Vaccine Ethics in a Time of Frail Elected Representative Government, Monopoly Media and American Betrayal (Working Draft)

If you are like me, you never gave the anti-vaxxing movement a second thought. I mean, what civilized human can be against vaccines? The best science, the best doctors, the best researchers, Jenner, Salk, Hileman, etc., all merged with the best expertise, the best science and all oriented around saving lives. I mean look at all this unimpeachable goodness of vaccines development, what Barbarian could be against that?

But then we had this curious pandemic when public health experts seemed to suffer from systemic failure. Whether those failures were born of incompetence, corruption, or undisclosed motives and goals remains to be seen.

Then you have serious Americans like Robert Kennedy Jr. who seem to speak with clarity. Kennedy deserves to be listened to and while you may disagree with him, shouldn’t the counter-case against him not rely on deplatforming, censoring and personal attacks? This makes many modern Americans assume what he says is true.

“My father told me when I was a child: people in authority lie.

If we are going to continue to live in a democracy we need to understand that people in authority lie.

People in authority will abuse every power that we relinquish to them and right now we are giving them the power to micro-manage every bit of our lives, 24 hours a day. They’re going to know where we are, they’re going to know the money that we spend, they’re going to have access to our children.

They’re going to have the right to compel unwanted medical interventions on us. You know, the NAZIs did that in the camps, in World War 2—they tested the vaccines on Gypsies and Jews.

And the world was so horrified after the war that we signed the Nuremburg Charter and we all pledged when we do that, we would never again impose unwanted medical interventions on human beings without informed consent.

And yet in two years all of that conviction has suddenly disappeared, and people are walking around in masks where the science has not been explained to them—they are doing what they’re told.

These government agencies are orchestrating obedience and it is not democratic—it’s not the product of democracy. It’s the product of a pharmaceutical-driven, bio-security agenda that will enslave the entire human race and plunge us into a dystopian nightmare where the apocalyptical forces of ignorance and greed will be running our lives and ruining our children and destroying all the dreams and dignity that we hope to give to our children.”

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

I noticed something early on in the pandemic response. I was outside the American media bubble and my confidants included expats and experts from outside of that world. And they and I noticed systemic false premises underlying the pandemic response.

President Trump stated (Feb. 27, 2020)
“We have in quarantine those infected and those at risk.  We have a lot of great quarantine facilities.  We’re rapidly developing a vaccine, and they can speak to you — the professionals can speak to you about that.  The vaccine is coming along well.  And in speaking to the doctors, we think this is something that we can develop fairly rapidly, a vaccine for the future, and coordinate with the support of our partners.  We have great relationships with all of the countries that we’re talking about.  Some fairly large number of countries.  Some it’s one person, and many countries have no problem whatsoever.  And we’ll see what happens.”

See how the President’s scope is so vast? Quarantine facilities for sick AND those at risk (entire country evidently). This was new. Who provided him with this advice as if it was a fait accompli? See how they have him scoped around vaccines that can’t come on-line for another year? Does this make sense when there are active off-patent prophylaxis and cures that existed right then for the wave hitting right then? What was the President being told by his advisers? What were the options that were presented to him? How were the risk scenarios framed?

Around now is when I started to hear the familiar refrain. What refrain? This refrain…“When can we go “back to normal?…only after we have a vaccine.” This was oft repeated and it contained a false premise that the people saying it did know about or should have known about. What if things could go back to normal without a vaccine?


Was a pandemic seen by a critical mass of scientists as an opportunity for vaccine development and was its importance as a solution over prioritized? Did the speedy development of the first successful coronavirus vaccine in history devour simpler methods that would have caused less disruption and also been more effective? (this in itself is at best a gutsy risk management call, possibly a reckless call, to seat a civilizational response on a yet to be discovered RNA virus solution involving timelines that deliver this hypothetical solution long after its needed) Did the existence of off patent prophylaxis and cures create a competitive problem for this vaccine development? Were these treatments seen as threats that could undermine political will to push the vaccine development through the administration and bureaucratic channels? Did the presence of prophylaxis or cures present legal or procedural hurdles? Did their existence create a market for their sabotage through research fraud schemes?

Here is an NGO “reading: (Bill Gates on April 5, 2020) and here is a US health agency “reading” (Dr. Anthony Fauci on April 7, 2020). Notice the common themes: always testing, always quarantines of everyone and always focus on a vaccine that could not come for a year at the earliest. Why was it assumed from the outset that no one could receive any medication UNTIL their was a positive test? Were there no other options? Why difference when compared to SARS that was treated based on symptoms (I believe this is true). Why was no one asking questions then and no one is asking questions now? We have lost 300,000 Americans why is no one asking questions?

Fauci: Getting back to normal ‘might not ever happen’ without a vaccine (msn.com)
Bill Gates: “Things Won’t Get Back To Normal Until We Have Gotten A Vaccine Out To The Entire World” | Video | RealClearPolitics

Bill Gates joined “FOX News Sunday” host Chris Wallace today to discuss his accurate prediction five years ago that the most deadly thing in our future would be a virus.

Gates said the coronavirus is “a nightmare scenario because human-to-human transmittal respiratory viruses can grow exponentially.

“If we had kept on going to work, traveling like we were, you know, that curve would never bend until you had the majority of the people infected and then a massive number seeking hospital care and lots of lots of deaths.”

“So, you know, we’ve got to use quarantine, which is an old thing back from the days of the plague as our primary tool,” he said. “Fortunately, if we use that well enough, we should, towards the end of this month, start to see those numbers level off. And then if we continue country-wide, and we’re testing the right people to understand what’s going on, which is not the case yet, those numbers will start to go down. And then we can look at some degree of opening back up.”

It is fair to say things won’t go back to truly normal until we have a vaccine that we’ve gotten out to basically the entire world,” he added.

Here is a Google Search “reading” based on “vaccine back to normal.” Why was this treated as if it was the only option available to American civilization at this point in time? What do these search results reflect? Is this cause, effect or something else?

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image-8.png

Why is a vaccine an ultimate weapon?! Says who?! Why not an effective and safe drug that has a near perfect safety profile that has a non-specific response to mutating RNA viruses?

And I wonder from a risk management perspective, did clearing a path for vaccines require the hobbling of cheaper, safer and more immediate solutions? Was it conventionally known that vaccine development was already that advanced by January 11? Should we have even had that kind of certainty regarding the severity of the virus to know that a vaccine would actually be needed? Is there an intersection between the precautions a society can take (lockdowns, masks, Vitamin D, etc.) and the point at which those precautions or treatments are in conflict with or benefit vaccine policy where it becomes the actual driver for what determines what sacrifices a civilization is required to make? American public health agencies rarely mentioned Vitamin D. Why? How can this be? Did it conflict with vaccine development? That seems like such a basic, minimal expectation for public health agencies to get a Vitamin D information out but they behaved as if it was a government secret. Why?




Think about this article in April when the country was poised to procure huge stores of HCQ, dole it out Marshall Plan style with zinc and treat the country like a malaria zone. It is possible in HCQ had not been sabotaged that there would have been no pandemic or could the pandemic been blunted enough to stave off lockdowns (always a bad idea) and obviate the needs of a Mars Mission vaccine development? But when you look at what everyone was saying, there was a 100% commitment to go to a 100% shutdown. Where did this preposterous consensus come from and how did it develop? What is the effect of mass lockdowns on perceived demand for a vaccine? What drove what?

You’d be hard pressed to read a more comprehensive accounting of commitment to failure. Its almost as if failure to a cataclysmic funeral dirge was preordained or programmed
Everyone seems to regale in the death and never asked the question, why was HCQ being withheld from early use that would have prevented all these Americans from dying?

But being 8,000 miles away from the USA something was screaming at me! A gnawing realization in the pit of my stomach. Realizations about the scope of what was happening that made it hard to sleep, that created intense misgivings. Could it actually be that the President was and is being betrayed by…doctors and research scientists?! The idea is almost too much to bear, but you have to actively avoid seeing the evidence not to see it.

But what if all this–this monstrous pandemic–was exacerbated or needlessly amped into a pandemic specifically to put mankind in a risk position, to unlock moon mission resources to pursue the “Holy Grail” of the vaccine industry: “mandatory vaccines?” What if taxpayer funded experts leveraged “support” from elected government officials by withholding viable solutions from their attention? What if the sense of devotion elected politicians have for the Americans they served was leveraged? What if these current pandemic conditions only were made possible by layering these elected politicians with false information, plying them with staged and corrupted advice, all from their taxpayer funded “experts” who actively withheld possible solutions while they betrayed their profession and the country?

What if a President looked over to his advisors and, after commenting that things looked grim, asked what his options were? What if his advisors, knowing full well that there were five options, said there was truly only one option or two options? What if some of the options would have permitted no pandemic at all using time tested, effective tools that were completely safe, but instead they said: “there is only one course, the only way to return to normal, Sir, is to develop and administer a vaccine?”

What if the vaccine wasn’t the only “cure,” but was instead an extortion payment to BigPharma and corrupted public agencies who had to be incentivized to permit Americans up off the mat after their false panaceas and plans were what had them pinned on the mat in the first place?

What if the President was absolutely, 100% correct about the potential of hydroxychloroquine? What if you are in that Presidential bubble, your instincts are screaming at you: “hydroxychloroquine can avert the whole pandemic!” You know it deep in your mind, in your soul in your heart. Your time tested snake detection system, bullshit detectors, betrayal aversion systems are maxed out (“you have to be kidding me, everything they have put me though and now this?!”), and what are the chances that the public health establishment could be adhering to a policy line that benefitted it, but was terrible for Americans?

The sabotage of HCQ, the streamlining of Remdesivir, the unanimous orientation around lockdown and quarantining well people, the failure to mention Vitamin D. These dark areas of inquiry will always leave me with open questions.