992 report by Subcommittee on Immunotoxicology, Committee on Biologic Markers, Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology, National Research Council “…This document presents a brief history and review of immunology, immunotoxicology, and biologic markers (Chapters 1 and 2). The effects of toxicants on the immune system can be expressed in two ways. Excessive stimulation can result in hypersensitivity or autoimmunity; suppression can result in the increased susceptibility of the host to infectious and neoplastic agents…”
