| Submit your comments on this article |
| -Signs, Portents, and the Weather- |
| 1 in every 500 small children who receive Pfizer vaccine hospitalized by it |
| 2022-10-22 |
| [Daily Skeptic via WND] One in every 500 children under five years who received the Pfizer mRNA Covid vaccine were hospitalised with a vaccine injury, and one in 200 had symptoms ongoing for weeks or months afterwards, a study has found. The study published in JAMA included 7,806 children aged five or younger who were followed up of for an average of 91.4 days following their first Pfizer vaccination. It was a retrospective cohort study done as an authenticated online survey (response rate 41.1%) in spring 2022 which included parents or caregivers who registered children for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in outpatient care facilities in Germany. It compared the adverse events to those of the same children with other vaccinations in order to control for over-reporting. It concluded that the symptoms reported after Pfizer vaccination were "comparable overall" to those for other vaccines. |
| Posted by:Besoeker |
| #4 Cornell Law Prof. William Jacobson of legalinsurrection.com posted the Court’s reasoning — this a huge turning point. Court: Fauci Must Testify Under Oath About Involvement in Social Media COVID Censorship “the Court finds that Plaintiffs have proven that Dr. Fauci has personal knowledge about the issue concerning censorship across social media as it related to COVID-19 and ancillary issues of COVID-19.” … “[Plaintiffs ie State of Missouri et al.] argue three reasons why Dr. Fauci should be questioned under oath. First, Plaintiffs assert that Dr. Fauci has refused to verify under oath his own interrogatory responses in violation of this Court’s Order. The NIAID’s responses were instead verified by Dr. Jill Harper, who was not named in the Complaint. Accordingly, Dr. Fauci has made no statements under oath regarding his communications with social-media platforms, which violates this Court’s Order regarding the discovery that instructed Dr. Fauci to provide interrogatory responses.21 The Court sees the importance of having Dr. Fauci make statements under oath as it relates to the issues of this matter. Next, Plaintiffs argue that even if Dr. Fauci can prove he never communicated with socialmedia platforms about censorship, there are compelling reasons that suggest Dr. Fauci has acted through intermediaries, and acted on behalf of others, in procuring the social-media censorship of credible scientific opinions. Plaintiffs argue that even if Dr. Fauci acted indirectly or as an intermediary on behalf of others, it is still relevant to Plaintiffs’ preliminary injunction motion. The Court agrees. Lastly, Plaintiffs argue that Dr. Fauci’s credibility has been in question on matters related to supposed COVID-19 “misinformation” since 2020. Specifically, Plaintiffs state that Dr. Fauci has made public statements on the efficacy of masks, the percentage of the population needed for herd immunity, NIAID’s funding of “gain-of-function” virus research in Wuhan, the lab-leak theory, and more. Plaintiffs urge that his comments on these important issues are relevant to the matter at hand and are further reasons why Dr. Fauci should be deposed. Plaintiffs assert that they should not be required to simply accept Dr. Fauci’s “self-serving blanket denials” that were issued from someone other than himself at face value. The Court agrees |
| Posted by: Nate B Forrest 2022-10-22 14:56 |
| #3 If I rubbed the magic lamp, one of my wishes would be a return to Biblical times where a liar's tongue caught fire when they spoke. It would be fun to watch. |
| Posted by: M. Murcek 2022-10-22 10:15 |
| #2 Some good news— the lying little rat-elf Fauci’s forced by the State of Missouri to sit for a deposition as to how he suppressed the truth about his corrupt gene-therapy experiment. Here’s Jeff Childers (“coffeeandcovid.com”) this morning: More than a year ago, I told Dr. Jay Bhattacharya that I thought there was enough evidence already in public record to sue that rat weasel Fauci for civil rights violations under the First Amendment, for the campaign that Fauci and the despicable Collins undertook in 2020 to destroy Jay and the other authors of the Great Barrington Declaration by branding them as “fringe scientists.” Well. In the best news of 2022, and I’m not exaggerating, yesterday a federal court in Louisiana overruled the federal government’s objections, ordered Dr. Fauci and other government officials to sit for depositions under oath, and said “The Court sees the importance of having Dr. Fauci make statements under oath as it relates to the issues of this matter.” Finally! That little weasel is going to have to answer some hard questions! The lawsuit, filed by the State of Missouri, alleges that Fauci and other government officials engaged in a corrupt scheme to deploy the full might of the U.S. government to illegally suppress Americans’ free speech during the pandemic. Examples cited in the Court’s order include: 1) the Hunter Biden laptop story prior to the 2020 Presidential election; 2) speech about the lab leak theory of COVID-19’s origin; 3) speech about the efficiency of masks and COVID-19 lockdowns; 4) speech about election integrity and the security of voting by mail; 5) censorship and suppression of speech by Plaintiffs Dr. Jayanta Bhattacharya and Dr. Aaron Kheriaty, co-authors of the Great Barrington Declaration; 6) censorship and suppression of Jim Hoft, owner of The Gateway Pundit, on social-media platforms; and 7) censorship and suppression of Jill Hines, co-director of Health Freedom Louisiana and Reopen Louisiana on social-media platforms. In support of its pending motion for a preliminary injunction, Missouri wants to take the expedited depositions of Tony Fauci (NIH), Rob Flaherty (White House), Andy Slavitt (White House), Jen Psaki (White House), Elvis Chan (FBI), Jen Easterly (CISA), Lauren Protenis (CISA), Vivek Murthy (Surgeon General), Carol Crawford (CDC), and Daniel Kimmage (State Dept.). |
| Posted by: Nate B Forrest 2022-10-22 09:43 |
| #1 It concluded that the symptoms reported after Pfizer vaccination were "comparable overall" to those for other vaccines. And the his lips fell off. I guess it depends on your definition of "comparable overall" Maybe it's comparable overall in that it doesn't |
| Posted by: Warthog 2022-10-22 07:50 |