James Perloff returns to SGT Report to expose the United Nations Agenda 2030 New World Order World Economic Forum plan for 15-minute gulags where human freedom will go to die. https://jamesperloff.net/
As someone who has always questioned the safety and efficacy of the Covid ‘injectables’, I’ve thought long and hard about why more doctors haven’t voiced concerns, why so many seem unaware of the documented side effects, and why so few are sounding the alarm.
To help me answer this question, I spoke with renowned UK cardiologist and heart-health campaigner Dr Aseem Malhotra, who has been breaking the silence.
‘Double-jabbed’ Malhotra originally supported the program, until a series of events sent him digging into the evidence. What he discovered alarmed him and resulted in the publication of two evidence-based, peer-reviewed papers along with a call for the immediate suspension of the Covid mRNA roll-out. He tells his story:
‘Despite being one of pharma’s biggest critics, I could not have expected or conceived of the possibility that these vaccines, these new vaccines, could cause harm. So very early on I was one of the first to have two doses of the Pfizer vaccine, and I helped out at a vaccine centre in January 2021.
About a month later I had a conversation with a friend of mine, film director Gurinder Chadha (who was) vaccine hesitant. I said to her, “Listen, traditional vaccines are still one of the safest pharmacological interventions in the history of medicine. That doesn’t mean that all vaccines are completely safe. No drug is completely safe. But when you compare them to other pharmacological interventions I’ve talked about and campaigned on, for example diabetes drugs, blood pressure pills or statins, they are far, far safer.”’
‘I said, “There are rational concerns for vaccine hesitancy and irrational concerns. The rational concerns are when looking at what the pharmaceutical industry has done for years — they’ve been found guilty of fraud on many occasions — and prescribed medications are the third most common cause of death after heart disease and cancer.” So, I was being open, and I felt compassion for people who were vaccine-hesitant. And I said, “In my opinion, as it stands at the moment, traditional vaccines are the safest.”
‘Six months later my father suffered an unexplained… cardiac arrest. The post-mortem didn’t make sense, he was a very fit guy, yet he had very severe narrowings of two of his coronary arteries. I had known his cardiac history inside out, we had done imaging on him a few years earlier. I found myself thinking “hold on a minute, he’s got a rapid progression of coronary artery disease when he’s doing really well during lockdown, walking 10,000 steps a day and eating well. This doesn’t make sense.“ And I could only attribute it at the time to stress, I couldn’t think of any other reason.’
Over the following months, emerging data led Malhotra to question whether the vaccine was linked to his father’s death. The first was an abstract published in Circulation (November 8, 2021) by US cardiothoracic surgeon, Dr Steven Gundry, who followed several hundred of his patients after the mRNA (Moderna/Pfizer) jabs. Gundry found that inflammatory markers correlated with heart disease risk went through the roof. On average, that change increased the risk of those people having a heart attack or stroke within the next five years, from 11 per cent up to 25 per cent. This increase in risk is massive.
The next event raised more alarm bells for Malhotra.
‘Within two weeks of that abstract, a whistle-blower contacted me from a prestigious institution in the country, and said that a group of researchers had accidentally found through imaging studies that mRNA vaccines were increasing heart attack risk through inflammation, but the lead researcher said they were not going to publish these findings because it may affect funding from pharma.
‘I then felt a duty and contacted GB News saying, “There is a Circulation abstract but also something else I’ve heard,” and I spoke about it on GB News. That interview went viral … with me raising questions and saying, “We need to investigate this.”’
The pushback was strong.
‘One very prestigious medical body that I am affiliated with received a number of anonymous complaints from doctors that I was bringing the medical profession into disrepute, and that as I was in an association with them, I was bringing them into disrepute. I was then asked to formally respond,’ he relates. Malhotra responded and let off with a warning.
This experience made him realise how difficult it would be to publicly expose things, so he decided to critically appraise the evidence himself.
‘When I broke the data down, it became very clear, the harms of the mRNA vaccine massively outweigh the benefits. It was not even close! And that’s based on the highest level of quality of data we will ever have.’
The evidence comes from the original double-blind, randomised control trials, that led to the approval of both Pfizer and Moderna by regulators worldwide. Malhotra explains,
‘In a reanalysis of the original trials with the Wuhan strain, eminent scientists essentially found you were more likely to suffer a serious adverse event — for example hospitalisation, disability, or a life-changing event – than you were to be hospitalised with Covid. That means, in essence, the mRNA vaccine should likely never, ever have been approved for anybody in the first place.’
‘The randomised control trial data showed a risk of serious adverse events of at least 1 in 800 within two months. It’s probably much higher than that as you go forward because one of the mechanisms is accelerated heart disease. My dad died six months after the second dose of the vaccine; many people are going to be dropping dead and having heart attacks months after having the vaccine because it accelerates coronary artery disease.
But other vaccines have been pulled for far less: the swine flu vaccine was withdrawn in 1976 following episodes of Guillain Barre syndrome at a rate of 1/100,000; rotavirusvaccine was withdrawn in 1999 for causing a form of bowel obstruction (intussusception) in 1/10,000; this is 1/800 at least. So, it’s a no-brainer. The question is: why have they not pulled it? Some say, “It was an emergency use authorisation.” Well, it’s no longer an emergency.’
This begs the question: if the evidence is now so clear, why does the silence continue? Well, I’m glad you asked. In a follow-up article, I will explore the factors contributing to the great silence — hint, it’s not just AHPRA — and how we can move from here.
Encouragingly, if recent events are anything to go by, the silence is (slowly) breaking. The past few weeks have seen appearances by doctors on mainstream media voicing jab safety concerns, including Australia’s Dr Kerryn Phelps, and Malhotra’s recent truth bomb drop on a live BBC broadcast receiving millions of views on Twitter. Thanks Elon.
Monthy Subscriptions the TheCrowhouse can now be received via Stripe or direct contributions can be made via Wise bank. If you would like to assist please visit this page: https://thecrowhouse.com/contribute.html
FDA declines to say whether it asked Pfizer for explanation of undercover video. Tucker Carlson producer claims Google staffer “call[ed] us to kill the story.” Tabloid quickly erases report with no explanation.
Undercover video that purportedly shows a Pfizer executive explaining the company’s “directed evolution” plan to keep COVID-19 a “cash cow,” then furiously backpedaling when Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe exposes the ruse, has drawn intense curiosity from members of Congress and intermittent Big Tech throttling and a partial media blackout.
Despite the fact that the figure identified as Jordon Walker belatedly called himself a “liar … trying to impress a person on a date,” played the race card in requesting police involvement, and physically attacked O’Keefe and the film crew, a prominent tabloid inexplicably removed its article on the sting.
The FDA declined either to answer whether it was following up with Pfizer for an explanation of the figure’s comments or give the agency’s interpretation of the video, telling Just the News to contact Pfizer, which has not responded to queries going back to Thursday afternoon.
The figure identified as Walker claimed regulators would not closely scrutinize Pfizer’s “exploratory” efforts because of the revolving door between government officials and pharmaceutical companies. Former FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb joined Pfizer’s board two months after leaving the Trump administration.
The sting victim also previewed a potential explanation from Pfizer to Congress by denying to his fraudulent date that “directed evolution” is “gain-of-function” research, the subject of ongoing inquiries from lawmakers. He speculated the initial Wuhan COVID outbreak was the result of insufficiently controlled mutations.
Search engines are giving unexpected results for the controversy. Neither Google nor privacy-focused Brave, which last year poached users upset with DuckDuckGo’s pledge to bury Russian “disinformation,” returned first-page results from Project Veritas itself in Just the News searches for “project veritas pfizer.”
Both surface purported fact-checks of the video and the trickle of mainstream media coverage in The Hill and local media, and both included an October 2021 fact-check of an earlier Project Veritas video about Pfizer.
Newsweek’s fact-check begins by aiming to discredit Project Veritas based on previous mainstream media fact-checks and then analyzes it line by line, at one point downplaying the potential problems gain-of-function research can cause.
Several Twitter users shared Google screenshots reading “results are changing quickly” and explaining that “reliable” information was still indexing. The recurring misspelling of Walker’s first name in searches didn’t prompt Google to suggest his correct name as it typically does with typos.
Sen. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) told Carlson this was par for the course with Google, which, he alleged, “changed their algorithm to benefit Joe Biden” during the general election campaign, rigs results to promote Google’s favored views, and has showered campaign cash on both parties to evade accountability.
Brave Software Head of Communications Catherine Corre told Just the News the old fact-check about Project Veritas showed up high in results because the source, the Poynter Institute, made an “invisible” meta tag update a few days ago, meaning the page “was labeled as ‘fresh’” in Brave’s search engine. It’s fixing the bug, she said.
“Brave Search is an independent search engine and we do not censor results,” nor does it apply blocks or rules to disfavor content other than child sexual abuse material, Corre said. “We do not prioritize so-called ‘fact checkers’ in any way.” She didn’t answer why Project Veritas itself didn’t appear in first-page results, but said its rankings depend on “relevancy to the query, freshness, page popularity, etc.”
Google didn’t answer Re’s claim about trying to kill Carlson’s story but told Just the News the “changing quickly” notices have been triggered millions of times since the feature’s rollout a year and half ago.
They appear automatically when “a range of sources have not yet weighed in” and they don’t block results, a Google spokesperson said. The query “herschel urged woman abortion she says,” referring to recent U.S. Senate candidate Herschel Walker, provoked the notice, for example.
“Political ideology is not a signal our systems understand” and Google does not “manually manipulate web listings” for ranking purposes, the spokesperson said.
The Daily Mail took down its report on the Project Veritas sting apparently within two hours of going live early Thursday morning, according to an archive of the page and baffled social media users. The report said it has asked Pfizer for comment.
MSN republished the Daily Mail report and removed it just as quickly. That version’s metadata still shows up in Brave results as of Friday afternoon, but Just the News has not been able to find archives or caches. Google slapped the search with the same “changing quickly” label.
Some say this isn’t credible, some say Jordon Walker doesn’t work for @Pfizer.
Well it seems he at least did – a LinkedIn page shows up on search engines but has been removed from the site. The Daily Mail article on this was also removed within the last hour.
Human Events noted the disappearance of the Daily Mail and MSN reports in a story written by Project Veritas Press Secretary R.C. Maxwell, which said neither website responded to questions.
Carlson and social media users speculated the disappearances and broader media blackout, which includes CNN and MSNBC, were related to Pfizer’s heavy advertising spending in mainstream media. The company paused its advertising on Twitter following billionaire Elon Musk’s takeover, according to The Wall Street Journal, due to concerns about a pullback on content moderation.
Header featured image (edited) credit: Walker/Twitter grab
Emphasis and pictorial content added by (TLB) editors
Stay tuned to …
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.