https://michaelbwharton.medium.com/pfizers-clinical-trial-data-is-a-mystery-84aa81227e3a

The documents are proof of major fraud. To me, that means the answer to the above headline is a resounding Yes!

It’s probably unnecessary to say so, but I concur with your observations– both the irksome (to me) penchant for leftists to “waffle”, and that whatever the article’s flaws or shortcomings, Parenti is to be commended for bravely pushing back against the grain.

It’s a fluke or flaw of temperament, I guess, but when I encounter work that I think is mostly good and worthwhile, I inevitably take notice of the perceived flaws and shortcomings and feel compelled to call attention to them. I’m a mostly unabashed “Negative Nellie/Debbie Downer”.

During my teens, or “formative years”, certain lines and phrases– mostly from songs– became embedded in my head as a kind of “touchstone” that would come to mind forever after. More than a few came from Bob Dylan songs written during the peak years preceding his pre-motorcycle accident and subsequent re-invention.

One is from his 1965 song “Queen Jane Approximately”: “Trying to prove that your conclusions should be more drastic…”

Even though it isn’t even a gramatically complete sentence, that seminal phrase pops into my mind when I find myself “nitpicking” otherwise praiseworthy analysis.

Agreed. I also noted that C. Parenti seem to indicate the Plandemic TM was not a conspiracy, but rather the product of typical bureaucratic incompetence while then he supplies load of examples that the corruption was incentivized, that is, planned, therefore a conspiracy. But that sort of waffling against his own research would be typical of left intellectuals. I remember the last chapter of Naomi Klein’s The Shock Doctrine where she pulls her punches and seems to refute what should be the obvious conclusions of her earlier excellent chapters. However, he’s done a lot of heavy lifting here, while not saying so explicitly he lays out a case for crimes against humanity. It took courage to write that article, he could lose his university gig for writing it.

I recently did some part time work in mechanical transmission systems. I was surprised during workshop banter just how deep was this belief in Total Medical ‘Science’.. must be in some people.
Both he (60’s) and his wife are ‘Science Health’. btw She still wears a mask He doesn’t, so including working for different companies how does that work out?
Does that even entre rational thought to you?
I observed “In the beginning”, 85% of people wearing masks were American women out in Public.
Which left managers little choice but to “request” at first their employees while at work also wear masks, adding break time whereby they exist the rear get some fresh air, go back in wearing a fresh mask.
End of the Beginning ( Winston Churchill).

May I ask, do you see as part of treatment an individual may need an injection to immunize against a specific?
Yes or No? because neither you or me even know the individual or the circumstances of the illness.

Btw, just to show I’am not being bias, I noticed my fellow Man, stopped shaking hands! And day one there was this dummy shopping wearing a Paint Booth gas mask!
Not as a joke, He is The Orignal Action Covidian Man. And He is White!
My God!

I am not going to attempt to contradict your experience, especially as I have heard of similar things happening to people in days gone by, before the days of antibiotics. And not just after serious accidents, but after apparently minor accidents while gardening, for example.

Also, I have heard Tom Cowan and Andrew Kaufman talking in a video conversation cum lecture. Neither of them believes in the virus as pathogen theory. I think their position on bacteria is more nuanced, and I heard them say that while they were not convinced that bacteria caused infectious diseases, they both believed or knew that certain bacteria emitted toxins under certain circumstances.

I would like to have been able to ask for a bit more information about this, but I was watching a recording, and it may not have been a “live” video in the first place.

However, as I understand it from people like Cowan, Kaufman and other sources, the primary function of bacteria is to break down dead tissue in animal or plant matter back to its basic components which can then be re-used.

(One conventional medical definition of gangrene is it is what happens to tissue in your body which die after loss of blood through injury, “illness” or “infection”. So if that was a “bacterial infection”, than conventional medicine has identified bacteria at the site of the “infection” and deduced that the bacteria caused the infection. However, if the tissue is dead because an accidental injury has caused loss of blood flow, then perhaps the bacteria has been “summoned” by the body’s natural healing mechanism (and we know that the body is full of bacteria and other microbes in our “microbiome”) in order to break down the dead tissue.

And if it is an “infection” rather than an injury, conventional medicine says that the bacteria caused the tissue to die, but alternative voices might say it was something else – lack of nutrients, poisons, whatever which caused the tissue to die, and the bacteria just happens to be at the scene of the “crime”, doing its best to clear up the mess.

Note that I am not contradicting your experience, merely offering an alternative explanation of the role of the bacteria.

I don’t know for sure what the natural role of swamp bacteria is, but my guess it would be to break down plant material that naturally finds its way into the swamp. Obviously, in the normal course of events, it should not find its way into the human body, but may do so if someone who has breaks or injuries in their skin finds themself in a swamp for whatever reason. Swamps are regarded as unhealthy places generally.

Presumably, once the bacteria enter the blood stream, they can feed, breed and multiply and presumably emit toxins (which is what I would suggest cause the gangrene). Before antibiotics, just about the only thing people had to kill bacteria was iodine, and this has a long history of use in disinfecting wounds. Lynne Farrow in her famous book about iodine describes finding iodine containers in the medical kits of military medics in the American Civil War.

Not altogether false. I’m the only one not vaxxed at work. A cold has been spreading around and guess which ones got that, and which one didn’t? The mighty covid went around in January, same deal with that of course. Now, there could be no connection, and this is purely anecdotal, but I cannot help but see it every day. As for the long term effects, I completely agree that many of those will not show up for years perhaps. I worry for those who’ve succumbed to that damned shot. But I cannot say that out loud, they’d not believe me and probably accuse me of gloating, which I really am not. I am extremely angry that they’ve been scared shitless into taking it.

A vaxxed friend told me last night of a friend of hers who supposedly has “long covid” and had what was described as a minor stroke. My friend had a major stroke 12 years ago, congenital issue from what we were told. She took that damned shot from fear of the covid. I’ve tried explaining how the PCR test is completely bogus, and since that is the case, how can one truly know if they’ve had it. But how to broach the subject with her of the deaths, the injuries, the stuff I’ve read about what may happen to her later, I haven’t figured that out yet. I want so badly to shriek that there is no godamned covid and “long covid” is merely cover for what is most likely a “vaccine” injury! But I can’t. Not yet. My friend has enough on her plate without my telling her she’s been duped. She will have to come to that on her own as I cannot make her see that. She will simply shut down, put up that subconscious wall and probably double down on her fervent belief in a killer virus should I even attempt to really get honest. So I skirt the issue, try to drop subtle hints, come away from those conversations frustrated and terrified. But hey, we’re all getting used to such conversations now, aren’t we? I am hardly alone there.

I was advised that many if not most people who are gifted books do not read them. I did not want to believe this because I’ve gifted many books to many people, but I suspected that the advice was correct because I’m a bit reluctant to read books that I am gifted (unless I have actually asked for the book in question which occasionally happens).