Wat Jessica Rose en Kevin McKernan in deze podcast zoal uiteenzetten, zal voor velen verbijsterend nieuw zijn. Voor wie de afgelopen jaren mee heeft gelezen op virusvaria is het meer een déjà‑vu. Het is wat we in talloze incidenten terug zagen: het roekeloze en ontkende Gain of Function onderzoek in Wuhan, de volgens experts hoogst onwaarschijnlijke lableak, de safe & effective scam, de Deltavax‑soap, de apathische respons op myocarditis en trombose, de verwording van de wetenschap, de academische en redactionele wachttorens voor wie buiten het narratief durfde denken - om maar wat te noemen. We zien en beschrijven het al zo'n vier jaar. Maar de podcast is genieten. Van de sfeer, het enthousiasme, de onderbouwing en de humor. De podcaster zelf komt trouwens nauwelijks aan het woord1The channel is called TFTC: "A media company focused on #Bitcoin, Freedom and Truth in the Digital Age. Truth for the Commoner" and has 88,000 followers..
Jessica Rose asks for wide distribution of this podcast. I would like to contribute. It lasts 1 hour and 45 minutes. If you just want an impression of what passes by, you can be done here in 10 minutes. Give the video on youtube Anyway, like and share!
What the podcast2From podcast: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYMUx6XDbLQ What makes it so special is that this time the sound does not come from an insignificant blogger, but from within the biological/pharmaceutical complex. McKernan3Kevin MacKernan is an American molecular biologist and genetic analyst, known as a former research leader at the Human Genome Project and as founder of Medicinal Genomics. He gained international fame through independent genetic research into the purity of mRNA vaccines, in which he demonstrated the presence of DNA contaminants and other production residues. MacKernan advocates full transparency in biotechnological research and independent supervision of pharmaceutical quality control. zat in de biotech‑industrie (Illumina, Harvard/MIT, Long Read sequencing labs). Rose4Dr. Jessica Rose is a Canadian biostatistician and computational biologist with expertise in immunology, virology and data analytics. She became known for her analyzes of vaccine safety data (including VAERS) and her publications on signaling side effects in large-scale datasets. Rose combines scientific rigor with activism for open data, peer review integrity, and free academic discussion of public health. was in the academy/government world (university research network, authorized data sources).
Dat maakt het ongemakkelijk voor de gevestigde orde. Je zou toch zeggen dat dit met goed fatsoen niet meer is toe te dekken. Hun bevindingen triggeren dezelfde reflex als toen Lareb, EMA en CDC in 2021 nonchalant eerst de trombose‑risico’s weglachten en later myocarditis bij jongeren en nog later nog veel meer. Met altijd weer de riedel: “er is geen causaal verband vastgesteld”, “voorzichtig geïnterpreteerde correlaties”, “de cijfers zijn nog te klein”, "het is alleen in vitro", "de onveiligheid is nooit wetenschappelijk aangetoond". De brave formules waarmee wetenschap zichzelf nu in bescherming neemt tegen wat het geweten ingeeft.
Just as draconian measures and vaccination blackmail had polarization as a side effect, the effects of the vaccination campaigns appear to reveal another side effect: institutional self-preservation.
Stability or truth-finding?
For the government, stability takes precedence over truth-finding. There is something to be said for that because a collapse of society is of no use to anyone, you could say.
Tegelijkertijd werkt het veronachtzamen van de realiteit ook corruptie in de hand, fouten, datamanipulatie, kneedbare wetenschap, censuur - waardoor de kans op herhaling van een echec als de corona-respons alleen maar groter wordt. Het is óf dat, ofwel het diskwalificeren van de pilaren waarop onze samenleving is gebouwd: betrouwbaarheid van overheden, onafhankelijkheid van instituties, data-gedreven wetenschap, kritische en waakzame media, billijk en rechtvaardig oordelende rechters, een O.M. dat verbale tegensputteraars niet opjaagt alsof het criminelen zijn en artsen die goed ingelezen zijn in hun vak en de arts-patiënt relatie boven protocollen stellen.
Do we really want to conclude that this was just a beautiful fairy tale? And was that only after 2020?
Of was er daarvoor ook al de wetenschapper die weigert te zien wat de eigen data zeggen, omdat die data zijn carrière bedreigen? De journal-redacteur die een paper onder “investigation” plaatst omdat anders de financier belt. De politiek die datasets classificeert als “intern beraad”, zodat niets is na te rekenen. En de rechtbank die alles wat van boven komt, bureaucratisch steunt met juridische mantra's, waardoor artsen die door de inspectie worden opgejaagd niet op clementie hoeven te rekenen, laat staan op rechtvaardigheid. Waarheidszoekers en integere wetenschappers die worden gecancelled en vervolgd - om de rust maar te bewaren.
How do you measure that peace, that stability, that trust, that gullibility? A good barometer for this is the willingness to vaccinate. So it has to increase, whether that is healthy or not.
“It's strange to do something normal – research – and then suddenly be a pariah.”
Jessica Rose
Virus pariah. That word connects everything from Claire Craig's data prosecution in London to the prosecuted doctors and the Biomedical Audit Chamber here in the Netherlands, which finds that even anonymous figures on mortality after vaccination are treated as a state secret.
Ontkennen, versnipperen, juridiseren, zwartlakken, wetten aanpassen. En als dat allemaal niet meer werkt (en dat gaat gebeuren, dankzij de data uit het buitenland), zullen ze zich proberen te verschuilen achter: "Jij hebt makkelijk praten met de kennis van nu."
Ondanks alle tijdige waarschuwingen, studies en blogs op al die platforms, met publicatiedatums verifieerbaar op de diverse internet-archiefpagina's, en ondanks de WOO-documenten die ander aantonen, zullen ze toch zeggen: "Dat hebben we toen echt niet geweten".
The echo of previous files
De podcast resoneert met dit blog. Om toch een paar dingen te noemen: je zult de “Hidden Argument Salad” rond de Deltavax‑data herkennen: de drogredenen waarmee datatransparantie wordt verhinderd. De “useful idiots” van het academisch complex die hier voorbij kwamen: hooggeleerden die denken wetenschap te verdedigen terwijl ze haar inruilen voor reputatiemanagement. De moed van academici als (naast talloze niet-academici, met excuus aan wie ik hier vergeet): Bram Bakker, Theo Schetters, Willem, Ronald Meester en Jona Walk, die het taboe op vaccin‑kritiek binnen het medische circuit openbrak. De HART‑brief over kindersterfte, die aan dovemansoren gestuurd werd. En natuurlijk de Gain‑of‑Function‑experimenten in onderbeveiligde BSL-2 labs, waarvan een lek later met veel wegwuiven “onwaarschijnlijk” en "Ron did it - hahaha" werd genoemd.
What is always missing is not the evidence - there is plenty of it - but the mechanism that ensures that the evidence gains meaning in society. The scientific infrastructure that should achieve exactly this is now used for delay, obfuscation and framing. Those who want to publish factual findings are accused of disinformation by the same groups that control the journals with their funds.
Peer review is used as a weapon. “Scientific integrity” and “trust in science” have come to mean the opposite of what they stood for. Integrity then means: not getting in anyone's way. Trust means: don't ask questions.
The forgotten crucial component: the media
Jessica and Kevin discuss defense and attack tactics within science journals, maar ze vergeten m.i. de distributiekanalen die wetenschappelijke kennis moeten 'populariseren': de journalistiek, de media. Ik merk dat ook in gesprekken met academici: wetenschappers denken werkelijk dat data de waarheid vanzelf aan het licht brengen en zo de publieke opinie zullen beïnvloeden. Helaas: daarvoor zijn toch echt de grote, publieke 'kwaliteits'media nodig en natuurlijk de talkshows die erin slagen om gesettelde top-experts aan tafel te krijgen: de Ab Osterhauzen van dit land. Die weten er immers het meeste van. Het zal duidelijk zijn: als alerte kritisch journalisten de vernieuwende data niet zelf oppikken, komt de disruptieve boodschap nooit bij het grote publiek.
Now that science journalists are stooping to lies, deceit and hit pieces to ward off unwelcome knowledge, we are even further from home. We already saw examples of this in NRC in 2020 and 20215Search by tag: NRC, Fidelity6Fidelity over aerosols and especially the Volkskrant7About some of the many lies and gaslighting in De Volkskrant. And that actually includes all newspapers of the DPG group, which is supported with millions by the EU. The EU is very committed to “supporting democratic quality journalism”, “digital transition”, “support for audiovisual innovation”. Established media conglomerates can partly consolidate their influence as a result.
Het publiek is zo al in een vroeg stadium geprimed om alle narratief-ondergravende data als 'desinformatie' of 'Russisch' te herkennen: dat is namelijk alles wat niet het stempel van de grote, betrouwbare media komt, kwaliteitskranten incluis. Kwaliteitskranten die zich baseren op "peer reviewed" studies uit de grote journals - en dan is het cirkeltje weer rond.
If public opinion has been massaged into that position, there is no reason for the average career politician to cut corners among his own supporters. And don't forget: doctors, the bar and the magistracy also consume quality media.
Without media conformity, the entire “scientific consensus” would never have been credible.
We also thank the US for that
From the moment the Pfizer logos appeared between news items in America, the basic journalistic rule of thumb disappeared - follow the money – completely out of the picture. New “discoveries” such as the Marschalek paper on thrombosis only became newsworthy if they were politically useful: then it was suddenly called “breakthrough research” because it could serve as a lightning rod for much larger problems. But as soon as the opposite – insecurity, immune disruption, or mortality rates – came into focus, equally valid evidence was repackaged under the label “not supported by sufficient evidence.”
The media became instrumental in the propaganda chain as facilitating parties.
Information, government communication and journalistic reporting were strikingly parallel. News editors often literally copied the wording from EMA or RIVM press releases without looking at the data, while the same platforms also received advertising revenue from ministerial and pharmaceutical campaigns. They called statistical excesses “incidents” and moralized the doubts. In this way, support was created for policy without there ever having to be a substantive democratic debate. People were already primed8Read Jan Bennink about it het opnieuw claimen van een reeds ingenomen "breinpositie".
It's the old trick of power systems: Prepare opinion, prepare the way, ensure that criticism can only exist within the channels you control.
Ursula von der Leyen maakt inmiddels met haar nieuwe term "pre-bunken" de weg vrij voor psyops met de bevolking waarvan zij zegt dat die het volkomen met haar eens is9The beautiful appearance of de Eurobarometer. Goebbels was actually seen that way fucking cool, to speak with Nick Fuentes.
Untying the Gordian Knot
In the podcast they say it between the lines: the narrative can no longer be maintained. New structures must be created – on Nostr, on Bitcoin, whatever – to take science out of the hands of authorities again. This is about more than just technology.
It is the necessary reintroduction of truth-finding.
Outside the Netherlands, the first cracks will become evident. NL is too compact, too small, too neat, too sealed, vacuumed and sealed, with an incompetent and lame parliament. Us knows us, in those few square kilometers. The scientific reserve is impenetrably fenced. So the truth will again come from outside, as has always been the case until now.
It's no longer the question of one knew what one was doing, but how one will find the courage to admit that one knew it. How the media will be expelled if they don't admit guilt.
En dan nog zal men zeggen: "ja, met de kennis van toen." Maar die kennis was er – alleen niet voor wie hem niet wilde zien.
Read what they Jessica and Kevin discuss in the summary10Summary: a overall timeline of the conversation, and what explanations and solutions they propose or view podcast.
Footnotes
- 1The channel is called TFTC: "A media company focused on #Bitcoin, Freedom and Truth in the Digital Age. Truth for the Commoner" and has 88,000 followers.
- 2From podcast: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYMUx6XDbLQ
- 3Kevin MacKernan is an American molecular biologist and genetic analyst, known as a former research leader at the Human Genome Project and as founder of Medicinal Genomics. He gained international fame through independent genetic research into the purity of mRNA vaccines, in which he demonstrated the presence of DNA contaminants and other production residues. MacKernan advocates full transparency in biotechnological research and independent supervision of pharmaceutical quality control.
- 4Dr. Jessica Rose is a Canadian biostatistician and computational biologist with expertise in immunology, virology and data analytics. She became known for her analyzes of vaccine safety data (including VAERS) and her publications on signaling side effects in large-scale datasets. Rose combines scientific rigor with activism for open data, peer review integrity, and free academic discussion of public health.
- 5Search by tag: NRC
- 6
- 7About some of the many lies and gaslighting in De Volkskrant
- 8Read Jan Bennink about it het opnieuw claimen van een reeds ingenomen "breinpositie"
- 9The beautiful appearance of de Eurobarometer
- 10
Nice piece Anton!
"It's the old trick of power systems: Prepare opinion, prepare the way, ensure that criticism can only exist within the channels you control."
The Overton window, beautifully described by Cees van den Bos in:
https://bomenenbos.substack.com/p/regeringsbeleid-gestuurd-door-het
The “courageous academic” Willem has shown that some of the Covid deaths must be attributed to something else and no longer even believes in the “Covid spaghetti monster.” We don't have to worry too much about a virus that only kills fat diabetic octogenarians.
Just like for the coronavirus, there is a zoonotic theory for HIV (from African monkeys to gays in San Francisco and New York: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_HIV/AIDS), a lab leak theory (spread via a hepatitis B vaccine: https://rense.com/general61/outof.htm) and a virus fabrication theory (hepatitis B vaccinees test positive on meaningless HIV test: https://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/mcinterviewsl.htm).
The official theory is, at first glance, the most implausible. What have those gays done with African monkeys, you might wonder? The last theory is currently the most likely of the three. After all, the predicted slaughter among heterosexuals has not materialized. Very few of them will worry about HIV anymore.
The virus fabrication theory is also the only one that has the great advantage that even promiscuous gays and fat diabetic octogenarians no longer have to worry about possible infection.
Not a hair better actually than in Russia or China...
All this reminds me of Swift who (if I remember correctly) also lived in a society (18th century England) where a lot depended on socially accepted truths, and which he mocked in his trip to LaPuta (what's in a name): island where science was so highly exalted that the island floated, the population lived in miserable conditions thanks to that science, and the only form of social interaction took place through so-called 'flappers' = media, flappers that the main character did not need, or did not think he needed, which led to serious misunderstandings.
Human behavior… https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=p0mRIhK9se