This Pfizer patent application was approved August 31st, 2021, and is the very first patent that shows up in a list of over 18500 for the purpose of remote contact tracing of all vaccinated humans worldwide who will be or are now connected to the “internet of things” by a quantum link of pulsating microwave frequencies of 2.4 gHz or higher from cell towers and satellites directly to the graphene oxide held in the fatty tissues of all persons who’ve had the death-shot.
A document prepared for the FDA Advisory Committee meeting, in which members voted seventeen to zero in favour of giving emergency use authorisation for the administration of the Pfizer Covid-19 injection to children aged 5 to 11, confirms that Pfizer have modified the formulation of their injection for children to include an ingredient that reduces the acidity of blood and is used to stabilise people who have suffered a heart attack.
“Authorization is being requested for a modified formulation of the Pfizer‑BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine. Each dose of this formulation contains 10 μg of a nucleoside-modified messenger RNA (mRNA) encoding the viral spike (S) glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2 that is formulated in lipid particles and supplied as a frozen suspension in multiple dose vials.”
“To provide a vaccine with an improved stability profile, the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine for use in children 5-11 years of age uses tromethamine (Tris) buffer instead of the phosphatebuffered saline (PBS) as used in the previous formulation and excludes sodium chloride and potassium chloride”.
EMERGENCY USE GRANTED
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA)granted emergency use authorization(EUA) to Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine for children aged between 5 to 11 years old on October 29th2021. The authorisation was based on what the FDA believes was their “thorough and transparent evaluation of the data” which included input from independent advisory committee experts, and the vote was overwhelmingly in favour of making the vaccine available to all children in this age group.
However, with overwhelming evidence against the safety of the vaccine and now a change in the formula used in clinical trials EUA should never have been granted.
THE 90% EFFECTIVE CLAIM IS MEANINGLESS
The Pfizer risk and benefitanalysispresented to the FDA for EUA approval, states that resulting from their clinical trials they have found the COVID-19 vaccine to be 90.7% effective at preventing symptomatic disease in children ages five to 11. The UKsJoint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation(JCVI) have said that the evidence strongly indicates that almost all children and young people are at very low risk from COVID-19.
Where symptoms are seen in children and young people, they are “typically mild, and little different from other mild respiratory viral infections which circulate each year”. Children also recover from these infections quickly and according to many studies develop arobustbroad spectrum immunity.
The rates in 5 to 11 are so low that there were no “cases” of severe COVID-19 or death from either the treatment (n= 1,518) orcontrol group(n= 750), this renders the “90% effective” claim, meaningless. This should have stopped an EUA application in its tracks, as clearly there is no emergency for this age group in particular and therefore no benefit either.
TRIALS WERE TOO SMALL
Additionally, Pfizer admit that the number of participants in the current clinical development program istoo smallto detect any potential risks of myocarditis associated with vaccination or long-term safety of COVID-19 vaccine in participants 5 to 11 years old.
The FDA had addressed this earlier in the year and asked Pfizer to expand the clinical trials, nevertheless, this had not happened., Pfizer just ignored them and instead “fudged it by importing data from a different study” according to experienced risk and benefit analyserToby Rogers PHD.
In hisarticle, “Ten red flags in the FDA risk benefit” Toby Rogers simplified, “if the rate of particular adverse outcome in kids as a result of the vaccine is 1 in 5,000 and the trial only enrols 1,518 in the treatment group then it is unlikely to spot this particular harm in the clinical trial”.
The study that was added “polluted data rather than clarified outcomes” as participants from cohort 1, which was 95.1% of the trial had safety follow-ups up to 2 months after Dose 2 and cohort 2 were only monitored for adverse events for a mere 17 days at the time of the September 6, 2021 data cut-off.”
Accordingto Dr Robert Malone, inventor of mRNA technology, the harms of myocarditis from these vaccines will likely unfold over the course of years the risks of “adverse events such as cardiomyopathy will be cumulative.” They will likely have to be repeated twice for each school year, at approx. six-month intervals.
For minimal if any direct clinical benefit to the child and will notprevent infection”. Therefore, the trials did not allow nearly adequate time to analyse the long-term effects, but also the other 4.9% who did not have a safety follow up after dose 2 with no indication of whether they were in the control group or the treatment group, potentially skews the results.
WHAT ARE THE OTHER RISKS OF THE VACCINE?
Pfizer-BioNTech do admit however, thatMyocarditis andPericarditis have occurred in some people who have received the vaccine. A first dose of Pfizer’s vaccine comes with a risk of 3 to 17 cases of vaccine-inducedMyocarditis and a second dose risks an additional 12 to 34 cases of myocarditis.
How can this be deemed safe? Yet through the recording of adverse events following vaccination, we have been made aware of the many other risks there have been 837,593 reports to date to the USVAERSsite alone. There is a remote chance that the vaccine could cause a severe allergic reaction according toPfizer-BioNTech. A severe allergic reaction would usually occur within a few minutes to one hour after getting a dose of the vaccine.
Signs of a severe allergic reaction can include:
• Difficulty breathing • Swelling of the face and throat • A fast heartbeat • A bad rash all over the body • Dizziness and weakness
A new report is revealing that the Amish community has made it through the coronavirus pandemic without experiencing a catastrophic loss of life despite their refusal to adopt many of the safety precautions as necessary to prevent widespread loss of life.
The Amish community in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, has made it through the coronavirus pandemic without experiencing a catastrophic loss of life despite their refusal to adopt many of the safety precautions portrayed as necessary to prevent widespread loss of life, according to a new report.
While officials in most U.S. cities ordered businesses and churches to close for several months in an attempt to slow the spread of COVID-19, the Amish continued working and never stopped worshiping together at church.
On her newsmagazine series “Full Measure” Sunday, investigative journalist Sharyl Attkissonreportedon the Amish community’s response to the coronavirus pandemic, which differed significantly from the approach taken by the rest of the country.
She described the Amish as a “Christian group that emphasizes the virtuous over the superficial.” In an effort to live a “virtuous” life, many in the group refrain from driving and using electricity.
Attkisson traveled to Lancaster County, well-known for its large Amish population, to talk to locals about how they handled the pandemic. One person she spoke to, an Amish Mennonite named Calvin Lapp, explained: “There are three things the Amish don’t like: And that’s government; they won’t get involved in government. They don’t like the public education system; they won’t send their children to education. And … they also don’t like the health system.”
“Those three things are all part of what COVID is,” he said. Attkisson noted that “after a short shutdown last year, the Amish chose a unique path that led to COVID-19 tearing through at warp speed.” The community gathered for a religious celebration in May 2020, where they all took communion.
Lapp then described how the Amish take communion: “They dunk their wine into a cup, and they take turns to drink out of the cup. So you go the whole way down the line and everybody drinks out of that cup, so if one person has coronavirus, the rest of the church is going to get coronavirus.”
While he acknowledged that “everybody got coronavirus,” Lapp defended the community’s approach: “It’s a worse thing to quit working than dying. But to shut down and say that we can’t go to church, we can’t get together with family, we can’t see our old people in the hospital, we got to quit working … it’s going completely against everything that we believe.”
About a year after the coronavirus pandemic first broke out in the U.S., national news outlets and The Associated Press wire service reported that the Lancaster County Amish community had reached herd immunity, meaning that “a large part of the population had been infected with COVID-19 and became immune.” However, precise data is difficult to come across because the Amish were hesitant to publicize coronavirus cases in their community.
Steve Nolt, a scholar on Amish and Mennonite culture, told Attkisson that in some cases, “Amish people … refused to go to the hospital, even when they were very sick because if they went there, they wouldn’t be able to have visitors, and it was more important to be sick, even very sick, at home and have the ability to have some people around you than to go to the hospital and be isolated.”
Nolt added that “even those who … believed that they had COVID tended not to get tested. Their approach tended to be ‘I’m sick, I know I’m sick, I don’t have to have someone else tell me I’m sick,’ or a concern that if they … got a positive test, they would then be asked to really dramatically limit what they were doing in a way that … might be uncomfortable for them.”
“There’s no evidence of any more deaths among the Amish than in places that shut down tight. Some claim there were fewer here,” Attkisson maintained. “That’s without masking, staying at home” or taking the coronavirus vaccine.
Lapp highlighted that the absence of a prolonged shutdown meant that the Amish “made more money in the last year than we ever did” as the rest of the country experienced economic hardships because of lockdowns. He described 2020 as “our best year ever.”
It ought to be quite clear by now to everyPlandemic watcher that there is a very stealthy plot afoot to depopulate planet Earth and enslave the remaining humanity via the COVID-19 bioweapon and weaponized Covid vaccines.
ThisNew World Orderglobalist scheme has many facets to it, but there are two primary components that work closely in tandem with each other.
First, there was the launch of the different generations of the COVID-19 bioweapon as well as its variants targeting certain nations across the planet. In other word, Wuhan, Milan, Tehran, New York City, Moscow and Guayaquil, Ecuador all experienced different variations of the COVID-19 bioweapon whose main pathogenic micro-organism was a parasite.
Secondly, there was the roll-out of the various weaponized Covid vaccine programs around the globe each of which was designed to provide more vectors of dissemination of the extremely deadly and damaging spike proteins. The bioweapon spike proteins bioengineered in the COVID-19 bioweapon were then super-charged by the spike weapons put into the Covid injections.
Both of these depopulation and debilitation phases of the CovidPlandemicwere designed to produce a slow-motion mass murder of the targeted populations as well as a gradual sickening of a large swath of humanity.
What follows is an excellent description of this one-two knockout punch thrown at the entire human race. This detailed explanation is rendered by a very smart Indian physician who appears to have read SOTN for many months since thisAlt Mediaplatform has posted many of the same pieces of the Covid crime puzzle.
In fact, this Covid one-two punch was presented by SOTN as a very similar dissection of the COVID-19 crime scene during the first few months of thePlandemicseveral months, before the vaccines were even approved on an emergency basis by the FDA. The first big clue came when the research team from India published their scientific paper (early in 2020) that identified the dangerous spike proteins found in COVID-19.
Now here is the highly informative video which should be posted and sent out everywhere post-haste, especially to all healthcare professionals—Thank you!
Marjorie Taylor Greene Meets With Jan. 6 ‘Political Prisoners’
By Eric Mack | Saturday, 06 November 2021 09:23 AM
Leftist social justice warriors will not do it, but patriotic Americans need to stand up against the “God-awful conditions” President Joe Biden’s “political prisoners” from Jan. 6 are suffering in, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., told Newsmax.
“When we walked into that section of the jail that is completely separate from the rest of the inmates and the other pretrial defendants there – what I saw is what appeared to be men who were political prisoners of war,” Greene told Friday’s “Greg Kelly Reports.” “They had thought that they were forgotten. They had thought that everyone didn’t care about them. They felt hopeless.”
Despite being abandoned and abused by their country for Jan. 6, the inmates share a love of the country that does not love them back, singing the national anthem 9 p.m. every night in the “patriot wing,” Greene told host Greg Kelly.null
“There’s people in this country that take a knee for our national anthem, people that make millions of dollars, but these men in jail, they sing, they stand for the national anthem, and they put their hand over their heart and they sing it more patriotically than I’ve ever heard in my life,” she added, saying Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, and their congressional staffers sang along with them.
Greene had been rejected on demands for months to visit the controversial D.C. jail – which has been scrutinized for inhumane treatment of inmates – and was only permitted to visit the “patriot wing” after being initially denied access. She said she refused to leave and it required phone calls on her three-hour tour to get access to the “political prisoners of war.”
“It should never happen to anyone, and here’s what everyone can do: Stop being complacent, stop sitting on the sidelines, because complacency and sitting on the sidelines and refusing to speak out is why we are where we are in America,” Greene continued.
“You know this is the greatest country in the world, and we are not a country where people should just languish and rot away in jail simply because they didn’t like the outcome of an election.”
Greene does acknowledge some of the inmates are charged with crimes they must answer for from the events of Jan. 6, but being “political prisoners of war” and receiving the treatment they have are gross injustices and a function of weaponized political prosecution.
“These are men that are charged with crimes, and I’m not defending what they had done at the Capitol, and I’m not defending the riot, because I did not like the riot, but what I am there for and the reason why I’m standing up for this issue is I am I am solidly against political witch-hunts,” Greene continued. “And I’m against what’s happening to these men and how they’re being treated, and I do believe in due process. I believe in justice. I believe in our court system, and I don’t think politics should have anything to do with it.
“And these are men that have committed misdemeanors, and they have been held for nearly 10 months now, some of them since they were arrested in January, and it’s time for America to wake up. We can’t allow this to happen in our country.”null
Despite Democrat-controlled cities doing away with cash bail and letting violent criminals out on the streets to commit more crime, the Jan. 6 political prisoners are being denied bail and “forced to stay in there, in horrible conditions,” Greene said.
“These people are there living in horrible conditions,” she continued. “Broken toilets, they can’t use the toilet. There’s mold on the walls.”
She also blasted corrections officials for restricting them to solitary confinement for up to 23 hours a day for the first four months, and then for 22 hours a day for two more months.
“Imagine, on misdemeanor charges, being treated that way,” she said, adding if they refuse being vaccinated, they receive “even worse treatment.”
The jail had already been blasted by officials and referred to the Justice Department for contempt charges for its conditions.
“It didn’t even meet the minimum requirements that needed to be met, and so there’s 400 inmates that are being transferred to another facility in Pennsylvania,” Greene concluded. “So this is just another situation in a Democrat-run city where we are seeing subpar conditions.
“We’re seeing high crime and we are seeing people live in and God-awful conditions that should not exist.
“Even people whose crimes, they’ve been convicted; they’re serving their time, but they should not live in abuse and such horrible conditions.”
The Wisconsin judge overseeing the intentional homicide trial of Kyle Rittenhouse on Tuesday afternoon dismissed the seventh count against the teen. That charge alleged that Rittenhouse failed to comply with an emergency management order of a state or local government by failing to heed a curfew on Aug. 25, 2020, when he shot three people and killed two of them.
Lead defense attorney Mark Richardsmoved to dismiss the count after the jury broke for lunch.
“I want to put on the record now that the state intends to rest,” said lead prosecutor Thomas Binger.
Judge Bruce Schroeder used the jury’s lunch break as a natural pause during which to handle motions. Richards asked Judge Schroeder to confirm that the state had rested its case; the judge interpreted the state’s intention to rest as a de facto termination of the state’s case in chief. (Some of the audio of the proceeding was muted, so all of the conversation leading up to request by Richards was unclear.) Spurred by the judge’s request to get the motions out of the way while the jury ate, Richards wasted no time; he seized the moment by lodging a standard request made by defense attorneys after prosecutors rest their cases in chief.
They have not put in any evidence regarding a lawful order for a curfew violation; we’ll be moving to dismiss that,” Richard said. He also renewed an object as to another count — count six — which alleged Rittenhouse possessed a dangerous weapon while under the age of 18. The court previously refused to acquiesce to the defense’s objections as to count six, but Richards sought to preserve the issue for the record so that it would not be waived. The issue involving count seven, however, required fresh discussion and consideration.
The judge asked lead prosecutor Thomas Binger to respond to the defense’s request to have count seven judicially jettisoned from the jury’s purview.
Binger replied that a police officer’s testimony should be acceptable.
“We’ve had testimony from the detective that a curfew was in place,” Binger responded.
“That’s not a lawful order,” Richards said.
“Did he testify as to by whom the order had been issued?” Judge Schroeder asked.
“I don’t know about that one,” Schroeder continued in what seemed like a stream-of-consciousness discussion. “I would expect that there would have to be — just the mere statement that a detective said that there was a curfew in effect doesn’t really satisfy the — the burden of proof. I will permit you to reopen the evidence, however — no, no, no — I don’t want to — this is — this is — .”
The judge appeared to be thinking out loud as he trailed off in thought. The attorneys jumped in with raised voices. One of the prosecutors appeared to say that the state hadn’t closed its case-in-chief just yet. Richards retorted that he explicitly asked if the state had rested; when the judge affirmed they had, he said he jumped in with a motion to dismiss count seven.
“That’s why I bought it up!” Richards exclaimed.
Schroeder talked over the bickering attorneys and extolled a few lessons about a judicial training from decades ago.
“We’re here to get to the truth of things, and I don’t want to mess around with — um, with, uh — an error in presentation of that magnitude,” Schroeder said.
The judge then indicated he was “inclined” to grant the request but did not do so immediately. He said he wanted to avoid a “thicket” that another judge from years past had entered by pondering whether to toss a charge.
“I’m not going to dismiss it on the ground that it wasn’t proven,” Schroeder said before lunch. He said the bigger issue as to count seven was slightly different, but the context was slightly unclear. He suggested that he needed to know whether another judge had previously resolved in issue surrounding the directive.
The judge broke for lunch while apparently pondering the request. He returned having apparently changed his mind.
“I think the evidence you offered was a statement by a . . . City of Kenosha police officer that there was a curfew in effect,” Judge Schroeder said. “And that’s the extent of it?”
“Yes,” a prosecutor said.
“I don’t believe that that’s sufficient,” said Richards.
“It’s not,” Schroeder ruled. “The motion is granted. Count seven is dismissed.”
Whoever intentionally fails to comply with an order issued by an agent of the state or of a local unit of government who is engaged in emergency management activities under this chapter, including training exercises, is subject to a forfeiture of not more than $200.
The loss of count seven is just one in a series of what might be perceived as prosecutorial blunders in the high-profile trial. Last week, prosecutors stopped eliciting testimony from a relative of one of the men Rittenhouse shot. The relative, Susan Hughes, was the great aunt of Anthony Huber. Hughes was prepared to testify that in her opinion Huber was generally a peaceful individual. The defense said it was prepared to cross-examine Hughes about Huber’s criminal and perhaps even psychiatric record to dig into the thoroughness of her opinions about her deceased relative’s character. The defense’s tactical move led prosecutors to withdraw one question already asked and to prematurely terminate their attempt to characterize Huber as a hero who tried to prevent Rittenhouse from committing harm. Legally speaking, prosecutors said they sought the testimony from Hughes to counteract claims by Rittenhouse’s lawyers that Huber was an initial aggressor in the attack.
Additionally, Gaige Grosskreutz, the man who survived being shot, testified that he failed to tell the police key portions of his story the night he was shot. For instance, he admitted on the witness stand that he never told the police he had a gun. He also admitted he was carrying a concealed weapon when he didn’t have a valid permit to do so.